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.
Cost of Living Index (Excl. Rent) is a relative indicator of consumer goods prices, including groceries, restaurants, transportation and utilities. Cost of Living Index does not include accommodation expenses such as rent or mortgage. If a city has a Cost of Living Index of 120, it means Numbeo has estimated it is 20% more expensive than New York (excluding rent).
Please refer further to: https://www.numbeo.com/cost-of-living/cpi_explained.jsp for motivation and methodology.
All credits to https://www.numbeo.com .
This dataset would surely help socio-economic researchers to analyse and get deeper insights regarding the life of people country-wise.
Thanks to @andradaolteanu for the motivation! Upwards and onwards...
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.
https://lida.dataverse.lt/api/datasets/:persistentId/versions/4.1/customlicense?persistentId=hdl:21.12137/TGJEJAhttps://lida.dataverse.lt/api/datasets/:persistentId/versions/4.1/customlicense?persistentId=hdl:21.12137/TGJEJA
This dataset contains data on monthly cost of living index in Estonia in 1919-1939. Dataset "Monthly Cost of Living Index in Estonia, 1919-1939" was published implementing project "Historical Sociology of Modern Restorations: a Cross-Time Comparative Study of Post-Communist Transformation in the Baltic States" from 2018 to 2022. Project leader is prof. Zenonas Norkus. Project is funded by the European Social Fund according to the activity "Improvement of researchers' qualification by implementing world-class R&D projects' of Measure No. 09.3.3-LMT-K-712".
At **** U.S. dollars, Switzerland has the most expensive Big Macs in the world, according to the January 2025 Big Mac index. Concurrently, the cost of a Big Mac was **** dollars in the U.S., and **** U.S. dollars in the Euro area. What is the Big Mac index? The Big Mac index, published by The Economist, is a novel way of measuring whether the market exchange rates for different countries’ currencies are overvalued or undervalued. It does this by measuring each currency against a common standard – the Big Mac hamburger sold by McDonald’s restaurants all over the world. Twice a year the Economist converts the average national price of a Big Mac into U.S. dollars using the exchange rate at that point in time. As a Big Mac is a completely standardized product across the world, the argument goes that it should have the same relative cost in every country. Differences in the cost of a Big Mac expressed as U.S. dollars therefore reflect differences in the purchasing power of each currency. Is the Big Mac index a good measure of purchasing power parity? Purchasing power parity (PPP) is the idea that items should cost the same in different countries, based on the exchange rate at that time. This relationship does not hold in practice. Factors like tax rates, wage regulations, whether components need to be imported, and the level of market competition all contribute to price variations between countries. The Big Mac index does measure this basic point – that one U.S. dollar can buy more in some countries than others. There are more accurate ways to measure differences in PPP though, which convert a larger range of products into their dollar price. Adjusting for PPP can have a massive effect on how we understand a country’s economy. The country with the largest GDP adjusted for PPP is China, but when looking at the unadjusted GDP of different countries, the U.S. has the largest economy.
https://lida.dataverse.lt/api/datasets/:persistentId/versions/1.3/customlicense?persistentId=hdl:21.12137/RZEGCFhttps://lida.dataverse.lt/api/datasets/:persistentId/versions/1.3/customlicense?persistentId=hdl:21.12137/RZEGCF
This dataset contains data on the monthly cost of living in Lithuania in 1913 and 1919-1939.
Attribution 4.0 (CC BY 4.0)https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
License information was derived automatically
Quality of Life Index (higher is better) is an estimation of overall quality of life by using an empirical formula which takes into account purchasing power index (higher is better), pollution index (lower is better), house price to income ratio (lower is better), cost of living index (lower is better), safety index (higher is better), health care index (higher is better), traffic commute time index (lower is better) and climate index (higher is better).
