West Virginia and Kansas had the lowest cost of living across all U.S. states, with composite costs being half of those found in Hawaii. This was according to a composite index that compares prices for various goods and services on a state-by-state basis. In West Virginia, the cost of living index amounted to **** — well below the national benchmark of 100. Virginia— which had an index value of ***** — was only slightly above that benchmark. Expensive places to live included Hawaii, Massachusetts, and California. Housing costs in the U.S. Housing is usually the highest expense in a household’s budget. In 2023, the average house sold for approximately ******* U.S. dollars, but house prices in the Northeast and West regions were significantly higher. Conversely, the South had some of the least expensive housing. In West Virginia, Mississippi, and Louisiana, the median price of the typical single-family home was less than ******* U.S. dollars. That makes living expenses in these states significantly lower than in states such as Hawaii and California, where housing is much pricier. What other expenses affect the cost of living? Utility costs such as electricity, natural gas, water, and internet also influence the cost of living. In Alaska, Hawaii, and Connecticut, the average monthly utility cost exceeded *** U.S. dollars. That was because of the significantly higher prices for electricity and natural gas in these states.

This is a comparison of the cost of living in various cities, as gathered by popular site numbeo. All data belongs to them and has been shared with permission

Currency is Euro

Portugal, Canada, and the United States were the countries with the highest house price to income ratio in 2024. In all three countries, the index exceeded 130 index points, while the average for all OECD countries stood at 116.2 index points. The index measures the development of housing affordability and is calculated by dividing nominal house price by nominal disposable income per head, with 2015 set as a base year when the index amounted to 100. An index value of 120, for example, would mean that house price growth has outpaced income growth by 20 percent since 2015. How have house prices worldwide changed since the COVID-19 pandemic? House prices started to rise gradually after the global financial crisis (2007–2008), but this trend accelerated with the pandemic. The countries with advanced economies, which usually have mature housing markets, experienced stronger growth than countries with emerging economies. Real house price growth (accounting for inflation) peaked in 2022 and has since lost some of the gain. Although, many countries experienced a decline in house prices, the global house price index shows that property prices in 2023 were still substantially higher than before COVID-19. Renting vs. buying In the past, house prices have grown faster than rents. However, the home affordability has been declining notably, with a direct impact on rental prices. As people struggle to buy a property of their own, they often turn to rental accommodation. This has resulted in a growing demand for rental apartments and soaring rental prices.

Geneva stands out as Europe's most expensive city for apartment purchases in early 2025, with prices reaching a staggering 15,720 euros per square meter. This Swiss city's real estate market dwarfs even high-cost locations like Zurich and London, highlighting the extreme disparities in housing affordability across the continent. The stark contrast between Geneva and more affordable cities like Nantes, France, where the price was 3,700 euros per square meter, underscores the complex factors influencing urban property markets in Europe. Rental market dynamics and affordability challenges While purchase prices vary widely, rental markets across Europe also show significant differences. London maintained its position as the continent's priciest city for apartment rentals in 2023, with the average monthly costs for a rental apartment amounting to 36.1 euros per square meter. This figure is double the rent in Lisbon, Portugal or Madrid, Spain, and substantially higher than in other major capitals like Paris and Berlin. The disparity in rental costs reflects broader economic trends, housing policies, and the intricate balance of supply and demand in urban centers. Economic factors influencing housing costs The European housing market is influenced by various economic factors, including inflation and energy costs. As of April 2025, the European Union's inflation rate stood at 2.4 percent, with significant variations among member states. Romania experienced the highest inflation at 4.9 percent, while France and Cyprus maintained lower rates. These economic pressures, coupled with rising energy costs, contribute to the overall cost of living and housing affordability across Europe. The volatility in electricity prices, particularly in countries like Italy where rates are projected to reach 153.83 euros per megawatt hour by February 2025, further impacts housing-related expenses for both homeowners and renters.

As of September 2024, Mumbai had the highest cost of living among other cities in the country, with an index value of ****. Gurgaon, a satellite city of Delhi and part of the National Capital Region (NCR) followed it with an index value of ****.  What is cost of living? The cost of living varies depending on geographical regions and factors that affect the cost of living in an area include housing, food, utilities, clothing, childcare, and fuel among others. The cost of living is calculated based on different measures such as the consumer price index (CPI), living cost indexes, and wage price index. CPI refers to the change in the value of consumer goods and services. The wage price index, on the other hand, measures the change in labor services prices due to market pressures. Lastly, the living cost indexes calculate the impact of changing costs on different households. The relationship between wages and costs determines affordability and shifts in the cost of living. Mumbai tops the list Mumbai usually tops the list of most expensive cities in India. As the financial and entertainment hub of the country, Mumbai offers wide opportunities and attracts talent from all over the country. It is the second-largest city in India and has one of the most expensive real estates in the world.

