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 84.8 - well below the national benchmark of 100. Nevada - which had an index value of 100.1 - 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 427,000 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 200,000 U.S. dollars. That makes living costs in these states significantly lower than in states such as Hawaii and California, where housing is much more expensive. 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 500 U.S. dollars. That was because of the significantly higher prices for electricity and natural gas in these states.
Singapore and New York were ranked as the most expensive cities worldwide with an index of 100 out of a possible 100. Three of the 11 most expensive cities were in the United States, whereas two were in Switzerland.
As of September 2024, Mumbai had the highest cost of living among other cities in the country, with an index value of 26.5. Gurgaon, a satellite city of Delhi and part of the National Capital Region (NCR) followed it with an index value of 25.1. 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://fred.stlouisfed.org/legal/#copyright-public-domainhttps://fred.stlouisfed.org/legal/#copyright-public-domain
Graph and download economic data for Estimated Mean Real Household Wages Adjusted by Cost of Living for St. Louis city, MO (MWACL29510) from 2009 to 2023 about St. Louis City, MO; St. Louis; adjusted; MO; average; wages; real; and USA.
Attribution 4.0 (CC BY 4.0)https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
License information was derived automatically
Ireland: Cost of living index, world average = 100: The latest value from 2021 is 175.68 index points, an increase from 157.19 index points in 2017. In comparison, the world average is 79.81 index points, based on data from 165 countries. Historically, the average for Ireland from 2017 to 2021 is 166.44 index points. The minimum value, 157.19 index points, was reached in 2017 while the maximum of 175.68 index points was recorded in 2021.
Attribution 4.0 (CC BY 4.0)https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
License information was derived automatically
Guinea: Cost of living index, world average = 100: The latest value from 2021 is 47.59 index points, a decline from 50.48 index points in 2017. In comparison, the world average is 79.81 index points, based on data from 165 countries. Historically, the average for Guinea from 2017 to 2021 is 49.04 index points. The minimum value, 47.59 index points, was reached in 2021 while the maximum of 50.48 index points was recorded in 2017.
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 70.3. Japan's capital Tokyo followed with a cost of living index score of 57.4. 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.
Attribution 4.0 (CC BY 4.0)https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
License information was derived automatically
Kazakhstan Cost of Living: Average per Capita data was reported at 28,620.000 KZT in Oct 2018. This records a decrease from the previous number of 28,690.000 KZT for Sep 2018. Kazakhstan Cost of Living: Average per Capita data is updated monthly, averaging 13,073.000 KZT from Oct 2000 (Median) to Oct 2018, with 217 observations. The data reached an all-time high of 29,146.000 KZT in Aug 2018 and a record low of 3,983.000 KZT in Oct 2000. Kazakhstan Cost of Living: Average per Capita data remains active status in CEIC and is reported by The Agency of Statistics of the Republic of Kazakhstan. The data is categorized under Global Database’s Kazakhstan – Table KZ.H012: Cost of Living: Average per Capita.
https://fred.stlouisfed.org/legal/#copyright-public-domainhttps://fred.stlouisfed.org/legal/#copyright-public-domain
Graph and download economic data for Estimated Mean Real Household Wages Adjusted by Cost of Living for New York County, NY (MWACL36061) from 2009 to 2023 about New York County, NY; adjusted; New York; average; NY; wages; real; and USA.
Attribution 4.0 (CC BY 4.0)https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
License information was derived automatically
Kazakhstan Cost of Living: Average per Capita: City: Almaty data was reported at 32,029.000 KZT in Oct 2018. This records a decrease from the previous number of 32,475.000 KZT for Sep 2018. Kazakhstan Cost of Living: Average per Capita: City: Almaty data is updated monthly, averaging 15,920.000 KZT from Oct 2000 (Median) to Oct 2018, with 217 observations. The data reached an all-time high of 32,640.000 KZT in Aug 2018 and a record low of 4,577.000 KZT in Oct 2000. Kazakhstan Cost of Living: Average per Capita: City: Almaty data remains active status in CEIC and is reported by The Agency of Statistics of the Republic of Kazakhstan. The data is categorized under Global Database’s Kazakhstan – Table KZ.H012: Cost of Living: Average per Capita.