Current formula (written in Java programming language):
index.main = Math.max(0, 100 + purchasingPowerInclRentIndex / 2.5 - (housePriceToIncomeRatio * 1.0) - costOfLivingIndex / 10 + safetyIndex / 2.0 + healthIndex / 2.5 - trafficTimeIndex / 2.0 - pollutionIndex * 2.0 / 3.0 + climateIndex / 3.0);
For details how purchasing power (including rent) index, pollution index, property price to income ratios, cost of living index, safety index, climate index, health index and traffic index are calculated please look up their respective pages.
Formulas used in the past
Formula used between June 2017 and Decembar 2017
We decided to decrease weight from costOfLivingIndex in this formula:
index.main = Math.max(0, 100 + purchasingPowerInclRentIndex / 2.5 - (housePriceToIncomeRatio * 1.0) - costOfLivingIndex / 5 + safetyIndex / 2.0 + healthIndex / 2.5 - trafficTimeIndex / 2.0 - pollutionIndex * 2.0 / 3.0 + climateIndex / 3.0);
The World Happiness 2017, which ranks 155 countries by their happiness levels, was released at the United Nations at an event celebrating International Day of Happiness on March 20th. The report continues to gain global recognition as governments, organizations and civil society increasingly use happiness indicators to inform their policy-making decisions. Leading experts across fields – economics, psychology, survey analysis, national statistics, health, public policy and more – describe how measurements of well-being can be used effectively to assess the progress of nations. The reports review the state of happiness in the world today and show how the new science of happiness explains personal and national variations in happiness.
The scores are based on answers to the main life evaluation question asked in the poll. This question, known as the Cantril ladder, asks respondents to think of a ladder with the best possible life for them being a 10 and the worst possible life being a 0 and to rate their own current lives on that scale. The scores are from nationally representative samples for 2017 and use the Gallup weights to make the estimates representative. The columns following the happiness score estimate the extent to which each of six factors – economic production, social support, life expectancy, freedom, absence of corruption, and generosity – contribute to making life evaluations higher in each country than they are in Dystopia, a hypothetical country that has values equal to the world’s lowest national averages for each of the six factors. They have no impact on the total score reported for each country, but they do explain why some countries rank higher than others.
Quality of life index, link: https://www.numbeo.com/quality-of-life/indices_explained.jsp
Happiness store, link: https://www.kaggle.com/unsdsn/world-happiness/home
In 2024, the consumer price index (CPI) was 315.61. Data represents U.S. city averages. The monthly inflation rate for the United States can be found here. United States urban Consumer Price Index (CPI) The U.S. Consumer Price Index is a measure of change in the price of consumer goods and services purchased by households. The CPI is defined by the United States Bureau of Labor Statistics as "a measure of the average change over time in the prices paid by urban consumers for a market basket of consumer goods and services." To calculate the CPI, the Bureau of Labor Statistics considers the price of goods and services from various categories: housing, transportation, apparel, food & beverage, medical care, recreation, education and other/uncategorized. The CPI is a useful measure, as it indicates how the cost of urban living in the United States has changed over time, compared to a base period. CPI is also used to calculate inflation, or change in the purchasing power of money. According to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, the U.S. urban CPI has been rising steadily since 1992. As of 2023, the CPI was 304.7, up from 233 ten years earlier and up from 184 twenty years earlier. This indicates the extent to which, compared to a base period 1982-1984 = 100, the price of various goods and services has risen.
Attribution 4.0 (CC BY 4.0)https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
License information was derived automatically
Consumer Price Index CPI in the United States increased to 321.47 points in May from 320.80 points in April of 2025. This dataset provides the latest reported value for - United States Consumer Price Index (CPI) - plus previous releases, historical high and low, short-term forecast and long-term prediction, economic calendar, survey consensus and news.
Monthly indexes and percentage changes for all components and special aggregates of the Consumer Price Index (CPI), not seasonally adjusted, for Canada, provinces, Whitehorse, Yellowknife and Iqaluit. Data are presented for the corresponding month of the previous year, the previous month and the current month. The base year for the index is 2002=100.