Key quality of life indicators - cost index, housing.

Cost of living data based on food, housing, utilities, transportation, healthcare, and consumer discretionary spending in the United States.

According to a survey among Chinese consumers in December 2021, ** percent of the respondents confirmed that they spent more on housing compared to six months ago, significantly lower than the global average of ** percent. In comparison, ** percent of Chinese respondents didn't perceive price changes regarding housing costs.

Table comparing monthly living expenses for gap year students in low-cost vs high-cost countries, including housing, education, transport, and emergency savings.

VITAL SIGNS INDICATOR Poverty (EQ5)

FULL MEASURE NAME The share of the population living in households that earn less than 200 percent of the federal poverty limit

LAST UPDATED December 2018

DESCRIPTION Poverty refers to the share of the population living in households that earn less than 200 percent of the federal poverty limit, which varies based on the number of individuals in a given household. It reflects the number of individuals who are economically struggling due to low household income levels.

DATA SOURCE U.S Census Bureau: Decennial Census http://www.nhgis.org (1980-1990) http://factfinder2.census.gov (2000)

U.S. Census Bureau: American Community Survey Form C17002 (2006-2017) http://api.census.gov

METHODOLOGY NOTES (across all datasets for this indicator) The U.S. Census Bureau defines a national poverty level (or household income) that varies by household size, number of children in a household, and age of householder. The national poverty level does not vary geographically even though cost of living is different across the United States. For the Bay Area, where cost of living is high and incomes are correspondingly high, an appropriate poverty level is 200% of poverty or twice the national poverty level, consistent with what was used for past equity work at MTC and ABAG. For comparison, however, both the national and 200% poverty levels are presented.

For Vital Signs, the poverty rate is defined as the number of people (including children) living below twice the poverty level divided by the number of people for whom poverty status is determined. Poverty rates do not include unrelated individuals below 15 years old or people who live in the following: institutionalized group quarters, college dormitories, military barracks, and situations without conventional housing. The household income definitions for poverty change each year to reflect inflation. The official poverty definition uses money income before taxes and does not include capital gains or noncash benefits (such as public housing, Medicaid, and food stamps). For the national poverty level definitions by year, see: https://www.census.gov/hhes/www/poverty/data/threshld/index.html For an explanation on how the Census Bureau measures poverty, see: https://www.census.gov/hhes/www/poverty/about/overview/measure.html

For the American Community Survey datasets, 1-year data was used for region, county, and metro areas whereas 5-year rolling average data was used for city and census tract.

To be consistent across metropolitan areas, the poverty definition for non-Bay Area metros is twice the national poverty level. Data were not adjusted for varying income and cost of living levels across the metropolitan areas.

South Korea's capital Seoul had the highest cost of living among megacities in the Asia-Pacific region in 2024, with an index score of ****. Japan's capital Tokyo followed with a cost of living index score of ****. AffordabilityIn terms of housing affordability, Chinese megacity Shanghai had the highest rent index score in 2024. Affordability has become an issue in certain megacities across the Asia-Pacific region, with accommodation proving expensive. Next to Shanghai, Japanese capital Tokyo and South Korean capital Seoul boast some of the highest rent indices in the region. Increased opportunities in megacitiesAs the biggest region in the world, it is not surprising that the Asia-Pacific region is home to 28 megacities as of January 2024, with expectations that this number will dramatically increase by 2030. The growing number of megacities in the Asia-Pacific region can be attributed to raised levels of employment and living conditions. Cities such as Tokyo, Shanghai, and Beijing have become economic and industrial hubs. Subsequently, these cities have forged a reputation as being the in-trend places to live among the younger generations. This reputation has also pushed them to become enticing to tourists, with Tokyo displaying increased numbers of tourists throughout recent years, which in turn has created more job opportunities for inhabitants. As well as Tokyo, Shanghai has benefitted from the increased tourism, and has demonstrated an increasing population. A big factor in this population increase could be due to the migration of citizens to the city, seeking better employment possibilities.

In the United States, Hawaii was the state with the most expensive housing, with the typical value of single-family homes in the 35th to 65th percentile range exceeding ******* U.S. dollars. Unsurprisingly, Hawaii also ranked top as the state with the highest cost of living. Meanwhile, a property was the least expensive in West Virginia, where it cost under ******* U.S. dollars to buy the typical single-family home. Single-family home prices increased across most states in the United States between December 2023 and December 2024, except in Louisiana, Florida, and the District of Colombia. According to the Federal Housing Association, house appreciation in 13 states exceeded **** percent in 2023.

