U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S.
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
View Poll Results: Which of the wealthiest states would you live in?
Maryland 20 9.95%
New Jersey 31 15.42%
Connecticut 10 4.98%
Alaska 9 4.48%
Hawaii 11 5.47%
Massachusetts 25 12.44%
New Hampshire 8 3.98%
Virginia 19 9.45%
California 44 21.89%
Washington 24 11.94%
Voters: 201. You may not vote on this poll

Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 09-27-2009, 10:39 AM
 
Location: Washington, DC
657 posts, read 1,311,526 times
Reputation: 503

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by wavehunter007 View Post

Note how Hartford is on the same plain as US/Mexican border...

And Hartford continues to lose ground…

Hartford Slides Lower On Poverty Scale -- Courant.com
Why do you think poverty is such a problem in Hartford when the rest of the state of Connecticut is rather wealthy?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 09-27-2009, 01:19 PM
 
Location: USA East Coast
4,445 posts, read 8,627,668 times
Reputation: 2077
Quote:
Originally Posted by back2dc View Post
Why do you think poverty is such a problem in Hartford when the rest of the state of Connecticut is rather wealthy?
…Because in a state of scarcely 3 million people…the masses live in the cities and old crumbling factory/mill towns…not a handful of extremely wealthy, very small, NYC bedroom towns, or wealthy coastal towns. The population of Hartford, New Haven, Bridgeport, Stamford, Waterbury, New Britain, and Norwalk…contain almost 800,000 people…or 25% of the WHOLE STATE population. Most of the residents of these large cities…as well as many who live in smaller cities and rural areas are far from wealthy. I see and map this EVERYDAY.

It is unfair…and demographically inaccurate… to base an image or take a statistical figure (income, house prices,…etc) of a place like California, New Jersey…or Connecticut …and broad brush a whole state. In fact, some of the wealthy states have some of the poorest areas on the US mainland. Take a ride through southeast Cailfornia or drive around the massive ghettos of Bailtmore or the rural poverty in southwest Colorado.

In demographics it’s called “The Shack Effect”.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-27-2009, 07:18 PM
 
Location: Germantown, MD
1,359 posts, read 3,277,517 times
Reputation: 569
Quote:
Originally Posted by wavehunter007 View Post
…Because in a state of scarcely 3 million people…the masses live in the cities and old crumbling factory/mill towns…not a handful of extremely wealthy, very small, NYC bedroom towns, or wealthy coastal towns. The population of Hartford, New Haven, Bridgeport, Stamford, Waterbury, New Britain, and Norwalk…contain almost 800,000 people…or 25% of the WHOLE STATE population. Most of the residents of these large cities…as well as many who live in smaller cities and rural areas are far from wealthy. I see and map this EVERYDAY.

It is unfair…and demographically inaccurate… to base an image or take a statistical figure (income, house prices,…etc) of a place like California, New Jersey…or Connecticut …and broad brush a whole state. In fact, some of the wealthy states have some of the poorest areas on the US mainland. Take a ride through southeast Cailfornia or drive around the massive ghettos of Bailtmore or the rural poverty in southwest Colorado.

In demographics it’s called “The Shack Effect”.
Every state has it's poor areas. I don't think anyone is saying that the most or the majority of people that live in these states are wealthy. The people that live in these states have a higher proportion of wealthy residents than poorer states. Here's a ranking of the states with the percentage of people below the poverty level (2007, since '08 data hasn't yet been released) which should give a clearer view:

Percent of People Below Poverty Level in the Past 12 Months

1. Mississippi--20.6%
2. Louisiana--18.6%
3. New Mexico--18.1%
4. Arkansas--17.9%
5. Kentucky--17.3%
6. (tie) Alabama--16.9%
6. (tie) West Virginia--16.9%
8. District of Columbia--16.4%
9. Texas--16.3%
10. (tie) Oklahoma--15.9%
10. (tie) Tennessee--15.9%
...
40. Vermont--10.1%
41. (tie) Massachusetts--9.9%
41. (tie) Virginia--9.9%
43. Utah--9.7%
44. Minnesota--9.5%
45. Alaska--8.9%
46. Wyoming--8.7%
47. New Jersey--8.6%
48. Maryland--8.3%
49. Hawaii--8.0%
50. Connecticut--7.9%
51. New Hampshire--7.1%

So as you can see only 7.9% of Connecticut's residents areimpoverished (as determined by the CB), the second lowest rate in the country.

United States and States - R1701. Percent of People Below Poverty Level
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-27-2009, 07:22 PM
 
Location: Sierra Vista, AZ
16,133 posts, read 20,826,624 times
Reputation: 8293
Quote:
Originally Posted by wavehunter007 View Post
As a person who studies demographics….just keep in mind that much of these rankings have to do with the fact that each of these states have a few “Very Wealthy” areas that skew the numbers to be higher than they would be.