In 2023, the U.S. Consumer Price Index was 309.42, and is projected to increase to 352.27 by 2029. The base period was 1982-84. The monthly CPI for all urban consumers in the U.S. can be accessed here. After a time of high inflation, the U.S. inflation rateis projected fall to two percent by 2027. United States Consumer Price Index ForecastIt is projected that the CPI will continue to rise year over year, reaching 325.6 in 2027. The Consumer Price Index of all urban consumers in previous years was lower, and has risen every year since 1992, except in 2009, when the CPI went from 215.30 in 2008 to 214.54 in 2009. The monthly unadjusted Consumer Price Index was 296.17 for the month of August in 2022. The U.S. CPI measures changes in the price of consumer goods and services purchased by households and is thought to reflect inflation in the U.S. as well as the health of the economy. The U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics calculates the CPI and defines it as, "a measure of the average change over time in the prices paid by urban consumers for a market basket of consumer goods and services." The BLS records the price of thousands of goods and services month by month. They consider goods and services within eight main categories: food and beverage, housing, apparel, transportation, medical care, recreation, education, and other goods and services. They aggregate the data collected in order to compare how much it would cost a consumer to buy the same market basket of goods and services within one month or one year compared with the previous month or year. Given that the CPI is used to calculate U.S. inflation, the CPI influences the annual adjustments of many financial institutions in the United States, both private and public. Wages, social security payments, and pensions are all affected by the CPI.
https://fred.stlouisfed.org/legal/#copyright-public-domainhttps://fred.stlouisfed.org/legal/#copyright-public-domain
Graph and download economic data for Inflation, consumer prices for the United States (FPCPITOTLZGUSA) from 1960 to 2024 about consumer, CPI, inflation, price index, indexes, price, and USA.
China Living Standards Survey (CLSS) consists of one household survey and one community (village) survey, conducted in Hebei and Liaoning Provinces (northern and northeast China) in July 1995 and July 1997 respectively. Five villages from each three sample counties of each province were selected (six were selected in Liaoyang County of Liaoning Province because of administrative area change). About 880 farm households were selected from total thirty-one sample villages for the household survey. The same thirty-one villages formed the samples of community survey. This document provides information on the content of different questionnaires, the survey design and implementation, data processing activities, and the different available data sets.
The China Living Standards Survey (CLSS) was conducted only in Hebei and Liaoning Provinces (northern and northeast China).
Sample survey data [ssd]
The CLSS sample is not a rigorous random sample drawn from a well-defined population. Instead it is only a rough approximation of the rural population in Hebei and Liaoning provinces in Northeastern China. The reason for this is that part of the motivation for the survey was to compare the current conditions with conditions that existed in Hebei and Liaoning in the 1930’s. Because of this, three counties in Hebei and three counties in Liaoning were selected as "primary sampling units" because data had been collected from those six counties by the Japanese occupation government in the 1930’s. Within each of these six counties (xian) five villages (cun) were selected, for an overall total of 30 villages (in fact, an administrative change in one village led to 31 villages being selected). In each county a "main village" was selected that was in fact a village that had been surveyed in the 1930s. Because of the interest in these villages 50 households were selected from each of these six villages (one for each of the six counties). In addition, four other villages were selected in each county. These other villages were not drawn randomly but were selected so as to "represent" variation within the county. Within each of these villages 20 households were selected for interviews. Thus the intended sample size was 780 households, 130 from each county.
Unlike county and village selection, the selection of households within each village was done according to standard sample selection procedures. In each village, a list of all households in the village was obtained from village leaders. An "interval" was calculated as the number of the households in the village divided by the number of households desired for the sample (50 for main villages and 20 for other villages). For the list of households, a random number was drawn between 1 and the interval number. This was used as a starting point. The interval was then added to this number to get a second number, then the interval was added to this second number to get a third number, and so on. The set of numbers produced were the numbers used to select the households, in terms of their order on the list.
