This statistic shows the median household income in the United States from 1970 to 2020, by income tier. In 2020, the median household income for the middle class stood at 90,131 U.S. dollars, which was approximately a 50 percent increase from 1970. However, the median income of upper income households in the U.S. increased by almost 70 percent compared to 1970.

This dataset contains replication files for "The Fading American Dream: Trends in Absolute Income Mobility Since 1940" by Raj Chetty, David Grusky, Maximilian Hell, Nathaniel Hendren, Robert Manduca, and Jimmy Narang. For more information, see https://opportunityinsights.org/paper/the-fading-american-dream/. A summary of the related publication follows. One of the defining features of the “American Dream” is the ideal that children have a higher standard of living than their parents. We assess whether the U.S. is living up to this ideal by estimating rates of “absolute income mobility” – the fraction of children who earn more than their parents – since 1940. We measure absolute mobility by comparing children’s household incomes at age 30 (adjusted for inflation using the Consumer Price Index) with their parents’ household incomes at age 30. We find that rates of absolute mobility have fallen from approximately 90% for children born in 1940 to 50% for children born in the 1980s. Absolute income mobility has fallen across the entire income distribution, with the largest declines for families in the middle class. These findings are unaffected by using alternative price indices to adjust for inflation, accounting for taxes and transfers, measuring income at later ages, and adjusting for changes in household size. Absolute mobility fell in all 50 states, although the rate of decline varied, with the largest declines concentrated in states in the industrial Midwest, such as Michigan and Illinois. The decline in absolute mobility is especially steep – from 95% for children born in 1940 to 41% for children born in 1984 – when we compare the sons’ earnings to their fathers’ earnings. Why have rates of upward income mobility fallen so sharply over the past half-century? There have been two important trends that have affected the incomes of children born in the 1980s relative to those born in the 1940s and 1950s: lower Gross Domestic Product (GDP) growth rates and greater inequality in the distribution of growth. We find that most of the decline in absolute mobility is driven by the more unequal distribution of economic growth rather than the slowdown in aggregate growth rates. When we simulate an economy that restores GDP growth to the levels experienced in the 1940s and 1950s but distributes that growth across income groups as it is distributed today, absolute mobility only increases to 62%. In contrast, maintaining GDP at its current level but distributing it more broadly across income groups – at it was distributed for children born in the 1940s – would increase absolute mobility to 80%, thereby reversing more than two-thirds of the decline in absolute mobility. These findings show that higher growth rates alone are insufficient to restore absolute mobility to the levels experienced in mid-century America. Under the current distribution of GDP, we would need real GDP growth rates above 6% per year to return to rates of absolute mobility in the 1940s. Intuitively, because a large fraction of GDP goes to a small fraction of high-income households today, higher GDP growth does not substantially increase the number of children who earn more than their parents. Of course, this does not mean that GDP growth does not matter: changing the distribution of growth naturally has smaller effects on absolute mobility when there is very little growth to be distributed. The key point is that increasing absolute mobility substantially would require more broad-based economic growth. We conclude that absolute mobility has declined sharply in America over the past half-century primarily because of the growth in inequality. If one wants to revive the “American Dream” of high rates of absolute mobility, one must have an interest in growth that is shared more broadly across the income distribution.

About this dataset

Context

The dataset presents the distribution of median household income among distinct age brackets of householders in Social Circle. Based on the latest 2019-2023 5-Year Estimates from the American Community Survey, it displays how income varies among householders of different ages in Social Circle. It showcases how household incomes typically rise as the head of the household gets older. The dataset can be utilized to gain insights into age-based household income trends and explore the variations in incomes across households.

Key observations: Insights from 2023

In terms of income distribution across age cohorts, in Social Circle, householders within the under 25 years age group have the highest median household income at $98,095, followed by those in the 25 to 44 years age group with an income of $97,564. Meanwhile householders within the 45 to 64 years age group report the second lowest median household income of $87,031. Notably, householders within the 65 years and over age group, had the lowest median household income at $29,895.

