Pennsylvania’s Top Miserable Cities: What Makes Them So Unhappy?

The “Keystone State,” Pennsylvania, is well-known for its beautiful natural settings, fascinating history, and welcoming locals. Still, not every city inside its boundaries is a sunny, happy place.

Put down your hoagies for the time being, and get ready to discover why certain Pennsylvanian municipalities are frowning. Is it something else entirely, a lack of cultural opportunities, or a lack of economic opportunities?

Come along as we illuminate these frequently disregarded communities and the struggles they encounter.

Duquesne

There are major socioeconomic issues in Duquesne, a town of 5,280 people. With 28.3% of the population living below the poverty line, a sizable fraction of the population is affected by poverty in the area.

Given the region’s economic challenges, the typical property price of $51,000 is comparatively low.

Due to the extremely low percentage of married households (18.0%) and the high percentage of child-bearing homes (32.27%), it appears that a large number of Duquesne families are non-traditional or single-parent households.

Darby

There are 10,688 people living in the small town of Darby. With a poverty rate of 27.7%, it nevertheless confronts formidable socioeconomic difficulties in spite of its size.

Darby’s $81,800 typical home price illustrates how reasonably priced housing is in the neighborhood. The proportion of married households in the town is comparatively low, at 10.0%.

Furthermore, 36.91% of households are made up of families with children, a hint that a sizable section of the population is raising kids in the neighborhood.

These figures depict a close-knit community that struggles to support its citizens despite economic differences.

Collingdale

The population of 8,857 in Collingdale struggles with a 22.2% poverty rate. The location is affordable, as seen by the median property price of $120,500, even in the face of economic hardships.

In terms of household dynamics, families with children make up 30.76% of homes, whereas married couples make up 16.0% of the population. These figures depict a varied community whose members deal with both the pleasures and duties of family life in addition to financial difficulties.

Shamokin

There are 6,981 people living in the little Pennsylvanian town of Shamokin. Even with its small size, a sizeable chunk of the population—roughly 34.7%—faces poverty.

The very low $42,400 median property price in the town is a reflection of the financial difficulties that many people experience. Furthermore, just 24.0% of families are reported to be married, suggesting that the population may be temporary or single.

It’s interesting to note that, despite financial difficulties, families with children make up roughly 28.26% of homes, indicating a strong emphasis on family in this close-knit society.

Vandergrift

The town of Vandergrift is home to 5,065 people. The village struggles with a 19.4% poverty rate despite its tiny size, highlighting socioeconomic issues in the area.

The town’s housing affordability is reflected in the $69,400 median home price. Notable family dynamics include the presence of married couples in 34.0% of homes and families with children in 35.17% of households.

To Conclude

Pennsylvania’s “not-so-shining stars” confront a range of difficulties, from economic inequality in Duquesne to a possible lack of opportunity in Shamokin.

Numerous of these villages are characterized by indomitable spirits and strong sentiments of community. These cities provide unique experiences and the opportunity to be a part of something bigger, even though they might not be at the top of happiness lists.

You might find a hidden gem that is just waiting to be discovered if you dig deeper into the histories of these communities. This is just the beginning.