In fact, the number of households in the sample is 785, as opposed to 780. Most of this difference is due to a village in which 24 households were interviewed, as opposed to the goal of 20 households
Face-to-face [f2f]
Household Questionnaire
The household questionnaire contains sections that collect data on household demographic structure, education, housing conditions, land, agricultural management, household non-agricultural business, household expenditures, gifts, remittances and other income sources, and saving and loans. For some sections (general household information, schooling, housing, gift-exchange, remittance, other income, and credit and savings) the individual designated by the household members as the household head provided responses. For some other sections (farm land, agricultural management, family-run non-farm business, and household consumption expenditure) a member identified as the most knowledgeable provided responses. Identification codes for respondents of different sections indicate who provided the information. In sections where the information collected pertains to individuals (employment), whenever possible, each member of the household was asked to respond for himself or herself, except that parents were allowed to respond for younger children. Therefore, in the case of the employment section it is possible that the information was not provided by the relevant person; variables in this section indicate when this is true.
The household questionnaire was completed in a one-time interview in the summer of 1995. The survey was designed so that more sensitive issues such as credit and savings were discussed near the end. The content of each section is briefly described below.
Section 0 SURVEY INFORMATION
This section mainly summarizes the results of the survey visits. The following information was entered into the computer: whether the survey and the data entry were completed, codes of supervisor’s brief comments on interviewer, data entry operator, and related revising suggestion (e.g., 1. good, 2. revise at office, and 3. re-interview needed). Information about the date of interview, the names of interviewer, supervisor, data enterer, and detail notes of interviewer and supervisor were not entered into the computer.
Section 1 GENERAL HOUSEHOLD INFORMATION
1A HOUSEHOLD STRUCTURE 1B INFORMATION ABOUT THE HOUSEHOLD MEMBERS’ PARENTS 1C INFORMATION ABOUT THE CHILDREN WHO ARE NOT LIVING IN HOME
Section 1A lists the personal id code, sex, relationship to the household head, ethnic group, type of resident permit (agricultural [nongye], non-agricultural [fei nongye], or no resident permit), date of birth, marital status of all people who spent the previous night in that household and for household members who are temporarily away from home. The household head is listed first and receives the personal id code 1. Household members were defined to include “all the people who normally live and eat their meals together in this dwelling.” Those who were absent more than nine of the last twelve months were excluded, except for the head of household. For individuals who are married and whose spouse resides in the household, the personal id number of the spouse is noted. By doing so, information on the spouse can be collected by appropriately merging information from the section 1A and other parts of the survey.
Section 1B collects information on the parents of all household members. For individuals whose parents reside in the household, parents’ personal id numbers are noted, and information can be obtained by appropriately merging information from other parts of the survey. For individuals whose parents do not reside in the household, information is recorded on whether each parent is alive, as well as their schooling and occupation.
Section 1C collects information for children of household members who are not living in home. Children who have died are not included. The information on the name, sex, types of resident permit, age, education level, education cost, reasons not living in home, current living place, and type of job of each such child is recorded.
Section 2 SCHOOLING
In Section 2, information about literacy and numeracy, school attendance, completion, and current enrollment for all household members of preschool age and older. The interpretation of pre-school age appears to have varied, with the result that while education information is available for some children of pre-school age, not all pre-school children were included in this section. But for ages 6 and above information is available for nearly all individuals, so in essence the data on schooling can be said to apply all persons 6 age and above. For those who were enrolled in school at the time of the survey, information was also collected on school attendance, expenses, and scholarships. If applicable, information on serving as an apprentice, technical or professional training was also collected.
Section 3 EMPLOYMENT
3A GENERAL INFORMATION 3B MAJOR NON-FARM JOB IN 1994 3C THE SECOND NON-FARM JOB IN 1994 3D OTHER EMPLOYMENT ACTIVITIES IN 1994 3E SEARCHING FOR NON-FARM JOB 3F PROCESS FOR GETTING MAJOR NON-FARM JOB 3G CORVEE LABOR
All individuals age thirteen and above were asked to respond to the employment activity questions in Section 3. Section 3A collects general information on farm and non-farm employment, such as whether or not the household member worked on household own farm in 1994, when was the last year the member worked on own farm if he/she did not work in 1994, work days and hours during busy season, occupation and sector codes of the major, second, and third non-farm jobs, work days and total income of these non-farm jobs. There is a variable which indicates whether or not the individual responded for himself or herself.
