Fertility rates fell more rapidly between 2007 and 2009 than they have in any two-year period during the past thirty years, according to a new report by the National Center for Health Statistics.
Birth rates fell among women in every age group under age 40. Among women aged 20 to 24, the birth rate fell to the lowest level ever recorded (96.3 births per 1,000 women). Births also fell in every race/Hispanic origin group, with the largest decline among Hispanics.
By state, fertility rates fell or were unchanged in every state. The biggest declines were in Arizona (-12%) and Nevada (-10%). Other states with an above average decline in fertility (more than 4%) were: California, Connecticut, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Louisiana, Mississippi, North Carolina, Oregon, South Carolina, Tennessee, Utah, and Vermont.
Source: National Center for Health Statistics, Recent Decline in Births in the United States, 2007-2009
Thursday, March 31, 2011
Little Savings
Percentage of workers who have saved $100,000 or more: 24%.
Source: Employee Benefit Research Institute, 2011 Retirement Confidence Survey
Source: Employee Benefit Research Institute, 2011 Retirement Confidence Survey
Wednesday, March 30, 2011
The Boomer Inheritance
How has the Great Recession affected the long anticipated inheritance of the baby-boom generation? According to a new study by the Center for Retirement Research at Boston College, the total amount still to be inherited by the baby-boom generation fell from $6.0 trillion in June 2006 to $5.2 trillion in June 2010 as stock and housing values declined.
Overall, two-thirds of boomer households will ultimately receive an inheritance. According to the researchers, $2.4 trillion has already been inherited by the 17 percent of boomer households that have so far received an inheritance. Median value: $78,000 per household. Fifty-eight percent of boomers still have at least one living parent, so most have yet to receive an inheritance, say the researchers, who estimate the median amount still to be inherited at $47,000 per household.
The researchers caution that the amounts to be inherited by boomers "are typically not large enough to be life-changing. Therefore, boomer households need to make many of their key financial decisions before they ever receive any inheritance."
Source: Center for Retirement Research at Boston College, "How Important Are Inheritances for Baby Boomers?"
Overall, two-thirds of boomer households will ultimately receive an inheritance. According to the researchers, $2.4 trillion has already been inherited by the 17 percent of boomer households that have so far received an inheritance. Median value: $78,000 per household. Fifty-eight percent of boomers still have at least one living parent, so most have yet to receive an inheritance, say the researchers, who estimate the median amount still to be inherited at $47,000 per household.
The researchers caution that the amounts to be inherited by boomers "are typically not large enough to be life-changing. Therefore, boomer households need to make many of their key financial decisions before they ever receive any inheritance."
Source: Center for Retirement Research at Boston College, "How Important Are Inheritances for Baby Boomers?"
Media Out of Sync
"The public's news interests this week are far out of sync with the news media's coverage," reports the Pew Research Center. Take a look:
Percentage of people who are following the news about Japan very closely: 57%
Percentage of news coverage devoted to Japan: 15%
Percentage of people who are following the news about Libya very closely: 15%
Percentage of news coverage devoted to Libya: 41%
Source: Pew Research Center, Public Stays Focused on Japan as Media Turns to Libya
Percentage of people who are following the news about Japan very closely: 57%
Percentage of news coverage devoted to Japan: 15%
Percentage of people who are following the news about Libya very closely: 15%
Percentage of news coverage devoted to Libya: 41%
Source: Pew Research Center, Public Stays Focused on Japan as Media Turns to Libya
Tuesday, March 29, 2011
Televisions, Computers, and Rechargeables
Number per household (percent distribution)...
| Televisions: | |
| 0 | 1.5% |
| 1 | 24.2% |
| 2 | 37.5% |
| 3 | 26.6% |
| 4 | 14.2% |
| 5+ | 9.7% |
| Computers: | |
| 0 | 27.4% |
| 1 | 46.9% |
| 2 | 24.3% |
| 3 | 9.5% |
| 4 | 3.6% |
| 5+ | 2.0% |
| Rechargeable Electronic Devices: | |
| 0 | 11.4% |
| 1 to 3 | 57.9% |
| 4 to 8 | 36.4% |
| 9+ | 7.9% |
Source: EIA, 2009 Residential Energy Consumption Survey
Metropolis
Eighty-three percent of Americans live in one of the nation's 366 metropolitan areas.
One in ten lives in New York or Los Angeles.
Source: Bureau of the Census, Population Distribution and Change: 2000 to 2010
One in ten lives in New York or Los Angeles.
