Welfare isn't the soul catalyst for single parenthood. It is likely not even the primary one, but it's hard to say because cases vary. The tragedy of welfare as it is set up now is that it transcends generations- something it was not supposed to do. So I support the Pubs' welfare reform reluctantly, though I think if the Crats designed it, it would be a bit better- mainly because the Pubs are excessively focused on villifying welfare recipients and not so focused on helping- but the Crats have become so attached to their failing programs and were up till recently too comfy to change them- now of course, they just don't care . When are we going to get a decent center-left party?
But the thing most of us take for granted is how difficult it actually is for someone to find work when raised in that position, much less work that is better than fast food. The mothers do not provide a good role model for work because they don't work. Even if the mother tries to push the kid through school and work, she really doesn't know how if she wasn't good at them herself. Filling out applications, speaking in a way employers like to hear, knowing how to dress, knowing how to look for jobs, knowing how to keep a job once found- these are things you and I take for granted. They are learned skills, not instinct. The lackings in skill are married to a culture that suggests it's not worth even trying because you'll probably be dead by thirty.
And as far as the "welfare more than education thing", depends on what is meant by welfare. If you're talking strictly the relief for poor mothers, no way. If it's a combination of Soc Sec, relief for mothers, Medicare, Medicaid, and other related things- then yes. Most of it is for old people.

Of course, by my definition, education is welfare. In fact anything the government does for a public good or to help citizens, anything other than strict national defense (excluding civilian defense- which is welfare), is welfare. So no matter how we move funds, we'll have a lot spent on welfare. Definitions vary.
I think we do focus sometimes too much on amounts. It's not that we spend too much on welfare (that is a symptom, not a cause) or not enough on education. It is that we never change the programs once we create them and they get outdated fast. We need to fix the flaws in welfare, rather than disposing of it. And we need to fix the flaws in education rather than feed more money into the same old same old. They both serve useful purposes. But their flaws over time exponentially create more things we need to go back and fix. So we'd be wise to stop being lazy and change programs on a more regular basis.

__________________
That information is classified and to be given only on a need-to-know basis...

And I do not need to know.

That is some very good insight on this topic. Once again, you have mentioned something that is very clever.

__________________

I recently commented on the fact that government spends a little more amount on education that welfare, and ignorantly stated that it was wrong.

Well, I've come to openly apologize who read all of that.

I recently learned (in fact, I learned it today) that the USA government only pays 10% of all educational funds. The states and communities take care of the rest. Although the government does the same thing with welfare, it is not on the same percentage basis. So I take back my first statement and replace it with this: even I still think too much welfare is being burned and wasted, it is not really considered more important than education in the government's eyes.

Again, I am sorry for my inaccuracies and thank you for putting up with me.

__________________