![Tyson Foods Plant [Photo: Food Manufacturing]](https://southarkansassun.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/08/iStock_1185520857__1_.5e441daa51cca-600x337.jpg)
![Silverado Senior Living Management Inc. [Photo: Los Angeles Times]](https://southarkansassun.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/download-6-4-600x337.jpg)
![China's Wuhan Institute of Virology [Photo: Nature]](https://southarkansassun.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/09/d41586-021-01529-3_19239608-600x337.jpg)
When considering the least preferable states to live in within the United States, New Hampshire isn’t typically the first to be considered. This peaceful and pleasant state is home to friendly inhabitants and provides affluence, plentiful green landscapes, cultural diversity, and natural magnificence. While it might lack numerous bustling cities, it’s important to recognize that the Granite State possesses various admirable qualities.
However, no place is entirely devoid of its challenges, and New Hampshire is no exception. To avoid grappling with high crime rates, unemployment, and poverty, it’s wise to steer clear of the worst places to live in New Hampshire.
Rochester: One of the worst places to live in New Hampshire. (Photo: Google)
Starting with the top entry, let’s look at Rochester. Contemplating a move to Rochester, which happens to be among the worst places to live in New Hampshire, might not hold much allure given its less-than-favorable circumstances. Living in this city comes with a notable risk of property crimes, surpassing the likelihood of securing lucrative employment opportunities. Featuring limited earnings, budget-friendly housing options, and elevated rates of joblessness and poverty, Rochester is confronted with substantial hurdles. While extending assistance to the city could be beneficial, the concern revolves around the potential financial repercussions.
Berlin: One of the worst places to live in New Hampshire. (Photo: Google)
Next on the list, the small city of Berlin. Berlin narrowly escapes being classified as one of the worst places to live in New Hampshire. With a population of 10,221, the city struggles with numerous issues, including a low median home value of $92,100, the highest unemployment rate in the state at 8%, and an overall poverty rate of 19.8%, making it less appealing for potential residents.
Even employed households find it challenging to make ends meet due to the average income of just $39,130. The city’s population has declined by 15% since 2005, reflecting its declining appeal.
Manchester: One of the worst places to live in New Hampshire. (Photo: Google)
Lastly, the Manchester. Manchester, recognized as the largest city in New Hampshire, unfortunately ranks among the worst places to live in New Hampshire due to its concerning crime statistics. Holding the dubious distinction of being the state’s most perilous urban area, Manchester’s population of 113,018 witnessed a staggering 2,096 incidents of violent crime and 2,560 property crimes in 2020. These alarming figures underscore the potential risks individuals face in terms of personal safety and property within the city.
Despite its advantageous location near the Merrimack River and close proximity to Boston, Massachusetts, Manchester’s crime rates remain distressingly high. Although the city is often lauded for its thriving small businesses and successful retailers in the downtown area, these positive aspects are overshadowed by the shadow of safety concerns that persistently define this urban landscape. Manchester, colloquially referred to as the Queen City, is regrettably associated with the significant security challenges that cast it among the ranks of the worst places to live in New Hampshire.
Read Also: 5 Most Dangerous Cities In Alaska: FBI Statistics Shows!
