Suburban Poverty Surges: See The 11 Areas Hit The Hardest (PHOTOS)

Over the last decade, much of the conversation surrounding poverty in America has focused on the urban poor. But according to a report released by the Brookings Institution today, there are now more impoverished people living in suburban areas than in the cities they border.

Between 2000 and 2008, the number of poor people living in America rose by 15.4 percent -- nearly twice the growth rate in the overall population in the same period. But the growth wasn't even across geographical areas.

The poverty rate in American suburbs increased 25 percent during that period -- and is growing significantly faster than the national average and urban rate. Due in large part to suburban population growth and the housing slump, the suburbs now contain the nation's biggest and fastest-growing poor population.

And some suburban areas' poor populations -- particularly those in the Midwest -- are growing faster than others. The Brookings Institution ranked metropolitan areas by the increase over the last decade in their share of suburban poor.

Check out the list below of the areas that are being hit the hardest by a rise in the suburban poor:

#11 Tampa-St. Petersburg-Clearwater, FL -- +7.2%

Tampa's share of suburban poor grew by 7.2 percentage points between 2000 and 2008. In 2000, the area's share was 62.4%, but by 2008 it had risen to 69.6%.

comments(83)

Rate This Photo (Current Rank: loading...)

Ruins Not That Bad

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

Now Make Your Own Top 5

And Share with Your Friends

Average rating: loading... out of 10

Current Top 5 Slides

loading...

Share Your Top 5 Slides

 | Become a fan

Picked These as the Top 5 Slides in the Slideshow

Share Your Top 5 Slides

Users Who Voted on this Slide

loading...

loading...

HuffPost Community Top 5 Slides:

«»

 | Become a fan

Share Your Top 5 Slides

 

Get HuffPost Business On Facebook and Twitter!

Comments

[Bratticus]

08:50 PM on 02/09/2010

How many of us have seen this coming for years? In 2003 a movie was made about it.: http://www.endofsuburbia.com/

[Monika Shaw]

12:20 PM on 01/27/2010

Suburban/exurban development has been the most fragile house of cards in the national economy. There was never much sound thinking behind it. Most of it has taken place in thinly inhabited rural land not prepared for development--no utilities or transport systems or anything else. Local governments permitted it because they didn't know any better. They will, oho, in the future...

While this development was often profitable in the short term for builders and mortgage brokers, its growth depended largely on the decay and abandonment of older, more urbanized areas--an incalculable cost that the rest of us had to pay. Finally, unbridled residential development was always a con-game, a Ponzi scheme that depended upon human weakness for its growth, and inevitably would bankrupt the last people to come aboard. Now the game is up, and it will be a long long time before anyone again tries to sell a $50,000 house for a half-million.

[whitemale08]

11:27 AM on 01/24/2010

I tried to warn you guys over 2-years ago that this was more then a recession/depression but a breakdown crisis of the world's financial system.

Bush/Obama has underestimated or lied to you and said it's just a 'great recession'.

The fundamental problem is that our consumer-led economy is bankrupt and we have no choice but to go back to work, not to produce consumer goods that no one can afford right now, but to develop the infrastructure and scientific industries required for the next generation.

This idea of 'green' austerity is silly. Anyone wanting that is wanting to help curb the population and resort to this fatalistic mantra: "now that we've consumed everything; let's eat drink and be merry and then die".

We're human beings and we're better then that.