The average transaction price of new housing in Europe was the highest in Norway, whereas existing homes were the most expensive in Austria. Since there is no central body that collects and tracks transaction activity or house prices across the whole continent or the European Union, not all countries are included. To compile the ranking, the source weighed the transaction prices of residential properties in the most important cities in each country based on data from their national offices. For example, in Germany, the cities included were Munich, Hamburg, Frankfurt, and Berlin. House prices have been soaring, with Sweden topping the ranking Considering the RHPI of houses in Europe (the price index in real terms, which measures price changes of single-family properties adjusted for the impact of inflation), however, the picture changes. Sweden, Luxembourg and Norway top this ranking, meaning residential property prices have surged the most in these countries. Real values were calculated using the so-called Personal Consumption Expenditure Deflator (PCE), This PCE uses both consumer prices as well as consumer expenditures, like medical and health care expenses paid by employers. It is meant to show how expensive housing is compared to the way of living in a country. Home ownership highest in Eastern Europe The home ownership rate in Europe varied from country to country. In 2020, roughly half of all homes in Germany were owner-occupied whereas home ownership was at nearly ** percent in Romania or around ** percent in Slovakia and Lithuania. These numbers were considerably higher than in France or Italy, where homeowners made up ** percent and ** percent of their respective populations.For more information on the topic of property in Europe, visit the following pages as a starting point for your research: real estate investments in Europe and residential real estate in Europe.

The house price to income index in Europe declined in almost all European countries in 2023, indicating that income grew faster than house prices. Portugal, Luxembourg, and the Netherlands led the house price to income index ranking in 2023, with values exceeding *** index points. Romania, Bulgaria, and Finland were on the other side of the spectrum, with less than 100 index points. The house price to income ratio is an indicator for the development of housing affordability across OECD countries and is calculated as the nominal house prices divided by nominal disposable income per head, with 2015 chosen as a base year. A ratio higher than 100 means that the nominal house price growth since 2015 has outpaced the nominal disposable income growth, and housing is therefore comparatively less affordable. In 2023, the OECD average stood at ***** index points.