Attribution 4.0 (CC BY 4.0)https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
License information was derived automatically
The average for 2021 based on 41 countries was 107.05 index points. The highest value was in Switzerland: 211.98 index points and the lowest value was in Belarus: 40.99 index points. The indicator is available from 2017 to 2021. Below is a chart for all countries where data are available.
Damascus in Syria was ranked as the least expensive city worldwide in 2023, with an index score of 13 out of 100. The country has been marred by civil war over the last decade, hitting the country's economy hard. Other cities in the Middle East and North Africa such as Tehran, Tripoli, and Tunis are also present on the list. Buenos Aires is the Latin American city with the highest costs of living, as Argentina has recently faced an economic crisis and rapidly rising inflation. On the other hand, Singapore and Zurich were ranked the most expensive cities in the world.
Attribution 4.0 (CC BY 4.0)https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
License information was derived automatically
Kazakhstan Cost of Living: Average per Capita: City: Shymkent data was reported at 26,400.000 KZT in Oct 2018. This records an increase from the previous number of 26,207.000 KZT for Sep 2018. Kazakhstan Cost of Living: Average per Capita: City: Shymkent data is updated monthly, averaging 26,195.000 KZT from Jun 2018 (Median) to Oct 2018, with 5 observations. The data reached an all-time high of 26,400.000 KZT in Oct 2018 and a record low of 24,740.000 KZT in Jul 2018. Kazakhstan Cost of Living: Average per Capita: City: Shymkent data remains active status in CEIC and is reported by The Agency of Statistics of the Republic of Kazakhstan. The data is categorized under Global Database’s Kazakhstan – Table KZ.H012: Cost of Living: Average per Capita.
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
THE CLEANED AND HARMONIZED VERSION OF THE SURVEY DATA PRODUCED AND PUBLISHED BY THE ECONOMIC RESEARCH FORUM REPRESENTS 100% OF THE ORIGINAL SURVEY DATA COLLECTED BY THE NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF STATISTICS - TUNISIA (INS)
The National Survey on Household Budget, Consumption, and Standard of Living is a quinquennial survey. The 2010 survey is the ninth of its kind that was carried out by the National Institute of Statistics (INS) in Tunisia. The eight previous surveys were conducted in 1968, 1975, 1980, 1985, 1990, 1995, 2000 and 2005, concurrently with the preparatory work for the Tunisian development plans.
The survey aims at providing detailed information on the procurement of goods and services for consumption. Its data was collected from direct observation of household consumption to allow for having the necessary elements to assess the situation & changes in the living standards & conditions of the households.
The National Survey on Household Budget, Consumption, and Standard of Living consists of three fundamental parts; the budget survey, the nutrition survey and the access to community services survey. Thus, it tackles three areas of study: 1- Households expenses and acquisitions during the survey period. 2 - Food consumption and nutritional status of households. 3 - Household access to health and education community services.
The main objectives of the "budget survey" are: a- Estimate the levels of expenditure on the household level: The total expenditure of the household is not only an indicator on household income, but it is also a quantitative assessment of the standard of living index. b- Evaluate the income distribution: Due to the absence of data on income distribution, the mass distribution of expenditure between the different categories of the population constitutes a first sketch for the income distribution in the country. c- Assess the structure of expenditure: Detailed information collected on expenditures per product are used to establish the structures of the household expenditure, as well as the budget coefficients according to different levels of classifications of goods and services. These coefficients are particularly useful in the revision and development of the Consumer Prices Index (CPI) weights. d- Predict the demand of households: The household behavior, assessed in terms of product demand, is synthesized by the coefficients of income elasticity, which, according to the model of consumption retained and under the assumptions of the growth of income and population, allows predicting future household demand. e- Analyze the importance of consumer subsidies: analysis of the consumption of subsidized goods by expenditure deciles allows identifying the impact of direct consumer subsidies. It also allows evaluating the effectiveness of public policies grants.
