According to healthcare.gov, the Federal Poverty Level (FPL) measure as of 2015 is as follows:

  • $11,770 for individuals
  • $15,930 for a family of 2
  • $20,090 for a family of 3
  • $24,250 for a family of 4
  • $28,410 for a family of 5
  • $32,570 for a family of 6
  • $36,730 for a family of 7
  • $40,890 for a family of 8

Now let’s turn our attention to the state of New York, where http://nyscommunityaction.org compiled recent data on poverty (April 2015)

Screen Shot 2015-05-16 at 7.22.34 PM

But our focus is New York City, so let’s take a look at the boroughs of a more detailed analysis. **Important to note: New York County=Manhattan, Kings County=Brooklyn, Bronx County=The Bronx, Richmond County=Staten Island, and Queens County=Queens.

Screen Shot 2015-05-16 at 7.26.13 PM Screen Shot 2015-05-16 at 7.25.19 PM

Screen Shot 2015-05-16 at 7.27.21 PM

Screen Shot 2015-05-16 at 7.29.28 PM

Screen Shot 2015-05-16 at 7.37.36 PM

What’s particularly interesting is the comparison between statewide and borough results.

When looking at the median income for men versus women, in all boroughs the women’s median income is noticeably lower than their male counterparts. It must be taken into account that these statistics include those with a high school diploma only, and thus it can be assumed that those with a bachelor degree or higher would contain higher incomes on average. Now these types of statistics can prove very misleading, for it doesn’t mention the types of occupations each gender has. Actually, a more accurate analysis would be to compare the income disparities amongst similar occupational categories. For example, if men are on average taking up jobs that tend to be higher paying, whereas many women are taking social work and teaching jobs let’s say, then the analysis is quite skewed. However, the general overview does give a good indication that indeed, women are more likely to be impoverished based on these results. Interestingly, Richmond County’s median income difference amongst the two genders was the largest (by over $20,000), whereas Manhattan’s had the least disparity. In addition, to reaffirm our previous trends, it does indeed seem that there is an indirect relationship between unemployment rates and educational attainment. The boroughs with a higher percentage of bachelor degree (or higher) recipients seem to have lower unemployment rates. The Bronx does indeed have the highest unemployment rate and lowest percentage of bachelor degree recipients, supporting its number one ranking in impoverishment for the city.

Concerning race and poverty, there is a large disparity between the percentage of impoverished white and impoverished African Americana and Hispanics/Latinos. Statewide, the percentages read at 11.5% (Whites), 24.0% (African Americans) and 26.6% for Latinos. But when you go to Queens County for example, the difference in percentage for Whites and Blacks is less than 1%! Kings county shows a similar trend, but once we take a look at the other three counties, the disparity increases once again. By looking at poverty amongst the races in a more detailed way, it enables us to make better decisions in regards to combating poverty, for they can be tailored to each borough rather than citywide or statewide.

_______________________________________________________________

However, Robinhood.org’s “Poverty Tracker” provides excellent data that looks beyond the inconsistencies of the Federal Government’s findings on poverty over the past 50 years. Take a look below:

http://povertytracker.robinhood.org/

Screen Shot 2015-05-16 at 6.55.30 PM

Screen Shot 2015-05-16 at 6.55.53 PM

Screen Shot 2015-05-16 at 6.56.32 PM

Now of course the government is not completely wrong in its analysis, so it would be wise to incorporate data from several sources, such as nyc.gov and RobinHood.org. Both arguably offer unique perspectives on impoverishment in the city. In fact, the info graphs(from nyscommunityaction.org) above should be shown more often! If the government advertised such statistics more frequently or on a more media-friendly basis, the message would perhaps hit home harder and make people realize that poverty is right in front of them, evenly in seemingly nice areas.