It's hard to get out of an area when you're economically distressed. Cutting that tiny lifeline is a massive risk. This is the same problem keeping poor rural people stuck in poor rural areas.
I don't think so;
> I wish the article focused more on the reasons people choose to stay in a place with a ridiculous cost of living that they can't afford.
Perhaps that's open to interpretation, but I took it to mean, why are staying if they can't afford to?
If someone needs a security guard, they'll pay the least that gets them someone competent to do the work. For the employer, the question isn't directly connected to the standard of living, it's "can I get a body in the door for this rate of pay?" I'd suspect the pay won't go up, as long as the answer's "yes".