It has been a while since we updated the Tchotchke Index—a measure of our economic wellbeing. The more Americans are willing to spend on tchotchkes—gift shop items, home decor trinkets, yard sale finds—the greater the economic confidence. Five years ago Demo Memo Blog created the Tchotchke Index to track excess consumer spending (here is the original post). The Tchotchke Index is the amount of money spent by the average household on "decorative items for the home," a detailed category in the Consumer Expenditure Survey.
Sadly, the Tchotchke Index has plummeted to the lowest level on record. In 2013, the average household spent just $103 on decorative items for the home—less than half of the $240 it spent on this category in 2000, after adjusting for inflation. The 2013 Index is even lower than the $108 spent in 2010, in the aftermath of the Great Recession. An ominous sign, for sure.
Tuesday, September 30, 2014
Monday, September 29, 2014
Book Store Jobs, 2004 and 2014
The number of Americans employed at book stores and news dealers fell 41 percent between 2004 and 2014, from 151,100 to 89,600—a loss of more than 60,000 jobs.
Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics, Spending and Employment related to Books and other Reading Materials
Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics, Spending and Employment related to Books and other Reading Materials
Friday, September 26, 2014
Fewer Middle-Aged Men Have Long-Term Jobs
Men's incomes are declining in part because fewer hold long-term jobs. This is especially true for men aged 45 to 54, typically the nation's peak earners. A generation ago, the average employed man in this age group had worked for his current employer for at least 10 years. Not so today. The 2014 numbers show a steep decline in long-term jobs among middle-aged men.
Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics, Employee Tenure
- Only 42.8 percent of men aged 45 to 49 had worked for their current employer for at least 10 years, down from 57.8 percent a generation ago in 1983—a 15 percentage point decline.
- Only 49.9 percent of men aged 50 to 54 had worked for their current employer for at least 10 years, down from 62.3 percent in 1983—a 12 percentage point decline.
Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics, Employee Tenure
Thursday, September 25, 2014
College Enrollment Declines
College enrollment has declined for the second year in a row, according to the Census Bureau. In the fall of 2013, the nation's two-year, four-year, and graduate schools enrolled 19.5 million students. This was 463,000 fewer students than in the fall of 2012 and 930,000 fewer students than in the fall of 2011—the peak year, when college enrollment reached 20.4 million.
Two-year schools accounted for almost all the enrollment decline between 2012 and 2013 (-560,000), while four-year schools made gains (+128,000). This was a reversal of the 2011-12 pattern of loss, when four-year schools accounted for almost all the enrollment decline (-580,000) and two-year schools made gains (+125,000). The nation's graduate schools experienced small declines in both years (-31,000 in 2012-13 and -13,000 in 2011-12).
Source: Census Bureau, School Enrollment
Two-year schools accounted for almost all the enrollment decline between 2012 and 2013 (-560,000), while four-year schools made gains (+128,000). This was a reversal of the 2011-12 pattern of loss, when four-year schools accounted for almost all the enrollment decline (-580,000) and two-year schools made gains (+125,000). The nation's graduate schools experienced small declines in both years (-31,000 in 2012-13 and -13,000 in 2011-12).
Source: Census Bureau, School Enrollment
Wednesday, September 24, 2014
What Do Women Want? A Man with a Steady Job
The median age at first marriage is at a record high for both men and women. To find out why, Pew Research Center surveyed Americans about their attitudes toward marriage and asked those who had not yet married what the heck they were waiting for.
Wouldn't you know it, a steady job is the number-one characteristic women want in a partner. Fully 78 percent of single women who want to marry someday say this is a very important quality in choosing a partner. Many more single women want a man with a steady job than want one who shares their ideas about raising children, morals, or religious beliefs.
Finding a man with a steady job is more difficulty than it used to be. According to Pew's analysis, there are only 91 employed men per 100 women in the 25-to-34 age group, down from 139 in 1960. Even worse, many of today's employed young men have low-paying and unstable jobs, making them unattractive marriage partners. When women decide to marry, they are making a rational economic decision. The fact that so many young women are choosing to remain single is evidence of the decline in men's earning power.