Content

When available, the data consists of estimates from the U.S. Census Bureau American Community Survey (ACS) 2019-2023 5-Year Estimates. All incomes have been adjusting for inflation and are presented in 2023-inflation-adjusted dollars.

Age groups classifications include:

• Under 25 years
• 25 to 44 years
• 45 to 64 years
• 65 years and over

Variables / Data Columns

• Age Of The Head Of Household: This column presents the age of the head of household
• Median Household Income: Median household income, in 2023 inflation-adjusted dollars for the specific age group

Good to know

Margin of Error

Data in the dataset are based on the estimates and are subject to sampling variability and thus a margin of error. Neilsberg Research recommends using caution when presening these estimates in your research.

Custom data

If you do need custom data for any of your research project, report or presentation, you can contact our research staff at research@neilsberg.com for a feasibility of a custom tabulation on a fee-for-service basis.

Inspiration

Neilsberg Research Team curates, analyze and publishes demographics and economic data from a variety of public and proprietary sources, each of which often includes multiple surveys and programs. The large majority of Neilsberg Research aggregated datasets and insights is made available for free download at https://www.neilsberg.com/research/.

Recommended for further research

This dataset is a part of the main dataset for Social Circle median household income by age. You can refer the same here

About this dataset

Context

The dataset presents the distribution of median household income among distinct age brackets of householders in Society Hill. Based on the latest 2019-2023 5-Year Estimates from the American Community Survey, it displays how income varies among householders of different ages in Society Hill. It showcases how household incomes typically rise as the head of the household gets older. The dataset can be utilized to gain insights into age-based household income trends and explore the variations in incomes across households.

Key observations: Insights from 2023

In terms of income distribution across age cohorts, Society Hill only reports a median household income of $18,125 among householders in the 65 years and over age group.

Content

When available, the data consists of estimates from the U.S. Census Bureau American Community Survey (ACS) 2019-2023 5-Year Estimates. All incomes have been adjusting for inflation and are presented in 2023-inflation-adjusted dollars.

Age groups classifications include:

• Under 25 years
• 25 to 44 years
• 45 to 64 years
• 65 years and over

Variables / Data Columns

• Age Of The Head Of Household: This column presents the age of the head of household
• Median Household Income: Median household income, in 2023 inflation-adjusted dollars for the specific age group

Good to know

Margin of Error

Data in the dataset are based on the estimates and are subject to sampling variability and thus a margin of error. Neilsberg Research recommends using caution when presening these estimates in your research.

Custom data

If you do need custom data for any of your research project, report or presentation, you can contact our research staff at research@neilsberg.com for a feasibility of a custom tabulation on a fee-for-service basis.

Inspiration

Neilsberg Research Team curates, analyze and publishes demographics and economic data from a variety of public and proprietary sources, each of which often includes multiple surveys and programs. The large majority of Neilsberg Research aggregated datasets and insights is made available for free download at https://www.neilsberg.com/research/.

Recommended for further research

This dataset is a part of the main dataset for Society Hill median household income by age. You can refer the same here

In 2019, most of Italians assumed to belong to the middle class. More specifically, 52 percent of individuals defined their social status as middle class. Moreover, 37 percent of Italians stated to be part of the lower social class. Data for social class perception suggested that the occupation with the highest share of upper-class people was being a student. At the same time, freelance professional was most popular job position among middle class citizens, while the majority of unemployed people felt to belong to the lower class.

How much do Italians earn on average?

From 2006 to 2015, gross household disposable income per capita in Italy was fluctuating with no precise pattern. In the next three years, however, gross income per capita steadily increased until peaking above 31 thousand U.S. dollars in 2018. This figure put Italy at the 17th place in the ranking of OECD countries with the gross disposable income per household.

Income inequalities in Italy

National average figures can be quite misleading. In Italy, substantial economic differences across regions and also due to gender can be observed. Inhabitants of the South and the Islands earn on average around ten thousand euros less annually than Italians from the North East. Moreover, female households’ average net income in 2017 was eight thousand euros smaller than male households’ income.

