16
   

What Do You Think About The South?

 
 
Miller
 
  -2  
Reply Sun 22 Sep, 2013 11:44 pm
@Miller,
Highest household income per year: Maryland $71,122

Lowest household income per year : Mississippi $37,095
Foofie
 
  0  
Reply Mon 23 Sep, 2013 07:10 am
@Miller,
Miller wrote:

Highest household income per year: Maryland $71,122

Lowest household income per year : Mississippi $37,095


Compare highest to highest and lowest to lowest. And what constitutes highest, or lowest. Whose income (what statistical class in a histogram).
Miller
 
  -2  
Reply Mon 23 Sep, 2013 10:40 am
@Foofie,
The highest median household income was in Maryland and the lowest median household income in the USA was in Mississippi.
Finn dAbuzz
 
  1  
Reply Mon 23 Sep, 2013 07:41 pm
@Miller,
Meaningless unless you compare the relative cost of living.
roger
 
  0  
Reply Mon 23 Sep, 2013 07:55 pm
@Miller,
Why, how specific.
JTT
 
  2  
Reply Mon 23 Sep, 2013 08:40 pm
@roger,
Wow, Roger the dodger has the gall to ask someone else to be specific.
0 Replies
 
ossobuco
 
  0  
Reply Mon 23 Sep, 2013 08:43 pm
@Lordyaswas,
Go so far as New Mexico, eh?
0 Replies
 
roger
 
  1  
Reply Mon 23 Sep, 2013 09:02 pm
@Lordyaswas,
Burke's South is not typical in a general sense. That is, there's a lot more going on than what he chooses to dwell on. I do read his stories.
Miller
 
  -2  
Reply Tue 24 Sep, 2013 09:45 am
@Finn dAbuzz,
Finn dAbuzz wrote:

Meaningless unless you compare the relative cost of living.


I didn't write the article.
0 Replies
 
Miller
 
  -2  
Reply Tue 24 Sep, 2013 09:46 am
@roger,
Tell that to the writers of the article, not me.
Miller
 
  -3  
Reply Tue 24 Sep, 2013 09:47 am
@roger,
roger wrote:

I do read his stories.


When did you start to read?
Miller
 
  0  
Reply Tue 24 Sep, 2013 09:51 am
@Miller,
U.S economy is in 'selective recovery', with Mississippi named the poorest state in the nation and Maryland the richest

By Daily Mail Reporter

PUBLISHED: 12:14 EST, 19 September 2013

Despite the U.S economy showing signs of improvement, not all segments of the population are seeing an economic turnaround, with Mississippi being named the poorest state in the nation.

In 45 states and the District of Columbia, poverty rates remained steady at high levels, according to new census data.

Mississippi was one of just three states posting increases in poverty, from 22.6 percent to 24.2 percent.

Median income remains flat household income in the us in 2012 declined slightly from 2011

California and New Hampshire were the others.

In Minnesota and Texas, the percentage of people in poverty declined.

Among the 25 largest metropolitan areas, the Washington, D.C., area had the highest median household income in 2012 at $88,233, followed by the San Francisco and Boston metro areas.

The Tampa-St. Petersburg metro area had the lowest median house income at $44,402.

By state, Oregon led the nation in food stamp use at 20.1 percent, or 1 in 5, due in part to generous state provisions that expand food stamp eligibility to families.






Oregon was followed by more rural or more economically hard-hit states, including Mississippi, Kentucky, Maine, Michigan and Tennessee. Wyoming had the fewest households on food stamps, at 7 percent.

Education, race, income and marriage are all deciding factors in recovery.

Poverty is on the rise in single-mother families. More people are falling into the lowest-income group.

After earlier signs of increased mobility, fewer people are moving as homeownership declined for a fifth straight year.

'We're in a selective recovery,' said William H. Frey, a Brookings Institution demographer who analyzed the numbers.

The annual U.S. survey of socioeconomic indicators covers all of last year, representing the third year of a post-recession rebound.

Household income in the U.S in 2012 declined slightly from 2011

The figures, released today, also show a slightly faster pace of growth in the foreign-born population, which increased to 40.8 million, or 13 percent of the U.S.

Last year's immigration increase of 440,000 people was a reversal of a 2011 dip in the influx, when many Mexicans already in the U.S. opted to return home.

Many of the newer immigrants are now higher-skilled workers from Asian countries such as China and India.


The number of immigrants in the U.S. with less than a high school diploma, who make up the bulk of the total foreign-born population, fell slightly in 2012 to 10.8 million.

Immigrants with bachelor's degrees or higher rose by more than 4 percent to 9.8 million.

In all, 21 states saw declines last year in their Hispanic foreign-born population, led by New Mexico, Illinois and Georgia.

The number of Americans in poverty remained largely unchanged at a record 46.5 million.

Single-mother families in poverty increased for the fourth straight year to 4.1 million, or 41.5 percent, coinciding with longer-term trends of declining marriage and out-of-wedlock births.

Many of these mothers are low income with low education. The share of married-couple families in poverty remained unchanged at 2.1 million, or 8.7 percent.

By race, a growing proportion of poor children are Hispanic, a record 37 percent of the total. Whites make up 30 percent, blacks 26 percent.

