[Steely Dan]

from the chicago tribune: http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/sns-ap-suburban-poverty,1,7912056.story?coll=chi-news-hed


12 Million Suburbanites Live in Poverty

By STEPHEN OHLEMACHER
Associated Press Writer
Published December 6, 2006, 11:37 PM CST

WASHINGTON -- As Americans flee the cities for the suburbs, many are failing to leave poverty behind.

The suburban poor outnumbered their inner-city counterparts for the first time last year, with more than 12 million suburban residents living in poverty, according to a study of the nation's 100 largest metropolitan areas released Thursday.

"Economies are regional now," said Alan Berube, who co-wrote the report for the Brookings Institution, a Washington think tank. "Where you see increases in city poverty, in almost every metropolitan area, you also see increases in suburban poverty."

Nationally, the poverty rate leveled off last year at 12.6 percent after increasing every year since the decade began. It was a period when the country went through a recession and an uneven recovery that is still sputtering in parts of the Northeast and Midwest.

"Looking back at the 1970s, you would have seen cities suffering and suburbs staying the same," said Berube, research director at the Brookings Institution's Metropolitan Policy Program. "But the story is different today."

Berube said several factors are contributing to an increase in suburban poverty:

* Suburbs are adding people much faster than cities, making it inevitable that the number of poor people living in suburbs would eventually surpass those living in cities.

* The poverty rate in large cities (18.8 percent) is still higher than it is in the suburbs (9.4 percent). But the overall number of people living in poverty is higher in the suburbs in part because of population growth.

* America's suburbs are becoming more diverse, racially and economically. "There's poverty really everywhere in metropolitan areas because there are low-wage jobs everywhere," Berube said.

* Recent immigrants are increasingly bypassing cities and moving directly to suburbs, especially in the South and West. Those immigrants, on average, have lower incomes than people born in the United States.

Berube and research analyst Elizabeth Kneebone studied poverty figures for the 100 largest metropolitan areas, measuring changes from 1999 to 2005, the most recent data available.

In 1999, the number of poor people living in cities and suburbs was roughly even, at about 10.3 million apiece, according to the report. Last year, the suburban poor outnumbered their urban counterparts by about 1.2 million.

The federal government defined the poverty level as $15,577 for a family of three in 2005.

"Traditionally, cities have been viewed as home to poor populations, surrounded by middle- and upper-income suburbs," the report said. "This 'tipping' of poor populations to the suburbs represents a signal development that upends historical notions about who lives in cities and suburbs."

Marc H. Morial, president and CEO of the National Urban League, said many of the same social and economic problems that have plagued cities for years are now affecting suburbs: struggling schools, rising crime and low-paying jobs.

"I call it the urbanization of the suburbs," Morial said.

"I hope this says to people that the way to confront poverty is not to wall it off and concentrate it," Morial said. "You really need policies to eliminate it."

Cleveland was the city with the highest poverty rate last year, at 32.4 percent, while San Jose had the lowest, at 9.7 percent.

Suburban McAllen, Texas, at the southern tip of the state, was the suburb with the highest poverty rate last year, at 43.9 percent, while suburban Des Moines, Iowa, had the lowest, at 3.7 percent.

* __

On The Net:

The report, including data for the 100 largest metro areas:

http://www.brookings.edu/metro/pubs/20061130_suburbanpoverty.pdf

[david23]

Older suburbs are turning into ghettos, what are we going to do? Just look at LA's suburbs that were built in the 40's and 50's. Truly sad.

[waterloowarrior]

http://tools.morningstar.com/charts/MStarCharts.aspx?Security=APPB&CountryId=USA&TimeFrame=M1&Totals=&Types=&bSize=299&Legend=Yes

no wonder my applebees stock has been falling

[Jared]

Uh oh! Time to move even farther out to escape the incoming poor people! :koko:

[JMancuso]

american cities are becoming europeanized

[MercurySky]

Stop crime,and sprawl will not move nearly as fast.

[Xing]

What is McAllen, Texas a suburb of?