Existing research analyzes the effects of cross national and temporal variation in income inequality on public opinion; however, research has failed to explore the impact of variation in inequality across citizens' local residential context. This article analyzes the impact of local inequality on citizens' belief in a core facet of the American ethos--meritocracy. We advance conditional effects hypotheses which collectively argue that the effect of residing in a high inequality context will be moderated by individual income. Utilizing national survey data, we demonstrate that residing in more unequal counties heightens rejection of meritocracy among low income residents and bolsters adherence among high income residents. In relatively equal counties, we find no significant differences between high and low income citizens. We conclude by discussing the implications of class-based polarization found in response to local inequality with respect to current debates over the consequences of income inequality for American democracy.

Judgement on economic and social conditions in the USA in comparison to the FRG. Topics: Development of personal economic conditions and the standard of living in the FRG; reasons for the so-called economic miracle and share of the USA in the economic recovery; perceived linking of German economic development with other countries; attitude to a European Common Market; reasons for the high American standard of living; comparison between the USA and the FRG regarding working conditions, productivity, social security and job security of workers; image of Americans; knowledge of economic data of the USA; investment inclination; attitude to the competitive economy; assumed ownership of various branches of the economy in the FRG and in the USA, differences according to government and private; expected influence of the American government on the economy and vice versa; estimated proportion of members of the middle classes; image of American agriculture; judgement on the ideological influence of the USA on the FRG; sources of information about America; membership in clubs and organizations and offices taken on; party preference; self-assessment of social class; local residency. Demography: age (classified); marital status; religious denomination; school education; occupation; employment; household income; state; refugee status. Interviewer rating: social class and willingness of respondent to cooperate; number of contact attempts. Also encoded were: age of interviewer and sex of interviewer; city size. Beurteilung der wirtschaftlichen und sozialen Verhältnisse in den USA im Vergleich zur BRD. Themen: Entwicklung der persönlichen wirtschaftlichen Verhältnisse und des Lebensstandards in der BRD; Gründe für das sogenannte Wirtschaftswunder und Anteil der USA am wirtschaftlichen Aufschwung; wahrgenommene Verknüpfung der deutschen Wirtschaftsentwicklung mit anderen Ländern; Einstellung zu einem europäischen gemeinsamen Markt; Gründe für den hohen amerikanischen Lebensstandard; Vergleich zwischen USA und BRD bezüglich der Arbeitsbedingungen, Produktivität, Leistungsfähigkeit, Sozialversicherung und Arbeitsplatzsicherheit von Arbeitern; Image von Amerikanern; Kenntnis wirtschaftlicher Daten der USA; Investitionsneigung; Einstellung zur Wettbewerbswirtschaft; vermutete Eignerschaft verschiedener Wirtschaftszweig in der BRD und in den USA, unterschieden nach staatlich und privat; vermuteter Einfluß der amerikanischen Regierung auf die Wirtschaft und umgekehrt; geschätzter Anteil von Zugehörigen zum Mittelstand; Image der amerikanischen Landwirtschaft; Beurteilung des ideologischen Einflusses der USA auf die BRD; Informationsquellen über Amerika; Mitgliedschaft in Vereinen und Organisationen und übernommene Ämter; Parteipräferenz; Selbsteinschätzung der Schichtzugehörigkeit; Ortsansässigkeit. Demographie: Alter (klassiert); Familienstand; Konfession; Schulbildung; Beruf; Berufstätigkeit; Haushaltseinkommen; Bundesland; Flüchtlingsstatus. Interviewerrating: Schichtzugehörigkeit und Kooperationsbereitschaft des Befragten; Anzahl der Kontaktversuche. Zusätzlich verkodet wurden: Intervieweralter und Interviewergeschlecht; Ortsgröße.

