Counties where children have the best opportunity for economic mobility in Texas
Canva
Counties where children have the best opportunity for economic mobility in Texas
Americans have long understood that their birthplace can significantly affect their futures, and academics have increasingly been able to connect tangible early life factors like where they live and the friendships they’ve cultivated with potential future income.
Among the most recent studies shedding light on what’s known as economic mobility—a person’s ability to move themselves and their families up the socioeconomic ladder over their lifetime—are a series of papers authored by Harvard University researchers leveraging vast troves of social networking data.
As part of a national analysis, Wealth Enhancement Group used data from Harvard University‘s Social Capital Atlas project to identify where in Texas children have the best (and worst) chances at upward economic mobility.
The research draws on a privacy-protected dataset representing 21 billion friendships from Facebook made public through its parent company Meta’s Data for Good project. It also uses anonymous tax records, according to the authors. The scholars assigned a score to locales according to how economically connected low- and high-income people living in the area have historically been over at least a decade, per that data. The dataset does not include scores for about 180 of the 3,000 or so counties in the U.S.
The research attempts to fill in the gaps of previous efforts to study American economic mobility that did not consider a person’s vast social networks nor their importance in creating better lives for themselves and their children.
It turns out the ability to cultivate friendships linking people of different socioeconomic backgrounds with one another is the strongest factor in determining whether a child can surpass the earning potential of their parents, Harvard researchers found. They call this economic connectedness.
Read on to find out where economic connectedness is strongest in your state.
SG Arts // Shutterstock
#50. Midland County
– Economic connectedness: 0.84
– Median Income: $88,210
– Population: 166,964
— 73.3% white
— 6.4% Black
— 0.7% American Indian and Alaska Native
— 2% Asian
Canva
#49. Andrews County
– Economic connectedness: 0.84
– Median Income: $80,518
– Population: 18,184
— 74.5% white
— 2.2% Black
— 0% American Indian and Alaska Native
— 0.5% Asian
Canva
#48. Montague County
– Economic connectedness: 0.85
– Median Income: $59,127
– Population: 19,850
— 92.4% white
— 0.7% Black
— 0.4% American Indian and Alaska Native
— 0% Asian
Canva
#47. Wilson County
– Economic connectedness: 0.85
– Median Income: $84,042
– Population: 49,374
— 82.8% white
— 1.5% Black
— 0.4% American Indian and Alaska Native
— 0.6% Asian
Canva
#46. Presidio County
– Economic connectedness: 0.85
– Median Income: $26,395
– Population: 6,328
— 69.6% white
— 0% Black
— 1.9% American Indian and Alaska Native
— 1.4% Asian
Canva
#45. Gillespie County
– Economic connectedness: 0.85
– Median Income: $64,438
– Population: 26,730
— 88% white
— 0.2% Black
— 2.5% American Indian and Alaska Native
— 0.4% Asian
xradiophotog // Shutterstock
#44. Lynn County
– Economic connectedness: 0.85
– Median Income: $49,747
– Population: 5,587
— 76.3% white
— 1% Black
— 0.2% American Indian and Alaska Native
— 0.4% Asian
Canva
#43. Mills County
– Economic connectedness: 0.85
– Median Income: $53,483
– Population: 4,520
— 84.6% white
— 0.5% Black
— 0.1% American Indian and Alaska Native
— 0.2% Asian
Roberto Galan // Shutterstock
#42. Hays County
– Economic connectedness: 0.85
– Median Income: $71,061
– Population: 234,573
— 76.6% white
— 4% Black
— 0.7% American Indian and Alaska Native
— 1.5% Asian
Canva
#41. Lampasas County
– Economic connectedness: 0.85
– Median Income: $66,506
– Population: 21,443
— 82.2% white
— 3.7% Black
— 0.7% American Indian and Alaska Native