Source: Bureau of the Census, Population Distribution and Change: 2000 to 2010
Monday, March 28, 2011
Vehicle Values Fall
Car and truck sales plunged during the Great Recession. Instead of buying new models, Americans clung to their depreciating automobiles. This explains the steep drop in the median value of household vehicles between 2007 and 2009.
In 2007, the median value of the vehicles owned by the average household was $16,200 (in 2009 dollars). By 2009, the figure had dropped to $12,000--a 26 percent decline, according to the Federal Reserve Board's analysis of household wealth. For much more data by demographic characteristic, see the appendix tables that accompany the Fed report, Surveying the Aftermath of the Storm: Changes in Family Finances from 2007 to 2009. For important information on how to interpret the tables, see my earlier post.
In 2007, the median value of the vehicles owned by the average household was $16,200 (in 2009 dollars). By 2009, the figure had dropped to $12,000--a 26 percent decline, according to the Federal Reserve Board's analysis of household wealth. For much more data by demographic characteristic, see the appendix tables that accompany the Fed report, Surveying the Aftermath of the Storm: Changes in Family Finances from 2007 to 2009. For important information on how to interpret the tables, see my earlier post.
Sunday, March 27, 2011
An Average Day: Sleeping
On an average day, amount of time people aged 15 or older spend sleeping...
Weekdays: 8.40 hours
Weekends: 9.34 hours
Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics, American Time Use Survey
Weekdays: 8.40 hours
Weekends: 9.34 hours
Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics, American Time Use Survey
Saturday, March 26, 2011
The Obama Effect on Racial Identification
Between 2000 and 2010, the number of people who identified themselves as black and white more than doubled, climbing from 785,000 to 1.8 million, a 134 percent increase. This combination alone accounted for nearly half the increase in the nation's multiracial population during the decade.
In 2000, the black/white combination accounted for only 11 percent of the total multiracial population. This group was greatly outnumbered by white/other (many "others" were Hispanics who were unaware that Hispanic is an ethnicity rather than a race), white/Asian, and white/American Indian.
In 2010, the black/white mix surged ahead of all the others, accounting for 20 percent of the total multiracial population. Why? Most likely, it is the Obama Effect. The nation's first multiracial president has boosted the popularity of asserting a multiracial identity, particularly the black/white combination. It is also likely that many of those doing the asserting are parents of children under age 18. As of 2009, the median age of the multiracial population was just 20, well below the median age of 37 for all Americans. We do not yet know the age distribution of the multiracial in 2010, but it is likely to be much more youthful than the general population. What accounts for this? Parents. When answering the census, parents supply the information for children under age 18, including racial identification. Many parents identify their children as multiracial (and increasingly so), but when those children become adults they may choose to adopt a single-race identification. Unless, that is, the Obama Effect permanently changes racial identification in the United States.
Source: Bureau of the Census, Overview of Race and Hispanic Origin 2010 and Overview of Race and Hispanic Origin 2000
In 2000, the black/white combination accounted for only 11 percent of the total multiracial population. This group was greatly outnumbered by white/other (many "others" were Hispanics who were unaware that Hispanic is an ethnicity rather than a race), white/Asian, and white/American Indian.
In 2010, the black/white mix surged ahead of all the others, accounting for 20 percent of the total multiracial population. Why? Most likely, it is the Obama Effect. The nation's first multiracial president has boosted the popularity of asserting a multiracial identity, particularly the black/white combination. It is also likely that many of those doing the asserting are parents of children under age 18. As of 2009, the median age of the multiracial population was just 20, well below the median age of 37 for all Americans. We do not yet know the age distribution of the multiracial in 2010, but it is likely to be much more youthful than the general population. What accounts for this? Parents. When answering the census, parents supply the information for children under age 18, including racial identification. Many parents identify their children as multiracial (and increasingly so), but when those children become adults they may choose to adopt a single-race identification. Unless, that is, the Obama Effect permanently changes racial identification in the United States.
Source: Bureau of the Census, Overview of Race and Hispanic Origin 2010 and Overview of Race and Hispanic Origin 2000
Bet You Didn't Know
Number of American families with an unemployed family member: 1 in 8.
Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics, Employment Characteristics of Families
Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics, Employment Characteristics of Families
Friday, March 25, 2011
This Is Where Your Customers Went
Any business wondering where the customers went can find out by taking a look at the Federal Reserve Board's new estimates of household debt. Millions of households, it turns out, are carrying the baggage of education loans, preventing them from buying homes, cars, furniture, going to restaurants, or taking vacations.