DOI Housing and residential status. Residential area and social structure. Mobility and economic situation. Employment. Election decision and participation. Topics: 1. Housing and housing status: size of the place of residence (degree of urbanisation); location; duration of residence; satisfaction with the place of residence; length of residence in the apartment; number of moves in the last ten years; previous place of residence; residential status of the previous apartment; living space of the previous apartment; reasons for moving; main reason for moving; residential status of the current apartment; one or more households in the house; monthly contribution costs; type of purchase of house/flat; construction of the house/flat by public subsidies; amount of monthly mortgage repayment and interest; amount of monthly ancillary costs; amount of heating costs in the last calendar year; amount of maintenance costs in the last calendar year; monthly burden subsidy received from the state; housing entitlement certificate required; owner of the flat; rent amount; rent including costs for heating and hot water; amount of lump sum for heating and hot water (or. for heating and hot water separately); average costs for heating and hot water and payment period; rent includes modernisation charge; amount of modernisation charge in total or per sqm; type of modernisation measures for which a modernisation charge is paid; adequacy of rental costs; receipt of housing benefit; amount of monthly housing charge; living space; number of rooms; assessment of apartment size; apartment furnishing; apartment equipment meets needs; preferred living standard; year of construction of the house; assessment of the structural condition of the house; satisfaction with the apartment. 2. Residential area and social structure: satisfaction with the immediate residential environment; satisfaction with the environmental conditions at the place of residence; walking distance to selected facilities (e.g. public transport stops, shopping facilities, doctors, kindergarten, primary school, etc.); social structure: social differences in the immediate living environment; relationship with neighbours; satisfaction with the neighbourhood; development of personal living situation; greatest loss after possible relocation (local connection); preferred home; preferred residential area; foreigners in the residential environment; proportion of foreigners in the residential area compared to other residential areas; foreigners who have been living in the residential area or have recently moved in; newly arrived foreigners are predominantly ethnic Germans, refugees or have been living in Germany for some time; relationship between foreigners and Germans in the residential environment; attitude towards the spatial separation of Germans and foreigners; personal contacts with foreigners or Germans in the family, at work, in the neighbourhood or among friends and acquaintances; assessment of assistance for foreigners (simple entry aids, more extensive integration measures or renouncement of such assistance). 3. Mobility: intention to move; reasons for moving; most important reason for moving; preference for moving (target area); plans for the current apartment within the next two years or changes already carried out in the last two years (new furnish, renovate, modernise, add-on or conversion); classification on a ladder best form of living / worst imaginable apartment (own apartment, in comparison own apartment 5 years ago, best accessible apartment, justly entitled apartment, average apartment of friends and acquaintances, apartment of an average German citizen); assessment of the current personal economic situation. 4. Employment: employment status; job security; length of working distance; longest accepted working distance in minutes; willingness to commute. 5. Election decision and participation: eligibility to vote in the last federal election; participation in the last federal election and election decision (second vote); party preference (Sunday question) or party most likely to be considered. Demography: sex; age (month of birth and year of birth); highest school leaving certificate or targeted school leaving certificate; age at school leaving certificate; vocational education or training certificate; current or former employment; full-time or part-time employment; current or last professional position; current or last professional activity; marital status; cohabitation with a partner; own children; self-classification of class; denomination; closeness to the church; household size; net income of the respondent; number of children in the household and age of these children; number of persons in the household aged 18 years and older; number of persons in the household who contribute to the household income; number of persons employed in the household; household net income; place of residence before 1989; car ownership; German citizenship; telephone connection in the household. Interviewer rating: residential house type; residential area type. Additionally coded was: BBSR ID; Split; Respondents ID; ADM network; state; government district; city size (political community size, BIK/Boustedt); interview date; Interview duration; weighting factors. Wohnung und Wohnstatus. Wohngebiet und Sozialstruktur. Mobilität und Wirtschaftliche Lage. Erwerbstätigkeit. Wahlentscheidung und Wahlbeteiligung. Themen: 1. Wohnen und Wohnstatus: Ortsgröße (Urbanisierungsgrad); Wohnlage; Wohndauer am Wohnort; Zufriedenheit mit dem Wohnort; Wohndauer in der Wohnung; Anzahl der Umzüge in den letzten zehn Jahren; vorherig Wohnlage; Wohnstatus der vorherigen Wohnung; Wohnfläche der vorherigen Wohnung; Umzugsgründe; wichtigster Umzugsgrund; Wohnstatus der jetzigen Wohnung; ein Haushalt oder mehrere Haushalte im Haus; Umlagekosten pro Monat; Art des Erwerbs des Hauses/der Wohnung; Bau des Hauses/der Wohnung durch öffentliche Förderung; Höhe der monatlichen Belastung für Hypotheken-Tilgung und Zinsen; Höhe der monatlichen Nebenkosten; Höhe der Heizkosten im letzten Kalenderjahr; Höhe der Instandhaltungskosten im letzten Kalenderjahr; monatlich vom Staat erhaltener Lastenzuschuss; Wohnberechtigungsschein erforderlich; Eigentümer der Wohnung; Miethöhe; Miete inklusive Kosten für Heizung und Warmwasser; Höhe der Pauschale für Heizung und Warmwasser (bzw. für Heizung und Warmwasser getrennt); durchschnittliche Kosten für Heizung und Warmwasser und Zahlungszeitraum; Miete enthält Modernisierungsumlage; Höhe der Modernisierungsumlage insgesamt oder pro qm; Art der Modernisierungsmaßnahmen, für die eine Modernisierungsumlage gezahlt wird; Angemessenheit der Mietkosten; Bezug von Wohngeld; Höhe des monatlichen Wohngelds; Wohnfläche; Anzahl der Wohnräume; Beurteilung der Wohnungsgröße; Wohnungsausstattung; Wohnungsausstattung entspricht den Bedürfnissen; präferierter Wohnstandard; Baujahr des Wohnhauses; Beurteilung des baulichen Zustands des Hauses; Zufriedenheit mit der Wohnung. 2. Wohngebiet und Sozialstruktur: Zufriedenheit mit der unmittelbaren Wohnumgebung; Zufriedenheit mit den Umweltbedingungen am Wohnort; fußläufige Erreichbarkeit ausgewählter Einrichtungen (z.B. Haltestellen für öffentliche Verkehrsmittel, Einkaufsmöglichkeiten, Ärzte, Kindergarten, Grundschule, etc.); Sozialstruktur: soziale Unterschiede in der unmittelbaren Wohnumgebung; Verhältnis zu den Nachbarn; Zufriedenheit mit der Nachbarschaft; Entwicklung der persönlichen Wohnsituation; größter Verlust nach möglichem Umzug (Ortsbindung); präferiertes Wunschhaus; präferierte Wohngegend; Ausländer in der Wohnumgebung; Ausländeranteil im eigenen Wohngebiet im Vergleich zu anderen Wohngebieten; Ausländer schon länger im Wohngebiet oder neu zugezogen; neu zugezogene Ausländer sind überwiegend Aussiedler, Flüchtlinge oder leben schon länger in Deutschland; Verhältnis zwischen Ausländern und Deutschen in der Wohnumgebung; Einstellung zur räumlichen Trennung von Deutschen und Ausländern; persönliche Kontakte zu Ausländern bzw. Deutschen in der Familie, am Arbeitsplatz, in der Nachbarschaft bzw. im Freundes- und Bekanntenkreis; Beurteilung von Hilfen für Ausländer (einfache Einstiegshilfen, umfangreichere Eingliederungsmaßnahmen oder Verzicht auf solche Hilfen). 3. Mobilität: Umzugsabsicht; Umzugsgründe; wichtigster Umzugsgrund; Umzugspräferenz (Zielgebiet); Pläne für die jetzige Wohnung innerhalb der nächsten zwei Jahre bzw. in den letzten zwei Jahren bereits durchgeführte Veränderungen (neu einrichten, renovieren, modernisieren, An- oder Umbau); Einordnung auf einer Leiter beste Wohnform/schlechteste vorstellbare Wohnung (eigene Wohnung, im Vergleich dazu eigene Wohnung vor 5 Jahren, beste erreichbare Wohnung, gerechterweise zustehende Wohnung, durchschnittliche Wohnung von Freunden und Bekannten, Wohnung eines durchschnittlichen Bundesbürgers); Beurteilung der derzeitigen persönlichen wirtschaftlichen Lage. 4. Erwerbstätigkeit: Erwerbsstatus; Sicherheit des eigenen Arbeitsplatzes; Länge des Arbeitsweges; akzeptierte längste Arbeitswegdauer in Minuten; Pendelbereitschaft. 5. Wahlentscheidung und Wahlbeteiligung: Wahlberechtigung bei der letzten Bundestagswahl; Teilnahme an der letzten Bundestagswahl und Wahlentscheidung (Zweitstimme); Parteipräferenz (Sonntagsfrage) bzw. Partei, die am ehesten in Frage käme. Demographie: Geschlecht; Alter (Geburtsmonat und Geburtsjahr); höchster Schulabschluss bzw. angestrebter Schulabschluss; Alter bei Schulabschluss; Berufsausbildung bzw. Ausbildungsabschluss; derzeitige bzw. frühere Erwerbstätigkeit; Vollzeit- bzw. Teilzeiterwerbstätigkeit; derzeitige bzw. letzte berufliche Stellung; derzeitige bzw. letzte berufliche Tätigkeit; Familienstand; Zusammenleben mit einem Partner; eigene Kinder; Selbsteinstufung der Schichtzugehörigkeit; Konfession bzw. Religionsgemeinschaft; Kirchenverbundenheit; Haushaltsgröße;

