HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Discussion Forums > City Discussions

Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #101  
Old Posted Jun 16, 2019, 12:32 AM
jtown,man jtown,man is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Norfolk, Va
Posts: 1,832
Also, random but MSP area seems to place nicely on any list that is positive. I am really impressed with the area, shame it is 'out of the way' of anywhere I usually go.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #102  
Old Posted Jun 16, 2019, 4:24 AM
KB0679's Avatar
KB0679 KB0679 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 1,434
Quote:
Originally Posted by JManc View Post
The overwhelming bulk people on the receiving end of federal and state benefits in MS are largely not your 'South shale rise again' redneck voting against their interests...it's the poor/ minorities gerrymandered out of a voice.
Actually it would be both.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #103  
Old Posted Jun 16, 2019, 5:34 AM
badrunner badrunner is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Posts: 454
Quote:
Originally Posted by SIGSEGV View Post
This is a very misleading map -- it's the difference between two poverty measures.
Yeah that's the problem with some of these highly derived statistics. Just like how people look at the raw data map of poverty in the South and want to derive new numbers by "correcting" for demographics.

Informed people already know the context in which the raw data is being presented, so there is no correction necessary. All you're doing is skewing and spinning the data, and in the case of the map showing MS, NM and WV as the states with the lowest levels of poverty, it presents a picture that is exactly the opposite of reality.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #104  
Old Posted Jun 16, 2019, 1:04 PM
Sun Belt's Avatar
Sun Belt Sun Belt is offline
The Good Times
 
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: The Envy of the World
Posts: 3,837
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crawford View Post
^
And the above is all fabricated. California and NY have some of the lowest poverty rates in the U.S.

But everyone already knew that; this is the "let's pretend that people are poorer if their houses are worth more" talking point regularly regurgitated by those living in places with low housing demand, as if Beverly Hills is poorer than Compton (which would be true using this bizarre logic).
Yup. I completely fabricated it. No wait, I colluded and conspired with your bible: The US Census Bureau to just make stuff up to present on an Internet forum to confuse Crawford. That's it.

You can't compare levels of poverty between region to region, state to state, city to city without factoring in Cost of Living. This is why the Supplemental Poverty Measure is a much accurate way to decipher the overall picture.

This is from yesterday afternoon, it uses the MIT Living Wage Calculator.
This map shows how much a single parent needs to earn to get by in every US state


Isn't it strange how it mirrors the Supplemental Poverty Measure findings?

Or there's this:

TRUE: California has the nation’s highest poverty rate, when factoring in cost-of-living

Or this:

How California has the highest poverty rate in the U.S.

Or this:

Literally dozens of other publications saying the same exact thing.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #105  
Old Posted Jun 16, 2019, 1:38 PM
Crawford Crawford is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Brooklyn, NYC/Polanco, DF
Posts: 18,168
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sun Belt View Post
Yup. I completely fabricated it. No wait, I colluded and conspired with your bible: The US Census Bureau to just make stuff up to present on an Internet forum to confuse Crawford. That's it.
Absurd response. Do you refuse to read what you post, or are you knowingly lying? It's one or the other.

I already corrected your ridiculous claims. You mischaracterized the Census data, which are to figure Sec 8 housing subsidies, and which have nothing to do with actual Census poverty rates.

In short, you claimed the richest states were the poorest states, and the poorest states were the richest states, because the former get the biggest Sec 8 subsidies, and the latter get the smallest (because federal Sec 8 subsidies are based on market rents). If you're aren't just lying, that's an incredibly dumb conclusion, easily corrected by just reading what you're posting.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sun Belt View Post
You can't compare levels of poverty between region to region, state to state, city to city without factoring in Cost of Living.
Um, yes you can, and that's exactly what the Census does. And the link you posted equalizes cost of living. That's exactly the point. A renter in SF under Sec 8 subsidies doesn't pay a penny more than a renter in rural MS. The relative subsidy is based on the relative difference in market rents.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #106  
Old Posted Jun 16, 2019, 2:52 PM
Ant131531 Ant131531 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Atlanta
Posts: 1,601
Keep in mind not everyone in poverty can qualify to be on section 8.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #107  
Old Posted Jun 16, 2019, 6:34 PM
badrunner badrunner is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Posts: 454
It's a nonsensical way to measure poverty in any case, at least not in the way that we normally understand the use of that word. Is someone living paycheck to paycheck in a nice $3k/month 1 bedroom apartment really living in poverty because his cost of living is so high? What about a retired couple on a fixed income living in a modest million dollar house with the mortgage paid off? Because they live in a wealthy area with a high cost of living, their income will come in way below the adjusted "poverty" line. They'll be considered worse off than a couple on the same income living in a trailer in Mississippi once you adjust for cost of living.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #108  
Old Posted Jun 16, 2019, 6:44 PM
The North One's Avatar
The North One The North One is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 3,760
Nobody is talking about people overpaying for "nice" apartments...

There are basic needs of living and the prices of such vary dramatically across the country, just because somebody is making more doesn't mean they're getting more and that should be adjusted. This isn't that hard to understand.
__________________
Spawn of questionable parentage!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #109  
Old Posted Jun 16, 2019, 6:46 PM
badrunner badrunner is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Posts: 454
If they're paying more presumably they are getting more, like better access to jobs, better local infrastructure, better climate, local attractions etc. Things aren't just more expensive for absolutely no reason otherwise no one would pay the premium.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #110  
Old Posted Jun 16, 2019, 6:47 PM
The North One's Avatar
The North One The North One is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 3,760
Quote:
Originally Posted by badrunner View Post
If they're paying more presumably they are getting more
Wrong, if you want to be willfully ignorant there's no point in discussing this further.

Poverty has nothing to do with weather or local attractions...
__________________
Spawn of questionable parentage!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #111  
Old Posted Jun 16, 2019, 7:06 PM
badrunner badrunner is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Posts: 454
Quote:
Originally Posted by The North One View Post
Poverty has nothing to do with weather or local attractions...
Yeah, that was kind of my point. Those things should have nothing to do with poverty, but that's precisely the effect you get when you adjust for cost of living. What do you think accounts for differences in cost of living across different regions?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #112  
Old Posted Jun 17, 2019, 2:17 AM
UrbanRevival UrbanRevival is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Posts: 143
Quote:
Originally Posted by badrunner View Post
If they're paying more presumably they are getting more, like better access to jobs, better local infrastructure, better climate, local attractions etc. Things aren't just more expensive for absolutely no reason otherwise no one would pay the premium.
The factors you cite play some role, but being that the primary driver of COL differences between each city is real estate/housing, it's actually quite simply a supply vs. demand issue relative to housing availability.

In other words, if developers in cities like New York or San Francisco built, say, 100,000 top-of-the-market housing units each month within the next year, does anyone honestly think that prices would remain at stratospheric levels?

The fact that the most expensive cities in the US simultaneously have some of the strictest zoning/lack of land availability in place is obviously not a coincidence.

Yes, of course the fact that NYC and SF have many lucrative jobs, countless amenities and supreme culture plays a role in creating that demand, but that's much more subjective and far less easily quantifiable in the real estate equation.

It's a fact of the matter that the "wealthiest" cities have become MUCH moreso due to the deliberate exclusion of the middle and lower classes through the lack of housing available to them.
Reply With Quote
     
     
End
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Discussion Forums > City Discussions
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 12:15 AM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.