Sections 3B and 3C collect detailed information on the major and the second non-farm job. Information includes number of months worked and which month in 1994 the member worked on these jobs, average works days (or hours) per month (per day), total number of years worked for these jobs by the end of 1994, different components of income, type of employment contracts. Information on employer’s ownership type and location was also collected.
Section 3D collects information on average hours spent doing chores and housework at home every day during non-busy and busy season. The chores refer to cooking, laundry, cleaning, shopping, cutting woods, as well as small-scale farm yard animals raising, for example, pigs or chickens. Large-scale animal
Background:
A household food consumption and expenditure survey has been conducted each year in Great Britain (excluding Northern Ireland) since 1940. At that time the National Food Survey (NFS) covered a sample drawn solely from urban working-class households, but this was extended to a fully demographically representative sample in 1950. From 1957 onwards the Family Expenditure Survey (FES) provided information on all household expenditure patterns including food expenditure, with the NFS providing more detailed information on food consumption and expenditure. The NFS was extended to cover Northern Ireland from 1996 onwards. In April 2001 these surveys were combined to form the Expenditure and Food Survey (EFS), which completely replaced both series. From January 2008, the EFS became known as the Living Costs and Food (LCF) module of the Integrated Household Survey (IHS). As a consequence of this change, the questionnaire was altered to accommodate the insertion of a core set of questions, common to all of the separate modules which together comprised the IHS. Some of these core questions are simply questions which were previously asked in the same or a similar format on all of the IHS component surveys. For further information on the LCF questionnaire, see Volume A of the LCF 2008 User Guide, held with SN 6385. Further information about the LCF, including links to published reports based on the survey, may be found by searching for 'Living Costs and Food Survey' on the ONS website. Further information on the NFS and Living Costs and Food Module of the IHS can be found by searching for 'Family Food' on the GOV.UK website.
History:
The LCF (then EFS) was the result of more than two years' development work to bring together the FES and NFS; both survey series were well-established and important sources of information for government and the wider community, and had charted changes and patterns in spending and food consumption since the 1950s. Whilst the NFS and FES series are now finished, users should note that previous data from both series are still available from the UK Data Archive, under GNs 33071 (NFS) and 33057 (FES).
Purpose of the LCF
The Office for National Statistics (ONS) has overall project management and financial responsibility for the LCF, while the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA) sponsors the food data element. As with the FES and NFS, the LCF continues to be primarily used to provide information for the Retail Prices Index, National Accounts estimates of household expenditure, analysis of the effect of taxes and benefits, and trends in nutrition. The results are multi-purpose, however, providing an invaluable supply of economic and social data. The merger of the two surveys also brings benefits for users, as a single survey on food expenditure removes the difficulties of reconciling data from two sources.
Design and methodology
The design of the LCF is based on the old FES, although the use of new processing software by the data creators has resulted in a dataset which differs from the previous structure. The most significant change in terms of reporting expenditure, however, is the introduction of the European Standard Classification of Individual Consumption by Purpose (COICOP), in place of the codes previously used. An additional level of hierarchy has been developed to improve the mapping to the previous codes. The LCF was conducted on a financial year basis from 2001, then moved to a calendar year basis from January 2006 (to complement the IHS) until 2015-16, when the financial year survey was reinstated at the request of users. Therefore, whilst SN 5688 covers April 2005 - March 2006, SN 5986 covers January-December 2006. Subsequent years cover January-December until 2014. SN 8210 returns to the financial year survey and currently covers April 2015 - March 2016.
Northern Ireland sample
Users should note that, due to funding constraints, from January 2010 the Northern Ireland (NI) sample used for the LCF was reduced to a sample proportionate to the NI population relative to the UK.