The system of social indicators for the Federal Republic of Germany - developed in its original version as part of the SPES project under the direction of Wolfgang Zapf - provides quantitative information on levels, distributions and changes in quality of life, social progress and social change in Germany from 1950 to 2013, i.e. over a period of more than sixty years. With the approximately 400 objective and subjective indicators that the indicator system comprises in total, it claims to measure welfare and quality of life in Germany in a differentiated way across various areas of life and to monitor them over time. In addition to the indicators for 13 areas of life, including income, education and health, a selection of cross-cutting global welfare measures were also included in the indicator system, i.e. general welfare indicators such as life satisfaction, social isolation or the Human Development Index. Based on available data from official statistics and survey data, time series were compiled for all indicators, ideally with annual values from 1950 to 2013. Around 90 of the indicators were marked as "key indicators" in order to highlight central dimensions of welfare and quality of life across the various areas of life. The further development and expansion, regular maintenance and updating as well as the provision of the data of the system of social indicators for the Federal Republic of Germany have been among the tasks of the Center for Social Indicator Research, which is based at GESIS, since 1987. For a detailed description of the system of social indicators for the Federal Republic of Germany, see the study description under "Other documents". Level of housing supply: Dwelling per household; Vacancy rate; Living space per person; Living space per person. Quality of housing facilities: Dwellings without standard furnishings; Dwellings without standard amenities (SOEP). Quality of living environment: Noisy dwellings. Cost of housing provision: Average rent burden; Households with high rent burden. Home ownership: Households in home ownership. Inequality in home ownership: Home ownership of self-employed and employees in comparison; Comparison of home ownership by blue-collar and white-collar workers. Subjective assessment of housing conditions; Housing satisfaction. Das System sozialer Indikatoren für die Bundesrepublik Deutschland – in seiner ursprünglichen Version im Rahmen des SPES-Projekts unter der Leitung von Wolfgang Zapf entwickelt – bietet quantitative Informationen zu Niveaus, Verteilungen und Veränderungen der Lebensqualität, gesellschaftlichen Fortschritt und sozialen Wandel in Deutschland von 1950 bis 2013, also über einen Zeitraum von mehr als sechzig Jahren. Mit den ca. 400 objektiven und subjektiven Indikatoren, die das Indikatorensystem insgesamt umfasst, wird beansprucht, Wohlfahrt und Lebensqualität in Deutschland über verschiedene Lebensbereiche hinweg differenziert zu messen und im Zeitverlauf zu beobachten. Neben den Indikatoren für 13 Lebensbereiche, u.a. Einkommen, Bildung und Gesundheit, wurde zudem eine Auswahl von bereichsübergreifenden globalen Wohlfahrtsmaßen in das Indikatorensystem einbezogen, d.h. allgemeine Wohlfahrtsindikatoren, wie z.B. die Lebenszufriedenheit, soziale Isolierung oder der Human Development Index. Basierend auf verfügbaren Daten der amtlichen Statistik und Umfragedaten wurden für sämtliche Indikatoren Zeitreihen zusammengestellt, im Idealfall mit jährlichen Werten von 1950 bis 2013. Von den Indikatoren wurden ca. 90 als “Schlüsselindikatoren” markiert, um zentrale Dimensionen von Wohlfahrt und Lebensqualität über die verschiedenen Lebensbereiche hinweg hervorzuheben. Die Weiterentwicklung und Erweiterung, die regelmäßige Pflege und Aktualisierung sowie die Bereitstellung der Daten des Systems sozialer Indikatoren für die Bundesrepublik Deutschland gehörte seit 1987 zu den Aufgaben des bei GESIS angesiedelten Zentrums für Sozialindikatorenforschung. Für eine ausführliche Darstellung des Systems sozialer Indikatoren für die Bundesrepublik Deutschland vgl. die Studienbeschreibung unter „Andere Dokumente“. Die Daten zu dem Lebensbereich ‚Wohnung‘ setzen sich wie folgt zusammen: Versorgungsniveau mit Wohnraum: Wohnung pro Haushalt, Leerwohnungsziffer, Wohnraum pro Person, Wohnfläche pro Person. Qualität der Wohnungsausstattung: Wohnungen ohne Standardausstattung, Wohnungen ohne Standardausstattung (SOEP). Qualität der Wohnumwelt: Lärmbelastete Wohnungen. Kosten der Wohnungsversorgung: Durchschnittliche Mietbelastung, Haushalte mit hoher Mietbelastung. Wohnungseigentum: Haushalte im Wohneigentum. Ungleichheit beim Wohnungseigentum: Wohnungseigentum von Selbständigen und Arbeitern im Vergleich, Wohnungseigentum von Arbeitern und Angestellten im Vergleich. Subjektive Bewertung der Wohnbedingungen: Wohnzufriedenheit. Sources: Official statistics, Large survey programs. Quellen: Amtliche Statistiken, große Umfrageprogramme.

