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.
NYC has a lower income than NYS, so it can't possibly raise the average of NYS, it doesn't work that way
If you have 100 people and there average Income is $100,000 and 40 peoples average income is $75,000 doesnt the other 60 have to have a higher than $100,000 otherwise the average wouldn't be $100,000
You are missing the point again. Your data doesnt support that suburbs have less poverty than cities. Im not trying to get sidetracked into an irrelevant argument.
Here are the facts. I have data showing suburbs have more poverty than cities. You have data that is irrelevant to this discussion and have shown that you are either purposely trying to misread to support a claim, or you dont really understand how to use to make a case.
So please provide information showing that suburbs have lower poverty than cities.
You are missing the point again. Your data doesnt support that suburbs have less poverty than cities. Im not trying to get sidetracked into an irrelevant argument.
Here are the facts. I have data showing suburbs have more poverty than cities. You have data that is irrelevant to this discussion and have shown that you are either purposely trying to misread to support a claim, or you dont really understand how to use to make a case.
So please provide information showing that suburbs have lower poverty than cities.
Thank You
The amount of people in Rural areas is minor in States like RI, CT, MA ect. So that leaves suburban areas
The amount of people in Rural areas is minor in States like RI, CT, MA ect. So that leaves suburban areas
Like I said get statistics to back up your point. Until then we have your word that these areas arent other cities or rural areas. I want evidence.
You need to show that poverty rates are lower in suburbs than cities, not just in one area but the whole country when taking every city and suburb into account.
You have not shown anything yet, except some median incomes, which doesnt relate to this discussion one way or the other.
Like I said get statistics to back up your point. Until then we have your word that these areas arent other cities or rural areas. I want evidence.
You need to show that poverty rates are lower in suburbs than cities, not just in one area but the whole country when taking every city and suburb into account.
You have not shown anything yet, except some median incomes, which doesnt relate to this discussion one way or the other.
Good luck, and I am eager for your proof. Remember keep it relevant, and if it is not relevant than you need to explain why it is with proof.
Ok. I don't feel like bothering to go through each one, but find an example of an urban area of more than 1.5 million people where the core city has less poverty than the suburbs. There might be a few but it's not many. I'm excluding smaller urban areas because it's harder for income to segregate between city and suburb and smaller urban areas.
I am the only one here to have an actual proof to back up my facts.
I know people dont want to hear unpleasant news, but the reality of the situation is not good for suburbanites.
I dont see how posting an unrelated video relates to the conversation at all. If you or anyone else has any sources or evidence they can share that counters what I have shown please provide it. It took me a whole 20 seconds to find relevant and credible information to support everything I have said. It shouldnt take you much longer.
Because most of your "proof" is a repeat of the same statement "you're wrong" over and over again; you're just contradicting the posters here rather than argueing, similar to the video I posted.
Because most of your "proof" is a repeat of the same statement "you're wrong" over and over again; you're just contradicting the posters here rather than argueing, similar to the video I posted.
No, I posted a link from CNNmoney. It explicitly states suburban poverty is higher than city poverty. If you google it you will find the exact same thing many times over. Their is university studies showing the same thing. Sometime in the 2000s there was higher poverty in suburbs.
The proof is there and no one has refuted it. Some people have said, "not true," but they dont have any counter proof. I can understand people being dubious if I didnt have proof but I HAVE PROVIDED proof. No one disagreeing can do this. I know some people are looking and I am still waiting.
So, yes I can say I am right. I can say they are wrong. I have the proof to say this.
Now I never said that every suburb is poorer than every city. Of course you can find exceptions, but overall the poverty rate is higher in suburbs. It is also growing MUCH faster in suburbs.
Now for a discussion what I am asking for is reasonable. I can provide proof why cant anyone else? I can understand this skepticism if I didnt have proof, like the people disagreeing with me lack, but since I have it is time to fess up to the facts.
I think people are shocked because they had some preconceived notion that suburbs had less poverty than cities, and this way true for awhile, but not anymore. However, when presented with proof that you are wrong, and still refusing to change your opinion even in the absence of proof to support your own opinion, that is an ignorant stance.
Ok. I don't feel like bothering to go through each one, but find an example of an urban area of more than 1.5 million people where the core city has less poverty than the suburbs. There might be a few but it's not many. I'm excluding smaller urban areas because it's harder for income to segregate between city and suburb and smaller urban areas.
Other than San Francisco, I don't see any metro where the poorest aren't concentrated in the city.
Unfortunately for the suburbs, they do have more poverty. For every city there are a few suburbs that might be richer than the city, but most suburbs are poorer. Suburbs are also getting poorer, while many cities are now getting richer. The young and educated are flocking to cities, while the previous city poor are going to suburbs. We are seeing a reversal of 60-70 year old trend.
No, I posted a link from CNNmoney. It explicitly states suburban poverty is higher than city poverty. If you google it you will find the exact same thing many times over. Their is university studies showing the same thing. Sometime in the 2000s there was higher poverty in suburbs.
The proof is there and no one has refuted it. Some people have said, "not true," but they dont have any counter proof. I can understand people being dubious if I didnt have proof but I HAVE PROVIDED proof. No one disagreeing can do this. I know some people are looking and I am still waiting.
So, yes I can say I am right. I can say they are wrong. I have the proof to say this.
Now I never said that every suburb is poorer than every city. Of course you can find exceptions, but overall the poverty rate is higher in suburbs. It is also growing MUCH faster in suburbs.
Now for a discussion what I am asking for is reasonable. I can provide proof why cant anyone else? I can understand this skepticism if I didnt have proof, like the people disagreeing with me lack, but since I have it is time to fess up to the facts.
I think people are shocked because they had some preconceived notion that suburbs had less poverty than cities, and this way true for awhile, but not anymore. However, when presented with proof that you are wrong, and still refusing to change your opinion even in the absence of proof to support your own opinion, that is an ignorant stance.
Posters have given a number of cities as examples. I showed the map. It's tedious to go through each city. I'm not shocked, I think you're wrong.
Ok. In the Northeast, the city limits of Boston, Philadelphia, NYC, Baltimore and DC all have a higher poverty rate than the rest of the metro area. If you don't believe those numbers, I could give a bit more detail on a specific city, though btownboss showed some numbers. Katiana showed similar with Denver.
Unfortunately for the suburbs, they do have more poverty. For every city there are a few suburbs that might be richer than the city, but most suburbs are poorer. Suburbs are also getting poorer, while many cities are now getting richer. The young and educated are flocking to cities, while the previous city poor are going to suburbs. We are seeing a reversal of 60-70 year old trend.
No that doesn't help you. Those numbers say the total number of poor in suburbs is greater than the total number of poor in cities. This isn't surprising since there are more people in suburbs than cities in the US. This has little do with the poverty rate of city vs suburb.
The amount of population in an urban area in the center city varies a lot. In some urban areas, only 15% lives in the limits of the center city. The poverty rate difference would have to be enormous for there to be more poor people in the city vs suburb.
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.