In 2009, a substantial 18 percent of households in the United States had education loans. This was up from 16 percent in 2007. By age, the percentage of households with student debt extends well into middle age. Take a look:
Under age 35: 37%
Aged 35 to 44: 20%
Aged 45 to 54: 18%
Aged 55 to 64: 10%
These loans are not trifling either. The size of student loans exceeds vehicle loans and far surpasses credit card debt. For households with student debt, the median amount owed was $15,000 in 2009, up from $12,400 in 2007 (in 2009 dollars)--a 21 percent increase in two years. For the record, the median amount households owed on vehicle loans was a smaller $12,400. The median amount owed on credit cards was just $3,300.
The households most burdened by student loans are the same ones many businesses were counting on to spend their way out of the Great Recession: married couples with children (24 percent have student loans, and they owe a median of $15,000), renters (24 percent have student loans, and they owe a median of $12,000), and college graduates (25 percent have student loans, and they owe a median of $20,000).
A funny thing happened on the way to where we are today. Your customers signed on a dotted line, and now their current and future income is being siphoned off by someone else.
In 2009, a substantial 18 percent of households in the United States had education loans. This was up from 16 percent in 2007. By age, the percentage of households with student debt extends well into middle age. Take a look:
Under age 35: 37%
Aged 35 to 44: 20%
Aged 45 to 54: 18%
Aged 55 to 64: 10%
These loans are not trifling either. The size of student loans exceeds vehicle loans and far surpasses credit card debt. For households with student debt, the median amount owed was $15,000 in 2009, up from $12,400 in 2007 (in 2009 dollars)--a 21 percent increase in two years. For the record, the median amount households owed on vehicle loans was a smaller $12,400. The median amount owed on credit cards was just $3,300.
The households most burdened by student loans are the same ones many businesses were counting on to spend their way out of the Great Recession: married couples with children (24 percent have student loans, and they owe a median of $15,000), renters (24 percent have student loans, and they owe a median of $12,000), and college graduates (25 percent have student loans, and they owe a median of $20,000).
A funny thing happened on the way to where we are today. Your customers signed on a dotted line, and now their current and future income is being siphoned off by someone else.
Thursday, March 24, 2011
Confusing Numbers
If you are digging into the updated Survey of Consumer Finances data, released earlier today, watch out for a confusing presentation of changes in medians. The percent change columns in the tables are median percent changes, not the percent change in median values. Likewise, the dollar change columns are median dollar changes, not the dollar amount by which the median changed.
Between 2007 and 2009, for example, median household net worth fell from $125,400 to $96,000 (in 2009 dollars), a 23 percent decline in the median value. But the table provided by the Federal Reserve shows "median % change" to be -18 rather than -23. That's because the Feds are measuring the median percent change in net worth rather than the percent change in median net worth. In other words, half of households saw their net worth decline by more than 18 percent between 2007 and 2009 and half saw their net worth decline by less than 18 percent. Likewise, the dollar change in median net worth between 2007 and 2009 was $29,400. Yet the Feds show "median $ change" to be $11,400. This means that half of households saw their net worth decline by more than $11,400 between 2007 and 2009 and half saw their net worth decline by less than that amount.
Insanely confusing.
Between 2007 and 2009, for example, median household net worth fell from $125,400 to $96,000 (in 2009 dollars), a 23 percent decline in the median value. But the table provided by the Federal Reserve shows "median % change" to be -18 rather than -23. That's because the Feds are measuring the median percent change in net worth rather than the percent change in median net worth. In other words, half of households saw their net worth decline by more than 18 percent between 2007 and 2009 and half saw their net worth decline by less than 18 percent. Likewise, the dollar change in median net worth between 2007 and 2009 was $29,400. Yet the Feds show "median $ change" to be $11,400. This means that half of households saw their net worth decline by more than $11,400 between 2007 and 2009 and half saw their net worth decline by less than that amount.
Insanely confusing.
Race & Hispanic, 2010 Census
This was a big day for demographers. Not only did the Federal Reserve Board release the long-awaited update on household wealth (see post below), but the Census Bureau released the 2010 population totals by race and Hispanic origin. Here they are (numbers in thousands):
| % change | ||
| 2010 | 2000–10 | |
| Total population | 308,746 | 9.7 |
| Asians (race alone) | 14,674 | 43.3 |
| Blacks (race alone) | 38,929 | 12.3 |
| Hispanics | 50,478 | 43.0 |
| Non-Hispanic whites | 196,818 | 1.2 |
How Much Did Net Worth Fall?
The answer: 23 percent.
