Most of Pittsburgh's poor are young and in the suburbs

[sparrowmint]

Originally Posted by h_curtis

Goes to show you how a stupid headline can distort the truth. If you look at the REAL numbers there are more people in the city limits per capita that are living in poverty. Per capita is all that matters.

It never is good to generalize about Pittsburgh or the suburbs. Etna and Sewickley Heights are both suburbs, but just a little different, don't you think? The average income in Fox Chapel is almost $300K a year. There is no section of the city that could compete with that. The variety is just too huge to generalize in either place.

Yes, but there's still a story here, and the story is in the details, not just the headline or lede. The point of the story wasn't "God! The suburbs are the worst!!" The story is, growing poverty in Penn Hills, where did the people come from? Many of them from within Pittsburgh, pushed out (among other reasons). Whenever we talk about the possibility of the Hill District gentrifying or anything like that, it doesn't raise the fortunes of anyone there, it just pushes them somewhere else, possibly somewhere with inferior transportation and fewer opportunities, as the woman studying Penn Hills found.

[speagles84]

Originally Posted by h_curtis

Goes to show you how a stupid headline can distort the truth. If you look at the REAL numbers there are more people in the city limits per capita that are living in poverty. Per capita is all that matters.

It never is good to generalize about Pittsburgh or the suburbs. Etna and Sewickley Heights are both suburbs, but just a little different, don't you think? The average income in Fox Chapel is almost $300K a year. There is no section of the city that could compete with that. The variety is just too huge to generalize in either place.

I completely agree. Certain people like to just grab whatever data there is to make a story. There are only a handful of suburbs that would be, per capita, poorer than the city.

Originally Posted by sparrowmint

Yes, but there's still a story here, and the story is in the details, not just the headline or lede. The point of the story wasn't "God! The suburbs are the worst!!" The story is, growing poverty in Penn Hills, where did the people come from? Many of them from within Pittsburgh, pushed out (among other reasons). Whenever we talk about the possibility of the Hill District gentrifying or anything like that, it doesn't raise the fortunes of anyone there, it just pushes them somewhere else, possibly somewhere with inferior transportation and fewer opportunities, as the woman studying Penn Hills found.

Exactly!! Also though, Penn Hills per capita still is wealthier than the city; so generalizing Penn Hills is all poor is a terrible assumption. Penn Hills is a huge municipality and has tons of small neighborhoods that encompass it.

[sparrowmint]

Originally Posted by speagles84

Exactly!! Also though, Penn Hills per capita still is wealthier than the city; so generalizing Penn Hills is all poor is a terrible assumption. Penn Hills is a huge municipality and has tons of small neighborhoods that encompass it.

Well no one characterized Penn Hills as all poor. But the west side is pretty poor, and in general, it's getting worse over time as people get pushed out from other areas and as middle class people get opportunities to move elsewhere (and that economic demographic isn't being replaced in equal numbers). And if you're poor and happen to not have stable transportation, your situation is only going to get worse by living in Penn Hills.

In my area, a fair number of houses have gone up for sale, especially due to the owners being elderly (moving for that reason, or having passed). People around here are very quick to take lowball offers from groups like "We Buy Houses," like I've posted about before. Despite them saying they're investors who improve the houses and re-sell, "For Rent" signs go up real fast. Replacing long-term owners with renters all over the place is not a great thing.

[I_Like_Spam]

Originally Posted by zman63

PG had an article this morning. More than 60 percent of those that are impoverished in the the pittsburgh region live in the suburbs....

Majority of Pittsburgh's poor are young, in suburbs - Pittsburgh Post-Gazette

Would you expect anything different? The vast majority of Pittsburghers live in the suburbs, and young people are usually poorer than middle age and elderly who have had a lifetime to accumulate a little wealth.

