America's Poorest and Richest States

whygohome

An interesting read. I won't copy and paste since there are two articles that include a list of the 10 poorest and 10 richest states in the Union.

http://247wallst.com/2012/09/20/america ... -states-2/

10 Poorest:
10. OKlahoma
9. SC
8. NM
7. Louisiana
6. TN
5. Alabama
4. Kentucky
3. Arkansas
2. West Virginia
1. Mississippi

10 Richest
10. Cali
9. Delaware
8. Hawaii
7. Virginia
6. New Hampshire
5. MA
4. CT
3. NJ
2. Alaska
1. Maryland

_

What's particularly interesting to me is how data is reported differently. For instance, I keep hearing that NM is now the poorest state in the nation, and several local & national news sources have reported this. But the article posted here says we're the 8th poorest. But it's assessing median household income, not percentage of people living in poverty. Of course, even if we look at % impoverished, it looks like the primary data source itself (http://www.census.gov/newsroom/releases ... 2-175.html) says NM is 2nd poorest, not 1st. So where did so many secondary sources get the idea that we're 1st? I guess it doesn't matter too much whether we're 1st or 2nd or 8th - but it just goes to show how we should always pay closer attention to data we hear reported in the news. And that we need to figure out what Vermont is doing.

The other data I find interesting from this report is the health insurance data. Looks like the % of people with health insurance is increasing, which I'd say is an indication that the Affordable Care Act is working.

whygohome

_ wrote:

What's particularly interesting to me is how data is reported differently. For instance, I keep hearing that NM is now the poorest state in the nation, and several local & national news sources have reported this. But the article posted here says we're the 8th poorest. But it's assessing median household income, not percentage of people living in poverty. Of course, even if we look at % impoverished, it looks like the primary data source itself (http://www.census.gov/newsroom/releases ... 2-175.html) says NM is 2nd poorest, not 1st. So where did so many secondary sources get the idea that we're 1st? I guess it doesn't matter too much whether we're 1st or 2nd or 8th - but it just goes to show how we should always pay closer attention to data we hear reported in the news. And that we need to figure out what Vermont is doing.

The other data I find interesting from this report is the health insurance data. Looks like the % of people with health insurance is increasing, which I'd say is an indication that the Affordable Care Act is working.

There is a lot of data out there, and each study could put more weight into a particular set of data. I came across this article while doing some research for work and simply found it interesting.

Since you mentioned Healthcare, I believe Vermont is soon set to vote on a single-payer system. Let's see how that works out. The success depends more on the people though--personal responsibility, eating healthy, exercising--more so than the system in place. It always comes down to the people.

_

whygohome wrote:

_ wrote:

What's particularly interesting to me is how data is reported differently. For instance, I keep hearing that NM is now the poorest state in the nation, and several local & national news sources have reported this. But the article posted here says we're the 8th poorest. But it's assessing median household income, not percentage of people living in poverty. Of course, even if we look at % impoverished, it looks like the primary data source itself (http://www.census.gov/newsroom/releases ... 2-175.html) says NM is 2nd poorest, not 1st. So where did so many secondary sources get the idea that we're 1st? I guess it doesn't matter too much whether we're 1st or 2nd or 8th - but it just goes to show how we should always pay closer attention to data we hear reported in the news. And that we need to figure out what Vermont is doing.

The other data I find interesting from this report is the health insurance data. Looks like the % of people with health insurance is increasing, which I'd say is an indication that the Affordable Care Act is working.

There is a lot of data out there, and each study could put more weight into a particular set of data. I came across this article while doing some research for work and simply found it interesting.

Since you mentioned Healthcare, I believe Vermont is soon set to vote on a single-payer system. Let's see how that works out. The success depends more on the people though--personal responsibility, eating healthy, exercising--more so than the system in place. It always comes down to the people.

I think all the news reports I've read are using the same study / data set - the new U.S. Census Bureau report I linked above.