Source: Pew Research Center, Record Share of Americans Have Never Married
Wouldn't you know it, a steady job is the number-one characteristic women want in a partner. Fully 78 percent of single women who want to marry someday say this is a very important quality in choosing a partner. Many more single women want a man with a steady job than want one who shares their ideas about raising children, morals, or religious beliefs.
Finding a man with a steady job is more difficulty than it used to be. According to Pew's analysis, there are only 91 employed men per 100 women in the 25-to-34 age group, down from 139 in 1960. Even worse, many of today's employed young men have low-paying and unstable jobs, making them unattractive marriage partners. When women decide to marry, they are making a rational economic decision. The fact that so many young women are choosing to remain single is evidence of the decline in men's earning power.
Source: Pew Research Center, Record Share of Americans Have Never Married
Tuesday, September 23, 2014
What's Behind the Rise in Obesity?
The percentage of Americans who are obese has soared over the past 50 years, according to height and weight measurements collected by the federal government. Fully 35 percent of adults aged 20 to 74 were obese in 2011-12, up from just 13 percent in 1960-62. Obesity is defined as having a body mass index of 30.0 or greater.
This rise in obesity did not occur steadily over the past 50 years. Most of the increase took place between 1976 and 2000, when obesity doubled from 15 to 31 percent. What happened then to cause the increase? Three converging trends may have been at work: the aging of the baby-boom generation into middle-age when people typically put on pounds, the rise of working women and mothers, and the substitution of fast-food meals for home cooking.
Interestingly, the percentage of Americans who are overweight but not obese has barely grown over the years, rising from 31.5 percent in 1960-62 to 33.3 percent in 2011-12. Add the overweight numbers to the obesity figures, and the 69 percent majority of Americans were overweight or obese in 2011-12, up from a 45 percent minority in 1960-62.
Source: National Center for Health Statistics, Prevalence of Overweight, Obesity, and Extreme Obesity among Adults: United States, 1960-1962 through 2011-2012
This rise in obesity did not occur steadily over the past 50 years. Most of the increase took place between 1976 and 2000, when obesity doubled from 15 to 31 percent. What happened then to cause the increase? Three converging trends may have been at work: the aging of the baby-boom generation into middle-age when people typically put on pounds, the rise of working women and mothers, and the substitution of fast-food meals for home cooking.
Interestingly, the percentage of Americans who are overweight but not obese has barely grown over the years, rising from 31.5 percent in 1960-62 to 33.3 percent in 2011-12. Add the overweight numbers to the obesity figures, and the 69 percent majority of Americans were overweight or obese in 2011-12, up from a 45 percent minority in 1960-62.
Source: National Center for Health Statistics, Prevalence of Overweight, Obesity, and Extreme Obesity among Adults: United States, 1960-1962 through 2011-2012
Monday, September 22, 2014
Gen X: Higher Incomes, Less Wealth
A study of the upward mobility of Generation X reveals contradictory trends. Although the incomes of Gen Xers are higher than their parents, they are not as wealthy. This is true especially of college graduates: 82 percent have higher incomes than their parents, but only 30 percent have greater wealth.
What accounts for this disparity? One factor is student debt. Although the education debt of Gen Xers is manageable on a day-to-day basis, notes the report, it is limiting their wealth accumulation and may hamper their ability to send their own children to college—the troubling "generational reach" of students loans.
Source: The Pew Charitable Trusts, A New Financial Reality—The Balance Sheets and Economic Mobility of Generation X
What accounts for this disparity? One factor is student debt. Although the education debt of Gen Xers is manageable on a day-to-day basis, notes the report, it is limiting their wealth accumulation and may hamper their ability to send their own children to college—the troubling "generational reach" of students loans.
Source: The Pew Charitable Trusts, A New Financial Reality—The Balance Sheets and Economic Mobility of Generation X
Friday, September 19, 2014
Change in Households by Age, 2013 to 2014
The number of households in the United States grew by a tiny 0.4 percent between 2013 and 2014, according to the Census Bureau's Current Population Survey—the third slowest rate of growth in more than four decades. Here is the numerical change in households by age of householder...
