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.
I will say that it's surprising to see that Pittsburgh has the lowest percentage of its workforce being six-figure-earners out of all five being compared. I swear every other vehicle near me is a BMW or Mercedes or Ranger Rover these days. Are these vehicles just coming down in price now to the point where progressively lower-earning people are able to afford them, or are an increasingly high portion of Pittsburghers overextending themselves by being "car poor" instead of being "rent poor" as they are in many other cities?
I’m not arguing that a Pittsburgh is “wealthy”. I’m pointing out the fallacy of this particular argument.
Only you didn't do that. Your basic argument is that if we narrow the scope of people we're looking at (to about the thousands rather than millions, which is non-sensical IMO), then we'll get a better idea about how "most" people live.
How does this not amount to "cherrypicking"?
Edit: I went back and re-read your post. Why is that you think median income is not a reflection of how "most" people live (i.e., the social worker, bus driver, etc.)?
Last edited by BajanYankee; 08-15-2019 at 11:39 AM..
I will say that it's surprising to see that Pittsburgh has the lowest percentage of its workforce being six-figure-earners out of all five being compared. I swear every other vehicle near me is a BMW or Mercedes or Ranger Rover these days. Are these vehicles just coming down in price now to the point where progressively lower-earning people are able to afford them, or are an increasingly high portion of Pittsburghers overextending themselves by being "car poor" instead of being "rent poor" as they are in many other cities?
This comparison is by MSA, not city. I'm fairly sure Pittsburgh would have the highest proportion of $100,000+ earners within city limits out of the metros being compared.
This comparison is by MSA, not city. I'm fairly sure Pittsburgh would have the highest proportion of $100,000+ earners within city limits out of the metros being compared.
Ah. Great catch. Yeah, we have a relatively upwardly-mobile city proper these days. Thanks for clarifying.
Ah. Great catch. Yeah, we have a relatively upwardly-mobile city proper these days. Thanks for clarifying.
Yeah. It's also worth mentioning that since we're comparing the entire metro, the outermost areas - like Armstrong and Fayette Counties - are probably way, way less cosmopolitan than outer counties in any of the four other metros. Hence we really don't measure well in terms of "average cosmopolitan-ness"
Yeah. It's also worth mentioning that since we're comparing the entire metro, the outermost areas - like Armstrong and Fayette Counties - are probably way, way less cosmopolitan than outer counties in any of the four other metros. Hence we really don't measure well in terms of "average cosmopolitan-ness"
Doesn't look like it hurts median earning stats much though.
That makes sense. But I'm not asking about just wealth, per se. Bougie, yuppiefied places are usually wealthy, but not every wealthy place is bougie and yuppiefied. When I think of socislly aware, bourgeois, and educated, I think precisely of Ann Arbor. But I think most of metro Detroit is quite distinctky unlike Ann Arbor.
Maybe this article will help with 20 areas in Metro Detroit which attract young professionals.
This article focuses on millennials but the places where they have settled are the same areas which have a high percentage of wealthy, socially aware, and educated people.
2 of them include Royal Oak and Ferndale. Other honorable mentions are Pleasant Ridge, all the Grosse Pointes, Birmingham, and Huntington Woods.
However, I believe that Birmingham is the poster child of Metro Detroit's bougie and yuppiefied area.
I think that my problem with this thread is that it really doesn't take into account voting patterns and demographics.
A lot of the towns in the Metro Detroit aren't like Ann Arbor yet, but they are trending that way based on the politics and demographics that are moving in.
I live in a solid Republican area, but in 20 years, it will be closer to 50-50 b/c the housing being built is meant to attract young , professional families.
I moved from Rochester Hills which is trending 50-50 today, but will be more liberal in the future.
A lot of the people who live here simply aren't "homers". A lot of people my age (mid-40's) moved out b/c they couldn't find jobs here, so the population is being replaced by transplants and immigrants. Everyone I went to college with lives somewhere other than where they grew up.
Just because an area isn't full blown Ann Arbor right this minute doesn't negate the signs that this is the way that a lot of places are heading.
I will say that it's surprising to see that Pittsburgh has the lowest percentage of its workforce being six-figure-earners out of all five being compared. I swear every other vehicle near me is a BMW or Mercedes or Ranger Rover these days. Are these vehicles just coming down in price now to the point where progressively lower-earning people are able to afford them, or are an increasingly high portion of Pittsburghers overextending themselves by being "car poor" instead of being "rent poor" as they are in many other cities?
Not sure where you saw that, though. The ACS data I posted "upthread" has Pittsburgh squarely in the middle (third) in terms of 100K+ earners, at 14.3%, ahead of St. Louis and Cleveland at the metro level.
Not sure where you saw that, though. The ACS data I posted "upthread" has Pittsburgh squarely in the middle (third) in terms of 100K+ earners, at 14.3%, ahead of St. Louis and Cleveland at the metro level.
I think he was talking about this.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BajanYankee
One way to account for demographic differences created by more or less expansive municipal boundaries is to focus exclusively on Non-Hispanic White earnings among full-time workers. That's pretty much apples-to-apples. Below is the number and percentage of Non-Hispanic Whites by MSA earning $100,000 or more. Data comes from the latest ACS 5-year data set.
New York - 1,103,543 (32.1%)
Washington, DC - 468,616 (39.2%)
Chicago - 455,222 (23.6%)
Los Angeles - 447,584 (31.8%)
Boston - 359,946 (27.5%)
Philadelphia - 314,428 (22.4%)
San Francisco - 311,048 (43.3%)
Detroit - 174,490 (17.9%)
Pittsburgh - 99,027 (13.7%)
Cleveland - 75,631 (14.5%)
As you can see, SF is in a different league here. DC is not too far behind. Philly is about right in the middle between Boston and Detroit, which is where we'd expect it to be.
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.
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.
