Mapping incomes
Income disparities are real—and getting more extreme. Maps of income distribution in U.S. cities reveal subtleties and surprises.
Along the curving streets of Beverly Hills in greater Los Angeles, gracious homes occupy large, manicured lots liberally sprinkled with swimming pools and tennis courts. A few miles to the southeast, modest, low-slung dwellings crowd the gritty, gridded streets of Watts.
Similarly, in Chicago, occupants of the luxury lakeshore high-rises of the Gold Coast can gaze through binoculars at the chronically poor neighborhoods south and west of the Loop.
To one degree or another, these stark contrasts characterize almost every U.S. city. And as income disparity continues to increase, so do the contrasts. The maps in this story explore patterns of wealth and poverty in a handful of American cities. By visualizing income data in three different ways—specifically, by mapping income predominance, income extremes, and income diversity—we can begin to discern general patterns in the distribution of earnings within and between America's urban centers.
Map 1: Predominance
First, a colorful map of Chicago census tracts shows households grouped into four categories...
In these highlighted tracts, the predominant (or most common) household income bracket is less than $25,000...
...in these tracts, the predominant income brackets are $25,000 - $50,000 and $50,000 - $100,000...
...and in these tracts, the predominant household income bracket is over $100,000.
Symbol size represents the total number of households within each census tract. Larger symbols represent tracts with more households.
Symbol brightness represents the strength of predominance. Dimmer symbols mean that households in other income categories are nearly as numerous as the predominant income category.
Map 2: Wealth and poverty concentrations
Nationwide, around a quarter of all households earn less than $25,000 each year, and another quarter or so earn at least $100,000 per year.
The second map shows tracts where the proportion of households in the top and bottom income categories exceeds 25 percent.
Red symbols represent tracts where at least one in four households makes $25,000 or less.
Blue symbols represent tracts where at least 25 percent of households earn $100,000 or more.
Symbol size represents the number of households in the census tract. Large symbols indicate more households.
Symbol brightness represents the amount by which each tract exceeds 25 percent. Dim symbols mean that the proportion of wealthy or impoverished households in that tract is closer to the national rate.
Map 3: Diversity
The previous maps suggest that income is not evenly distributed across urban geographies—but some areas are notably more income-diverse than others.
The third map shows income diversity; that is, the likelihood that households in a given area belong to different income brackets.
Purple areas are less income-diverse, meaning that most households in that tract fall into a single income bracket...
While green tracts have greater income diversity, meaning they contain a greater mix of wealthy and less wealthy households.
Gray symbols indicate tracts with average levels of income diversity.
Symbol size represents the number of households in each census tract.
Now that we've explained the maps, let's look at patterns of wealth and poverty in a few cities across the United States.
Los Angeles
Mansions in Beverly Hills; cheek-by-jowl bungalows in South Los Angeles
In many ways Los Angeles is a bellwether for the nation. While people of color will make up the majority of the U.S. population by 2044, Los Angeles crossed that threshold in the 1980s. Economic opportunity is spread unevenly across LA's population—and its geography.
Visualizing income in four categories reveals neighborhood and municipal patterns across the sprawling city. Large parts of , the , and the east of the city are solidly middle class (indicated by purple and magenta hues).
Wealthy households abound in coastal areas, in Hollywood and , and in the hills overlooking the city. Lower-income households are densely concentrated near and in the area east of the city.
Even the wealthiest areas in LA exhibit relatively high income diversity, meaning that households in those areas have a range of income levels. But the poorest areas, including , have the least diversity. Few households in these areas are affluent, an indication that there is less social mobility in these neighborhoods.
New York City
Tony apartments and townhouses on Manhattan's Upper East Side; public housing in the Bronx's Mott Haven neighborhood
The densely populated boroughs of Manhattan, the Bronx, Queens, and Brooklyn are largely divided into distinct income categories, although gentrification, particularly in Brooklyn, is raising income levels in some areas.
New York's distinct neighborhood boundaries are reflected in income patterns. Manhattan neighborhoods are mostly wealthy, except for parts of the and . Middle-class enclaves are located in Brooklyn, Staten Island, and across the Hudson River in New Jersey. Meanwhile, households in the are overwhelmingly low-income.
Looking only at wealthiest and poorest categories reveals the stark divide between affluent areas in the heart of and poorer neighborhoods in and .
Brooklyn neighborhoods undergoing rapid gentrification, such as , show greater income diversity than areas of north of Manhattan, where less gentrification has occurred, and where over half the population lives below the poverty line.
Detroit
A wealthy Detroit suburb; vacant lots not far from GM's Detroit-Hamtramck Assembly Plant
Some recent media reports have claimed that a renaissance is underway in Detroit, a city long beleaguered by dramatic reductions in manufacturing employment. Unfortunately, this resurgence is limited to a few localities in the urban core, while income disparities in other areas continue to mount.
Nearly one in three Detroit residents lives below the poverty line.
Broad swaths of Detroit's are firmly in the lowest income quartile, with affluent areas largely confined to the suburbs north and west of downtown, such as .
The lack of income diversity in poorer urban areas, including , is symptomatic of Detroit's enduring struggle to attract higher-income transplants.
Philadelphia
Leafy estates in Ardmore along the Philadelphia Main Line; row houses in the Kensington neighborhood north of Center City
In stark contrast to Detroit, Philadelphia's center city is thriving. Yet other neighborhoods continue to experience chronic poverty.
Philadelphia's predominant income map shows a familiar transition from higher-income suburbs to lower-income urban neighborhoods. But the striking exception is , where affluent urbanites enjoy the amenities of a thriving downtown.
Mapping only the lowest- and highest-income categories emphasizes the concentrated poverty in and .
As with other cities, the lowest-income areas, including North Philadelphia, are the least diverse in terms of income categories.
Houston
Gracious homes near Rice University; modest garden apartments in the Gulfton neighborhood
Houston has the outer ring of wealthy suburbs that typifies most American cities. But like Philadelphia, portions of the inner city are also affluent.
Areas of urban wealth include Houston's downtown, and extend to the west and south to include the and West University Place neighborhoods, home to Rice University, art museums, and other amenities.
Yet mere miles away, the neighborhoods of downtown are strikingly less affluent.
As with other cities, the least affluent areas also tend to have the least diversity of income categories. But there are also areas of concentrated wealth, especially in the .
Nationwide
It's an oversimplification, perhaps, but largely true: Wealth is concentrated in America's cities, while rural areas are less affluent and less upwardly mobile.
In this county-level view of income predominance, cities appear as beacons of prosperity. Middle America is firmly middle class, while large, primarily rural swaths of the south remain mired in poverty.
The urban-rural disparity is even more apparent when comparing local proportions of low- and high-income households to the national rates. In most counties in the South, over a quarter of households earn less than $25,000.
The most economically homogeneous areas are also located in the South.
Want to explore your own city? Click and drag the interactive map, or use the search tool to locate a specific county. Zoom in to view individual tracts.
