I use it when it’s in the 70s (from Mid-Atlantic, reside in Midwest). Maybe it’s the humidity? I still remember when my first GF made a big point to tell me how poor I must be, since my parents had a home without central AC (we had a window unit). Still, it is pretty much my expectation that every modern home will have AC, and that most people I encounter will use it for approx 1/2 the year.
^
Half the Top 20 Poorest Counties in America are included in Indian reservations http://www.aaanativearts.com/mailbag-archive/1413-half-the-top-20-poorest-counties-in-america-are-included-in-indian-reservations.html#ixzz3GHF5Kpeh
I have relatives that live on the Pine Ridge reservation in ND. It is tragic that in this day and age, anyone in America lives in such squalor. There are houses that are literally smaller than my 10X12 bedroom where entire families live with no indoor plumbing or electricty.
Portland does get humid, just not to the same extent as eastern states. Still moreso than the Rocky Mountain and intermountain region. Average max dewpoint in the summer is about 57 or 58F but you get a good number of days where it’s 60+.
And most of the top ten (and all of the top three) are in SD. Go us?
You obviously didn’t read the article you cited, otherwise you would know that Pine Ridge is in SD not ND.
Noticed something else while looking at that map. Flatter areas are richer. The flatter, the wealthier.
Something to do with agriculture?
The Rio Grande Valley of Texas, the Delta region of Mississippi and Appalachia, particularly in NE Kentucky, SE Ohio and much of West Virginia are probably the poorest regions of the United States. Also, three of the poorest counties in the US are in South Dakota and are contiguous with the Lakota/Pine Ridge reservation there.
None of those areas are technically in the West.
Texas is more Southwest than West.
Parts of the San Joaquin Valley in California have crushing poverty. Generally Hispanic field workers in unincorporated parts of counties.
If we use the number of a/c units and the universal presence of paved roads as THE criteria for wealth, then, yes, most of the PNW is poor.
In case you were unaware, the weather is temperate west of the cascade mountains. This eliminates the need for any a/c. Even the folks who live on “snob hill” do not have a/c. They could afford it, but why? It may come in handy for TWO DAYS in an average summer. Therefore it is not worth the cost of maintenance each year. To say nothing of the cost of the original installation. It would be like an eskimo having a/c in Point Barrow, Alaska. No need.
As far as paved roads are concerned, there are literally thousands of miles of gravel roads in any county in the PNW. They are easier to maintain it this wet climate then pavement is. Many of the “paved roads” you would see if you were to visit, are actually oil and gravel. Once again, it is easier to maintain and the roads flex enough to not break up as real pavement does. Oil and gravel is also cheaper to lay down in the first place.
I grew up in the PNW, and I have visited the deep south as well as NE Kentucky. From personal experience, I can tell you very few places in the PNW come even close to the abject poverty I have seen in these other places. This includes the tribal lands of the First Nations folks in the PNW.
IHTH, 48.
I can tell you that in the Metro Detroit area, some very wealthy neighborhoods still have unpaved streets. Supposedly they like it that way because it cuts down on traffic. Cars and trucks will rut and washboard a dirt road in no time.
Don’t tell that to the people that live in Aspen or Vail. 
This is what I was thinking too.
Harlan County, KY is very poor.
Interesting read on the Wiki page for List of lowest-income counties in the United States
Number of counties by state in the 100 poorest counties: Texas, 17; Kentucky, 16; Mississippi, 14; South Dakota, 10; Louisiana, 5;
do note that Texas, by far, has many more counties than any other state, so just counting the number of poor counties in Texas isn’t particularly meaningful.
I think that map is biased. For one thing, a larger proportion of the populace with college degrees doesn’t necessarily mean the education is better, it could just mean having a degree is an essential for getting a decent job, or that people moved from other places to those cities but got a good education elsewhere. I bet you Portland and Seattle transplants are a lot more likely to have degrees than people born and raised in the city, for example.
Also it doesn’t adjust the average income for cost of living. San Jose averages $90,000 a year but it will probably only get you as far as $25,000 in rural Kentucky!
Expanding on protoboard’s point without necessarily agreeing with the initial premise, I note that two Georgia counties with which I’m familiar - Bulloch and Clark - are probably ranked weirdly, at best. Both are home to large universities, which skews the per capita income ranking and the education levels. A large portion of the residents of both counties don’t have degrees (because that’s why they’re living in that area - to get a degree,) and work low-paying jobs, because that’s what college students do!
Overall, though, I can’t imagine how a reasonable person could think that the American west coast could possibly be anywhere near as poor as Appalachia, or the Mississippi delta, or the reservations, or parts of the Rust Belt. Maybe the OP has just never traveled?
What I mean is the Western US is the poorest census region of the US, when you adjust for its cost of living. California (which has over half the West’s population), Nevada, Arizona, and New Mexico are all poorer than average for the US. Oregon ranks slightly above average for poverty in general but is one of the very worst for child poverty.
The only places out West that are really thriving are the Seattle metro, Utah, Idaho, Alaska, Montana and Wyoming. Those areas only make up about 15 percent of the West’s total population.
In the South only about 60 percent of the population lives in poorer than average states compared to the 75 percent or so of Westerners. List of U.S. states and territories by poverty rate - Wikipedia
And yes, parts of rural Oregon are every bit as poor as Appalachia! There are no jobs in those towns.
He lives here in Portland. He just likes to bitch about it rather than move away or improve his lot in life.
Notice that the same link has the states sorted by the “supplemental poverty measure” which is basically what you’re arguing about poverty when adjusted for cost of living. Yeah, California is a bit of an outlier but other than than that I don’t see any particular regional bias to it. It mostly just seems to be high in states that have a lot of large cities, which makes sense if you think about it.
ETA: Also note that by that measure Oregon is well below the national average, and Washington is significantly lower.
I’m actually pretty content with my lot now, but it’s hard to deny that people on the West Coast are ripped off and for no good reason. We don’t really get any better benefits than people in the rest of the country, and we pay an enormous sunshine tax. Even in Portland which lacks sunshine, aside from this past year at least.
Objectively the eastern 2/3 of the country as well as all of Canada are more affordable, have friendlier people, and less arid climates. Australia and most of Europe also offer a higher standard of living than California, Oregon and Washington. At least weed is legal I guess.
I think it’s partly that and also blue states subsidize red states in taxes, which I imagine makes things more expensive for people who live in blue states.
It’s not just that though, I did a bunch of average home cost comparisons and for their size west coast cities are definitely more expensive in terms of real estate than other regions. From the small towns up to the biggest cities.