Change in number of households, 2013 to 2014
Total households: 492,000
Under age 25: 9,532
Aged 25 to 34: -8,994
Aged 35 to 44: -288,231
Aged 45 to 54: -258,528
Aged 55 to 64: 233,447
Aged 65-plus: 804,985
The decline in households headed by people aged 35 to 54 is due to the small Generation X moving into those age groups. The increase in households headed by people aged 55 or older is due to the large Baby-Boom generation moving into those age groups. The troubling number, and a sign of economic distress, is the decline in households headed by 25-to-34-year-olds, a group that should be expanding with the Millennial generation.
Source: Census Bureau, Income and Poverty in the United States: 2013
Change in number of households, 2013 to 2014
Total households: 492,000
Under age 25: 9,532
Aged 25 to 34: -8,994
Aged 35 to 44: -288,231
Aged 45 to 54: -258,528
Aged 55 to 64: 233,447
Aged 65-plus: 804,985
The decline in households headed by people aged 35 to 54 is due to the small Generation X moving into those age groups. The increase in households headed by people aged 55 or older is due to the large Baby-Boom generation moving into those age groups. The troubling number, and a sign of economic distress, is the decline in households headed by 25-to-34-year-olds, a group that should be expanding with the Millennial generation.
Source: Census Bureau, Income and Poverty in the United States: 2013
Thursday, September 18, 2014
What Happened to the Nation's Peak Earners?
Median household income peaks in the 45-to-54 age group, but the peak is smaller today than it once was because of the staggering decline in the median income of the age group.
In 1999, the year when the nation's median household income reached its all-time high, the median of households headed by 45-to-54-year-olds was 40 percent greater than the overall median: $79,550 versus $56,895 (in 2013 dollars). Today, however, the median income of householders aged 45 to 54 is just 29 percent higher than the overall median: $67,141 versus $51,939. Between 1999 and 2013, the median income of householders aged 45 to 54 fell by a stunning 15.6 percent—a loss of more than $12,000, after adjusting for inflation.
Median household income in 2013 (and percent change since 1999; in 2013 dollars)
Total households: $51,939 (-8.7%)
Under age 25: $34,311 (-2.4%)
Aged 25 to 34: $52,702 (-10.4%)
Aged 35 to 44: $64,973 (-8.5%)
Aged 45 to 54: $67,141 (-15.6%)
Aged 55 to 64: $57,538 (-7.9%)
Aged 65-plus: $35,611 (+11.7%)
Source: Census Bureau, Income and Poverty in the United States: 2013
In 1999, the year when the nation's median household income reached its all-time high, the median of households headed by 45-to-54-year-olds was 40 percent greater than the overall median: $79,550 versus $56,895 (in 2013 dollars). Today, however, the median income of householders aged 45 to 54 is just 29 percent higher than the overall median: $67,141 versus $51,939. Between 1999 and 2013, the median income of householders aged 45 to 54 fell by a stunning 15.6 percent—a loss of more than $12,000, after adjusting for inflation.
Median household income in 2013 (and percent change since 1999; in 2013 dollars)
Total households: $51,939 (-8.7%)
Under age 25: $34,311 (-2.4%)
Aged 25 to 34: $52,702 (-10.4%)
Aged 35 to 44: $64,973 (-8.5%)
Aged 45 to 54: $67,141 (-15.6%)
Aged 55 to 64: $57,538 (-7.9%)
Aged 65-plus: $35,611 (+11.7%)
Source: Census Bureau, Income and Poverty in the United States: 2013
Wednesday, September 17, 2014
Anemic Household Growth, 2013-14
The number of households in the United States increased by a tiny 0.4 percent between 2013 and 2014, according to the Census Bureau's latest estimates. In only 2 of the past 40 years have households grown more slowly (in 2008–09 and 2009–10). The 492,000 households added to the nation's total between 2013 and 2014 is the fourth smallest numerical gain in four decades of tracking the numbers (smaller gains were recorded in 1982–83, 2008–09, and 2009–10).
Also notable, the number of non-Hispanic White households fell slightly between 2013 and 2014. The decline marks only the 4th time in 40 years that the Census Bureau has estimated a drop in the number of non-Hispanic White households.
