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.
1) even your own link shows Massachusetts spending nearly 25% more on welfare than PA. There is a reason Massachusetts has an net inflow of low income households despite its COL.
2) SPM is actually not great because it measures costs by % of income. So if you make $15.00 and spend 90% of your money on Food/Rent/Utilities vs make $10 and spend 85% on such. One is impoverished and the other isn’t. However if you make $15 you have the same disposable income.
Cost-adjusted (i.e., the "purchasing power" of welfare benefits would go further in PA) spending would bring these states much closer to parity, if not an outright advantage in PA.
SPM is not perfect, but clearly it's much more accurate than the traditional measure. And yes, anyone spending anywhere close to 85-90% of their income on basic necessities is most likely going to be impoverished.
Disposable income is still subject to higher COL once you decide to spend it.
I mean adjusted for inflation... The guys from Southie and the loud mouthers from Revere in the 80s-90s weren't exactly making much more than 38k a year.. but they still found a way to plaster Boston everywhere lol.
That wasn't snobby, that's more like repping your hood. But speaking of those folks...
Also underrated how many more blue-collar feeling suburbs there are in the Bosotn are even if the income are middle class on paper. Adjusted for COL it ain't much.
Lotta scruffier, worn, decidedly unsnobby suburbs south of Boston. As well as some places to the north, but more so in the Merrimack Valley. Those regions feel noticeably different than MetroWest.
Typically former Bostonians who move up and out move to those regions^ not West.
Cost-adjusted (i.e., the "purchasing power" of welfare benefits would go further in PA) spending would bring these states much closer to parity, if not an outright advantage in PA.
SPM is not perfect, but clearly it's much more accurate than the traditional measure. And yes, anyone spending anywhere close to 85-90% of their income on basic necessities is most likely going to be impoverished.
Disposable income is still subject to higher COL once you decide to spend it.
Not true since a lot of housing stuff isn’t direct spending it’s tax credits or building incentives so didn’t show up in that $3250/2600. So it’s like for food or gas or something. Which are comparable cost.
SPM does inflate more expensive places poverty rates. It rates someone who makes 60k spending 2400 in rent equally housing burdened than somebody mamkng 25k paying 1000 in rent. That is not the same thing because a banana isn’t $.35c in Buffalo but $3 in SF. So living of $1000 is not the same as living of $450 after housing anywhere. This inflation in certainly enough to make a couple percent difference between PA and MA. This is the same reason that Boston is wealthier than Philly by a good amount despite housing costs differences. GDP per capita is 27%+ higher in Boston. 18 Montclair posted several things that Boston/SF/Philly and Chicago are all equally affordable to most of their residents based on % of people who spend over 1/3rd of their income on rent/mortgages.
Thirdly you ignored otherthings that are non welfare like family leave and required PTO which don’t exist in PA but do in MA for all workers. I think it’s fair to say MA takes care of its workers better than PA.
So the whole “everyone is treated with dignity and Respect here unlike literally every other city” line is complete bull. Not to mention Most American cities like Boston or NY were also founded on very practical minimalists cultures. Not like the Puritans were big fans of vanity either
Last edited by btownboss4; 03-12-2021 at 11:57 AM..
This is pretty old data? Shows Philly ahead of both of the Texas giants.
Ye it's quite old. Wiki has them around #16 now so they got passed by Dallas, Houston, DC, SF, and Boston in the intermediate years as well as Shanghai and Bejing.
Their economy has still grown by a good 50b since then, it's just these other cities have been passed them out. So I can see why they get left behind in a sense.
Philly is less snobby because it’s poorer. Hard to be snobby when you make. $38k/year.
One thing that binds “snobby metros” is they’re all very wealthy. Except LA
If we are looking at city proper, then yes, Philadelphia has a larger % of poor or impoverished people, but lets not pretend that poor and poverty is nonexistent in Boston or New York.
The same way Philadelphia gets downplayed for its wealth and economy, Boston is up-played. Plus, if we break down stats, then Miami is by far the poorest region in this poll. When factoring in the Philadelphia burbs, it falls right in line with Chicago, New York, Dallas, Houston, etc. in terms of relative wealth and economics. But I am used your shady / uninformed comments...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Boston Shudra
Maybe fewer than in Middlesex/Norfolk, but there are still plenty of wealthy folks in Montgomery and Chester Counties.
And Delaware and Bucks Counties. Those 2 counties have a larger socio-economic mix, but some of the most affluent municipalities in the state are located in those 2 counties (in addition to the huge range of wealthy areas in Chester & Montgomery Counties).
Plus, similar to Boston, the Philadelphia burbs are among the most elite in the nation due to their long/unique history, local institutions, elite universities, old money, etc. You really do not find much of that in most other large metros. Which is why Philadelphia safely has a place in the coastal elite group, regardless of misconceptions or Philadelphia being a poorer city proper.
Outsiders underestimate Philadelphia so much. There is so much wealth in its suburbs. Most people only know it from Center City and South Philadelphia (which is basically a mini Queens).
For example. Vanguard is one of the largest financial institutions in the world, rivaling anything in Manhattan. Few recognize it because it sits in the Philadelphia suburbs and does not have a front row high rise in Center City.
Philadelphia is one of the few cities to have an active operating NASDAQ marketplace live on the floor. Again, few people know this. Philadelphia was one of the original centers of finance in the USA, before NYC and while NYC has taken that crown, the finance industry still is quite strong in the Philadelphia metro.
Yup, for better or worse the Philadelphia suburbs are unique in that they are a major (rather independent) economic, educational and institutional powerhouse with many strong connections to finance, education and law.
Philadelphia has a presence of this too, but as a city & region its sometimes overlooked unless people know that world or are familiar with the region.
I've met people in New York (and beyond) who attended Villanova or visited that area for a work / educational event and they were amazed at the entire Main Line region, which is good to hear, but frustrating why people are surprised. The Philadelphia region is one of the oldest and most established in the nation, it should be no less surprising to see wealthy, elite institutions, etc. than in New York, Boston, DC, etc.
But perceptions change over time, lets hope Philadelphia (city) can continue its boom post-pandemic, which will further change perceptions.
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.
