U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Covid-19 Information Page
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Pennsylvania > Pittsburgh
 [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)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 10-13-2010, 07:11 AM
 
Location: The canyon (with my pistols and knife)
13,454 posts, read 19,115,179 times
Reputation: 15277

Advertisements

Top 10 U.S. cities in per capita income growth since 1984

1. El Paso, TX
2. Baton Rouge, LA
3. Baltimore, MD
4. Virginia Beach, VA
5. New Orleans, LA
6. Pittsburgh, PA
7. Oklahoma City, OK
8. Little Rock, AR
9. Jackson, MS
10. Honolulu, HI

Among the top 10, only Baltimore and Honolulu have a higher per capita income than Pittsburgh.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 10-13-2010, 07:41 AM
 
20,273 posts, read 29,830,154 times
Reputation: 2898
If you look back even farther, Pittsburgh is on a pretty unique track. Back before the steel bust, Pittsburgh was above-average in per capita income among U.S. metros, basically because there were a lot of good jobs available even for those with a limited education. Then the steel bust and other industrial contractions in the early 1980s caused Pittsburgh to dip substantially below the U.S. metro average. As this study indicates, Pittsburgh has since been in recovery mode, and now is back above the U.S. metro average (and continuing to climb in relative terms). But now rather than being driven by good jobs for people with relatively little education, Pittsburgh's relatively good income statistics are being driven by a younger population which is among the best-educated in the country, which is good for income statistics in general, and particularly good in this recession.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-13-2010, 12:38 PM
Status: "Autumn!" (set 5 days ago)
 
Location: Foot of the Rockies
90,045 posts, read 108,016,939 times
Reputation: 35673
Here's the methodology, with an interesting comment:

Methodology Of 25 Year Income Growth Analysis - Special Reports - Portfolio.com (http://www.portfolio.com/special-reports/2010/10/13/methodology-of-25-year-income-growth-analysis - broken link)

In 1984, Pittsburgh was in a major recession. It's no wonder per capita income has grown a lot since then.

The region's unemployment rate peaked at 18.2 percent in January 1983, with 212,400 people out of work. In Beaver County alone, which lost at least five major steelmaking plants, the jobless rate hit a staggering 28 percent -- higher than for many states during the Great Depression, Mr. Briem noted.

Read more: For Pittsburgh, this recession is nothing in comparison to '80s

Also note:

El Paso was mired in 99th place with its PCI of $28,638. The only market to finish lower was another Texas metro along the Mexican border, McAllen-Edinburg, at $19,720.

But Portfolio.com took a different tack—looking for the strongest growth rates, not the highest income levels.

Read more: El Paso Texas Sets National Pace For Income Growth - Special Reports - Portfolio.com (http://www.portfolio.com/special-reports/2010/10/13/el-paso-texas-sets-national-pace-for-income-growth#ixzz12GUor16f - broken link)

Further support for my opinion that you can prove just about anything with statistics.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-13-2010, 01:33 PM
 
20,273 posts, read 29,830,154 times
Reputation: 2898
When you compare Pittsburgh's per capita income to the U.S. metro average, 1984 wasn't the trough--that actually came a bit later in the 1980s:



By the way, I was wrong above--Pittsburgh was above the overall U.S. average for per capita income in the late 1970s, but still slightly below the U.S. metro average.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-13-2010, 02:21 PM
Status: "Autumn!" (set 5 days ago)
 
Location: Foot of the Rockies
90,045 posts, read 108,016,939 times
Reputation: 35673
Quote:
Originally Posted by BrianTH View Post
When you compare Pittsburgh's per capita income to the U.S. metro average, 1984 wasn't the trough--that actually came a bit later in the 1980s:


By the way, I was wrong above--Pittsburgh was above the overall U.S. average for per capita income in the late 1970s, but still slightly below the U.S. metro average.
No, but it was pretty low. If UE was 18.2% in 1983 (and 28% in Beaver County), it was likely higher than that in 1984, according to this graph.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-13-2010, 03:25 PM
 
20,273 posts, read 29,830,154 times
Reputation: 2898
Quote:
Originally Posted by Katiana View Post
No, but it was pretty low.
Interestingly, as of 1984 it was pretty much around the same as it was prior to the late 1970s bubble.

Anyway, here is the same graph, now with three different linear fits: to the whole series, starting in 1984 (like the study), and starting in 1991 (when it had recovered to its pre-steel bust levels):



It is true the 1984 fit gives you the highest rate of increase, as you would expect since it starts during the steel bust period (albeit not at the bottom). But all three of these fits nonetheless give you a rising trend, and the 91 fit really isn't that far off from the 1984 fit, meaning the recent trend is pretty robustly positive even if you start from after the steel bust.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-13-2010, 05:09 PM
Status: "Autumn!" (set 5 days ago)
 
Location: Foot of the Rockies
90,045 posts, read 108,016,939 times
Reputation: 35673
I believe the choice of year was that it was 25 years of PCI history, 1984-2009.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-13-2010, 05:20 PM
 
2,326 posts, read 2,460,278 times
Reputation: 1763
I love charts and graphs
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-14-2010, 06:30 AM
 
Location: The canyon (with my pistols and knife)
13,454 posts, read 19,115,179 times
Reputation: 15277
Quote:
Originally Posted by Katiana View Post
Here's the methodology, with an interesting comment:

Methodology Of 25 Year Income Growth Analysis - Special Reports - Portfolio.com (http://www.portfolio.com/special-reports/2010/10/13/methodology-of-25-year-income-growth-analysis - broken link)

In 1984, Pittsburgh was in a major recession. It's no wonder per capita income has grown a lot since then.

The region's unemployment rate peaked at 18.2 percent in January 1983, with 212,400 people out of work. In Beaver County alone, which lost at least five major steelmaking plants, the jobless rate hit a staggering 28 percent -- higher than for many states during the Great Depression, Mr. Briem noted.

Read more: For Pittsburgh, this recession is nothing in comparison to '80s

Also note:

El Paso was mired in 99th place with its PCI of $28,638. The only market to finish lower was another Texas metro along the Mexican border, McAllen-Edinburg, at $19,720.

But Portfolio.com took a different tack—looking for the strongest growth rates, not the highest income levels.

Read more: El Paso Texas Sets National Pace For Income Growth - Special Reports - Portfolio.com (http://www.portfolio.com/special-reports/2010/10/13/el-paso-texas-sets-national-pace-for-income-growth#ixzz12GUor16f - broken link)

Further support for my opinion that you can prove just about anything with statistics.
Pittsburgh's per capita income growth rate has been well above the U.S. average since 1969.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago
While Pittsburgh ranked low in college attainment in 1970, its gains in this metric since then have been the most rapid. Perhaps not accidentally, Pittsburgh’s growth in per capita income also outpaced other cities in the region.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-14-2010, 07:22 AM
Status: "Autumn!" (set 5 days ago)
 
Location: Foot of the Rockies
90,045 posts, read 108,016,939 times
Reputation: 35673
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gnutella View Post
Pittsburgh's per capita income growth rate has been well above the U.S. average since 1969.
If 1.0 on the graph Brian posted is the US average, which is what I think that means, Pgh's PCI was not at the nat. average from 1969 until 2007. I'm not arguing growth rate, I'm saying, it was pretty low to begin with, especially in the base year of the article, 1984.
Rate this post positively 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:


Settings
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2020 data
Loading data...

123
Hide US histogram

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 > Pennsylvania > Pittsburgh
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2020, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - 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, 36, 37 - Top