America's Low-Cost
Counties
What does the Federal Poverty Line represent, when the
least expensive counties in the United States have a
bare-bones cost of living that is well above that line?
This table lists the Self-Sufficiency Standard — that
is, a barebones, no-frills, basic needs budget — for
several configurations of family, for one to three low
cost-of-living counties per state, from the Self
Sufficiency Standard studies — and the Federal
Poverty Rate. Here are a few observations:
- The lowest-cost place costs 26% more than the
Federal Poverty
Guideline for a single adult
- The SSS as a percent of the FPG rises as one moves
from single adult to adult and one child, to adult and
two children to two adults and two children, even in
these low-cost places
- Most of the low-cost places are rural counties with
low populations and low densities. The exceptions are the
cities of St. Louis, New Orleans, Hartford, Worcester and
Springfield.
- Many of these low-cost places have Federal Poverty
Rates well above the national average, and yet the
"SSS % FPG"
calculations show that there is significant need over and
above that acknowledged by the FPG in these low-cost
places.
America's
Low-Cost Counties: The Self-Sufficiency Standard and
the Federal Poverty Guideline |
This table shows
selected counties from Table
SSS-1-2-3-4. The counties are among the lowest-cost
places to live in each state. The year shown is the
year in which the Self-Sufficiency Standard Study for
that state was done, and the "% FPG" calculations are
to the Federal Poverty Guidelines, by household size,
for that year. |
State
|
County
|
Year
|
Single
Adult
|
SSS %
FPG
|
Adult +
Pre-schooler
|
SSS %
FPG
|
Adult,
Pre-schooler,
Schoolage
|
SSS %
FPG
|
Two Adults,
Pre-schooler,
Schoolage
|
SSS %
FPG
|
Federal Poverty
Rate, 2004
|
NY |
Clinton |
2000 |
$13,248
|
159%
|
$23,256
|
207%
|
$28,968
|
205%
|
$35,412
|
208%
|
13.9%
|
SD |
Spink |
2000 |
11,326
|
136%
|
18,024
|
160%
|
24,672
|
174%
|
30,996
|
182%
|
12.8%
|
|
Todd |
2000 |
11,328
|
136%
|
17,184
|
153%
|
23,556
|
166%
|
29,832
|
175%
|
48.3%
|
CA |
Trinity |
2000 |
13,332
|
160%
|
22,594
|
201%
|
27,893
|
197%
|
34,703
|
204%
|
18.7%
|
|
Tulare |
2000 |
13,505
|
162%
|
21,810
|
194%
|
28,066
|
198%
|
35,126
|
206%
|
23.9%
|
IL |
Brown |
2001 |
12,223
|
142%
|
18,515
|
159%
|
|
|
31,901
|
181%
|
8.5%
|
|
Edgar |
2001 |
11,667
|
136%
|
17,906
|
154%
|
|
|
31,019
|
176%
|
10.5%
|
KY |
Knott |
2001 |
13,328
|
155%
|
21,307
|
184%
|
28,039
|
192%
|
35,731
|
202%
|
31.1%
|
|
Calloway |
2001 |
12,781
|
149%
|
20,949
|
180%
|
27,719
|
189%
|
35,452
|
201%
|
16.6%
|
MD |
Kent |
2001 |
16,459
|
192%
|
24,563
|
212%
|
26,712
|
183%
|
35,532
|
201%
|
13.0%
|
|
Allegany |
2001 |
16,159
|
188%
|
22,966
|
198%
|
27,819
|
190%
|
36,402
|
206%
|
14.8%
|
UT |
Sevier |
2001 |
14,773
|
172%
|
24,048
|
207%
|
29,619
|
202%
|
37,456
|
212%
|
10.8%
|
|
Emery |
2001 |
14,807
|
172%
|
|
|
|
|
34,600
|
196%
|
11.5%
|
WA |
Chelan |
2001 |
13,158
|
153%
|
22,931
|
272%
|
26,489
|
181%
|
33,374
|
189%
|
12.4%
|
|
Douglas |
2001 |
13,364
|
156%
|
21,809
|
234%
|
|
|
32,129
|
182%
|
14.4%
|
AZ |
Apache |
2002 |
14,168
|
160%
|
24,219
|
202%
|
29,829
|
199%
|
37,171
|
205%
|
37.8%
|
|
La Paz |
2002 |
14,296