There is more to housing affordability than the rent or mortgage you pay. Transportation costs are the second-biggest budget item for most families, but it can be difficult for people to fully factor transportation costs into decisions about where to live and work. The Location Affordability Index (LAI) is a user-friendly source of standardized data at the neighborhood (census tract) level on combined housing and transportation costs to help consumers, policymakers, and developers make more informed decisions about where to live, work, and invest. Compare eight household profiles (see table below) —which vary by household income, size, and number of commuters—and see the impact of the built environment on affordability in a given location while holding household demographics constant.*$11,880 for a single person household in 2016 according to US Dept. of Health and Human Services: https://aspe.hhs.gov/computations-2016-poverty-guidelinesThis layer is symbolized by the percentage of housing and transportation costs as a percentage of income for the Median-Income Family profile, but the costs as a percentage of income for all household profiles are listed in the pop-up:Also available is a gallery of 8 web maps (one for each household profile) all symbolized the same way for easy comparison: Median-Income Family, Very Low-Income Individual, Working Individual, Single Professional, Retired Couple, Single-Parent Family, Moderate-Income Family, and Dual-Professional Family.An accompanying story map provides side-by-side comparisons and additional context.--Variables used in HUD's calculations include 24 measures such as people per household, average number of rooms per housing unit, monthly housing costs (mortgage/rent as well as utility and maintenance expenses), average number of cars per household, median commute distance, vehicle miles traveled per year, percent of trips taken on transit, street connectivity and walkability (measured by block density), and many more.To learn more about the Location Affordability Index (v.3) visit: https://www.hudexchange.info/programs/location-affordability-index/. There you will find some background and an FAQ page, which includes the question:"Manhattan, San Francisco, and downtown Boston are some of the most expensive places to live in the country, yet the LAI shows them as affordable for the typical regional household. Why?" These areas have some of the lowest transportation costs in the country, which helps offset the high cost of housing. The area median income (AMI) in these regions is also high, so when costs are shown as a percent of income for the typical regional household these neighborhoods appear affordable; however, they are generally unaffordable to households earning less than the AMI.Date of Coverage: 2012-2016 Date Released: March 2019Date Downloaded from HUD Open Data: 4/18/19Further Documentation:LAI Version 3 Data and MethodologyLAI Version 3 Technical Documentation_**The documentation below is in reference to this items placement in the NM Supply Chain Data Hub. The documentation is of use to understanding the source of this item, and how to reproduce it for updates**