I didn't know Vermont was about to vote on a single-payer system. I'm curious to see how that goes. I'm not sure I agree, though, that success is more about individuals than it is about the system. I'm not sure you can really separate one from the other.

whygohome

_ wrote:

I didn't know Vermont was about to vote on a single-payer system. I'm curious to see how that goes. I'm not sure I agree, though, that success is more about individuals than it is about the system. I'm not sure you can really separate one from the other.

Wow, dude, I was wrong; they already passed it:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/05/2 ... 67573.html

_

whygohome wrote:

_ wrote:

I didn't know Vermont was about to vote on a single-payer system. I'm curious to see how that goes. I'm not sure I agree, though, that success is more about individuals than it is about the system. I'm not sure you can really separate one from the other.

Wow, dude, I was wrong; they already passed it:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/05/2 ... 67573.html

Wow, that's awesome! Well they must be doing something right because, according to the new Census Bureau data that we've been discussing:

"Vermont had the highest increase in [health insurance] coverage among the young adult population, increasing from an insured rate of 75.2 percent in 2009 to 89.1 percent in 2011."

"Between the 2010 and 2011 American Community Survey, both the percentage and number of people in poverty in Vermont declined."

"Between the 2010 and 2011 American Community Survey, Vermont was the only state that showed an increase in median household income."

chadwick

iowa be in the middle. not wealthy, not poor either. good to go i guess

satansbed

What's interesting is that while the poorest states support republicans while the richest voters also support republicans

http://www.stat.columbia.edu/~gelman/re ... b_qjps.pdf

riotgrl

satansbed wrote:

What's interesting is that while the poorest states support republicans while the richest voters also support republicans

http://www.stat.columbia.edu/~gelman/re ... b_qjps.pdf

I live in KY - 4th poorest state and almost completely red. I always find it surprising to see people here vote republican and/or want to end federal income tax. I would be interested in seeing what percentage of federal dollars are collected here (and in the poor states, in general) versus how much federal aid is received. In theory, getting rid of all federal taxes and just allowing state and local taxes, should work. But I don't think my state is wealthy enough to generate enough taxes to do any of the things necessary to run our state, even if state and local taxes were drastically increased. I wonder if any of my fellow voters have thought about how much worse we would be if that happens.

Jason P

I wonder how everything would pan out if you figure in the cost of living? You quality of life on a $40K salary is very different depending on whether you live in L.A. or Lincoln, Nebraska.

Go Beavers

satansbed wrote:

What's interesting is that while the poorest states support republicans while the richest voters also support republicans

http://www.stat.columbia.edu/~gelman/re ... b_qjps.pdf

Rich people in poor areas tend to go more Republican, and rich people in rich areas go Democrat.

chadwick

Jason P wrote:

I wonder how everything would pan out if you figure in the cost of living? You quality of life on a $40K salary is very different depending on whether you live in L.A. or Lincoln, Nebraska.

thank you!

lovin life bigtime in lincoln, nebraska raking in a whopping $40k vs' struggling one's balls right off @ $40k in L.A. or Seattle.

rent in those cities...let's just say $1,000 per month maybe $800 for a small dump
rent in lincoln, nebraska... let's just say $500 per month and possibly lower for a house with several bedrooms

i knew a dude in college whom lived in southern california; he paid $1,000 a month for a bedroom the size of a smokers shelter at the school which could seat 4 people on the bench with a roof over it. he surfed and lived near the beach.

_

riotgrl wrote:

satansbed wrote:

I would be interested in seeing what percentage of federal dollars are collected here (and in the poor states, in general) versus how much federal aid is received.

I think I saw such a study recently, but all I read was the headline. If I see it again, I'll post it. I think it looked at red vs blue instead of poor vs wealthy states though.

_

Jason P wrote:

I wonder how everything would pan out if you figure in the cost of living? You quality of life on a $40K salary is very different depending on whether you live in L.A. or Lincoln, Nebraska.

I've been thinking about this lately, too, with regard to minimum wage. How can places like L.A. have the same minimum wage as places like NM? (Santa Fe actually has the highest minimum wage in the country, but I don't think the rest of NM is higher than the national minimum.)