— 1.3% Asian
Canva
#40. Randall County
– Economic connectedness: 0.85
– Median Income: $70,544
– Population: 139,176
— 83.7% white
— 3.3% Black
— 0.8% American Indian and Alaska Native
— 2% Asian
Roberto Galan // Shutterstock
#39. Guadalupe County
– Economic connectedness: 0.85
– Median Income: $80,047
– Population: 169,477
— 69.4% white
— 8.6% Black
— 0.2% American Indian and Alaska Native
— 1.7% Asian
Canva
#38. Hemphill County
– Economic connectedness: 0.85
– Median Income: $54,867
– Population: 3,450
— 77.8% white
— 1.6% Black
— 0.2% American Indian and Alaska Native
— 0% Asian
Canva
#37. Hamilton County
– Economic connectedness: 0.86
– Median Income: $44,030
– Population: 8,211
— 91.9% white
— 0.3% Black
— 0.2% American Indian and Alaska Native
— 0.1% Asian
Canva
#36. Callahan County
– Economic connectedness: 0.86
– Median Income: $55,820
– Population: 13,781
— 92% white
— 1% Black
— 0.1% American Indian and Alaska Native
— 0.4% Asian
Canva
#35. Chambers County
– Economic connectedness: 0.86
– Median Income: $93,707
– Population: 45,257
— 79.2% white
— 7.6% Black
— 0.1% American Indian and Alaska Native
— 0.7% Asian
Canva
#34. Fort Bend County
– Economic connectedness: 0.86
– Median Income: $102,590
– Population: 806,497
— 44.8% white
— 20.2% Black
— 0.3% American Indian and Alaska Native
— 21% Asian
Canva
#33. Fayette County
– Economic connectedness: 0.86
– Median Income: $66,624
– Population: 24,445
— 86.8% white
— 6.2% Black
— 0.1% American Indian and Alaska Native
— 0.5% Asian
mivod // Shutterstock
#32. Van Zandt County
– Economic connectedness: 0.86
– Median Income: $61,121
– Population: 58,782
— 91.6% white
— 2.9% Black
— 0.7% American Indian and Alaska Native
— 0.4% Asian
xradiophotog // Shutterstock
#31. Erath County
– Economic connectedness: 0.86
– Median Income: $56,691
– Population: 42,288
— 86% white
— 1.4% Black
— 1.4% American Indian and Alaska Native
— 1.1% Asian
Canva
#30. Fisher County
– Economic connectedness: 0.87
– Median Income: $55,862
– Population: 3,720
— 83.4% white
— 2.1% Black
— 0.5% American Indian and Alaska Native
— 0.2% Asian
Roberto Galan // Shutterstock
#29. Johnson County
– Economic connectedness: 0.87
– Median Income: $70,767
– Population: 177,022
— 85.6% white
— 4.4% Black
— 0.3% American Indian and Alaska Native
— 1.1% Asian
Canva
#28. Martin County
– Economic connectedness: 0.88
– Median Income: $69,194
– Population: 5,213
— 83.5% white
— 0.5% Black
— 0% American Indian and Alaska Native
— 0.2% Asian
Canva
#27. Archer County
– Economic connectedness: 0.88
– Median Income: $67,083
– Population: 8,616
— 92.9% white
— 0.5% Black
— 1.2% American Indian and Alaska Native
— 0.1% Asian
Canva
#26. Real County
– Economic connectedness: 0.88
– Median Income: $44,083
– Population: 2,852
— 95.8% white
— 1.4% Black
— 0% American Indian and Alaska Native
— 0% Asian
Canva
#25. Shackelford County
– Economic connectedness: 0.89
– Median Income: $54,896
– Population: 3,145
— 93.2% white
— 0.2% Black
— 0.6% American Indian and Alaska Native
— 0.2% Asian
Canva
#24. Mason County
– Economic connectedness: 0.89
– Median Income: $73,186
– Population: 3,948
— 85.9% white
— 0% Black
— 1.9% American Indian and Alaska Native
— 0.8% Asian
xradiophotog // Shutterstock
#23. Upton County
– Economic connectedness: 0.89
– Median Income: $58,333
– Population: 3,340
— 42.7% white
— 3.8% Black
— 0.5% American Indian and Alaska Native
— 0.5% Asian
Canva
#22. Goliad County
– Economic connectedness: 0.89
– Median Income: $52,335
– Population: 7,085
— 83.2% white
— 4.9% Black
— 0.3% American Indian and Alaska Native
— 0.2% Asian
xradiophotog // Shutterstock
#21. Hood County
– Economic connectedness: 0.91
– Median Income: $75,851
– Population: 60,521
— 91.9% white
— 1% Black
— 0.6% American Indian and Alaska Native
— 0.6% Asian
xradiophotog // Shutterstock
#20. Clay County
– Economic connectedness: 0.91
– Median Income: $69,967
– Population: 10,236
— 92.8% white
— 0.4% Black