|
161%
|
23,253
|
195%
|
29,024
|
193%
|
36,596
|
202%
|
19.6%
|
FL |
Leon |
2002 |
14,821
|
167%
|
25,240
|
211%
|
31,400
|
209%
|
37,476
|
207%
|
18.2%
|
GA |
Hancock |
2002 |
14,036
|
158%
|
20,292
|
170%
|
23,087
|
154%
|
32,242
|
178%
|
29.4%
|
|
Floyd |
2002 |
14,254
|
161%
|
22,215
|
186%
|
26,249
|
175%
|
34,550
|
191%
|
14.4%
|
MO |
Bates |
2002 |
11,412
|
129%
|
16,423
|
138%
|
20,663
|
138%
|
28,020
|
155%
|
14.5%
|
|
City of St. Louis |
2002 |
12,072
|
136%
|
23,275
|
195%
|
30,177
|
201%
|
33,551
|
185%
|
24.6%
|
|
Washington |
2002 |
12,567
|
142%
|
16,993
|
142%
|
20,761
|
138%
|
28,150
|
156%
|
20.8%
|
MT |
Dawson |
2002 |
13,017
|
147%
|
20,852
|
175%
|
25,475
|
170%
|
33,100
|
183%
|
14.9%
|
|
Rosebud |
2002 |
12,693
|
143%
|
21,310
|
178%
|
26,230
|
175%
|
33,804
|
187%
|
22.4%
|
NE |
Colfax |
2002 |
11,983
|
135%
|
16,069
|
135%
|
20,970
|
140%
|
28,576
|
158%
|
10.8%
|
|
Scotts Bluff |
2002 |
12,065
|
136%
|
17,093
|
143%
|
22,610
|
151%
|
30,691
|
170%
|
14.5%
|
NV |
Elko |
2002 |
15,702
|
177%
|
25,402
|
213%
|
28,954
|
193%
|
36,210
|
200%
|
8.9%
|
NJ |
Camden |
2002 |
15,745
|
177%
|
28,623
|
240%
|
34,898
|
232%
|
38,252
|
211%
|
10.4%
|
OK |
Adair |
2002 |
12,770
|
144%
|
18,857
|
158%
|
22,432
|
149%
|
32,425
|
179%
|
23.2%
|
|
Texas |
2002 |
12,759
|
144%
|
20,691
|
173%
|
25,167
|
168%
|
34,275
|
189%
|
14.1%
|
TN |
Cocke |
2002 |
12,031
|
136%
|
18,401
|
154%
|
23,091
|
154%
|
31,768
|
176%
|
22.5%
|
|
Hardeman |
2002 |
12,333
|
139%
|
17,906
|
150%
|
21,657
|
144%
|
29,962
|
166%
|
19.7%
|
VA |
City of Roanoke |
2002 |
13,831
|
156%
|
20,393
|
171%
|
23,469
|
156%
|
32,746
|
181%
|
15.9%
|
|
Washington |
2002 |
13,905
|
157%
|
18,214
|
153%
|
20,692
|
138%
|
29,818
|
165%
|
10.9%
|
AL |
Cherokee |
2003 |
12,658
|
141%
|
17,881
|
148%
|
21,071
|
138%
|
28,153
|
153%
|
15.6%
|
|
Wilcox |
2003 |
12,646
|
141%
|
17,422
|
144%
|
20,810
|
136%
|
29,312
|
159%
|
39.9%
|
CA |
Shasta |
2003 |
15,316
|
171%
|
25,579
|
211%
|
29,551
|
194%
|
36,218
|
197%
|
15.4%
|
|
Tulare |
2003 |
14,394
|
160%
|
23,061
|
190%
|
28,290
|
185%
|
34,736
|
189%
|
23.9%
|
MA |
City of Springfield |
2003 |
15,304
|
170%
|
31,471
|
260%
|
36,603
|
240%
|
42,844
|
233%
|
23.1%
|
|
City of North Adams |
2003 |
14,583
|
162%
|
29,744
|
245%
|
34,875
|
229%
|
40,909
|
222%
|
9.5%
|
DE |
Sussex |
2003 |
14,424
|
161%
|
23,303
|
192%
|
27,638
|
181%
|
34,666
|
188%
|
10.5%
|
LA |
Orleans Parish |
2003 |
16,847
|
147%
|
21,810
|
180%
|
26,610
|
174%
|
30,101
|
164%
|
27.9%
|
|
East Carrol Parish |
2003 |
12,224
|
136%
|
18,402
|
152%
|
23,579
|
155%
|
30,113
|
164%
|
40.5%
|
|
Caddo Parish |
2003 |
13,998
|
156%
|
20,745
|
171%
|
25,277
|
166%
|
31,942
|
174%
|
21.1%
|
MS |
Sunflower |
2003 |
12,929
|
144%
|
18,115
|
149%
|
21,730
|
142%
|
29,206
|
159%
|
30.0%
|
|
Itawamba |
2003 |
13,075
|
146%
|
17,524
|
153%
|
22,024
|
144%
|
29,548
|
161%
|
14.0%
|
CO |
Pueblo |
2004 |
15,477
|
166%
|
23,736
|
190%
|
29,884
|
191%
|
36,965
|
196%
|
14.9%
|
|
Alamosa |
2004 |
14,551
|
156%
|
21,075
|
169%
|
28,266
|
180%
|
35,463
|
188%
|
21.3%
|
PA |
Warren |
2004 |
13,595
|
146%
|
20,755
|
166%
|
25,647
|
164%
|
32,654
|
173%
|
9.9%
|
|
Clearfield |
2004 |
13,579
|
145%
|
21,252
|
170%
|
|
|
31,416
|
167%
|
12.5%
