Poorest Cities in 26 States

More than 50 percent of households in Selma are relying on less than $25,000 per annum to live and pay all their expenses. Indeed, people are moving away from this Alabama town fairly quickly to seek better opportunities elsewhere. This difficult financial situation has been ongoing for five decades, with an estimated 8.5 percent lost this decade alone. Figures show $24,223 as the median household income.

Don’t confuse this Houston City with the success to be found down south in its richer namesake. There are no oilfields here and, despite being home to less than 2,000 people, they are finding it hard to get by. With an unemployment rate of 18.5 percent, which is 14 percent higher than the national average, 14.2 percent of its inhabitants were living in poverty in 2016. Figures show $39,615 as the median household income.

One of the most deprived towns in the whole United States, let alone its own state, is South Tucson. South Tucson households depend on a median average of $21,160 per annum, which does not even make it to half the number that households throughout the rest of the state earn. Indeed, many do not even make it to the $10,000 mark.

Figures show a median household income of $21,667 in this Arkansas city of 11,500 people – that’s half the national average. There is only one other poorer city in the country, thanks to a 44.2 percent poverty rate and an unemployment rate that affects 12.8 percent of its residents.

A staggering 54.2 percent of San Joaquin’s 4,000 residents are in poverty. The rest of the state has it considerably better with Californian residents’ median property worth $103,100, highlighting just how dire San Joaquin’s $24,661 median household income really is.

A median household income of $32,785 wouldn’t be so dire in some states, but living in Colorado costs money when the average property goes for $146,000. More than 35 percent of Alamosa’s 9,500 residents do not come up above the poverty line.

For some reason, Connecticut’s prosperity has not reached Willimantic households, with more than 30 percent of this former city relying on SNAP handouts to get by. Willimantic has never recovered from its biggest employer moving out in 1985, meaning that households throughout the rest of the state now bring home $16,000 more per annum than Willimantic households.

When 34.7 percent of your town does not make it above the poverty line, times are hard. Laurel’s population of 3,900 are still really struggling on a median household intake of $34,291, although some small improvement has been seen recently.

No one thinks of this scenic state as struggling but Florida City itself is hiding a big poverty stain. Household intakes have not kept up with the rest of this richer state, being on $34,545, which puts a staggering 48 percent below the poverty line.

Brunswick’s poverty rate of 39 percent is among the worst in the whole United States, having experienced great financial turmoil that has left more than 50 percent of its households earning less than $25,000 per annum. SNAP handouts are relied upon by many of the 16,000 families who are considerably worse off than the rest of Georgia.

Who doesn’t love a holiday in the picturesque surroundings this gem of the Pacific has to offer? Poverty isn’t something that comes to mind when we think of Hawaii but living there is very costly. In the town of Oahu, who has it the worst, more than 50 percent of households are in poverty, despite a median income of $80,078 – which shows just how expensive living in Hawaii is.

Despite strong population growth, Rexburg’s future has yet to look any brighter, with more than 40 percent of its 26,723 residents in poverty. Household intake continues to fall and is currently estimated at $26,341, in contrast to the rising property values.

A significant disparity exists between the household intake of Carbondale residents and the city’s property value, being at median rates of $20,873 and $111,600 respectively. A staggering 49.3 percent of the 26,192 inhabitants are below the poverty line.

Despite not showing as many residents in poverty as some other contenders on this list, looking closer shows that living is Bloomington poses real challenges. Because it is very costly to live here, a median household intake of $33,172 does not get you very far, compared to a median property value of $173,400.

A quarter of Onawa’s population is in poverty, making this small Iowa town the poorest in the state. Studying the SNAP figures shows how alarming the situation is, with 24.9 percent of residents depending on the benefit being twice as high as anywhere else in Iowa.

Kentucky is among the most deprived states in the US, bringing in around $10,000 less income on average than the rest of the country. It won’t surprise you, therefore, that Glasgow residents have it particularly hard, with 29 percent found to be in poverty and young people finding it especially hard to find an income. Glasgow has a wonderful subtropical climate but could do with more employers.

Despite being a nice stop-off for those hoping to get a view of Lake Cumberland, the tourists do not support Somerset enough to bring the poverty rate of 34.4 percent down. There has been some recent growth, but the town is still among the poorest in the country, bringing in a median average income of $23,518.

An awful poverty rate of 41.9 percent is more than twice that of any other town or city in Louisiana. The median household intake of this 16,600 inhabitant town is at a desperate level of $20,005, with all current figures suggesting the problem is getting worse.

Despite the reputation this state has for hard work, employment is short in Presque Isle, meaning a poverty rate of 23.2 percent. This small town is the worse off in Maine, with 12 percent of its households not even reaching $10,000 per annum – closing in on twice the national average.

A massive disparity between the average household income of $37,099 and median property costs of $170,300 highlight the challenges that Frostburg residents face. This Maryland city is home to 8,759 residents, of whom 31.7 percent are experiencing various levels of poverty.

Alarming poverty rates of 41.3 percent persist in Amherst, despite attempts to turnaround the fortunes of the town. Indeed, median household incomes still show a significant decrease each year, meaning some further action is required to improve the fortunes of Amherst’s 19,543 residents and their median household intake of $36,648.

Considered as one of the three worse-off towns in the whole country, Hamtramck has more than 50 percent of its population living below the poverty line. The vast majority of these individuals have no choice but to rely on SNAP benefits because of the deep financial turmoil.

Although figures show a high level of educational attainment in Brainerd, this success has not yet had an impact on financial prosperity. The town’s poverty rate sits at 21.8 percent, relying on a median household intake of $34,358. Perhaps employers would do well to consider Brainerd residents as an untapped source.

Mississippi has real poverty issues and nowhere more so than Vicksburg, where households are failing to earn more than $30,000 per annum on average. This is around half as much as the typical US household and leaves a third of Vicksburg’s population experiencing the challenges of poverty.

Missouri’s poorest town is home to just 4,000 residents, recording an average $24,640 household income per annum. Fredericktown’s population is relying upon around half of the income that other Missouri households bring in, with signs that a poor level of educational attainment is part of the problem. Only 16.7 percent have gone on to higher education, which is considerably less than the rest of the state.

This small city of northern Montana brings in $43,372 for its average household each year. The national average stands at $50,000 so this state is not doing as badly as many others when it comes to poverty. Indeed, Conrad itself is not significantly worse off than other towns and cities in the state, meaning its population of 2,570 does not have it as bad as some, although the population has declined since the 1970s suggesting that many are moving elsewhere to make a living.