[mechman110]

10:26 AM on 01/23/2010

Unempoloyment more like 55% soon other countries will now longer lend to a shaky america and GOD KNOWS we will be working for the GOVerment and hold our hands over our A_ _ what doe you think the health care plan is about big taxes increase the gov can pay for their stupid wars X 3 while america falls apart! yes i feel for thee haitians but this goverment never learned the basic facts? CHARITY BEGINS AT HOME FIRST! then the rest of the world - we nation build iran and afganistan while americans live under bridges and go hungry! BEEN THERE!
WAKE UP AMERICA! it's almost too late

[mechman110]

10:20 AM on 01/23/2010

just liike under g Bush the only ones in thiis coutry that coutned was the rich! THEY ARE TREATED AS god's and get away with murder we see this trime after time after time in the news!
there are 2 sets of laws in this country one for the rich and one for the rest of us poor slobs! And GOD forbid you ever get a court appointed attorney they will sell you down the drain every time! nice and easy for them collect their fee and run! Dont take their advice FIGHT the rich courts who unlike Matlock on .t.v. who always fight till the truth is known the procuter don't care for the truth put em away now matter if they have evidence or not? see i doing my Job making the community safer! What a Joke

[Lorianne]

02:01 PM on 01/22/2010

The suburban experiment is over.
If you're in an exurb or outer ring suburb, move.
Even if you lose money on your house, you'd best get out NOW.

[hswanson2]

10:21 AM on 01/22/2010

Most useless statistics of the day. There is no data here that tells you anything. Look at the number one city with "out of control increases in suburban poverty" - NO - are there more poor people in NO suburbs then 10 years ago - maybe but you wouldn't know from these data. A greater percentage of poor people in Metro NO now live in the suburbs - could that be because many of the urban poor areas were destroyed and the poor left - leaving a greater percentage in the suburbs or maybe just overall more people left urban NO rich and poor - maybe they moved to the suburbs maybe they just left all together all three of these scenarios would cause these changes. For most US cities population trends have been to the suburbs if rich and poor moved in the same numbers it would cause these changes so maybe we are just looking at a list of cities with the most sprawl. Most of all in intro paragraph the cardinal sin of misleading statistics saying something went up 15% without giving an original figure. Was the poverty rate 10% and went up to 11.5% or was it 70% and went up to 80% either way it rose 15% but it makes a big difference.

[hswanson2]

10:39 AM on 01/22/2010

yes replying to my own post - not denying the reality of rising poverty frustrated in the poor way it is presented.

[Threedog]

07:12 PM on 01/22/2010

I think it's funny how Americans define 'poverty.' It's laughable. The 'poor' in America have access to food, clean water to drink, money to beg for. The 'poor' live better than 95 percent of the world!

I'd rather be homeless in America than a farmer in Bangladesh.

[mikefina]

08:30 PM on 01/21/2010

Wouldn't live in ANY of those cities--never mind their suburbs. Sorry for the hard times. Move.

[ImmanuelGoldstein]

01:45 AM on 01/22/2010

Move WHERE? Where is this massive oasis of employment? They can be just as poor where they are as they can be anyplace else.

[mikefina]

10:15 AM on 01/22/2010

Be unemployed elsewhere. Someplace warm.

[senorlou]

08:11 PM on 01/21/2010

I live in the San Fernando Valley, one of the typical suburbs - an early one. I am here to say, suburban living is really a dumb way to go. The houses are incredibly expensive, the utilities, the repair, etc. The transportation is lame - usually a bus. There is no soul or real feeling of community. Everybody goes home, hides in their home, and that's that. It's lonely, expensive, and wasteful. If you live in an earthquake zone - OK, I can kind of understand it because you don't want anything more than a couple of stories high. If you don't have to live that way, don't do it - unless you're rich.

[Threedog]

07:10 PM on 01/22/2010

I was born and raised in the San Fernando Valley. .

The problem with LA is the lack of public transportation. Obviously, we depend on cars, so it's no surprise that as gas becomes more expensive ($3.15 a gallon), the economics of the city will eventually collapse.

On a bright note, the freeways are not as busy due to the depression.

[MajorKong]

05:41 PM on 01/21/2010

Gee, maybe selling our houses to each other wasn't the best thing to base the economy on?

[Threedog]

07:13 PM on 01/22/2010

HAHA. Thanks for the laugh.

[DFL]

05:23 PM on 01/21/2010

Good, those further out suburbs are where we saw the most bush / cheney signs in 00+04, they are now reaping what they've sowed.