|
WI |
Ashland |
2004 |
12,014
|
129%
|
21,299
|
171%
|
27,779
|
177%
|
34,797
|
185%
|
11.9%
|
|
Adams |
2004 |
11,774
|
126%
|
|
|
23,341
|
149%
|
28,741
|
152%
|
10.4%
|
WY |
Carbon |
2004 |
12,371
|
133%
|
20,008
|
160%
|
24,282
|
155%
|
31,168
|
165%
|
12.9%
|
|
Niobara |
2004 |
12,509
|
134%
|
20,537
|
164%
|
25,348
|
162%
|
31,990
|
170%
|
13.4%
|
CT |
Hartford |
2005 |
14,792
|
155%
|
33,545
|
261%
|
44,628
|
277%
|
47,499
|
245%
|
30.6%
|
IN |
Orange |
2005 |
13,375
|
140%
|
18,681
|
146%
|
20,452
|
127%
|
28,304
|
146%
|
12.4%
|
|
Fulton |
2005 |
14,925
|
156%
|
20,133
|
157%
|
23,737
|
148%
|
32,368
|
167%
|
7.6%
|
NJ |
Atlantic |
2005 |
16,803
|
176%
|
29,732
|
232%
|
36,547
|
227%
|
41,350
|
214%
|
10.5%
|
|
Camden |
2005 |
16,884
|
176%
|
30,312
|
236%
|
37,374
|
232%
|
42,136
|
218%
|
10.4%
|
WV |
Fayette |
2005 |
13,820
|
144%
|
20,057
|
156%
|
23,901
|
149%
|
32,594
|
168%
|
21.7%
|
|
Marshall |
2005 |
13,327
|
139%
|
20,046
|
156%
|
24,321
|
151%
|
33,160
|
171%
|
16.6%
|
VA |
City of Roanoke |
2006 |
14,534
|
148%
|
26,213
|
199%
|
29,435
|
177%
|
36,778
|
184%
|
|
|
Washington County, VA |
2006 |
14,819
|
151%
|
21,903
|
166%
|
24,554
|
148%
|
32,359
|
162%
|
|
PA |
Lycoming |
2006 |
11,602
|
118%
|
17,518
|
133%
|
24,009
|
145%
|
27,885
|
139%
|
|
|
Warren |
2006 |
15,087
|
154%
|
24,864
|
188%
|
30,269
|
182%
|
38,148
|
191%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The gaps in this table are due to
certain configurations of families not being provided
in the appendices of the original studies, the links
for which are available
here.
|
Here's something to think about. Suppose that some major
portion of the retiring Baby Boom generation finds itself
unable to afford to stay in the towns they are currently
living and working in. Not only can they not afford to stay
in the house whose home equity they have been borrowing
against instead of paying off their mortgage in
anticipation of retirement, but they cannot afford a more
modest home nearby either, because most of the cost of a
property there is in the land value rather than the house
itself. And the apartment rents in those places tend to be
higher too, so renting there may not be within their
budget.
So they'll take their home equity, whatever is available
after paying off their refinanced mortgages, and set off in
search of less expensive places to live.
What will happen to America's rural areas when a few of
them start to trickle into each of the less expensive
counties? Who will benefit? Who will be hardpressed by
their arrival?
The beneficiaries will be those with apartments and
houses to rent and sell, or land on which housing can be
built. Their patience and foresight will be rewarded, and
whose children and grandchildren will be enriched by
population growth. (See also : land speculation,
speculators,
all
benefits...) As population rises, economic rent rises.
But others who already are renters there will have
competition for the available rentals. Young people just
starting families will be competing for existing housing
with these new arrivals.
|
To share this page with a friend:
right click, choose "send," and add your
comments.
|
|
Red links have not been
visited; .
Green links are pages you've seen
|
|