This is a longitudinal survey designed to provide detailed information on the economic situation of households and persons in the United States. These data examine the distribution of income, wealth, and poverty in American society and gauge the effects of federal and state programs on the well-being of families and individuals. There are three basic elements contained in the survey. The first is a control card that records basic social and demographic characteristics for each person in a household, as well as changes in such characteristics over the course of the interviewing period. The second element is the core portion of the questionnaire, with questions repeated at each interview on labor force activity, types and amounts of income, participation in various cash and noncash benefit programs, attendance in postsecondary schools, private health insurance coverage, public or subsidized rental housing, low-income energy assistance, and school breakfast and lunch participation. The third element consists of topical modules, which are a series of supplemental questions asked during selected household visits. Topical modules include some core data to help link individuals to the core files. Topical module data for the 1992 Panel cover the following topics: Topical Module 1 -- welfare and other aid recipiency and employment, Topical Module 2 -- work disability, education and training, marital status, migration, and fertility histories, Topical Module 3 -- extended measures of well-being, including consumer durables, living conditions, and basic needs, Topical Module 4 -- assets and liabilities, retirement expectations and pension plan coverage, real estate, property, and vehicles, Topical Module 5 -- school enrollment and financing, Topical Module 6 -- work schedules, child care, support for nonhousehold members, functional limitations and disabilities, utilization of health care services, and home-based self-employment and size of firm, Topical Module 7 -- selected financial assets, medical expenses and work disability, real estate, shelter costs, dependent care, and vehicles, Topical Module 8 -- school enrollment and financing, Topical Module 9 -- work schedule, child care, child support agreements, child support, support for nonhousehold members, functional limitations and disability, utilization of health care, functional limitations and disability of children, health status and utilization of health care services, and utilization of health care services for children. Parts 26 and 27 are the Wave 5 and Wave 8 Topical Module Microdata Research Files obtained from the Census Bureau. These two topical module files include data on annual income, retirement accounts and taxes, and school enrollment and financing. These topical module files have not been edited nor imputed, although they have been topcoded or bottomcoded and recoded if necessary by the Census Bureau to avoid disclosure of individual respondents' identities. (Source: downloaded from ICPSR 7/13/10)

Assessment of economic and social conditions in the USA in comparison to the FRG. Topics: Judgement on development of personal economic situation; evaluation of cooperation between the German and the American economy; evaluation of German and American commercial life, the economic strength of America, the German and American standard of living as well as the influence of American ideas on the FRG; reasons for the economic strength of America and the high standard of living as well as for American aid for European countries; differences between German and American trade unions and assumed political influence of American trade unions; economic strength of European countries; comparison of shopping habits of Germans and Americans; attitude to America and the Americans; use of sources of information about America; assessment of the best form of provision for one´s old age; naming the American film city and automobile city; estimate of quota of vehicle possession in the FRG and the USA. Demography: age (classified); marital status; religious denomination; school education; occupation; employment; household income; party preference; self-assessment of social class; state; refugee status; present and past offices held; membership. Interviewer rating: social class and willingness of respondent to cooperate; number of contact attempts. Also encoded were: age of interviewer and sex of interviewer; city size. Einschätzung der wirtschaftlichen und gesellschaftlichen Verhältnisse in den USA im Vergleich zur BRD. Themen: Beurteilung der Entwicklung der eigenen wirtschaftlichen Lage; Bewertung der Zusammenarbeit zwischen der deutschen und der amerikanischen Wirtschaft; Bewertung des deutschen und amerikanischen Geschäftslebens, der wirtschaftlichen Stärke Amerikas, des deutschen und amerikanischen Lebensstandards sowie des Einflusses amerikanischer Ideen auf die BRD; Gründe für die wirtschaftliche Stärke Amerikas und den hohen Lebensstandard sowie für die amerikanische Hilfe an europäischen Staaten; Unterschiede zwischen deutschen und amerikanischen Gewerkschaften und vermuteter politischer Einfluß der amerikanischen Gewerkschaften; wirtschaftliche Stärke europäischer Länder; Vergleich der Kaufgewohnheiten von Deutschen und Amerikanern; Einstellung zu Amerika und den Amerikanern; Nutzung von Informationsquellen über Amerika; Einschätzung der besten Form der Altersversorgung; Nennung der amerikanischen Filmstadt und Autostadt; Schätzung der Kfz-Besitzquoten in der BRD und den USA. Demographie: Alter (klassiert); Familienstand; Konfession; Schulbildung; Beruf; Berufstätigkeit; Haushaltseinkommen; Parteipräferenz; Selbsteinschätzung der Schichtzugehörigkeit; Bundesland; Flüchtlingsstatus; innegehabte und innehabende Ämter; Mitgliedschaft. Interviewerrating: Kooperationsbereitschaft und Schichtzugehörigkeit des Befragten; Anzahl der Kontaktversuche. Zusätzlich verkodet wurden: Intervieweralter und Interviewergeschlecht; Ortsgröße.

