What criteria does a town have to fill to be considered "Poor"? (New York: unemployment rate, private schools)

[nancy thereader]

Brookville, NY: This neighborhood has a median household income of $72,953 (as of 2008) and is around 80% Black.

Brookville has a population that is 80% black? Are you sure? Isn't that the same as Old Brookville?

[LongIslandPerson]

Originally Posted by nancy thereader

Brookville, NY: This neighborhood has a median household income of $72,953 (as of 2008) and is around 80% Black.

Brookville has a population that is 80% black? Are you sure? Isn't that the same as Old Brookville?

LOL, I was referring to Brookville, NYC, NY

^^ Which is a neighborhood of Southeastern Queens;
Brookville, Queens - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

(btw: The income figure on the wiki page is from the 2000 census)

[checkmatechamp13]

Originally Posted by LongIslandPerson

True. Just keep in mind that the main reason why middle class black areas tend to have higher crime rates than middle class white areas on average, is b/c almost every middle class black area is directly outside of a lower-income/higher crime area. So, there is a considerable amount of spill-over. Like in Elmont, there was a crime wave early last year and almost every criminal came from a troubled part of Queens.

Very true. That would explain why in some Black middle class areas (like the 67th Precinct in East Flatbush, Brooklyn and the 47th Precint in the NE Bronx) saw a high murder rate, but others (like the 105th Precinct in SE Queens, or the 63rd Precinct in the Flatlands area of Brooklyn) saw relatively low murder rates. The first two have some public housing complexes, whereas the other two don't.

I mean, this isn't exactly a fair comparison because the second pair doesn't have as large a Black population as the first two, because the precinct covers some White neighborhoods, but you get the point.

2011 murder rate by precinct

[Pequaman]

Originally Posted by checkmatechamp13

What if it fits one standard but not the other?

For instance, Hempstead's poverty rate is 13.5%, but the per capita income is $20,131: http://www.city-data.com/city/Hempstead-New-York.html

Roosevelt's poverty rate is 9.4%, but the per capita income is $23,121: http://www.city-data.com/city/Roosevelt-New-York.html

Uniondale's poverty rate is 8.5%, but the per capita income is $21,204:
http://www.city-data.com/city/Uniondale-New-York.html

You really aren't going to find a whole lot of areas with a high poverty rate on Long Island. Suburbs in general don't tend to have the extremes of wealth and poverty that you find in the city.

And also keep in mind that within each hamlet/village, you have areas with different socioeconomic characteristics. For instance, Bay Shore has a poverty rate of 8.4%, and a per capita income of $27,159, and it has some upper-middle class (or wealthy) areas south of Montauk Highway, but it has some public housing around the train station: http://www.city-data.com/city/Bay-Shore-New-York.html

Ideally, the best information to have would be the median per capita income (not the same as the mean per capita income), because it gives you an idea of what the average household in the village/hamlet makes (it isn't skewed by high-earning households). But unfortunately, that data is not easily available, so we have to go by the mean per capita income.

Just to give an example, NYC has a per capita income of $30,000, but it has a poverty rate of close to 20%. Compare that to Bay Shore where the per capita income is lower, but the poverty rate is also lower because again, suburbs tend to have more equality between the different classes, without extremes of wealth or poverty.

The best information available from Census[Factfinder 2] to get a better idea of real income is:
Median earnings for male full-time, year-round workers (dollars)
Median earnings for female full-time, year-round workers (dollars)

You will see both of those listed when you pull up Economic statistics in Factfinder2. The median earnings for year-round workers are a little more accurate than per capita income and median household income. The reason is that per capita counts every single man, woman and child living in the region. That means part-time workers, retirees, students, maids, etc.. You can see how that can get easily skewed.

Median Household Income also counts all workers in each household. This can also get skewed and will make this number seem higher in some areas where family sizes are larger (usually family sizes are larger in poorer areas--extended family, young adults living at home, etc..).

Take a look at the difference in these figures for a few towns in this post>
LI communities ranked by income (note: these are old numbers, 2010 #s are higher across the board)

Notice Elmont rank higher in MHI than F'dale, but F'dale has higher full time earners.
#230 ELMONT Median household income (dollars) $75,929
Median earnings for male full-time, year-round workers (dollars) $47,674
Median earnings for female full-time, year-round workers (dollars) $40,184

#237 FARMINGDALE Median household income (dollars) $73,883
Median earnings for male full-time, year-round workers (dollars) $63,839
Median earnings for female full-time, year-round workers (dollars) $53,119

Also, Factfinder2 lists "families living under poverty line" .. and NYstart.gov also shows "students eligible for free lunch" .. Elmont Union Free School District's 'eligible for free lunch' percentage is at 35%, while Farmingdale's is at 11%.

Those are just two random examples. But generally I would look at median earnings for male (and female) full-time, year-round workers, poverty rate and eligible for free lunch, as three good indicators of how wealthy an area is.

[LongIslandPerson]

Originally Posted by Pequaman

The best information available from Census[Factfinder 2] to get a better idea of real income is:
Median earnings for male full-time, year-round workers (dollars)
Median earnings for female full-time, year-round workers (dollars)

You will see both of those listed when you pull up Economic statistics in Factfinder2. The median earnings for year-round workers are a little more accurate than per capita income and median household income. The reason is that per capita counts every single man, woman and child living in the region. That means part-time workers, retirees, students, maids, etc.. You can see how that can get easily skewed.

