Study shows Augusta has 2nd most concentrated 'working poor' (credit, income)

[GeorgiaTransplant]

Concentration of working poor rising 081208 - The Augusta Chronicle (http://chronicle.augusta.com/stories/081208/met_469163.shtml - broken link)

You may have to register to see the full text, but it's fairly easy. The upshot is that the Brookings Institute did a study of 58 metro areas and found that Augusta had the second highest concentration of 'working poor', defined for this study as families who receive an earned income tax credit.

In other words, they have jobs, file taxes, but their tax liability is very low because of low wages. That's a very poor indicator of the state of the economy in Augusta itself. Low cost of living won't offset the kind of poverty necessary to trigger an EITC.

The study included the outlying counties in the metro area (Columbia, Aiken, Burke, etc.), but it was really Richmond County that put the metro area over the top.

[DisgustaTruth]

This is one of the main reasons Augusta was chosen for a Kroc center..because of the large concentration of poor families in the inner city... I think they still have to raise a certain number of matching funds for the center to be built. Hopefully it will help the situation some.

[Budson]

The Brookings Institute uses percentages, so it is not the second highest concentration of working poor. If you look at the actual numbers of all the cities in the survey, Augusta's total numbers of "working poor" rank around 63rd, not second. Since Augusta had low numbers...compariatively...an increase was shown as a higher percentage. Secondly, the data was from 2004 and from 1999. Thirdly, of the eight zip codes used in the survey for the Augusta area, six of those zip codes were Burke County. It was all spelled out in the Augusta Chronicle at the end of the story.

[CaptainAwesome]

30901 zip code (downtown Augusta) had over 56.7%. That's higher than any of the Burke County zips. And concentration by definition is a percentage.

One thing worth pointing out is that the data is dated. The Chronicle has a very good editorial today about the study that I think is worth reading.

http://chronicle.augusta.com/stories/081408/edi_469408.shtml (broken link)

[GeorgiaTransplant]

Originally Posted by Budson

The Brookings Institute uses percentages, so it is not the second highest concentration of working poor. If you look at the actual numbers of all the cities in the survey, Augusta's total numbers of "working poor" rank around 63rd, not second. Since Augusta had low numbers...compariatively...an increase was shown as a higher percentage. Secondly, the data was from 2004 and from 1999. Thirdly, of the eight zip codes used in the survey for the Augusta area, six of those zip codes were Burke County. It was all spelled out in the Augusta Chronicle at the end of the story.

Dude, I'm an Augusta fan...but the study and my message was not a 'waah waah Augusta is horrible' message. It points out a real economic problem, that was highlighted in a real study. You may disagree with the methodology, but they were indeed comparing apples to apples-the percentage, not the raw number, of working poor. By numbers, New York would have many more working poor, but if the proportion (percentage) is lower, they have a better indicator and probably a better economy.