In Michigan’s highest-income places, 55.2% of adults are married, vs 31.0% in the lowest-income places

Picture two kitchen tables. At one, two working spouses in a Kent County suburb sort through a stack of bills and a college savings statement. At another, in Flint, a single parent works out how to stretch one paycheck to the end of the month. It is tempting to look at scenes like these and draw a quick conclusion about marriage and money. The data on marriage and income in Michigan shows a real pattern, but the story behind it is more complicated than “marriage makes you richer” or “money makes you marry.”

Higher-income Michigan places have more married adults: 55.2% vs 31.0%

We sorted Michigan’s 101 places with at least 10,000 residents by median household income and split them into five groups (quintiles). The average share of adults who are married rises at every step:

• Lowest income quintile ($37,646 to $51,773): 31.0% married
• Second ($52,272 to $62,710): 38.5%
• Middle ($63,978 to $73,500): 40.4%
• Fourth ($73,677 to $86,472): 48.0%
• Highest ($88,636 to $177,412): 55.2% married

Across all 101 places, the correlation between median household income and married share is r = 0.78, which statisticians would call strong. Michigan’s statewide married share, 47.6%, falls between the fourth and fifth groups.

Where the pattern holds, and where it breaks

At the top, the fit is close. Beverly Hills ($177,412 median household income, 64.0% married), East Grand Rapids ($166,610, 70.6%) and Forest Hills ($158,005, 75.2%) are both the wealthiest and among the most married places in the state. At the bottom, Flint ($37,646, 22.2%), Saginaw ($38,579, 26.8%), Inkster ($39,252, 22.4%) and Detroit ($39,938, 22.3%) are low on both.

The exceptions are where the learning happens. Hamtramck has one of the lowest median incomes ($39,293) yet 53.1% of its adults are married, above the state. Nearly half its residents (46.7%) were born abroad, and factors other than income, such as culture and family traditions, may matter more there. Going the other way, Ann Arbor has a solid median income ($82,212) but only 35.2% married, because its median age is 27.7. Royal Oak ($101,109, 39.8%) and Ferndale ($94,640, 37.1%) are higher-income suburbs where many adults are single or partnered without being married.

Median household income and married share: highest- and lowest-income places

Correlation is not causation: four reasons to read this carefully

1. Household income counts everyone in the home. A married couple often has two earners, so places with more married households will tend to show higher household incomes almost by definition. Part of the correlation runs from marriage to income, not the other way around.
2. Age shapes both numbers. Young adults usually earn less and are less likely to be married yet. Places with many people in their 20s will be lower on both measures, even if nothing else differs.
3. College towns pull the low end down. Mount Pleasant ($44,706, 20.1% married) and East Lansing are full of students with little income and no spouse. That is a life stage, not a long-term economic picture.
4. Places are not people. A correlation between communities does not tell you how income and marriage relate for any individual. A married couple in Flint may be stretched thin and a single person in Birmingham may be comfortable; place averages cannot tell you either way.

Other forces could also sit behind both measures: housing prices, the kinds of jobs available, school districts that attract families, and cultural traditions. This data cannot separate them.

Methodology

Data come from the U.S. Census Bureau’s American Community Survey 2024 5-year estimates (2020 to 2024), retrieved via the Census Reporter API. Median household income is from table B19013, in 2024 inflation-adjusted dollars. Married share is from table B12001: residents 15 and older who are now married, excluding separated, divided by all residents 15 and older. All 101 Michigan places with 10,000 or more residents are included. Quintiles were formed by ranking places by income and dividing them into five groups (four of 20 places and a top group of 21), then averaging the married share within each group without population weighting. The Pearson correlation (r = 0.78) is calculated across all 101 places; squaring it (0.78 x 0.78, about 0.61) means income differences line up with roughly 61% of the variation in married share between places.

Limitations

• Both measures are survey estimates with margins of error, larger in small places.
• Median household income does not adjust for household size or cost of living.
• The analysis covers only places over 10,000 residents, so rural Michigan is not represented.
• Five-year estimates blend 2020 through 2024, a period that included the pandemic and high inflation.

What this means for couples and families

This data does not say that marriage is a financial strategy, or that people in lower-income places are doing anything wrong. It says that money, age and family structure are tangled together across Michigan’s communities.

Inside a relationship, money is rarely just math. It carries stories about security, fairness and what we learned growing up. Many couples find it helps to talk about those stories with someone neutral, and couples therapy is one place to do that. If cost is a concern, our guide to whether insurance covers couples therapy explains what to ask your plan. Iryna Morhunova-Sutton, LLMFT, sees clients online anywhere in Michigan, and sessions can be billed to several plans, including Blue Cross Blue Shield of Michigan, Priority Health and Aetna; coverage, copays and whether couples sessions are covered depend on your individual plan, so verify your benefits first. For the education side of this picture, see college degrees and marriage in Michigan.

When we update this analysis

We rerun the quintiles and correlation each December when the Census Bureau releases a new ACS 5-year dataset.