[senorlou]

08:07 PM on 01/21/2010

Heh, heh. The problem is, they're blaming the Democrats, of course. Can you say - clueless?

[ReedYoung]

03:52 PM on 01/21/2010

About 1:30pm EST on C-SPAN2, Republican Senator John Thune of South Dakota proposed a great idea -- FOR ME TO POOP ON!

Facts:
Of the $700 Billion in TARP, $320 Billion has been repaid, or has never been committed (155 + 165, but I don't remember which number corresponds to which category; as it's nearly 50%/50%, I didn't think it mattered much and didn't pay attention to that)

Thune's proposal:
Prevent that money from ever being spent, so that it cannot be spent on "unintended" projects, like stabilizing the economy. Now that Wall Street is subsidized, he is declaring "Mission Accomplished" which should mean the end of his career in politics, if the total IQ of South Dakota is greater than its population.

My better idea:
The public permitted TARP for exactly one reason, Hank Paulson's assertion that without TARP, employers would be unable to obtain short-term loans they commonly use to meet their payrolls. His promise of employment is now obviously broken, so I propose that the $320 Billion now available from TARP, and all funds subsequently re-paid, must be automatically earmarked for a fund which must be spent first on putting foreclosed families back into their homes, then to employ electricians to install publicly owned windmills off the Atlantic coast, then in the plains states (where the electricity generating potential is less, but still significant) then installing on homes in the southwest, photovoltaic solar panels to be owned by the homeowners.

NO CORPORATIONS ALLOWED

[Hank10303]

04:43 PM on 01/21/2010

Your plan has a few flaws but I like the general idea. However, the banks have seen fit to reinvest the money made post TARP in their executive bonuses. Fine, if you remember in May/June of 2008 when repayments were discussed they (banks) went crazy of a repayment percentage fee. Then they turned around and raised fees of every Americans account not worth at least $100,000. So I would suggest creating a little competition.

The TARP money was meant to multiply and in that process stimulate jobs via business loans. Just like we the people are moving our money from commercial banks so should the TARP money be redirected to Savings and Loans (who have been regulated since their bad boi behavior), Union savings and the like.

Some of the Recovery Act funds are already ear marked for the wind mill plan later down the road. The part missing in your plan is the national grid that would convert and carry the electricity to power plants; which in turn delivers it to businesses, home, etc.

As for Thune - we will see what happens in November. The republicans have tried very hard to re-write history and ignore facts. Those that aren't really involved or sincerely care also will ignore the facts. If they don't there shouldn't be one single republican holding his/her office on November 5th that is up for re-election.

[Threedog]

07:15 PM on 01/22/2010

I don't agree with your plan.

[AmazingChicken]

03:38 PM on 01/21/2010

While the story is bad, it's the overall percentage that is a bigger one. See Atlanta which is nearly all poor now. It should be #1.

[hswanson2]

10:30 AM on 01/22/2010

No that is not what this is saying at all ATL is not almost all poor (poorly worded misleading data) ATL has the highest percentage of "their" poor people living in the suburbs.

[Tom95134]

02:22 PM on 01/21/2010

The fruits of the Reagan Revolution. Except for New Orleans, whch IMO should not have been included because of the special situation resulting from Katrina, most of the cities shown were growing and their economy improving during the Clinton years.

[NickGranite]

05:15 PM on 01/21/2010

Better than the Obamanomics. The rich get poorer. The middle class get poorer. The poor get poorer. Trickle down poverty.

[OneConservative]

02:13 PM on 01/21/2010

Obama's plan is working like a charm.

[marijam]

04:24 PM on 01/21/2010

After 20+ years of Republican free markets what do you expect? It can't be turned around in just one year. Not even the great Reagan, har de har har, did that.

[NickGranite]

05:14 PM on 01/21/2010

What kind of market do you expect to bring us back?

[senorlou]

08:13 PM on 01/21/2010

Oh yeah, he really was the reason we're in this mess. No clue whatsoever, huh? You'll never get one.