题干
我的文章， 欢迎修正哦！
From this table, there is still 1,837,000 person, which is 11%, living in poverty, considering all households. We can see that sole parent have the most proportion living in poverty, which is 21%. While the second family type is single,no children, just 2% lower than the sole parent, that's 19%.
To the opposite, it is clear to tell that the aged person, either single aged person or aged couple family type, there is low rate. We can get the conculsion that young people have more stress than the aged ones, may have more proportion living in poverty.
Comparing with couple with children and couple no children, that is 12% and 7%, we know that the ones with children should have more financial issues than those who haven't children.
Meanwhile，set the family type single or couple who both have no children for example, the number is 19% and 7%. How can the big gap with the two data? The couple surely can do earn more money than the singles on the average.
范文
The table gives a breakdon of the different types of family who were living in poverty in Australia in 1999. On average, 11% of all households, comprising almost two million people, were in this position. However, those consisting of only parent or a single adult had almost doule this porportion of poor people, with 21% and 19% respectively. Couples generally tended to be befferoff, with lower poverty levels for couples with out children(7%) than those with children(12%).It is noticeable that for both types of household with children, a higher than average propotion were living in poverty at this time. Older people were generally less likely to be poor,though once again the trend favored elder couples(only 4%) rather than single elderly people(6%).
Overall the table of single adults and those with children were more likely to be living in poverty than those consisting of couples.
网友评论