— 0.9% American Indian and Alaska Native
— 0.9% Asian
Canva
#19. Wise County
– Economic connectedness: 0.91
– Median Income: $75,482
– Population: 67,877
— 88.3% white
— 1.4% Black
— 0.7% American Indian and Alaska Native
— 0.4% Asian
Matthew R McClure // Shutterstock
#18. Hardin County
– Economic connectedness: 0.91
– Median Income: $65,347
– Population: 56,124
— 88.8% white
— 6.1% Black
— 0.3% American Indian and Alaska Native
— 0.5% Asian
Canva
#17. Donley County
– Economic connectedness: 0.92
– Median Income: $52,888
– Population: 3,266
— 87.6% white
— 6.8% Black
— 0.2% American Indian and Alaska Native
— 0.2% Asian
Canva
#16. Bandera County
– Economic connectedness: 0.92
– Median Income: $64,495
– Population: 20,839
— 85.4% white
— 1% Black
— 0.5% American Indian and Alaska Native
— 0.4% Asian
Canva
#15. Rockwall County
– Economic connectedness: 0.95
– Median Income: $111,595
– Population: 105,227
— 77.4% white
— 7.2% Black
— 0.9% American Indian and Alaska Native
— 3.1% Asian
Canva
#14. Somervell County
– Economic connectedness: 0.95
– Median Income: $89,253
– Population: 9,170
— 82.4% white
— 2.1% Black
— 0.3% American Indian and Alaska Native
— 1.1% Asian
G B Hart // Shutterstock
#13. Sterling County
– Economic connectedness: 0.95
– Median Income: $55,481
– Population: 1,391
— 76.9% white
— 0.1% Black
— 0.2% American Indian and Alaska Native
— 0.9% Asian
Canva
#12. Coke County
– Economic connectedness: 0.97
– Median Income: $42,639
– Population: 3,288
— 87.8% white
— 1% Black
— 0.2% American Indian and Alaska Native
— 0% Asian
Canva
#11. Parker County
– Economic connectedness: 0.97
– Median Income: $88,535
– Population: 144,803
— 89.4% white
— 1.6% Black
— 0.5% American Indian and Alaska Native
— 0.7% Asian
Canva
#10. Blanco County
– Economic connectedness: 0.98
– Median Income: $71,201
– Population: 11,313
— 81.1% white
— 0% Black
— 0.5% American Indian and Alaska Native
— 0.9% Asian
Canva
#9. Brewster County
– Economic connectedness: 0.98
– Median Income: $48,679
– Population: 9,501
— 80.7% white
— 0.3% Black
— 0.8% American Indian and Alaska Native
— 3.9% Asian
Canva
#8. Denton County
– Economic connectedness: 0.98
– Median Income: $96,265
– Population: 885,012
— 68.2% white
— 10.3% Black
— 0.5% American Indian and Alaska Native
— 9.5% Asian
Canva
#7. Comal County
– Economic connectedness: 0.99
– Median Income: $85,912
– Population: 156,257
— 84.1% white
— 2.3% Black
— 0.3% American Indian and Alaska Native
— 1.3% Asian
Canva
#6. Williamson County
– Economic connectedness: 1.
– Median Income: $94,705
– Population: 591,759
— 71.9% white
— 6.5% Black
— 0.4% American Indian and Alaska Native
— 7.5% Asian
Canva
#5. Kendall County
– Economic connectedness: 1.02
– Median Income: $100,706
– Population: 43,842
— 82.9% white
— 0.3% Black
— 0.5% American Indian and Alaska Native
— 1% Asian
Canva
#4. Carson County
– Economic connectedness: 1.05
– Median Income: $76,786
– Population: 5,856
— 91.8% white
— 1% Black
— 2.5% American Indian and Alaska Native
— 0.3% Asian
Canva
#3. Collin County
– Economic connectedness: 1.06
– Median Income: $104,327
– Population: 1,039,812
— 62.9% white
— 10.1% Black
— 0.4% American Indian and Alaska Native
— 16.3% Asian
Canva
#2. Armstrong County
– Economic connectedness: 1.07
– Median Income: $71,136
– Population: 1,980
— 93.6% white
— 0.7% Black
— 1.1% American Indian and Alaska Native
— 0.2% Asian
Canva
#1. Oldham County
– Economic connectedness: 1.11
– Median Income: $68,077
– Population: 2,251
— 88% white
— 4.6% Black
— 0.2% American Indian and Alaska Native
— 1% Asian
This story features data reporting and writing by Dom DiFurio and is part of a series utilizing data automation across 50 states.
This story originally appeared on Wealth Enhancement Group and was produced and
distributed in partnership with Stacker Studio.
The post Counties where children have the best opportunity for economic mobility in Texas appeared first on KVIA.
Comments (0)