[scribeman]

Uh oh! Time to move even farther out to escape the incoming poor people! :koko:
This article seems to indicate both a desire to spear the suburbs as Teh Soopar Eval: Why We City Folk Are Better and a misguided attempt to indicate some very vague statistics.
If there's increasing poverty in suburban America, I would point to other economic factors, including but not limited to the recent housing burst, static wages, a general trend back towards the cities for those who can afford it, the aging populace left behind in the suburbs by their children (who now live in "cities"), etc.
While it's a given that people will badly and incorrectly misinterpret data, due to either stupidity or avarice, I knew I could rely on one poster to try and pass this off on Those Biggoted Racist Evil Suburbans Fleeing The Untouchables.

[KevinFromTexas]

McAllen isn't really a suburb of another larger city, though, that area of Texas is pretty suburban. There's several small cities down there clustered together. The metro area is at about 700,000 now. Behind the 6 major cities of Texas it's the next largest metro area in the state and is even closing in on El Paso's metro pop.

McAllen, Texas.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McAllen%2C_Texas

Rio Grande Valley region.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rio_Grande_Valley

McAllen - 123,622
Weslaco - 31,081
Metro Pop - 678,275

The whole area combined including the other cities, which are part of another metro area, but are generally the same region have around 1.1 million people.

Brownsville - 167,493 - (The largest city in the Valley).
Harlingen - 62,318
Edinburg - 48,465
Pharr - 46,660
Mission - 45,408
Port Isabel - 4,865
South Padre Island - 2,475 - (South Padre Island actually has most of the highrises in the Valley).
Metro Pop - 398,693

[Jared]

This article seems to indicate both a desire to spear the suburbs as Teh Soopar Eval: Why We City Folk Are Better and a misguided attempt to indicate some very vague statistics.
If there's increasing poverty in suburban America, I would point to other economic factors, including but not limited to the recent housing burst, static wages, a general trend back towards the cities for those who can afford it, the aging populace left behind in the suburbs by their children (who now live in "cities"), etc.
While it's a given that people will badly and incorrectly misinterpret data, due to either stupidity or avarice, I knew I could rely on one poster to try and pass this off on Those Biggoted Racist Evil Suburbans Fleeing The Untouchables.

Click here to be enlightened:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sarcasm

[scribeman]

Click here to be enlightened:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sarcasm
Then that was my mistake. But you have to admit, you were waiting for it.

[i-215]

Older suburbs are turning into ghettos, what are we going to do? Just look at LA's suburbs that were built in the 40's and 50's. Truly sad.

Yeah, but it's still gonna cost me $800,000 to buy one of those shacks if I ever try to move to So. Cal.

[miketoronto]

Yeah, but it's still gonna cost me $800,000 to buy one of those shacks if I ever try to move to So. Cal.

Thats what I don't understand. Housing prices in many inner suburbs are very high, yet their incomes are much lower then the outter suburbs. So who is buying and affording these homes??????????????????????????????????????

I notice this in Toronto where some inner suburb areas have very expensive housing, yet the family incomes are like 10,000-15,000 below outter suburbs with cheaper housing.

[Buckeye Native 001]

Older suburbs are turning into ghettos, what are we going to do? Just look at LA's suburbs that were built in the 40's and 50's. Truly sad.

Which ones in particular are you referring to? South Central? East LA? West LA? Long Beach? SFV? SGV? Orange County?

It ain't all shit.

[scribeman]

Thats what I don't understand. Housing prices in many inner suburbs are very high, yet their incomes are much lower then the outter suburbs. So who is buying and affording these homes??????????????????????????????????????

I notice this in Toronto where some inner suburb areas have very expensive housing, yet the family incomes are like 10,000-15,000 below outter suburbs with cheaper housing.
I suspect the prices are high because of insurance concerns and property shortage. Inner city real estate is STILL real estate, and because it's "inner" city it's in extremely short supply. So the spillover costs from more desirable real estate raise the prices of even the undesirable real estate.