Long-term longitudinal dataset with information on generational links and socioeconomic and health conditions of individuals over time. The central foci of the data are economic and demographic, with substantial detail on income sources and amounts, wealth, savings, employment, pensions, family composition changes, childbirth and marriage histories, and residential location. Over the life of the PSID, the NIA has funded supplements on wealth, health, parental health and long term care, housing, and the financial impact of illness, thus also making it possible to model retirement and residential mobility. Starting in 1999, much greater detail on specific health conditions and health care expenses is included for respondent and spouse. Other enhancements have included a question series about emotional distress (2001); the two stem questions from the Composite International Diagnostic Interview to assess symptoms of major depression (2003); a supplement on philanthropic giving and volunteering (2001-03); a question series on Internet and computer use (2003); linkage to the National Death Index with cause of death information for more than 4,000 individuals through the 1997 wave, updated for each subsequent wave; social and family history variables and GIS-linked environmental data; basic data on pension plans; event history calendar methodology to facilitate recall of employment spells (2001). The reporting unit is the family: single person living alone or sharing a household with other non-relatives; group of people related by blood, marriage, or adoption; unmarried couple living together in what appears to be a fairly permanent arrangement. Interviews were conducted annually from 1968 through 1997; biennial interviewing began in 1999. There is an oversample of Blacks (30%). Waves 1990 through 1995 included a 20% Hispanic oversample; within the Hispanic oversample, Cubans and Puerto Ricans were oversampled relative to Mexicans. All data from 1994 through 2001 are available as public release files; prior waves can be obtained in archive versions. The special files with weights for families are also available. Restricted files include the Geocode Match File with information for 1968 through 2001, the 1968-2001 Death File, and the 1991 Medicare Claims File. * Dates of Study: 1968-2003 * Study Features: Longitudinal, Minority Oversampling * Sample Size: 65,000+ Links * ICPSR Series: http://www.icpsr.umich.edu/icpsrweb/ICPSR/series/00131 * ICPSR 1968-1999: Annual Core Data: http://www.icpsr.umich.edu/icpsrweb/ICPSR/studies/07439 * ICPSR 1968-1999: Supplemental Files: http://www.icpsr.umich.edu/icpsrweb/ICPSR/studies/03202 * ICPSR 1989-1990: Latino Sample: http://www.icpsr.umich.edu/icpsrweb/ICPSR/studies/03203

This table contains data on income inequality. The primary measure is the Gini index – a measure of the extent to which the distribution of income among families/households within a community deviates from a perfectly equal distribution. The index ranges from 0.0, when all families (households) have equal shares of income (implies perfect equality), to 1.0 when one family (household) has all the income and the rest have none (implies perfect inequality). Index data is provided for California and its counties, regions, and large cities/towns. The data is from the U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey. The table is part of a series of indicators in the Healthy Communities Data and Indicators Project of the Office of Health Equity. Income is linked to acquiring resources for healthy living. Both household income and the distribution of income across a society independently contribute to the overall health status of a community. On average Western industrialized nations with large disparities in income distribution tend to have poorer health status than similarly advanced nations with a more equitable distribution of income. Approximately 119,200 (5%) of the 2.4 million U.S. deaths in 2000 are attributable to income inequality. The pathways by which income inequality act to increase adverse health outcomes are not known with certainty, but policies that provide for a strong safety net of health and social services have been identified as potential buffers. More information about the data table and a data dictionary can be found in the About/Attachments section.