The main objectives of "the nutrition survey" are: a- Provide estimates of food consumption by product for different groups of households according to their demographic and socio-economic characteristics. b- Estimate food consumption of each product by collecting data on the quantities consumed of each product by source, whether purchased or own produced. c- Identify the nutritional status of the population according to its demographic, geographic and socio-economic level. The comparison between the standards needs of nutrients to those acquired by the household enables assessing of the nutritional status and thus deficits in different nutrients such as calories, protein, vitamins, calcium, ... can also be captured. d- Estimate the calorie intake and energy needs of the Tunisian population: This estimate is indispensible in the calculation of the food component of the poverty line and, in consequence, the threshold of global poverty.
The main objective of "the access to community services survey" is to provide an overview on the state of morbidity of the Tunisian population, from one hand, and on the households' access to various health and education public services on other hand.
The raw survey data provided by the Statistical Agency were cleaned and harmonized by the Economic Research Forum, in the context of a major project that started in 2009. During which extensive efforts have been exerted to acquire, clean, harmonize, preserve and disseminate micro data of existing household surveys in several Arab countries.
Covering a sample of all urban, small and medium towns and rural areas.
1- Household/family. 2- Individual/person.
The survey covered a national sample of households and all individuals permanently residing in surveyed households.
Sample survey data [ssd]
The National Survey on Household Budget, Consumption and Standard of Living, 2010 has focused initially on a sample of 13,392 households drawn using a two stages stratified random sampling in each governorate. The sampling frame follows that of the General Census of Population and Housing in 2004 which was updated during the implementation of the National Population and Employment Survey in 2009.
Stratification criteria: The sampling frame is stratified by two geographical criteria: namely the governorate and the living area. The latter is stratified as follows: large cities, medium and small cities, and non-communal areas.
These stratification criteria (governorate, living area and size of city) represent variables that differentiate between surveyed households' lifestyles. Thus, the 3 strata types used are as follows:
Stratum of large cities (stratum 1): This stratum is formed of large urban centers corresponding to municipalities with more than 100.000 inhabitants and neighboring municipalities.
Stratum of medium and small cities (stratum 2): This stratum includes all medium and small sized cities other than those classified in the stratum of large cities.
Stratum of non-communal areas (stratum 3): It includes agglomerations in rural areas that are classified as major agglomerations in the General Census of Population and Housing 2004 and the National Population and Employment Survey in 2009. In addition to other areas that are located outside the territory of main municipalities and cities.
Households in these areas reside in scattered dwellings or are grouped in small agglomerations.
The sampling frame is divided on the level of each governorate according to strata previously defined. On the stratum level, a two-stage random sampling is planned for the selection of the survey sample of households. This process allows to breakdown the sample into clusters of 12 households relatively little distant from each other, thereby facilitating the conduct of the survey at the time of the information collection in the field.
In the first stage, a sample of 1,116 primary units is drawn in proportion to the number of households identified in the 2009National Population and Employment Survey. Taking into consideration that the primary units correspond to the districts that have been defined in the General Census of Population and Housing in 2004, which are geographic areas comprising on average 70 households.
In the second stage, from each primary unit (or cluster), twelve households are drawn through a simple random sampling technique. A substitutive sample of 12 additional households is further drawn from each primary unit. Those additional households constituting a substitutive list are used to cover for unidentified households at the time of the survey, given the mobility of households and the period between the date on which the sample is drawn and the date on which the survey is conducted.
The size of the sample drawn in the first stage is 1,116 primary sampling units (PSU) corresponding to 13,392 households. The samples in the second stage are 12 households per primary unit. To optimize the use of logistic and material resources available, a sample of at least 36 PSU was selected from the less populated governorates, 3 PSU per month (the survey is conducted over a 12 months period). This represents the monthly work of the survey team (3 interviews and 1 supervisor to whom a car is assigned). Moreover, as the number of households varies from one governorate to another, it was agreed to adopt different rate of sampling from one governorate to another.
The following table shows the regional distribution of the sample and the corresponding sampling rates.