Nearly one-third of the nation's households are now headed by Blacks, Asians, or Hispanics. Black households outnumber Hispanic households by more than 1 million, and they grew faster than Hispanic households between 2013 and 2014 (a 1.8 percent gain for Blacks versus a 1.4 percent gain for Hispanics). Asian households are far less numerous than Black or Hispanic, but they grew by a faster 4.1 percent between 2013 and 2014.
Number (and percent distribution) of households by race and Hispanic origin, 2014
Total: 122,952,000 (100.0%)
Asian: 6,111,000 (5.0%)
Black: 16,855,000 (13.7%)
Hispanic: 15,811,000 (12.8%)
Non-Hispanic White: 83,641,000 (68.0%)
Source: Census Bureau, 2014 Current Population Survey
Also notable, the number of non-Hispanic White households fell slightly between 2013 and 2014. The decline marks only the 4th time in 40 years that the Census Bureau has estimated a drop in the number of non-Hispanic White households.
Nearly one-third of the nation's households are now headed by Blacks, Asians, or Hispanics. Black households outnumber Hispanic households by more than 1 million, and they grew faster than Hispanic households between 2013 and 2014 (a 1.8 percent gain for Blacks versus a 1.4 percent gain for Hispanics). Asian households are far less numerous than Black or Hispanic, but they grew by a faster 4.1 percent between 2013 and 2014.
Number (and percent distribution) of households by race and Hispanic origin, 2014
Total: 122,952,000 (100.0%)
Asian: 6,111,000 (5.0%)
Black: 16,855,000 (13.7%)
Hispanic: 15,811,000 (12.8%)
Non-Hispanic White: 83,641,000 (68.0%)
Source: Census Bureau, 2014 Current Population Survey
Tuesday, September 16, 2014
Median Household Income in 2013
The $51,939 median household income of 2013 was not significantly different from the $51,758 of 2012, after adjusting for inflation. This is the second year in a row of no significant change in median household income, according to the Census Bureau, following two years of decline.
Median household income in 2013 was 8.0 percent below the median of 2007 (the Great Recession officially began in December 2007), after adjusting for inflation. But 2007 was nothing special as far as median household income is concerned because the median had peaked years before that—all the way back in 1999 at $56,895. Median household income in 2013 was 8.7 percent below that all-time high.
Median household income, 1999 to 2013 (in 2013 dollars)
2013: $51,939
2012: $51,758
2011: $51,842
2010: $52,646
2009: $54,059
2008: $54,423
2007: $56,436
1999: $56,895 (all-time high)
Source: Census Bureau, Income and Poverty in the United States: 2013
Median household income in 2013 was 8.0 percent below the median of 2007 (the Great Recession officially began in December 2007), after adjusting for inflation. But 2007 was nothing special as far as median household income is concerned because the median had peaked years before that—all the way back in 1999 at $56,895. Median household income in 2013 was 8.7 percent below that all-time high.
Median household income, 1999 to 2013 (in 2013 dollars)
2013: $51,939
2012: $51,758
2011: $51,842
2010: $52,646
2009: $54,059
2008: $54,423
2007: $56,436
1999: $56,895 (all-time high)
Source: Census Bureau, Income and Poverty in the United States: 2013
Monday, September 15, 2014
Spending Trends by Region, 2006 to 2013
The Northeast is the only region in which average household spending in 2013 exceeded spending in 2006 (the peak spending year, nationally), after adjusting for inflation.
Average household spending in 2013 (and percent change since 2006; in 2013 dollars)
Total households: $51,100 (-8.6%)
Northeast: $57,027 (+0.4%)
Midwest: $50,527 (-3.1%)
South: $45,956 (-10.6%)
West: $55,460 (-16.5%)
Households in the Northeast are now the biggest spenders. At the other extreme, households in the South spend the least and are losing ground. In dollar terms, the household spending gap between the Northeast and South has more than doubled, rising from $5,388 in 2006 to $11,071 in 2013.
Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics, Consumer Expenditure Surveys
Average household spending in 2013 (and percent change since 2006; in 2013 dollars)
Total households: $51,100 (-8.6%)
Northeast: $57,027 (+0.4%)
Midwest: $50,527 (-3.1%)
South: $45,956 (-10.6%)
West: $55,460 (-16.5%)
Households in the Northeast are now the biggest spenders. At the other extreme, households in the South spend the least and are losing ground. In dollar terms, the household spending gap between the Northeast and South has more than doubled, rising from $5,388 in 2006 to $11,071 in 2013.
Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics, Consumer Expenditure Surveys
Friday, September 12, 2014
Stuck in the Suburbs
As boomers age into their sixties and beyond, most still live in suburban and rural areas designed for younger adults in their physical prime. Driving is a requirement for getting groceries, seeing a doctor, or visiting friends and family. Yet many older Americans (20 percent of those aged 50 or older, according to an AARP study) limit their driving or have given it up entirely. As boomers age, millions will be isolated in suburban and rural areas. Housing America's Older Adults, a new report from the Joint Center for Housing Studies of Harvard University, examines this emerging problem and what can be done about it.
Thursday, September 11, 2014
Spending by Age, 2006 to 2013
Average household spending fell 8.6 percent between 2006 (the peak year) and 2013, after adjusting for inflation—from $55,926 to $51,100. According to a Demo Memo analysis of the Consumer Expenditure Survey, only 16 percent of the $4,826 decline in average household spending during those years was due to the aging of the population—a consequence of the large baby-boom population getting older, retiring, and reducing its spending.
Most of the decline in average household spending was due to budget cutting in all but one age group. Here is average household spending by age of householder in 2013 (and percent change since 2006; in 2013 dollars)...
Under age 25: $30,373 (-6.7%)
Aged 25 to 34: $48,087 (-12.5%)
Aged 35 to 44: $58,784 (-11.5%)
Aged 45 to 54: $60,524 (-9.0%)
Aged 55 to 64: $55,892 (-4.8%)
Aged 65-plus: $41,403 (+2.2%)
In dollar terms, households headed by people aged 35 to 44 cut their spending the most. In 2013, these households spent a substantial $7,632 less than they did in 2006, after adjusting for inflation.
Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics, Consumer Expenditure Surveys
Most of the decline in average household spending was due to budget cutting in all but one age group. Here is average household spending by age of householder in 2013 (and percent change since 2006; in 2013 dollars)...
Under age 25: $30,373 (-6.7%)
Aged 25 to 34: $48,087 (-12.5%)
Aged 35 to 44: $58,784 (-11.5%)
Aged 45 to 54: $60,524 (-9.0%)
Aged 55 to 64: $55,892 (-4.8%)
Aged 65-plus: $41,403 (+2.2%)
In dollar terms, households headed by people aged 35 to 44 cut their spending the most. In 2013, these households spent a substantial $7,632 less than they did in 2006, after adjusting for inflation.
Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics, Consumer Expenditure Surveys
Wednesday, September 10, 2014
Spending in 2013: Another Decline
Average household spending peaked in 2006, just prior to the Great Recession, and has yet to recover. In 2013, the average household spent just $51,100, according to the latest numbers from the Consumer Expenditure Survey. This is 2.1 percent less than the average household spent in 2012 and fully 8.6 percent less than it spent in 2006, after adjusting for inflation. Here is average annual household spending from the peak spending year of 2006 through 2013 (in 2013 dollars), and the percent change in spending from the preceding year...
2013: $51,100 (-2.1%)
2012: $52,196 (+1.4%)
2011: $51,477 (+0.2%)
2010: $51,397 (-3.5%)
2009: $53,280 (-2.5%)
2008: $54,626 (-2.1%)
2007: $55,770 (-0.3%)
2006: $55,926 (+1.0%)
Note that the 2012-13 spending decline of 2.1 percent is equal to the decline that occurred between 2007 and 2008—in the midst of the Great Recession.
Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics, Consumer Expenditure Survey
2013: $51,100 (-2.1%)
2012: $52,196 (+1.4%)
2011: $51,477 (+0.2%)
2010: $51,397 (-3.5%)
2009: $53,280 (-2.5%)
2008: $54,626 (-2.1%)
2007: $55,770 (-0.3%)
2006: $55,926 (+1.0%)
Note that the 2012-13 spending decline of 2.1 percent is equal to the decline that occurred between 2007 and 2008—in the midst of the Great Recession.
Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics, Consumer Expenditure Survey
Tuesday, September 09, 2014
Why Renters Aren't Buying
Renters aren't becoming homeowners like they once did. Is that because they don't want to own a home or because they can't afford to buy? To determine the answer, the Federal Reserve Bank of New York added a series of questions on its Survey of Consumer Expectations, fielded in February. Were renters planning on moving in the next three years? Among those who planned to move, would they rent or buy their next home? If they did not plan to buy, why not?
It turns out most renters who plan to move and rent rather than buy just don't have the money to become homeowners. The 56 percent majority of these potential homebuyers say they don't have enough money saved or they have too much debt to buy a home.
Source: Federal Reserve Bank of New York, Liberty Street Economics, Why Aren't More Renters Becoming Homeowners?
It turns out most renters who plan to move and rent rather than buy just don't have the money to become homeowners. The 56 percent majority of these potential homebuyers say they don't have enough money saved or they have too much debt to buy a home.
Source: Federal Reserve Bank of New York, Liberty Street Economics, Why Aren't More Renters Becoming Homeowners?
Monday, September 08, 2014
Household Income Stable in July 2014
Median household income inched up to $54,045 in July 2014, according to Sentier Research. This was a statistically insignificant $105 more than in June, after adjusting for inflation. The July 2014 median was 1.7 percent higher than in July 2013, however, and 4.2 percent more than the $51,843 of August 2011—the low point in Sentier's household income series.
"The period since August 2011 has been marked by an uneven, but generally upward trend in the level of real median annual household income," reports Sentier. "Many of the month-to-month changes in median income during this period have not been statistically significant. However, the cumulative effect of the various month-to-month changes since August 2011 resulted in the income improvement." Sentier's median household income estimates are derived from the Census Bureau's monthly Current Population Survey.
Median household income in July 2014 was 2.9 percent below the median of June 2009, the end of the Great Recession. It was 4.6 percent below the median of December 2007, the start of the Great Recession. It was 5.7 percent below the median of January 2000. For more information on household income trends for the nation, states, and metropolitan areas, visit the Sentier Research web site.
Source: Sentier Research, Household Income Trends: July 2014
"The period since August 2011 has been marked by an uneven, but generally upward trend in the level of real median annual household income," reports Sentier. "Many of the month-to-month changes in median income during this period have not been statistically significant. However, the cumulative effect of the various month-to-month changes since August 2011 resulted in the income improvement." Sentier's median household income estimates are derived from the Census Bureau's monthly Current Population Survey.
Median household income in July 2014 was 2.9 percent below the median of June 2009, the end of the Great Recession. It was 4.6 percent below the median of December 2007, the start of the Great Recession. It was 5.7 percent below the median of January 2000. For more information on household income trends for the nation, states, and metropolitan areas, visit the Sentier Research web site.
Source: Sentier Research, Household Income Trends: July 2014
Friday, September 05, 2014
Household Wealth, 2007 to 2013
Bad news: Americans are still reeling from the Great Recession, according to the latest findings from the Survey of Consumer Finances. Median household net worth fell 40 percent between 2007 and 2013, after adjusting for inflation. Although most of that decline occurred between 2007 and 2010, net worth continued to drift downward between 2010 and 2013.
Median household net worth, 2007 to 2013 (in 2013 dollars)
2013: $81,200
2010: $82,800
2007: $135,400
Many households experienced double-digit declines in net worth between 2010 and 2013, after adjusting for inflation. Households headed by people aged 45 to 54, for example, saw their net worth fall by an additional 17 percent during those years, following a 39 percent decline between 2007 and 2010. Other household segments experiencing double-digit declines in net worth between 2010 and 2013 were those headed by people 55 to 64, aged 75 or older, without a high school diploma, with only some college, and the broad segment "nonwhites or Hispanics."