MotoDC

Wow, Maryland is the richest state? Find that very hard to believe, though I guess it's a pretty damn small state that has two major to fairly-major cities supporting it (B'more and DC).

Newch91

Connecticut's only high on the rich list because of Fairfield county. Otherwise, it would probably end up near the middle, closer to the poor list.

tybird

_ wrote:

Jason P wrote:

I wonder how everything would pan out if you figure in the cost of living? You quality of life on a $40K salary is very different depending on whether you live in L.A. or Lincoln, Nebraska.

I've been thinking about this lately, too, with regard to minimum wage. How can places like L.A. have the same minimum wage as places like NM? (Santa Fe actually has the highest minimum wage in the country, but I don't think the rest of NM is higher than the national minimum.)

Cities setting minimum wages? Really? Never heard of that here in this poor-ass state....Alabama, BTW.....where we always say thank God for Mississippi when lists like this are compiled.

riotgrl

tybird wrote:

_ wrote:

Jason P wrote:

I wonder how everything would pan out if you figure in the cost of living? You quality of life on a $40K salary is very different depending on whether you live in L.A. or Lincoln, Nebraska.

I've been thinking about this lately, too, with regard to minimum wage. How can places like L.A. have the same minimum wage as places like NM? (Santa Fe actually has the highest minimum wage in the country, but I don't think the rest of NM is higher than the national minimum.)

Cities setting minimum wages? Really? Never heard of that here in this poor-ass state....Alabama, BTW.....where we always say thank God for Mississippi when lists like this are compiled.

Same thing we say in KY

Jason P

_ wrote:

Jason P wrote:

I wonder how everything would pan out if you figure in the cost of living? You quality of life on a $40K salary is very different depending on whether you live in L.A. or Lincoln, Nebraska.

I've been thinking about this lately, too, with regard to minimum wage. How can places like L.A. have the same minimum wage as places like NM? (Santa Fe actually has the highest minimum wage in the country, but I don't think the rest of NM is higher than the national minimum.)

It appears based on Sante Fe that cities can raise the minimum wage higher then the national minimum. San Francisco is $9.80 (which may allow you to get rent a place with 25 square feet of space). Some states are linking minimum wage with the consumer price index as well.

MotoDC

_ wrote:

Jason P wrote:

I wonder how everything would pan out if you figure in the cost of living? You quality of life on a $40K salary is very different depending on whether you live in L.A. or Lincoln, Nebraska.

I've been thinking about this lately, too, with regard to minimum wage. How can places like L.A. have the same minimum wage as places like NM? (Santa Fe actually has the highest minimum wage in the country, but I don't think the rest of NM is higher than the national minimum.)

That logic applies to the graduated income tax brackets as well. A family of 4 making $250k in NYC is a sight less wealthy than a family of 4 doing it in Kentucky (or wherever), yet federal taxes are applied the same.

_

_ wrote:

whygohome wrote:

_ wrote:

I didn't know Vermont was about to vote on a single-payer system. I'm curious to see how that goes. I'm not sure I agree, though, that success is more about individuals than it is about the system. I'm not sure you can really separate one from the other.

Wow, dude, I was wrong; they already passed it:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/05/2 ... 67573.html

Wow, that's awesome! Well they must be doing something right because, according to the new Census Bureau data that we've been discussing:

"Vermont had the highest increase in [health insurance] coverage among the young adult population, increasing from an insured rate of 75.2 percent in 2009 to 89.1 percent in 2011."

"Between the 2010 and 2011 American Community Survey, both the percentage and number of people in poverty in Vermont declined."

"Between the 2010 and 2011 American Community Survey, Vermont was the only state that showed an increase in median household income."

Coincidentally, I met a man at a party Wednesday night who played an instrumental role in Vermont's healthcare coverage for 20 years. I asked him what they were doing that was working so well & he talked about how their major goal was always to get as many people covered by Medicaid as possible. And he explained all about how that actually requires very little cost for the state. Wish I had had just one less glass of wine so I could remember all the details.