we utilized data from two main sources: the United States Census Bureau's American Community Survey (ACS) and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention/Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (CDC/ATSDR) Social Vulnerability Index (SVI).American Community Survey (ACS):Conducted by the U.S. Census Bureau, the ACS is an ongoing survey that provides detailed demographic and socio-economic data on the population and housing characteristics of the United States.The survey collects information on various topics such as income, education, employment, health insurance coverage, and housing costs and conditions.It offers more frequent and up-to-date information compared to the decennial census, with annual estimates produced based on a rolling sample of households.The ACS data is essential for policymakers, researchers, and communities to make informed decisions and address the evolving needs of the population.CDC/ATSDR Social Vulnerability Index (SVI):Created by ATSDR’s Geospatial Research, Analysis & Services Program (GRASP) and utilized by the CDC, the SVI is designed to identify and map communities that are most likely to need support before, during, and after hazardous events.

This study surveyed two separate samples of Buenos Aires residents in 1960. Respondents in Sample A (Part 1), drawn from household members, were asked to provide details about their employment and information about their foreign background and arrival in Argentina if they were immigrants. The respondents' native language, their familiarity with it, and their feelings toward their native country were also assessed. Family heads, included in Sample B (Part 2), along with the questions asked of Sample A respondents, also answered questions about their leisure activities, their outlook on life, and attitudes toward people. Several variables traced the respondents' occupational patterns beginning at age 21 and continuing through the time of the interview. The respondents' fathers' and grandfathers' occupations were also ascertained. Derived measures evaluate the respondents' own occupational mobility as well as occupational change from one generation of their family to the next. Demographic information covers the respondents' age, gender, marital status, level of education, and income.

Extent to which informed and ideas about the USA. Contacts with Americans and trips to the United States. Topics: Knowledge of English; knowledge and reading American newspapers, books and films; concepts of respondent about the American school system, family life, way of life, press, radio and television, agriculture, the political, cultural, religious life, the social problems, social services, the relationship employer-employee, the economy, industry and technology; judgement on Americans and reasons for a possible change in attitude to Americans; position on the international policy of the USA; trips of respondent to the USA; evaluation of the influence of a trip to the USA on one´s own attitude to the USA; personal contacts with travelers to America; contacts with Americans since the end of the war; knowledge of experiences with the German-American exchange program; adjustment of prejudices through contact with an ´Exchangee´; evaluation of employment with American employers; personal difficulties of respondent; listening to the broadcast ´Voice of America´; trips to the America House. Demography: age (classified); sex; marital status; religious denomination; school education; occupation; employment; household income; party preference; party membership; state; refugee status; present and past offices held. Interviewer rating: social class and willingness of respondent to cooperate; number of contact attempts; city size. Informiertheit und Vorstellungen über die USA. Kontakte zu Amerikanern und Reisen in die Vereinigten Staaten. Themen: Englischkenntnisse; Kenntnis und Lektüre amerikanischer Zeitungen, Bücher und Filme; Vorstellungen des Befragten über das amerikanische Schulwesen, das Familienleben, die Lebensweise, das Presse-, Rundfunk- und Fernsehwesen, die Landwirtschaft, das politische, kulturelle, religiöse Leben, die sozialen Probleme, die Sozialleistungen, das Verhältnis Arbeitgeber - Arbeitnehmer, die Wirtschaft, Industrie und Technik; Beurteilung der Amerikaner und Gründe für eine evtl. Veränderung in der Einstellung zu Amerikanern; Stellungnahme zur internationalen Politik der USA; USA-Besuche des Befragten; Bewertung des Einflusses eines USA-Besuches auf die eigene Einstellung zu den USA; eigene Kontakte zu Amerikabesuchern; Kontakte zu Amerikanern seit Kriegsende; Kenntnis von Erfahrungen mit dem deutsch-amerikanischen Austauschprogramm; Korrektur von Vorurteilen durch den Kontakt mit einem "Exchangee"; Bewertung der Beschäftigung bei amerikanischen Dienststellen; persönliche Schwierigkeiten des Befragten; Hören der Sendung "Stimme Amerikas"; Besuche im Amerika-Haus. Demographie: Alter (klassiert); Geschlecht; Familienstand; Konfession; Schulbildung; Beruf; Berufstätigkeit; Haushaltseinkommen; Parteipräferenz; Parteimitgliedschaft; Bundesland; Flüchtlingsstatus; innegehabte und innehabende Ämter. Interviewerrating: Schichtzugehörigkeit und Kooperationsbereitschaft des Befragten; Anzahl der Kontaktversuche; Ortsgröße. Three different universes were defined and 3 different samples drawn: The first universe (representative survey of the population) is described by age and research area (multi-stage random sample, 1582 cases); the second through occupation: specifically employees of civilian and military American government offices (365 cases). There is no more detailed information on the sample of the third survey group, a survey of persons who could provide impressions and experiences of travelers to America but had not themselves been in the USA (311 cases).

