Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S.
 [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 03-07-2016, 08:31 AM
 
22 posts, read 38,304 times
Reputation: 11

Advertisements

Rural poverty in the US is mostly associated with the South and the Midwest , however I bet that there are poor rural areas in New England as well . I know there are poor places in the Western US and the Mid Atlantic States ( Pennsylvania comes to mind ) , but I don't know of any poor rural areas in New England .


So are there any areas like that ?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 03-07-2016, 09:23 AM
 
93,264 posts, read 123,898,066 times
Reputation: 18258
Umm, there is rural poverty pretty much everywhere to some degree.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-07-2016, 09:30 AM
 
1,586 posts, read 2,148,148 times
Reputation: 2418
Much of rural Maine struggles with poverty. And I've been through some rough-looking rural parts of Massachusetts. But I feel like you don't hear about poverty in New England because it pales in comparison with the levels you see in a region like Appalachia.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-07-2016, 10:08 AM
 
Location: Santa Cruz, CA
1,722 posts, read 1,742,090 times
Reputation: 1341
Quote:
Originally Posted by boulevardofdef View Post
Much of rural Maine struggles with poverty. And I've been through some rough-looking rural parts of Massachusetts. But I feel like you don't hear about poverty in New England because it pales in comparison with the levels you see in a region like Appalachia.
I think that's true.
It's not my sense (and it wasn't when i lived all around Northern New England) that there was the kind of poverty where, for example, the kids are getting enough to eat although i'm sure there is some small degree of poverty like that.
There are certainly people all over rural N.E. who, though they may not be going to bed hungry, are struggling to make ends meet as is the case all over the U.S..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-07-2016, 10:18 AM
 
Location: Minneapolis, Minnesota
1,912 posts, read 2,089,823 times
Reputation: 4048
Quote:
Originally Posted by Little Big Man View Post
Rural poverty in the US is mostly associated with the South and the Midwest
It is? According to this map from the CDC, rural poverty is more of a problem in the South and the West:

Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-07-2016, 10:22 AM
 
Location: Pittsburgh, PA (Morningside)
14,353 posts, read 17,022,283 times
Reputation: 12406
There really is less of it in New England than the South. Albeit it's not the absolute lowest in the nation.



It's worth noting that New England has always been an area which hasn't had a lot of rural poor people. Indeed, it was noted even in Colonial times that virtually everyone was what would be considered "middle class" today - small landowners and tradesmen - while in the South there were tons of poor landless farm laborers (black and white). It wasn't until the 19th century that New England really developed a working class, which by and large was imported from French Canada and Ireland.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-07-2016, 11:01 AM
 
Location: Texas
1,982 posts, read 2,089,310 times
Reputation: 2185
Quote:
Originally Posted by eschaton View Post
There really is less of it in New England than the South. Albeit it's not the absolute lowest in the nation.



It's worth noting that New England has always been an area which hasn't had a lot of rural poor people. Indeed, it was noted even in Colonial times that virtually everyone was what would be considered "middle class" today - small landowners and tradesmen - while in the South there were tons of poor landless farm laborers (black and white). It wasn't until the 19th century that New England really developed a working class, which by and large was imported from French Canada and Ireland.
Sorry if this is a stupid question, but are the colors based on the poverty rate of the state or just the state excluding urban/(possibly suburban) areas? Also, is it nominal or COL?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-07-2016, 11:33 AM
 
Location: Pittsburgh, PA (Morningside)
14,353 posts, read 17,022,283 times
Reputation: 12406
Quote:
Originally Posted by Parhe View Post
Sorry if this is a stupid question, but are the colors based on the poverty rate of the state or just the state excluding urban/(possibly suburban) areas? Also, is it nominal or COL?
Appears to be based upon rural areas only.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-07-2016, 12:53 PM
 
Location: USA
2,753 posts, read 3,311,589 times
Reputation: 2192
New England in general is pretty urban compared to other parts of the U.S. Massachusetts, Connecticut, and Rhode Island are 3 of the 5 most densely populated states in the country. Maine and Vermont consist of the most rural poverty in New England IMO but it's not as poor as parts of the Deep South and west. I believe most of the poverty in New England actually comes from its major cities, not its rural areas. Springfield MA, Hartford CT, Worcester MA, Bridgeport CT, and Boston MA have ALOT of poor areas.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-07-2016, 12:56 PM
 
Location: USA
2,753 posts, read 3,311,589 times
Reputation: 2192
Quote:
Originally Posted by eschaton View Post
There really is less of it in New England than the South. Albeit it's not the absolute lowest in the nation.



It's worth noting that New England has always been an area which hasn't had a lot of rural poor people. Indeed, it was noted even in Colonial times that virtually everyone was what would be considered "middle class" today - small landowners and tradesmen - while in the South there were tons of poor landless farm laborers (black and white). It wasn't until the 19th century that New England really developed a working class, which by and large was imported from French Canada and Ireland.
Rhode Island is so small you can barely see its green dot.

I'm not surprised with Kentucky at all but I am surprised with Wyoming. It's percentage is nearly as the same as many NE states.
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:


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 > General U.S.

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 08:42 AM.

© 2005-2024, 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