Source: Federal Reserve Board, Survey of Consumer Finances
Thursday, September 04, 2014
The Complete Guide to Young Adults in Four Numbers
Median annual earnings of 20-to-24-year-olds who are not in school, by highest level of educational attainment, 2000 and 2012 (in 2012 dollars)...
High school graduates
2000: $20,800
2012: $15,930
Bachelor's degree or more
2000: $29,700
2012: $24,990
Source: Forum on Child and Family Statistics, America's Young Adults, Special Issue 2014
High school graduates
2000: $20,800
2012: $15,930
Bachelor's degree or more
2000: $29,700
2012: $24,990
Source: Forum on Child and Family Statistics, America's Young Adults, Special Issue 2014
Wednesday, September 03, 2014
Who Has a Basement?
Only 29 percent of the 569,000 new single-family homes completed in 2013 included a basement. Basements are uncommon in new homes because most are being built in the South, where basements are a rare commodity. Here is the number of new single-family homes completed in 2013 (and the percent with a basement) by region...
Northeast: 48,000 (71%)
Midwest: 96,000 (72%)
South: 296,000 (10%)
West: 129,000 (27%)
Source: Census Bureau, Characteristics of New Housing
Northeast: 48,000 (71%)
Midwest: 96,000 (72%)
South: 296,000 (10%)
West: 129,000 (27%)
Source: Census Bureau, Characteristics of New Housing
Tuesday, September 02, 2014
Big Cities Are More Affordable than You Think
When comparing the cost of living in various cities, housing dominates the discussion. That's because housing is our biggest expense. In 2012, the average American household spent $16,000 on shelter and utilities—32 percent of the household budget.
But according to an analysis of HUD data by the Citizens Budget Commission (CBC) of New York City, reported on in Better Cities and Towns, there is a second variable that should be included in the affordability equation: transportation, which is the the second biggest household expense. In 2012, the average household spent $9,000 on transportation—17 percent of the household budget.
Walkable cities with public transportation can be more affordable than sprawling cities where residents must devote a hefty portion of their budget to vehicles and gasoline. It turns out, New York City is affordable after all. The average New York City household spends only $5,752 annually on transportation—well below the national average. Long thought to be one of the most expensive places to live, the combined cost of housing and transportation in New York City is lower than in 13 of 22 cities examined by the CBC, including Miami, Atlanta, Phoenix, Seattle, Austin, and Jacksonville.
Source: Better Cities and Towns, Why San Francisco, New York and DC May Be More Affordable than You Thought
But according to an analysis of HUD data by the Citizens Budget Commission (CBC) of New York City, reported on in Better Cities and Towns, there is a second variable that should be included in the affordability equation: transportation, which is the the second biggest household expense. In 2012, the average household spent $9,000 on transportation—17 percent of the household budget.
Walkable cities with public transportation can be more affordable than sprawling cities where residents must devote a hefty portion of their budget to vehicles and gasoline. It turns out, New York City is affordable after all. The average New York City household spends only $5,752 annually on transportation—well below the national average. Long thought to be one of the most expensive places to live, the combined cost of housing and transportation in New York City is lower than in 13 of 22 cities examined by the CBC, including Miami, Atlanta, Phoenix, Seattle, Austin, and Jacksonville.
Source: Better Cities and Towns, Why San Francisco, New York and DC May Be More Affordable than You Thought
Monday, September 01, 2014
Characteristics of Minimum Wage Workers, 2013
The federal minimum wage is $7.25 per hour. Nationally, 3.3 million workers are paid minimum wage or less. Here are some of their characteristics...
Percent who work full-time: 35.5%
Percent with college experience: 42.2%
Percent who live in the South: 46.4%
Percent food prep workers: 46.7%
Percent aged 25 or older: 49.6%
Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics, Characteristics of Minimum Wage Workers, 2013 (pdf)
Percent who work full-time: 35.5%
Percent with college experience: 42.2%
Percent who live in the South: 46.4%
Percent food prep workers: 46.7%
Percent aged 25 or older: 49.6%
Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics, Characteristics of Minimum Wage Workers, 2013 (pdf)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)