Family Food database:
'Family Food' is an annual publication which provides detailed statistical information on purchased quantities, expenditure and nutrient intakes derived from both household and eating out food and drink. Data is collected for a sample of households in the United Kingdom using self-reported diaries of all purchases, including food eaten out, over a two week period. Where possible quantities are recorded in the diaries but otherwise estimated. Energy and nutrient intakes are calculated using standard nutrient composition data for each of some 500 types of food. Current estimates are based on data collected in the Family Food Module of the LCFS. Further information about the LCF food databases can be found on the GOV.UK Family Food Statistics web pages.
Secure Access version
A Secure Access version of the LCF from 2006 onwards is available from the UK Data Archive under SN 7047, subject to stringent access conditions. The Secure Access version includes variables that are not included in the standard End User Licence (EUL) version, including geographical variables with detail below Government Office Region, to postcode level; urban/rural area indicators; other sensitive variables; raw diary information files (derived variables are available in the EUL) and the family expenditure codes files. Users are strongly advised to check whether the EUL version is sufficient for their needs before considering an application for the Secure Access version.
Occupation data for 2021 and 2022 data files
The ONS have identified an issue with the collection of some
occupational data in 2021 and 2022 data files in a number of their
surveys. While they estimate any impacts will be small overall, this
will affect the
accuracy of the breakdowns of some detailed (four-digit Standard
Occupational
Classification (SOC)) occupations, and data derived from them. None of
ONS' headline
statistics, other than those directly sourced from occupational data,
are affected and you
can continue to rely on their accuracy. For further information on this
issue, please see:
https://www.ons.gov.uk/news/statementsandletters/occupationaldatainonssurveys.
For the second edition (May 2011), the variables A012p and A013p in file dvper were replaced with new versions to correct data errors. For the third edition (June 2011), a new version of the DV Set89 data file was deposited. The variable COI_PLUS (Coicop-plus expenditure code) has been updated to correct truncated codes that were present in the previous version. For the fourth edition (July 2011), the Specs2009 document was replaced with an updated version. The previous version contained some notes that were no longer needed.
DEFRA Family Food database:
This is available as a separate Access download zip file for those users who require it.
Attribution 4.0 (CC BY 4.0)https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
License information was derived automatically
Consumer Price Index CPI in Thailand increased to 100.42 points in June from 100.40 points in May of 2025. This dataset provides the latest reported value for - Thailand Consumer Price Index (CPI) - plus previous releases, historical high and low, short-term forecast and long-term prediction, economic calendar, survey consensus and news.
Annual indexes for major components and special aggregates of the Consumer Price Index (CPI), for Canada, provinces, Whitehorse, Yellowknife and Iqaluit. Data are presented for the last five years. The base year for the index is 2002=100.
Open Government Licence 3.0http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/open-government-licence/version/3/
License information was derived automatically
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.
Monthly indexes for major components and special aggregates of the Consumer Price Index (CPI), not seasonally adjusted, for Canada, provinces, Whitehorse, Yellowknife and Iqaluit. Data are presented for the current month and previous four months. The base year for the index is 2002=100.
In June 2024, the household cost inflation rate (HCI) for low-income households in the United Kingdom was 1.7 percent, compared with 2.3 percent for middle-income households, and 3.3 percent for high-income households. Unlike other measures of inflation such as the consumer price index (CPI) the HCI isn't based on a fixed basket of goods, but is weighted to show how price changes affect different households by their economic status.
Attribution 4.0 (CC BY 4.0)https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
License information was derived automatically
Analysis of ‘GapMinder - Income Inequality’ provided by Analyst-2 (analyst-2.ai), based on source dataset retrieved from https://www.kaggle.com/psterk/income-inequality on 28 January 2022.
--- Dataset description provided by original source is as follows ---
This analysis focuses on income inequailty as measured by the Gini Index* and its association with economic metrics such as GDP per capita, investments as a % of GDP, and tax revenue as a % of GDP. One polical metric, EIU democracy index, is also included.
The data is for years 2006 - 2016
This investigation can be considered a starting point for complex questions such as:
This analysis uses the gapminder dataset from the Gapminder Foundation. The Gapminder Foundation is a non-profit venture registered in Stockholm, Sweden, that promotes sustainable global development and achievement of the United Nations Millennium Development Goals by increased use and understanding of statistics and other information about social, economic and environmental development at local, national and global levels.
