Persistent high poverty is most prevalent among children, with those living in rural America disproportionally impacted, according to researchers from the Carsey Institute at the University of New Hampshire.
"Nearly 22 percent of America's children live in poverty, compared with 14 percent of the total population. Poverty is scattered and geographically concentrated, and it ebbs and flows with economic cycles. However, in some parts of the country, poverty has persisted for generations," the researchers said.
Areas with persistent high child poverty are defined as places where child poverty rates have been greater than 20 percent at the start of each decade since 1980.
The key findings include:
- Between 1980 and 2009, 706 U.S. counties (23 percent) experienced persistent high child poverty. Only half as many counties had persistent high poverty across ages.
- Since the onset of the recession, poverty levels in these persistent child poverty counties have sharply increased. Prior to the recession, 61 percent of persistent child poverty counties had more than 30 percent of children living in poverty. Now, it is 68 percent.
- Counties with persistent child poverty are disproportionately concentrated in rural areas; 81 percent of such counties are nonmetropolitan while only 65 percent of all U.S. counties are nonmetropolitan.
- Overall, 26 percent of the rural child population resides in counties whose poverty rates have been persistently high. This compares with 12 percent of the children in urban counties.
- Counties with persistent child poverty cluster in Appalachia, the Mississippi Delta, other areas of the Southeast, parts of the Southwest, and in the Great Plains.
"The problems that all poor people struggle with are often exacerbated by the isolation and lack of support services in rural areas," the researchers said.
The research was conducted by Beth Mattingly, director of research on vulnerable families at the Carsey Institute and research assistant professor of sociology at UNH; Ken Johnson, senior demographer at the Carsey Institute and a professor of sociology at UNH; and Andrew Schaefer, a doctoral student in sociology at UNH and research assistant at the Carsey Institute.
This analysis is based upon decennial census data from 1980, 1990, and 2000, as well as American Community Survey five-year estimates (ACS) released in 2009. "High" child poverty is 20 percent or more of the children living in poverty in a county. "Persistent" poverty is high poverty rates in three consecutive decades: 1980, 1990, 2000, as well as 2009. Demographic data for each county are from the U.S. Census Bureau's "U.S.A. Counties Data Files." The complete Carsey Institute report about this research is available at http://www.carseyinstitute.unh.edu/CarseySearch/search.php?id=176.

LVT
1.8 / 5 (5) Oct 18, 2011CHollman82
1 / 5 (5) Oct 18, 2011CHollman82
1 / 5 (4) Oct 18, 2011Bleeding hearts who think with the wrong organ cause more suffering than they prevent.
Vendicar_Decarian
2.3 / 5 (3) Oct 19, 2011We do know that the number of children living in Poverty rises with every Republican president in the White House.
Isn't that correlation good enough for you?
CHollman82
1 / 5 (4) Oct 19, 2011Give me all the 1's you want it's only evidence of your ignorance... I want to cure the problem, you want to treat the symptom while simultaneously making the problem worse.
LVT
1 / 5 (2) Oct 19, 2011Republicans help people create wealth, Democrats help people take other peoples wealth.
Vendicar_Decarian
1 / 5 (2) Oct 19, 2011Borrow and spend Republican Economic policies have bankrupted America.
Libertarian ideology sits at the root of those nation bankrupting, wealth destroying, Republican policies.
beau2am
not rated yet Oct 20, 2011-Trick question! heheheh. We all know conservatives can't end child poverty. After all, to end child poverty, you'd have to give or "reward" the poor people stuff for free (like money, or food, or credits for gas so they could afford to drive their kids to school, pay rent, and eat -while still taking care of medical expenses that often occur because they haven't been well educated or well-trained in maintaining certain health practices -or they haven't had a previous opportunity to pay for help for their current physical ailments) --and giving poor people stuff for free (sorry, "rewarding them for being poor") is socialism. And socialism is always bad. That's just plain logic that anyone can understand by watching Fox 'News'.
CHollman82
1 / 5 (2) Oct 20, 2011Giving poor people money is not the solution you dolts. Poverty is a symptom, the problem runs much deeper and in several directions.
CHollman82
1 / 5 (1) Oct 21, 2011If someone doesn't want to put effort into their life to do well in school and make good choices so that they don't become a fuckup then they deserve to live in poverty. The problem is that people are fuckups, not that people are poor. The problem is poor attitudes toward education leading to stupidity and stupid decisions that then lead to drug addiction or incarceration. No decent person that can present himself well and hold his head high and be proud of himself and his work is in poverty.... the people in poverty deserve to be there as a natural consequence of poor decisions, and we should address the factors that lead people to make these poor decisions, not throw money at fuckups. Sure, these people's children are innocent victims that should be helped, but there are better ways than supplying drug money to their paren
Isaacsname
not rated yet Oct 23, 2011Who wrote this, Captain Obvious ?
Lemme try this:
" Researchers find toilets located in restrooms more than any other location, completely dumbfounded "