For instance

…much of California’s wealth is concentrated in the Los Angeles basin, metro San Diego, and the San Francisco Bay area. Parts of northern California’s are as average in income and wealth as most other states, while parts of southeast California are very poor, with people who live in substandard housing, with some of the worst health-care in the Western Hemisphere…

…90% of Connecticut’s wealth is deeply concentrated in southwestern Connecticut outside of NYC. Most of the rest of the state ranks as just "average" in terms of income and housing costs. Parts of northeastern Connecticut have as much rural poverty as parts of South Carolina or Virginia. Take a ride through Norwich. Three (3) of the top 10 poor cities in America are located in Connecticut also (Bridgeport, Hartford, Waterbury).

…much of New Jersey’s wealth is concentrated near NYC, outside Philly, and in a 5-mile zone close to the ocean. LARGE parts of southern New Jersey are downscale, old towns with a high unemployment, and poor, and economically polarized people. Camden, NJ, Jersey City, and Newark are some of the poorest cities in North America.

…about 95% of Virginia’s wealth is outside the Washington DC area and near Virginia Beach. Due east of Virginia Beach and south of Richmond…is one of the poorest areas in the USA. Take a ride along US 58 out of Virginia Beach toward I-95 a see “all the wealth” there is in Virginia.

The top 10 states are ranked the way they are because they are adjacent to the biggest urban centers in America.
So they are wealthy because people want to live and work there.
Wonder why?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-27-2009, 11:08 PM
 
Location: New Mexico to Texas
4,552 posts, read 13,457,615 times
Reputation: 2125
Quote:
Originally Posted by cpterp View Post
Every state has it's poor areas. I don't think anyone is saying that the most or the majority of people that live in these states are wealthy. The people that live in these states have a higher proportion of wealthy residents than poorer states. Here's a ranking of the states with the percentage of people below the poverty level (2007, since '08 data hasn't yet been released) which should give a clearer view:

Percent of People Below Poverty Level in the Past 12 Months

1. Mississippi--20.6%
2. Louisiana--18.6%
3. New Mexico--18.1%
4. Arkansas--17.9%
5. Kentucky--17.3%
6. (tie) Alabama--16.9%
6. (tie) West Virginia--16.9%
8. District of Columbia--16.4%
9. Texas--16.3%
10. (tie) Oklahoma--15.9%
10. (tie) Tennessee--15.9%
...
40. Vermont--10.1%
41. (tie) Massachusetts--9.9%
41. (tie) Virginia--9.9%
43. Utah--9.7%
44. Minnesota--9.5%
45. Alaska--8.9%
46. Wyoming--8.7%
47. New Jersey--8.6%
48. Maryland--8.3%
49. Hawaii--8.0%
50. Connecticut--7.9%
51. New Hampshire--7.1%

So as you can see only 7.9% of Connecticut's residents areimpoverished (as determined by the CB), the second lowest rate in the country.

United States and States - R1701. Percent of People Below Poverty Level


this is why I want to move to Alabama from New Mexico, it might be an improvement in the quality of life category.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-28-2009, 10:58 PM
 
2,770 posts, read 5,358,413 times
Reputation: 734
Quote:
Originally Posted by wavehunter007 View Post

…much of California’s wealth is concentrated in the Los Angeles basin, metro San Diego, and the San Francisco Bay area. Parts of northern California’s are as average in income and wealth as most other states, while parts of southeast California are very poor, with people who live in substandard housing, with some of the worst health-care in the Western Hemisphere…

…much of New Jersey’s wealth is concentrated near NYC, outside Philly, and in a 5-mile zone close to the ocean. LARGE parts of southern New Jersey are downscale, old towns with a high unemployment, and poor, and economically polarized people. Camden, NJ, Jersey City, and Newark are some of the poorest cities in North America.


The top 10 states are ranked the way they are because they are adjacent to the biggest urban centers in America.

Your statement I've bolded is false. Evidence of this as follows: NJ near NYC/Philly and the Jersey Shore make up about 90% of the state. NJ is not geographically large so these metro areas take up large swaths of land.

Furthermore, to back up your claim you only mentioned 3 cities. And two cities you named are poor but they are not that large to begin with. (Newark is just shy of 300,000 people, yet the state is well over 8 million)

Jersey City is not generally classified as poor city.

NJ doesn't anchor the NYC urban center...it is wholly a part of it. NJ's ports/rail and infrastructure are tied directly NYC. And the NYC-Newark metro stretches the entire swath of North Jersey into Pa.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-29-2009, 07:29 AM
 
Location: USA East Coast
4,445 posts, read 8,627,668 times
Reputation: 2077
Quote:
Originally Posted by cpterp View Post
I don't think anyone is saying that the most or the majority of people that live in these states are wealthy. [/url]

Then my “point” has been made…or you see my point. That was then only thing I was trying to get across...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-29-2009, 08:27 AM
 
Location: USA East Coast
4,445 posts, read 8,627,668 times
Reputation: 2077
Quote:
Originally Posted by 66nexus View Post
NJ doesn't anchor the NYC urban center...it is wholly a part of it. NJ's ports/rail and infrastructure are tied directly NYC.