The numbers also reflect widening economic inequality, an issue President Barack Obama has pledged would be a top priority of his administration to address.

Upward mobility in the U.S. has been hurt by a tight job market and the longer-term disappearance of mid-skill jobs due to globalization and automation.

The new census data shows that lower-income households are a steadily increasing share of the population, while middle- to higher-income groups shrank or were flat.

In 2012, households earning less than $24,999 made up 24.4 percent of total households, up from 21.7 percent four years earlier.

The share of households earning $50,000 to $99,999 slipped from 31.2 percent to 29.9 percent.

Top-income households making more than $200,000 dipped less, from 5 percent to 4.6 percent over that period.

The still-weak economy also meant fewer household moves in 2012.

After showing signs of increased migration in 2011, fewer Americans were on the move, many because of few job opportunities or the inability to buy a home.

U.S. migration fell by 0.2 percent in 2012 after edging up the previous year.


While the number of longer-distance moves remained steady at 2.3 percent, moves within a county edged lower to 9 percent, particularly among young adults 18-34.

Demographers say that suggests eroding career opportunities and a diminished ability to buy a home. Young adults typically make long-distance moves to seek a new career, while those who make local moves often do so when buying a home.

Homeownership declined for the fifth year in the row to 63.9 percent.

'Many Americans continue to think that a rising tide lifts all boats,' said Sheldon Danziger, a University of Michigan economist.
'But the bad news is that given the way economic growth trickles down now, the number of poor and disadvantaged will remain high unless we do more to help those in need.'

With poverty remaining high, food stamp use continued to climb. Roughly 15.8 million, or 13.6 percent of U.S. households, received food stamps, the highest level on record.

Just over half of these households, or 52 percent, were below poverty and 44 percent had one or more people with a disability.
0 Replies
 
Miller
 
  -2  
Reply Tue 24 Sep, 2013 09:52 am
I've posted the above article elsewhere on A2K.
hawkeye10
 
  1  
Reply Tue 24 Sep, 2013 10:35 am
@Miller,
I think we covered the selective part by pointing out that 95% of the post Great Recession gains have gone to the 1%.
Miller
 
  -2  
Reply Tue 24 Sep, 2013 01:43 pm
@hawkeye10,
hawkeye10 wrote:

... pointing out that 95% of the post Great Recession gains have gone to the 1%.


A good percentage of this gain to the 1% has come via stocks and dividends.

The old saying is true, " money makes money". But with that money, you have to be willing to take a certain amount of risk, if you're investing especially in today's stock market.
Foofie
 
  0  
Reply Tue 24 Sep, 2013 01:54 pm
@Miller,
Miller wrote:

The highest median household income was in Maryland and the lowest median household income in the USA was in Mississippi.


And, the inverse? Lowest median income in Maryland, and the highest median income in Mississippi? Otherwise, false inferences can be believed. Plus, "median" means in the middle. That can give a false impression, if there are outliers.
0 Replies
 
Miller
 
  -2  
Reply Tue 24 Sep, 2013 02:20 pm
A median income of $71,000 in the Northeast ( Boston and NYCIty) would be in the middle class, probably at the lower end of the middle distribution.

If your income is $71,000 and you live in NYCity, and don't own your own home, I'd say you'd have a hard time making ends meet and having a fun-filled life at the same time.
Setanta
 
  0  
Reply Tue 24 Sep, 2013 02:24 pm
@Miller,
Oh yeah, trickle-down Reaganomics. I'm not surprised to see you peddling that bullsh*t. They're called the one percent because 99 percent of the population doesn't have dividend income, halfwit.
0 Replies
 
roger
 
  0  
Reply Tue 24 Sep, 2013 02:41 pm
@Miller,
Did you even notice what post I was replying to? Your comment makes no sense at all.
Foofie
 
  0  
Reply Thu 26 Sep, 2013 10:02 am
@Miller,
Miller wrote:

A median income of $71,000 in the Northeast ( Boston and NYCIty) would be in the middle class, probably at the lower end of the middle distribution.

If your income is $71,000 and you live in NYCity, and don't own your own home, I'd say you'd have a hard time making ends meet and having a fun-filled life at the same time.


a) You are not specifying whether you are talking about a family of four, or two or one. b) You are are making certain assumptions about rent or mortgages, which may or may not be correct, based on a neighborhood. c) Your choice of "fun-filled" as a description of one's quality of life is sort of Californian, in my opinion. May not apply to those that are not conspicuous consumers.

You brought in the northeast's supposed middle class income for what purpose? You did not explain what you were proving and WHY? You should stay in the confines of your chosen profession when analyzing data, in my opinion. You are making certain assumptions, as to what people consider a contented existence. You might need many of the accoutrements of the high end of the economic bellcurve. You are not talking about necessities, which is what many people just need, but do not have. You may be doing a Marie Antoinette, in my opinion? Your lifestyle might correspond to your educational level. Few may have neither, so you might not qualify for this analysis, in some people's opinion, since you set your analysis in two places that can have one of the highest cost of livings in the U.S. One can infer from your analysis that life in a trailer park, in rural America, cannot reflect a contented existence. That is not true, in my opinion. They could be very happy, knowing that they do not have your ilk to contend with. Get it?
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 05/06/2024 at 03:46:21