Title: Location Affordability Index - NMCDC Copy

Summary: This layer contains the Location Affordability Index from U.S. Dept. of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) - standardized household, housing, and transportation cost estimates by census tract for 8 household profiles.

Notes: This map is copied from source map: https://nmcdc.maps.arcgis.com/home/item.html?id=de341c1338c5447da400c4e8c51ae1f6, created by dianaclavery_uo, and identified in Living Atlas.

Prepared by: dianaclavery_uo, copied by EMcRae_NMCDC

Source: This map is copied from source map: https://nmcdc.maps.arcgis.com/home/item.html?id=de341c1338c5447da400c4e8c51ae1f6, created by dianaclavery_uo, and identified in Living Atlas. Check the source documentation or other details above for more information about data sources.

Feature Service: https://nmcdc.maps.arcgis.com/home/item.html?id=447a461f048845979f30a2478b9e65bb

UID: 73

Data Requested: Family income spent on basic need

Method of Acquisition: Search for Location Affordability Index in the Living Atlas. Make a copy of most recent map available. To update this map, copy the most recent map available. In a new tab, open the AGOL Assistant Portal tool and use the functions in the portal to copy the new maps JSON, and paste it over the old map (this map with item id

Date Acquired: Map copied on May 10, 2022

Priority rank as Identified in 2022 (scale of 1 being the highest priority, to 11 being the lowest priority): 6

Tags: PENDING

The housing situation, circles of contact, activities and desires of old people as well as their judgement on the care of old people in the FRG. The main focus areas of the study are the housing situation and the housing desires of old people, circles of contact and the associated care situation, furthermore the determination of activities similar to employment in old age. Topics: Preferred contact persons and actual visits in the last two weeks; frequency of contact with relatives and friends; reference person; conversation partner for daily conversations and satisfaction with frequency of contact; interest in a residence for older people; biggest problems in old age; membership in clubs and organizations as well as frequency of participation in club events; preferred leisure activity; type of newspapers and magazines read regularly; general need for security; information on financially particularly disadvantaged groups in society; satisfaction with personal income situation; assessment whether enough is done for older people; last contact with authorities and assessment of experiences with authorities; personal contacts with the social services office and judgement on the people using the the social services office; the party soonest considering the problems of the older generation; attitude to reform policies and most important political problems; requirements for a politician (semantic differential); housing situation and housing desires; residential area and assessment of adequate care of older people in the vicinity; possibilities to care better for older fellow-citizens; assistance from neighbors, relatives or friends; distance of residence from close persons; satisfaction with general living conditions; preference for activity or leisure; length of daily occupation work; type of activity exercised; comparison of current financial situation with the time before retirement; cost of living; last visit to the doctor. Demography: age (classified); sex; marital status; religious denomination; religiousness; school education; vocational training; occupation; employment; income; household income; size of household; party preference; city size; state. Die Wohnsituation, die Kontaktkreise, die Tätigkeiten und Wünsche alter Menschen sowie ihre Beurteilung der Versorgung alter Menschen in der BRD. Schwerpunkte der Studie sind die Wohnsituation und die Wohnwünsche alter Menschen, die Kontaktkreise und die damit verknüpfte Versorgungssituation, ferner die Ermittlung berufsähnlicher Tätigkeiten im Alter. Themen: Präferierte Kontaktpersonen und tatsächliche Besuche in den letzten zwei Wochen; Kontakthäufigkeit mit Verwandten und Bekannten; Bezugsperson; Gesprächspartner für tägliche Unterhaltungen und Zufriedenheit mit der Kontakthäufigkeit; Interesse an einer Altenwohnung; größte Probleme im Alter; Mitgliedschaft in Vereinen und Organisationen sowie Häufigkeit der Teilnahme an Vereinsveranstaltungen; präferierte Freizeitbeschäftigung; Art der regelmäßig gelesenen Zeitungen und Zeitschriften; allgemeines Sicherheitsbedürfnis; Angabe der finanziell besonders benachteiligten Gruppen in der Gesellschaft; Zufriedenheit mit der eigenen Einkommenssituation; Einschätzung, ob für die älteren Menschen genügend getan wird; letzter Behördenkontakt und Einschätzung der Erfahrungen mit Behörden; eigene Kontakte mit dem Sozialamt und Beurteilung der Leute, die das Sozialamt in Anspruch nehmen; Partei, die am ehesten die Probleme der älteren Generation berücksichtigt; Einstellung zur Reformpolitik und wichtigste politische Probleme; Anforderungsprofil für einen Politiker (semantisches Differential); Wohnsituation und Wohnwünsche; Wohnlage und Einschätzung der genügenden Versorgung älterer Menschen in der Umgebung; Möglichkeiten, ältere Mitbürger besser zu versorgen; Hilfeleistung durch Nachbarn, Verwandte oder Bekannte; Entfernung der Wohnung von nahestehenden Personen; Zufriedenheit mit den allgemeinen Lebensbedingungen; Präferenz von Aktivität oder Muße; Dauer der täglichen Berufsarbeit; Art der ausgeübten Tätigkeit; Vergleich der derzeitigen finanziellen Situation mit der Zeit vor der Pensionierung; Lebenshaltungskosten; letzter Arztbesuch. Demographie: Alter (klassiert); Geschlecht; Familienstand; Konfession; Religiosität; Schulbildung; Berufsausbildung; Beruf; Berufstätigkeit; Einkommen; Haushaltseinkommen; Haushaltsgröße; Parteipräferenz; Ortsgröße; Bundesland. Quota sample of persons according to age (60 - 84 years old), education and size of place of residence on the second stage; on the first stage according to the ADM mastersample. Quotenauswahl von Personen nach Alter, Bildung und Wohnortgröße auf der zweiten Stufe; auf der ersten Stufe nach dem ADM-Mastersample.