*The Gini Index is a measure of statistical dispersion intended to represent the income or wealth distribution of a nation's residents, and is the most commonly used measurement of inequality. It was developed by the Italian statistician and sociologist Corrado Gini and published in his 1912 paper Variability and Mutability.
The dataset contains data from the following GapMinder datasets:
"This democracy index is using the data from the Economist Inteligence Unit to express the quality of democracies as a number between 0 and 100. It's based on 60 different aspects of societies that are relevant to democracy universal suffrage for all adults, voter participation, perception of human rights protection and freedom to form organizations and parties. The democracy index is calculated from the 60 indicators, divided into five ""sub indexes"", which are:
The sub-indexes are based on the sum of scores on roughly 12 indicators per sub-index, converted into a score between 0 and 100. (The Economist publishes the index with a scale from 0 to 10, but Gapminder has converted it to 0 to 100 to make it easier to communicate as a percentage.)" https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1d0noZrwAWxNBTDSfDgG06_aLGWUz4R6fgDhRaUZbDzE/edit#gid=935776888
GDP per capita measures the value of everything produced in a country during a year, divided by the number of people. The unit is in international dollars, fixed 2011 prices. The data is adjusted for inflation and differences in the cost of living between countries, so-called PPP dollars. The end of the time series, between 1990 and 2016, uses the latest GDP per capita data from the World Bank, from their World Development Indicators. To go back in time before the World Bank series starts in 1990, we have used several sources, such as Angus Maddison. https://www.gapminder.org/data/documentation/gd001/
Capital formation is a term used to describe the net capital accumulation during an accounting period for a particular country. The term refers to additions of capital goods, such as equipment, tools, transportation assets, and electricity. Countries need capital goods to replace the older ones that are used to produce goods and services. If a country cannot replace capital goods as they reach the end of their useful lives, production declines. Generally, the higher the capital formation of an economy, the faster an economy can grow its aggregate income.
refers to compulsory transfers to the central governement for public purposes. Does not include social security. https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/GC.TAX.TOTL.GD.ZS
Gapminder is an independent Swedish foundation with no political, religious or economic affiliations. Gapminder is a fact tank, not a think tank. Gapminder fights devastating misconceptions about global development. Gapminder produces free teaching resources making the world understandable based on reliable statistics. Gapminder promotes a fact-based worldview everyone can understand. Gapminder collaborates with universities, UN, public agencies and non-governmental organizations. All Gapminder activities are governed by the board. We do not award grants. Gapminder Foundation is registered at Stockholm County Administration Board. Our constitution can be found here.
Thanks to gapminder.org for organizing the above datasets.
Below are some research questions associated with the data and some initial conclusions:
Research Question 1 - Is Income Inequality Getting Worse or Better in the Last 10 Years?
Answer:
Yes, it is getting better, improving from 38.7 to 37.3
On a continent basis, all were either declining or mostly flat, except for Africa.
Research Question 2 - What Top 10 Countries Have the Lowest and Highest Income Inequality?
Answer:
Lowest: Slovenia, Ukraine, Czech Republic, Norway, Slovak Republic, Denmark, Kazakhstan, Finland, Belarus,Kyrgyz Republic
Highest: Colombia, Lesotho, Honduras, Bolivia, Central African Republic, Zambia, Suriname, Namibia, Botswana, South Africa
Research Question 3 Is a higher tax revenue as a % of GDP associated with less income inequality?
Answer: No
Research Question 4 - Is Higher Income Per Person - GDP Per Capita associated with less income inequality?
Answer: No, but weak negative correlation.
Research Question 5 - Is Higher Investment as % GDP associated with less income inequality?
Answer: No
Research Question 6 - Is Higher EIU Democracy Index associated with less income inequality?
Answer: No, but weak negative correlation.
The above results suggest that there are other drivers for the overall reduction in income inequality. Futher analysis of additional factors should be undertaken.
--- Original source retains full ownership of the source dataset ---
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.