Regional Distribution of the Survey Sample
Region | Total | Sample size | Second stage sampling rate | ||
District | Households | District | Households | Household sample (%) | |
Grand Tunis | 7863 | 268113 | 240 | 2880 | 0.45 |
North East | 4446 | 370812 | 156 | 1872 | 0,50 |
North West | 3821 | 269466 | 144 | 1728 | 0,58 |
Centre East | 7379 | 606287 | 216 | 1728 | 0,29 |
Centre West | 3871 | 300223 | 144 | 2592 | 0,86 |
South East | 2711 | 213471 | 108 | 1296 | 0,61 |
South West | 1644 | 130371 | 108 | 1296 | 0,99 |
Total | 31735 | 2553157 |
Open Government Licence 3.0http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/open-government-licence/version/3/
License information was derived automatically
People in Great Britain's experiences of and actions following increases in their costs of living, and how these differed by a range of personal characteristics.
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
89.0 (Index, higher means higher cost of living) in 2024Q3.
https://fred.stlouisfed.org/legal/#copyright-public-domainhttps://fred.stlouisfed.org/legal/#copyright-public-domain
Graph and download economic data for Estimated Mean Real Household Wages Adjusted by Cost of Living for Honolulu County/city, HI (MWACL15003) from 2009 to 2023 about Honolulu County/City, HI; Honolulu; HI; adjusted; average; wages; real; and USA.
The principal objective of this survey is to collect basic data reflecting the actual living conditions of the population in Tajikistan. These data will then be used for evaluating socio-economic development and formulating policies to improve living conditions.
The first assessment of living standards in Tajikistan was conducted in 1999. This assessment is bringing about data in order to update the 1999 assessment.
The survey collects information on education, health, employment and other productive activities, demographic characteristics, migration, housing conditions, expenditures and assets.
The information gathered is intended to improve economic and social policy in Tajikistan. It should enable decision-makers to 1) identify target groups for government assistance, 2) inform programs of socio-economic development, and 3) analyse the impact of decisions already made and the current economic conditions on households.
National coverage. The 2003 data are representative at the regional level (4 regions) and urban/rural.
Sample survey data [ssd]
The Tajikistan Living Standards Survey (TLSS) for 2003 was based on a stratified random probability sample, with the sample stratified according to oblast and urban/rural settlements and with the share of each strata in the overall sample being in proportion to its share in the total number of households as recorded in the 2000 Census. The same approach was used in the TLSS 1999 although there were some differences in the sampling. First the share of each strata in the overall sample in 1999 was determined according to ‘best estimates’, as it was conducted prior to the 2000 Census. Second the TLSS 2003 over-sampled by 40 percent in Dushanbe, 300 percent in rural Gorno-Badakhshan Administrative Oblast (GBAO) and 600 percent in urban GBAO. Third the sample size was increased in 2003 in comparison with 1999 in order to reduce sampling error. In 2003, the overall sample size was 4,156 households compared with 2,000 households in 1999. [Note: Taken from “Republic of Tajikistan: Poverty Assessment Update”, Report No. 30853, Human Development Sector Unit, Central Asia Country Unit, Europe and Central Asia Region, World Bank, January 2005.]
In addition to the capital city of Dushanbe, the country has several oblasts (regions): (i) Khatlon (comprising Kurban-Tube and Khulyab), which is an agricultural area with most of the country’s cotton growing districts; (ii) the Rayons of Republican Subordination (RRS) with the massive aluminum smelter in the west and agricultural valleys in the east growing crops other than cotton; (iii) Sugd which is the most industrialized oblast; and (iv) Gorno-Badakhshan Administrative Oblast which is mountainous and remote with a small population.
The 2003 data are representative at the regional level (4 regions) and urban/rural.
Face-to-face [f2f]
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 84.8 - well below the national benchmark of 100. Nevada - which had an index value of 100.1 - 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 427,000 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 200,000 U.S. dollars. That makes living costs in these states significantly lower than in states such as Hawaii and California, where housing is much more expensive. 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 500 U.S. dollars. That was because of the significantly higher prices for electricity and natural gas in these states.