The Great Recession reduced median household net worth by 23 percent, according to the long-awaited update of the 2007 Survey of Consumer Finances. This unprecedented update was undertaken by the Federal Reserve Board solely to determine the impact of the Great Recession on household net worth, assets, and debt.
Median household net worth fell from $125,400 in 2007 to $96,000 in 2009 (in 2009 dollars). The decline in wealth occurred across the board, affecting nearly two out of three households.
The biggest reason for the decline in wealth was the loss of housing equity, which is the single largest asset owned by the average household. The median value of owned homes fell from $207,100 in 2007 to $176,000 in 2009 (in 2009 dollars). Unfortunately, the decline in housing values continues.
Source: Federal Reserve Board, Surveying the Aftermath of the Storm: Changes in Family Finances from 2007 to 2009
The Great Recession reduced median household net worth by 23 percent, according to the long-awaited update of the 2007 Survey of Consumer Finances. This unprecedented update was undertaken by the Federal Reserve Board solely to determine the impact of the Great Recession on household net worth, assets, and debt.
Median household net worth fell from $125,400 in 2007 to $96,000 in 2009 (in 2009 dollars). The decline in wealth occurred across the board, affecting nearly two out of three households.
The biggest reason for the decline in wealth was the loss of housing equity, which is the single largest asset owned by the average household. The median value of owned homes fell from $207,100 in 2007 to $176,000 in 2009 (in 2009 dollars). Unfortunately, the decline in housing values continues.
Source: Federal Reserve Board, Surveying the Aftermath of the Storm: Changes in Family Finances from 2007 to 2009
The Detroit Surprise
The city of Detroit's population loss between 2000 and 2010 was not a surprise. The magnitude of the loss was a surprise. Here's why:
2009 estimate of Detroit's population: 910,848
2010 census count of Detroit's population: 713,777
Source: 2009 American Community Survey and 2010 Census
Wednesday, March 23, 2011
North and South
Percentage of people who do not have health insurance, by region...
Northeast: 11%
Midwest: 12%
South: 20%
West: 19%
Source: National Center for Health Statistics, Health Insurance Coverage: Early Release of Estimates from the National Health Interview Survey, January-September 2010
Northeast: 11%
Midwest: 12%
South: 20%
West: 19%
Source: National Center for Health Statistics, Health Insurance Coverage: Early Release of Estimates from the National Health Interview Survey, January-September 2010
Are You Past Your Prime?
Staying on top of your finances is getting more and more complex. So complex, in fact, that doing it successfully is often beyond the capabilities of the inexperienced (such as young adults) and the naive (such as older adults). In fact, a study by the Center for Retirement Research at Boston College (What Is the Age of Reason? ) shows that younger and older adults do not make the best choices when managing their personal finances. Who does? To be precise, people aged 53.3.
That's right. A series of tests on people of different ages, asking them to make real-world decisions regarding credit cards and interest rates, for example, revealed that 53.3 is the average age when people make the fewest financial mistakes.
That's right. A series of tests on people of different ages, asking them to make real-world decisions regarding credit cards and interest rates, for example, revealed that 53.3 is the average age when people make the fewest financial mistakes.
Tuesday, March 22, 2011
Bet You Didn't Know
Percentage of whites who feel close to blacks, by age...
Aged 18 to 30: 54%
Aged 30 to 64: 38%
Aged 65 or older: 35%
Note: On a scale of 1 (not at all close) to 9 (very close), percent who say 6 to 9.
Source: 2010 General Social Survey
Aged 18 to 30: 54%
Aged 30 to 64: 38%
Aged 65 or older: 35%
Note: On a scale of 1 (not at all close) to 9 (very close), percent who say 6 to 9.
Source: 2010 General Social Survey
Why Do Renters Move?
Ask renters why they moved and "for a job" is often what you hear, according to the American Housing Survey. Twenty-five percent of renters who moved in the past year did so for employment reasons.
The job factor is especially important for renters who moved into new housing--newly built apartments or single-family homes. Thirty-two percent of renters who moved into a new unit in the past year cited a new job, a job transfer, or the need to be closer to their job.
With gasoline approaching $4.00 per gallon, the job factor is likely to become increasingly important to renters as they decide where to live.
Source: Bureau of the Census, American Housing Survey
Monday, March 21, 2011
Poor Demographics
Percent distribution of the poverty population by race and Hispanic origin...
Non-Hispanic whites: 43%
Hispanics: 28%
Blacks: 24%
Source: Bureau of the Census, Current Population Survey
Non-Hispanic whites: 43%
Hispanics: 28%
Blacks: 24%
Source: Bureau of the Census, Current Population Survey
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)