[Jared]

Then that was my mistake. But you have to admit, you were waiting for it.

heh, no worries; you're fairly new here, and likely dont yet know what various forumers tend to think about things. Watch out for Chicago103 though; he's dead serious when he says it. ;)

[EastSideHBG]

Thats what I don't understand. Housing prices in many inner suburbs are very high, yet their incomes are much lower then the outter suburbs. So who is buying and affording these homes??????????????????????????????????????
Well what I am seeing in my area is the rich are buying them, or people who just barely can afford it (but I am betting on a foreclosure in the future; you can only squeak by for so long, and one disaster will more than likely do them in).

I don't like the direction American metros are headed at all, and I don't see good things for our future. The middle-class is quickly disappearing, and once you get rid of that important group, forget it...

[PhillyRising]

So I guess the poor in the burbs are driving 10 year old SUV's....and work as a cashier at Wal-Mart or hostess at Applebee's.

[david23]

Which ones in particular are you referring to? South Central? East LA? West LA? Long Beach? SFV? SGV? Orange County?

It ain't all shit.

East SFV and central LA county in particular have turned into massive ghettos.

[crisp444]

Central LA County - yeah, pretty much.
East SFV - really? I know there are some not-nice portions of it, but isn't most of it still fairly middle class? I haven't been in a while.

[WesTheAngelino]

Crisp:

You are on my list of hoity toity gays who thumb their noses at the poor. Just thought I'd let you know.

[crisp444]

Huh???

1) I'm not gay
2) Why do you say I "thumb my nose at the poor?"
3) Why would you express that on this thread? I don't believe that what I said in this thread has to do with my views on the poor at all.

[david23]

Yeah, but it's still gonna cost me $800,000 to buy one of those shacks if I ever try to move to So. Cal.

No, I think you are talking about the Bay area, not So Cal. The median price of those shacks in central LA county is $100,000(ex. Bell). The further you drive out the higher the prices. By the time you get to Downey median home price is over $200,000(home to mostly Hispanic middle class). By the time you are in Norwalk the median home price is $300,000; in Lakewood $400,000. When you reach the coast(Palos Verdes) it's well over $1,000,000.

[Chicago103]

Thats what I don't understand. Housing prices in many inner suburbs are very high, yet their incomes are much lower then the outter suburbs. So who is buying and affording these homes??????????????????????????????????????

I notice this in Toronto where some inner suburb areas have very expensive housing, yet the family incomes are like 10,000-15,000 below outter suburbs with cheaper housing.

Well in part its because alot of inner suburbs and certain parts of the city have alot of long term residents that moved there decades ago when housing was alot cheaper and can get by because their house is already paid for. Also its cost per square foot and diverse populations, there is probably is a good deal of rental housing in those more inner areas and those people tend to be poorer whereas in the outer suburbs there is less rental housing and things are more single family detached housing dominated. Also in terms of cost per square foot I believe there are more people living in smaller houses with more people in the city and near suburbs, I know this is true in the Chicago area with hispanics in some city neighborhoods and suburbs like Cicero. Immigrants are a mixed bunch, those that tend to be poorer live in smaller houses in more crowded conditions whereas the immigrants that are better off are more likely to go for that big house in the suburbs.

Even if you look at someone like me I live in a fairly expensive area (for my metro) and yet I make far less than most people in my neighborhood (although the median income is not as high as to correlate to median housing costs), thats because I am a renter and there are lot of rental options in the area. Now I know I am not talking about suburbs right now but the same thing would apply in many of Chicago's inner suburbs. There maybe new yuppy housing or yuppie like people moving in but there is still an older population that tends to be less affluent and there probably are more multi-family rental housing options in Oak Park than in Hoffman Estates. Also you can live car free or car lite in Oak Park and not Hoffman Estates, and car ownership and expenses associated with it can be a significant part of a families budget and eats away what can otherwise be used for housing.

The bottom line is that inner suburbs have more diverse populations in every way whereas in the outer suburbs you encounter people that are more homogonous in terms of income, age, race, etc and also housing options are more homogonous and since a greater percentage of the housing is new the prices tend to be more homogonous as well. You can find deals in older and more urban areas but in new subdivisions everything tends to cost about the same.