The American Community Survey (ACS) is an ongoing statistical survey that samples a small percentage of the population every year -- giving communities the information they need to plan investments and services. The 5-year public use microdata sample (PUMS) for 2011-2015 is a subset of the 2011-2011 ACS sample. It contains the same sample as the combined PUMS 1-year files for 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014 and 2015. This data collection provides a person-level subset of 129,895 respondents whose occupations were coded as arts-related in the 2011-2015 ACS PUMS. The 2011-2015 PUMS is the seventh 5-year file published by the ACS. This data collection contains five years of data for the population from households and the group quarters (GQ) population. The GQ population and population from households are all weighted to agree with the ACS counts which are an average over the five year period (2011-2015). The ACS sample was selected from all counties across the nation. The ACS provides social, housing, and economic characteristics for demographic groups covering a broad spectrum of geographic areas in the United States. Demographic variables include sex, age, relationship of person to the selected respondent, race, and Hispanic origin. Social characteristics variables include school enrollment, educational attainment, marital status, fertility, grandparents caring for children, veteran status, type of disability, health insurance, place of birth, United States citizenship status, year of entry, year of naturalization, language spoken at home, and ancestry. Variables focusing on economic characteristics include employment status, commuting to work, occupation, industry, class of worker, income and benefits, and poverty status.

This data collection is part of a longitudinal survey designed to provide detailed information on the economic situation of households and persons in the United States. These data examine the distribution of income, wealth, and poverty in American society and gauge the effects of federal and state programs on the well-being of families and individuals. There are three basic elements contained in the survey. The first is a control card that records basic social and demographic characteristics for each person in a household, as well as changes in such characteristics over the course of the interviewing period. These include age, sex, race, ethnic origin, marital status, household relationship, education, and veteran status. Limited data are provided on housing unit characteristics such as units in structure, tenure, access, and complete kitchen facilities. The second element is the core portion of the questionnaire, with questions repeated at each interview on labor force activity, types and amounts of income, and participation in various cash and noncash benefit programs for each month of the four- month reference period. Data for employed persons include number of hours and weeks worked, earnings, and weeks without a job. Nonworkers are classified as unemployed or not in the labor force. In addition to providing income data associated with labor force activity, the core questions cover nearly 50 other types of income. Core data also include postsecondary school attendance, public or private subsidized rental housing, low-income energy assistance, and school breakfast and lunch participation. The third element consists of topical modules, which are a series of supplemental questions asked during selected household visits. Topical modules include some core data to link individuals to the core files. The Wave 1 Topical Module covers recipiency and employment history. The Wave 2 Topical Module includes work disability, education and training, marital, migration, and fertility histories, and household relationships. The Wave 3 Topical Module covers medical expenses and utilization of health care, work-related expenses and child support, assets and liabilities, real estate, shelter costs, dependent care, vehicles, value of business, interest earning accounts, rental properties, stocks and mutual fund shares, mortgages, and other assets. The Wave 4 Topical Module covers work schedule, taxes, child care, and annual income and retirement accounts. Data in the Wave 5 Topical Module describe child support agreements, school enrollment and financing, support for non-household members, adult and child disability, and employer-provided health benefits. The Wave 6 Topical Module covers medical expenses and utilization of health care, work related expenses, child support paid and child care poverty, assets and liabilities, real estate, shelter costs, dependent care, vehicles, value of business, interest earning accounts, rental properties, stock and mutual fund shares, mortgages, and other financial investments. The Wave 7 Topical Module covers informal caregiving, children's well-being, and annual income and retirement accounts. The Wave 8 Topical Module and Wave 8 Welfare Reform Topical Module cover child support agreements, support for nonhousehold members, adult disability, child disability, adult well-being, and welfare reform. The Wave 9 Topical Module covers medical expenses and utilization of heath care (adults and children), work related expenses, child support paid and child care poverty, assets and liabilities, real estate, shelter costs, dependent care, vehicles, value of business, interest earnings accounts, rental properties, stocks and mutual fund shares mortgages, and other financial investments (Source: downloaded from ICPSR 7/13/10)