[Katarina Witt]

Originally Posted by speagles84

Yeah, and it really bugs me about that. I've just decided when talking about Pittsburgh, I'm just going to start comparing Urban Areas. That's the fairest way to compare places. In reality, Pittsburgh isn't 2.661 million like our CSA suggests. Northwest Indiana County really isn't part of Pittsburgh anymore. Just including Allegheny County and the fringes of Washington and Butler and part way into Westmoreland and Beaver you get 1.8 million people and truly the extent of where Pittsburgh reaches. Ironically, it refutes the notions that Pittsburgh is non-diverse to a considerable degree. It keeps the African American population of the UA above 13%,Asian American above 3%, Hispanic above 2%, etc etc and also keeps the median income up as well.

Please post some supporting stats.

[speagles84]

Originally Posted by Katiana

Please post some supporting stats.

It's not a clear stat, more I took the liberty of adding Allegheny County and the surrounding areas. Little less than my estimate, I admit, but the point remains. I've seen studies saying our metro is 90%+ white; the UA is only 83.7% by my calcs. 20 years ago, I'd guess it was over 90%, maybe even sooner.

2010 Census Interactive Population Map

Allegheny County

White - 978,225 (79.9%)
AA - 184,460 (15.0%)
Asian - 36,070 (3.1%)
Hispanic - 19,070 (1.7%)
Other - 5,523 (0.3%)

Peters Township

White - 20,097 (94.7%)
AA - 110 (0.5%)
Asian - 617 (2.9%)
Hispanic - 316 (1.5%)
Other - 73 (0.4%)

etc etc

And came up with

Pittsburgh Combined Urban Area

Total - 1,821,790 (100%)
White - 1,524,991 (83.7%)
AA - 217,633 (12.0%)
Asian - 45,537 (2.5%)
Hispanic - 26,170 (1.5%)
Other - 7,459 (0.3%)

EDIT: As compared to CSA stats. (From wiki)

As of the census[20] of 2000, there were 2,525,730 people, 1,032,596 households, and 678,085 families residing within the CSA. The racial makeup of the CSA was 90.0% White, 7.7% African American, 0.1% Native American, 1.1% Asian, <0.1% Pacific Islander, 0.3% from other races, and 0.9% from two or more races. 0.7% were Hispanic or Latino of any race.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pittsbu...a#Demographics

[Katarina Witt]

Actually, the US is 77.9% white, and only 63% white non-Hispanic.
USA QuickFacts from the US Census Bureau
White alone, percent, 2012 (a) 77.9%
Black or African American alone, percent definition and source info Black or African American alone, percent, 2012 (a) 13.1%
American Indian and Alaska Native alone, percent definition and source info American Indian and Alaska Native alone, percent, 2012 (a) 1.2%
Asian alone, percent definition and source info Asian alone, percent, 2012 (a) 5.1%
Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander alone, percent definition and source info Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander alone, percent, 2012 (a) 0.2%
Two or More Races, percent definition and source info Two or More Races, percent, 2012 2.4%
Hispanic or Latino, percent definition and source info Hispanic or Latino, percent, 2012 (b) 16.9%
White alone, not Hispanic or Latino, percent definition and source info White alone, not Hispanic or Latino, percent, 2012 63.0%

Subtracting out the Hispanic population from the white pop, Pittsburgh is 82.2% white non-Hispanic.

[gg]

Maybe the headlines should also read, MOST of the young rich live in the suburbs? Considering most people live in suburbs I would imagine that is true as well. Sort of shows how STUPID this poorly written mess is. Written by a moron no doubt.

[Uptown kid]

Do suburbs include all county neighborhoods besides the several cities (Pittsburgh, Duquesne, McKeesport, etc)? If so Penn Hills poorest areas (Lincoln Park, Hulton Arbors, Leechburg Gardens, etc) and scattered section 8 has nothing on: Allepo/Leetsdale, McKees Rocks, the 15104, East Pittsburgh, South Swissvale, Homestead/Muhall, the rest if the Mon Valley, etc.
If the suburbs include all non city neighborhoods, IMO this would make logical sense... As there are more highly populated poor areas in the rest of county than in the city of Pittsburgh proper.