[Buckeye Native 001]

I was getting worried that it was 2pm PST and I'd yet to receive my daily installment of Chicago103's "Why doesn't everybody else live like me?" post.

;)

[UncleRando]

Here is a similar article published in Cincy about the local effects.

Study: Suburban poverty up
In region, 9.4% of those residents classified as poor
BY PEGGY O'FARRELL | ENQUIRER STAFF WRITER

CINCINNATI - Cincinnati's suburbs are getting poorer as they get bigger, a new study from the Brookings Institution shows.

The number of poor families living within Cincinnati increased slightly - from 21 percent to 25 percent, the study showed. Statistics were based on data from the 2000 Census and the 2005 American Community Survey.

In the suburbs, poverty increased from 7.1 percent to 9.4 percent, a jump mirrored by national trends, said Alan Benrube, a fellow and research director with Brookings' metropolitan policy program.

The increase gave the metropolitan area one of the fastest growing suburban poverty rates of communities studied in the report, he said. The number of children living in poverty also increased throughout the region, the study showed.

The study used 2005 federal income guidelines to define poverty, Benrube said, which is a yearly income of about $20,000 or less for a family of four.

Benrube said the shift was probably due more to suburban residents suffering job losses and other economic setbacks than to low-income families leaving Cincinnati.

"Economies are regional in nature," he said. "With economic weakness affecting a lot of the Midwest, and especially Ohio in the last several years, people in the suburbs aren't immune to that. They're losing their jobs. They're seeing their hours cut back. They're seeing their salaries cut. And a lot of families are falling into poverty," he said.

Retail growth in suburban communities also means more low-wage jobs, Benrube said. "What it means is that poverty is there to stay in the suburbs because that's where the low-wage jobs are," he said.

Liz Carter, executive director of St. Vincent de Paul, said residents shouldn't be surprised by the report's findings. "A lot of the work we do is out in the suburbs," she said. "It's exactly in those areas where a lot of people are thinking that the poor people are all downtown and far away from me."

Clermont County is one area where St. Vincent de Paul's calls for help are increasing, she said, but Ohio's continuing economic slump, coupled with higher fuel and utility costs, means lower-income families everywhere are hurting.

"What we see all the time is you basically have so many people who live very, very close to the edge. They work. They have jobs and they can afford an apartment. But (when) one of the parents gets sick and is out of work for six months or the car breaks down, let one of those things happen and all of a sudden the stability that let them just barely manage is gone," Carter said.

E-mail pofarrell@enquirer.com
http://news.enquirer.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20061211/NEWS01/612110396/1077/COL02

[LoKKiTo]

HMM...?

http://encyclopedia.quickseek.com/images/Usa_suburb.jpg

http://www.southeasternstone.com/images/Autumn%20Brown%20Gables%20Foundationlg.jpg

OR

http://ksgaccman.harvard.edu/hotc/getFile.asp?id=529

http://iws.punahou.edu/user/JStevens/project/Queensbridge%5B1%5D-thumb.jpg

:shrug:

[LMich]

Yeah, because both those examples represent the full spectrum of urban and suburban living, huh? lol Please. You seem to love stereotypes to death. Some style, but little substance.

[LoKKiTo]

Yeah, because both those examples represent the full spectrum of urban and suburban living, huh? lol Please. You seem to love stereotypes to death. Some style, but little substance.

:D

No, just a little reminder poverty is everywhere.

Urban VS Suburban living... The equivalent of the Middle East, Northern Ireland and the war on drugs on this forum. Endless...

:haha:

[LostInTheZone]

and your post, did so much to enlighten the discussion. Thank you.

[passdoubt]

Well lokkito has a point. The article's headline is kinda misleading. It's relying on the fact that people don't know how to interpret statistics, and don't know the difference between raw numbers and rates. The article notes that the poverty rate is still much lower than that of core cities... the suburban poor are only equal in size now because so many people live in the suburbs.