VITAL SIGNS INDICATOR Poverty (EQ5)

FULL MEASURE NAME The share of the population living in households that earn less than 200 percent of the federal poverty limit

LAST UPDATED December 2018

DESCRIPTION Poverty refers to the share of the population living in households that earn less than 200 percent of the federal poverty limit, which varies based on the number of individuals in a given household. It reflects the number of individuals who are economically struggling due to low household income levels.

DATA SOURCE U.S Census Bureau: Decennial Census http://www.nhgis.org (1980-1990) http://factfinder2.census.gov (2000)

U.S. Census Bureau: American Community Survey Form C17002 (2006-2017) http://api.census.gov

METHODOLOGY NOTES (across all datasets for this indicator) The U.S. Census Bureau defines a national poverty level (or household income) that varies by household size, number of children in a household, and age of householder. The national poverty level does not vary geographically even though cost of living is different across the United States. For the Bay Area, where cost of living is high and incomes are correspondingly high, an appropriate poverty level is 200% of poverty or twice the national poverty level, consistent with what was used for past equity work at MTC and ABAG. For comparison, however, both the national and 200% poverty levels are presented.

For Vital Signs, the poverty rate is defined as the number of people (including children) living below twice the poverty level divided by the number of people for whom poverty status is determined. Poverty rates do not include unrelated individuals below 15 years old or people who live in the following: institutionalized group quarters, college dormitories, military barracks, and situations without conventional housing. The household income definitions for poverty change each year to reflect inflation. The official poverty definition uses money income before taxes and does not include capital gains or noncash benefits (such as public housing, Medicaid, and food stamps). For the national poverty level definitions by year, see: https://www.census.gov/hhes/www/poverty/data/threshld/index.html For an explanation on how the Census Bureau measures poverty, see: https://www.census.gov/hhes/www/poverty/about/overview/measure.html

For the American Community Survey datasets, 1-year data was used for region, county, and metro areas whereas 5-year rolling average data was used for city and census tract.

To be consistent across metropolitan areas, the poverty definition for non-Bay Area metros is twice the national poverty level. Data were not adjusted for varying income and cost of living levels across the metropolitan areas.

CPIH is the most comprehensive measure of inflation. It extends CPI to include a measure of the costs associated with owning, maintaining and living in one's own home, known as owner occupiers' housing costs (OOH), along with council tax. This dataset provides CPIH time series (2005 to latest published month), allowing users to customise their own selection, view or download.