This really isn't all that meaningful. IN reading the article, the term "welfare" is being applied to a broad range of benefits. I would imagine that there are many Americans whose only benefit is a child or children on free or reduced lunch in school who do not consider themselves to be on welfare. By the same token, there are probably a lot of seniors who are getting some benefit that some would consider welfare.
One specious jump is that a benefit utilized by a child equates to his parent being on welfare. If this is the case, then there are a number of senior citizens and others who have gotten custody of related or unrelated children who would themselves be considered to be on welfare, even though they live in a paid for $300,000 house and drive a new car.
Surveys like this measure many things, truth and accuracy aren't at the top.
Queerdom and being a liberal must really screw up your brain when you post stupid shit like this.
Ironically, UPenn's motto is (translated into English), "Laws without morals are useless." I wonder how keeping this sneering racist - in Religious Studies! - is consistent with their motto. Maybe if...