I made the change to my initial post. McCreary is 21st poorest per capita, not Owsley.

Thanks, lol. We make enough lists the way it is.

The article states that 98% of the town is white, have not been able to verify that this is is a definition used by the Census Bureau.

 

Oh, for God's sake. Do we really need a cutoff point to know a town is lily-white? Not sure why we're haggling about percentages.

I wonder if that number (29 counties) is inflated somewhat due to the fact that Ky has 120 counties many of which are rather small geographically. Not that these areas wouldn't still be poor, but I guess the number compared with other states would perhaps be more in line maybe. The post doesn't say but I'm going to assume that 29 of the 100 poorest counties would be the most of any state.

 

There are 3,007 counties in the U.S. Kentucky has 120 of them - right at 4%. Kentucky evidently has 29% of the poorest counties in the nation.

Oh, for God's sake. Do we really need a cutoff point to know a town is lily-white? Not sure why we're haggling about percentages.

Have never heard the term white town referenced, just trying to educate myself, didn't mean to upset you.

Have never heard the term white town referenced, just trying to educate myself, didn't mean to upset you.

 

You gotta try hard to upset me.

 

But I have to ask, is 98 percent not a high enough threshold?

You gotta try hard to upset me.

 

But I have to ask, is 98 percent not a high enough threshold?

Until I can define white town, you'll have to decide the answer to this question yourself.

Oh, for God's sake. Do we really need a cutoff point to know a town is lily-white? Not sure why we're haggling about percentages.

 

To be fair isn't only like 8% of Kentucky black. Well below the national average. I'd say majority of the state would be considered a white town. Outside of like the top 5 or 6 cities. I'm guessing the population is tiny.

To be fair isn't only like 8% of Kentucky black. Well below the national average. I'd say majority of the state would be considered a white town. Outside of like the top 5 or 6 cities. I'm guessing the population is tiny.

 

If you're going to call Kentucky as a whole lily-white, I'm on board with that. It is. Some towns are just a lot whiter than the next.

There are 3,007 counties in the U.S. Kentucky has 120 of them - right at 4%. Kentucky evidently has 29% of the poorest counties in the nation.

 

I get that, what I'm trying to say is that perhaps the 29% figure is a little misleading when you consider that two or three poor counties in KY clustered together may be the same size as an equivalent poor county in another state.

 

With 3007 counties the average state only has 60 counties. KY is only the 37th largest state in terms of geographic area but has the 4th most # of counties. Heck we have more than twice the number of counties that California has.

 

I understand that the 29 of 100 stat is correct. What I am saying is that by just looking at that figure alone it might look like KY is worse off than say California when perhaps the number of people living in poverty in California might be quite a bit more, even though they wouldn't have as many counties in the top 100.

I get that, what I'm trying to say is that perhaps the 29% figure is a little misleading when you consider that two or three poor counties in KY clustered together may be the same size as an equivalent poor county in another state.

 

With 3007 counties the average state only has 60 counties. KY is only the 37th largest state in terms of geographic area but has the 4th most # of counties. Heck we have more than twice the number of counties that California has.

 

I understand that the 29 of 100 stat is correct. What I am saying is that by just looking at that figure alone it might look like KY is worse off than say California when perhaps the number of people living in poverty in California might be quite a bit more, even though they wouldn't have as many counties in the top 100.

 

That makes sense.

 

Maybe we just have too many counties.

That makes sense.

 

Maybe we just have too many counties.

 

I don't think there's any question about that.

That makes sense.

 

Maybe we just have too many counties.

 

I've been preaching that for decades. Unfortunately, to contract the outrageous number of counties this state has requires lots of people to lose the power over their current penny-anty fiefdoms.

I've been preaching that for decades. Unfortunately, to contract the outrageous number of counties this state has requires lots of people to lose the power over their current penny-anty fiefdoms.

 

^ This is the problem, but due to politics it will probably never change. Kentucky needs no more than 60 counties.

Reducing counties from 120 to 60 would just mean there would be 15 of the poorest counties in the country in Kentucky instead of 29. Reducing the number of counties while it may be a good idea, would have next to zero impact on poverty in this state.

Reducing counties from 120 to 60 would just mean there would be 15 of the poorest counties in the country in Kentucky instead of 29. Reducing the number of counties while it may be a good idea, would have next to zero impact on poverty in this state.

 

I'm still trying to figure out how that added government efficiency would be harmful.