The suburbs are still mostly unique in the fact that poverty rates are incredibly low. Both urban and rural America are far poorer. Of course there are exceptions, but for the most part American suburbia is not a poor place at all. What were seeing is simply enlargening of the poor urban core, as suburbs and exurbs also move further out into formerly-poor rural areas.

[austin356]

There is a major positive to this trend imo:

That is that over the last 1/2 century it was the middle class/rich in the suburbs and poor/rich in the cities. This meant that the poor were always separated from those who are more educated and subsequently more well off and not interacting with anyone above what their current standard for life was.

Now with the middle class/lower class living in the suburbs and the rich living in the cities, then you will find that the lower class is more able to lift themselves up to the middle class because that is who their children are going to school with/hanging out with/etc.. It also means that poverty is not and will become less consolidated thus effectively eliminating to some degree the "Hoods" where one had little chance for future success or even a future chance for a job.

Bottom line is I think the lower class is better off with the middle class than with the upper class (who avoid them anyway). And I also believe that spreading out poverty actually helps fight poverty because it eliminates that "poverty culture" that became ingraved in central ATL, the Bronx, South Central LA, South Chicago, etc.

[JMancuso]

lokkito, dude...move upstate.

[DeadManWalking]

The farther out the middle class move, the more poverty there will be in the suburbs.

Let me explain my logic. In the past many of the poor lived in the inner city and commuted to the suburbs to work in service jobs. At some point in time commuting from the inner city has become too much of a hassle due to the suburbs being too far away. The only way the poor could continue to work is if they moved closer to the work, and out into the suburbs.

[Jeff_in_Dayton]

You are starting to see that in some areas I'm familiar with, where apartment complexes near major retail areas are attracting poorer people and minoritys so they can be closer to work (less of a bus ride).

But there is also that downward mobilty poverty happening, too, in areas that used to have a lot of higher-paying blue collar jobs. Ive seen this happen in Louisville, where working class suburbia in the "Southwest County", dating from the 1950s & early 60s became poorer and poorer, to the point one is seeing board-ups in some of these old working class subdivisions (which are pretty far out from the city, too), and the opening of thrift stores and food banks.

For Dayton, a good map on this...showing the long term increase in poverty in both the inner city and out into suburbia...

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v240/Jeff59c/misc%20II/Dpov5.jpg

[austin356]

For Dayton, a good map on this...showing the long term increase in poverty in both the inner city and out into suburbs

Luckily this is limited to certain areas, mostly the rust belt. This is imo, the main cause for the rise in populism in states such as Ohio.

[MJB83]

No, I think you are talking about the Bay area, not So Cal. The median price of those shacks in central LA county is $100,000(ex. Bell). The further you drive out the higher the prices. By the time you get to Downey median home price is over $200,000(home to mostly Hispanic middle class). By the time you are in Norwalk the median home price is $300,000; in Lakewood $400,000. When you reach the coast(Palos Verdes) it's well over $1,000,000.

The medians are all about the same for the places you mention, except Palos Verdes: they're all around $500k. It's not so much the housing prices that vary, but rather the rates of homeownership, income levels, and overcrowding.

(Medians at: http://www.dqnews.com/ZIPCAR.shtm )

[TomAuch]

Inner suburbs are becoming like this because there is no middle class. If you look at some of the inner suburbs around NYC in Westchester and LI, people there are either rich (ie. Bronxville, Scarsdale, Larchmont, and parts of New Rochelle and Mamaroneck) or poor (ie. Yonkers, Mt. Vernon, parts of New Rochelle and Mamaroneck, and Port Chester.) The middle class in Westchester/Hudson Valley are moving further up north to Putnam County, Orange County, or Dutchess County, where the taxes are housing are much lower. Meanwhile, places like Westchester, Fairfield County, CT and Nassau County are becoming filled with either extreme wealth or extreme poverty. In other words, the income disparity problems of Manhattan are extending northward and eastward.

[Patel]

Yea we are broke.

You city guys are better. Suburbanites should be led to the gallows like our previously happy dictator Saddam.

[suga]

In LA, the transition of the poor from urban to suburbann neighborhoods is creating a new genre of problems. I worry what will happen considering the precedence of the central core.