This poll, fielded April 1-5, 2009, is a part of a continuing series of monthly surveys that solicit public opinion on the presidency and on a range of other political and social issues. Respondents were asked whether they approved of the way Barack Obama was handling the presidency and issues such as the economy and foreign policy. A series of questions addressed the Obama Administration's approach to solving economic problems and whether the administration's policies favored the rich, the middle class, or the poor. Respondents gave their opinions of First Lady Michelle Obama, the United States Congress, the Republican and Democratic parties, and whether President Obama or the Republicans in Congress were more likely to make the right decisions about the national economy and national security. Views were sought on President Obama's proposed budget plan, including changes in federal income taxes and government spending, and proposals to give financial assistance to the banking and automotive industries. A series of questions addressed the condition of the national economy, the most important economic problem facing the nation, the financial situation of the respondent's household, and how the recession was affecting their life. Respondents compared their current standard of living with that of their parents at the same age and gave their expectations about the standard of living of their children. Other questions asked respondents what the phrase "American dream" meant to them and whether they had achieved the "American dream" or expected to in their lifetime. Additional topics addressed the bonuses given to AIG insurance company executives, the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, international trade, health insurance coverage, and government spending on cancer research. Demographic variables include sex, age, race, education level, marital status, household income, employment status, perceived social class, political party affiliation, political philosophy, voter registration status and participation history, religious preference, whether respondents had children under the age of 18 years, and whether respondents considered themselves to be a born-again Christian.

The Detroit Arab American Study (DAAS), 2003, a companion survey to the 2003 Detroit Area Study (DAS), using a representative sample (DAS, n = 500) drawn from the three-county Detroit metropolitan area and an oversample of Arab Americans (DAAS, n = 1000) from the same region, provides a unique dataset on September 11, 2001, and its impacts on Arab Americans living in the Detroit metropolitan area. The data contain respondent information concerning opinions on their experiences since the September 11, 2001, attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, social trust, confidence in institutions, intercultural relationships, local social capital, attachments to transnational communities, respondent characteristics, and community needs. Examples of the issues addressed in the data include frequency of religious participation, level of political activism, level of interaction with people outside of their cultural, racial, and ethnic groups, and the quality of the social and political institutions in their area. Background information includes birth country, citizenship status, citizenship status of spouse, education, home ownership status, household income, language spoken in the home (if not English), marital status, number of children (under 18) in the household, parents' countries of birth and citizenship status, political affiliation, total number of people living in the household, voter registration status, whether the respondent ever served in the United States Armed Forces, and year of immigration, if not born in the United States.

Graph and download economic data for Income Before Taxes: Social Security, Private & Government Retirement by Highest Education: Less Than College Graduate: High School Graduate with Some College (CXURETIRINCLB1405M) from 2012 to 2023 about social, no college, retirement, social assistance, secondary schooling, secondary, tax, education, government, private, income, and USA.

These datasets contain measures of socioeconomic and demographic characteristics by U.S. census tract for the years 1990-2022 and ZIP code tabulation area (ZCTA) for the years 2008-2022. Example measures include population density; population distribution by race, ethnicity, age, and income; income inequality by race and ethnicity; and proportion of population living below the poverty level, receiving public assistance, and female-headed or single parent families with kids. The datasets also contain a set of theoretically derived measures capturing neighborhood socioeconomic disadvantage and affluence, as well as a neighborhood index of Hispanic, foreign born, and limited English.