Median Household Income also counts all workers in each household. This can also get skewed and will make this number seem higher in some areas where family sizes are larger (usually family sizes are larger in poorer areas--extended family, young adults living at home, etc..).

If that was the case then why do areas similar to Brentwood, Central Islip, and North Bay Shore have low/below-average median household incomes when they have very large average household sizes.

Also, Factfinder2 lists "families living under poverty line" .. and NYstart.gov also shows "students eligible for free lunch" .. Elmont Union Free School District's 'eligible for free lunch' percentage is at 35%, while Farmingdale's is at 11%.

You must keep in mind that a lot of well-off people in a community send their kids to private school so those kids wouldn't be accounted for. And Farmingdale SD has somewhat higher performance than Elmont SD so a parent would be far more likely to send their child to private school in Elmont due to this fact. Also, Elmont is served mainly by two School Districts, Elmont SD and Sewanhaka SD so unfortunately that just paints a partial picture. But I do agree that Free Lunch % would be an good tool of helping measuring poverty but only if almost every student attended private school and the whole community was served by one school district.

[Pequaman]

Originally Posted by LongIslandPerson

If that was the case then why do areas similar to Brentwood, Central Islip, and North Bay Shore have low/below-average median household incomes when they have very large average household sizes.

Because they are very poor. A large household does not always mean a higher median household income. But the higher household size causes it to appear higher than villages or hamlets that have smaller households. Basically, Brentwood & North Bay Shore have 1.40 persons extra income added to their MHI vs the average Suffolk household.

BRENTWOOD
Avg. Household size= 4.35
Median Household Income= $68,750
Median earnings for male full-time, year-round workers (dollars) $35,121
Median earnings for female full-time, year-round workers (dollars) $32,203

North Bay Shore-
Avg. Household size= 4.30
Median Household Income= $72,540
Median earnings for male full-time, year-round workers (dollars) $43,734
Median earnings for female full-time, year-round workers (dollars) $28,832

Nassau County Avg household size= 2.94
Suffolk County Avg household size= 2.93

This is not to say that MHI, Mean Household Income and Per Capita have no value. They are perfectly fine to use and more accurate the closer the hamlet/village is to the avg household size of LI.

Originally Posted by LongIslandPerson

You must keep in mind that a lot of well-off people in a community send their kids to private school so those kids wouldn't be accounted for. And Farmingdale SD has somewhat higher performance than Elmont SD so a parent would be far more likely to send their child to private school in Elmont due to this fact. Also, Elmont is served mainly by two School Districts, Elmont SD and Sewanhaka SD so unfortunately that just paints a partial picture. But I do agree that Free Lunch % would be an good tool of helping measuring poverty but only if almost every student attended private school and the whole community was served by one school district.

True..and good point. But it's still something to consider to get an idea of the school district and the community. It also helps to look at this when a school district is composed of many hamlets and villages.
(eg- FARMINGDALE SD -vs- Farmingdale Village, South Farmingdale, East Farmingdale) -- F'dale SD extends into even more hamlets and villages than those 3.

[FrmlyBklyn]

Originally Posted by checkmatechamp13

That makes sense (not that I necessarily agree with it, but it makes sense).

I mean, to me, those numbers would be more working-class than poor.



East Orange and Orange are far from being considered desirable. If you put them on Long Island, they'd be the Black version of Hempstead.

It's only West Orange and South Orange that are considered desirable, and those aren't majority Black (I think both towns have a slight White majority. The city-data pages say so, but I think West Orange might have slipped under 50% White as of the 2010 census)

http://www.city-data.com/city/West-O...ew-Jersey.html
http://www.city-data.com/city/South-...ew-Jersey.html

They'd be more comparable to an area like Baldwin than Wheatley Heights.

Parts of West Orange are also undesirable. The problem with the Oranges, is you cross the street and you will find yourself in East Orange or Orange and it's all bad. Same could be said for Montclair - there's Montclair and then Upper Montclair. Upper Montclair is where the real coin is, just like Glen Ridge.

[LongIslandPerson]

Originally Posted by FrmlyBklyn

Parts of West Orange are also undesirable. The problem with the Oranges, is you cross the street and you will find yourself in East Orange or Orange and it's all bad. Same could be said for Montclair - there's Montclair and then Upper Montclair. Upper Montclair is where the real coin is, just like Glen Ridge.

There's a nice section of East Orange though.

Idk, just though i'd throw that in..

[FrmlyBklyn]

Originally Posted by LongIslandPerson

There's a nice section of East Orange though.

How big is that section? Everytime I drive down the parkway, I see those dilapidated houses boarded up, made the mistake of exiting off there one time, never again. Doesn't it sit next to Irvington - another bad town.

[LongIslandPerson]

Originally Posted by FrmlyBklyn

How big is that section? Everytime I drive down the parkway, I see those dilapidated houses boarded up, made the mistake of exiting off there one time, never again. Doesn't it sit next to Irvington - another bad town.

I'm sorry, I meant Orange, NJ.

There is a part of Orange that could pass as South Orange in terms of the neighborhood. It's between Scotland Rd and S.Centre Street, the area borders South Orange.

This is 2 random intersections in this area on google maps;
orange, nj - Google Maps
http://maps.google.com/maps?q=orange...,39.34,,0,9.08