…and that’s wholly my point – New Jersey ranks as one of the wealthiest states in the USA because of the "PROXMITY" (and the economic power) of two of the largest metro areas in the USA - NYC and Philly.

ALL OF the states listed on the list (except Alaska – for a totally different reason)…are IN or CLOSE to the biggest CMSA’s, and are centers of economic power. California (LA, San Diego, San Francisco)…Connecticut (NYC)…Maryland (Baltimore, Washington)…Massachusetts and New Hampshire (Boston)…Virginia (Washington, DC)…Washington State (Seattle-Tacoma). My point about “parts” of south-central interior NJ is that the income, housing costs, or wealth…etc, is generally lower that much of the state.

As far Newark…it IS a big city, the largest in NJ, and one of the top 200 in population of the 10,000 + cities and towns across the USA. I think that quantifies it as a “big city”. My point was not to say that the are many poor areas in NJ however…only that despite many, very wealthy areas…there is just as many not so wealthy areas. I am aware of the recent boom in Jersey City, perhaps my comment about poverty was based in my experiences there in the 1980’s. I am aware there has been a lot of redevelopment downtown and near the water.

IMO, after years of looking at demographic data…although informative, a “list” of the top 10 wealthiest states is absurd. It only shows that the greatest wealth is generated around large metro areas, and broad brushes the facts that many who live outside of the metro areas of these states (and the opportunties they offer)… are far from wealthy.

I have worked at several social agencies and have encountered people with no money, no home, and no teeth in eastern Connecticut for 5 years. Trust me… there is plenty of poverty in those 10 states. Plenty.

Last edited by wavehunter007; 09-29-2009 at 08:36 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-29-2009, 09:22 AM
 
2,770 posts, read 5,358,413 times
Reputation: 734
Quote:
Originally Posted by wavehunter007 View Post
…and that’s wholly my point – New Jersey ranks as one of the wealthiest states in the USA because of the "PROXMITY" (and the economic power) of two of the largest metro areas in the USA - NYC and Philly.

ALL OF the states listed on the list (except Alaska – for a totally different reason)…are IN or CLOSE to the biggest CMSA’s, and are centers of economic power. California (LA, San Diego, San Francisco)…Connecticut (NYC)…Maryland (Baltimore, Washington)…Massachusetts and New Hampshire (Boston)…Virginia (Washington, DC)…Washington State (Seattle-Tacoma). My point about “parts” of south-central interior NJ is that the income, housing costs, or wealth…etc, is generally lower that much of the state.


As far Newark…it IS a big city, the largest in NJ, and one of the top 200 in population of the 10,000 + cities and towns across the USA. I think that quantifies it as a “big city”. My point was not to say that the are many poor areas in NJ however…only that despite many, very wealthy areas…there is just as many not so wealthy areas. I am aware of the recent boom in Jersey City, perhaps my comment about poverty was based in my experiences there in the 1980’s. I am aware there has been a lot of redevelopment downtown and near the water.

I
.
A 'poor' area (or a poverty-stricken one) is a far cry from a 'not so wealthy' area (which in itself can mean a great number of things).

All in all, you already know these stats are done to include overall standings. If you had just as many bad areas as good ones you wouldn't rank that high. You'd certainly have to have much more good than bad.

And maybe broad-brushing is not a good idea, in a state as large as California (where there are many areas outside a large metro). In NJ, nearly the ENTIRE state falls under a metro area. You seem to feel that areas in NJ outside of large metro make up a large portion when the fact is that those areas make up barely 10% of the state (in popul. and land-area)

Additionally. You seem to think that NJ is part of these large metros, it's not just 'close' to them. Therefore, it's not simply that the larger core-city ie. NYC or Philly, just provide provide provide. NJ provides a well-educated labor market (and usually well-groomed suburbs that commuters would rather live in)

Without the NJ portion of the NY-NJ-LI metro, the NYC metro shrinks terribly.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-29-2009, 09:25 AM
 
Location: Texas
43,562 posts, read 52,678,186 times
Reputation: 70812
States with high taxes use this tax revenue to pay for EDUCATION. Conservatives don't like to pay taxes and end up with underfunded school systems full of people who put pulpit ahead of practicality.


If you had studied, then you'd already know that the solution to better education has little to do with how much money you pour into the school.

And FYI, the Hawaiian public school systems are some of the worst in the country - everyone I know who lives there says you have to put your kids in private school. And that's the only state on the list that would appeal to me at all.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S.
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top