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 collection contains data obtained from families of wage earners or salaried workers in industrial locales scattered throughout the United States. The purpose of the survey was to estimate the cost of living of a "typical" American family. The completed questionnaires contain information about income sources and family expenditures including specific quantities and costs of food, housing, clothing, fuel, furniture, and miscellaneous household items for the calendar year. Demographic characteristics recorded for each household member include relationship to head, age, sex, occupation, weeks spent in the household and employed, wage rate, and total earnings.

This statistic shows the most affordable metro areas in the Unites States in 2017, by share of income spent on living expenses. In 2017, Omaha was the second most affordable metro area because 25.18 percent of the median blending annual household income was spent on the average cost of owning or renting a home as well the average cost of utilities and taxes.

Quality of life is a measure of comfort, health, and happiness by a person or a group of people. Quality of life is determined by both material factors, such as income and housing, and broader considerations like health, education, and freedom. Each year, US & World News releases its “Best States to Live in” report, which ranks states on the quality of life each state provides its residents. In order to determine rankings, U.S. News & World Report considers a wide range of factors, including healthcare, education, economy, infrastructure, opportunity, fiscal stability, crime and corrections, and the natural environment. More information on these categories and what is measured in each can be found below:

Healthcare includes access, quality, and affordability of healthcare, as well as health measurements, such as obesity rates and rates of smoking. Education measures how well public schools perform in terms of testing and graduation rates, as well as tuition costs associated with higher education and college debt load. Economy looks at GDP growth, migration to the state, and new business. Infrastructure includes transportation availability, road quality, communications, and internet access. Opportunity includes poverty rates, cost of living, housing costs and gender and racial equality. Fiscal Stability considers the health of the government's finances, including how well the state balances its budget. Crime and Corrections ranks a state’s public safety and measures prison systems and their populations. Natural Environment looks at the quality of air and water and exposure to pollution.

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

Graph and download economic data for Expenses for Assisted Living Facilities for The Elderly, All Establishments, Employer Firms (ALFFTEEAEEF3623312) from 2013 to 2022 about elderly, assistance, employer firms, establishments, expenditures, and USA.

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

Judgement on economic and social conditions in the USA in comparison to the FRG.

Topics: Development of personal economic conditions and the standard of living in the FRG; reasons for the so-called economic miracle and share of the USA in the economic recovery; perceived linking of German economic development with other countries; attitude to a European Common Market; reasons for the high American standard of living; comparison between the USA and the FRG regarding working conditions, productivity, social security and job security of workers; image of Americans; knowledge of economic data of the USA; investment inclination; attitude to the competitive economy; assumed ownership of various branches of the economy in the FRG and in the USA, differences according to government and private; expected influence of the American government on the economy and vice versa; estimated proportion of members of the middle classes; image of American agriculture; judgement on the ideological influence of the USA on the FRG; sources of information about America; membership in clubs and organizations and offices taken on; party preference; self-assessment of social class; local residency.

Demography: age (classified); marital status; religious denomination; school education; occupation; employment; household income; state; refugee status.

Interviewer rating: social class and willingness of respondent to cooperate; number of contact attempts.

Also encoded were: age of interviewer and sex of interviewer; city size.

Out of all 50 states, New York had the highest per-capita real gross domestic product (GDP) in 2023, at 90,730 U.S. dollars, followed closely by Massachusetts. Mississippi had the lowest per-capita real GDP, at 39,102 U.S. dollars. While not a state, the District of Columbia had a per capita GDP of more than 214,000 U.S. dollars. What is real GDP? A country’s real GDP is a measure that shows the value of the goods and services produced by an economy and is adjusted for inflation. The real GDP of a country helps economists to see the health of a country’s economy and its standard of living. Downturns in GDP growth can indicate financial difficulties, such as the financial crisis of 2008 and 2009, when the U.S. GDP decreased by 2.5 percent. The COVID-19 pandemic had a significant impact on U.S. GDP, shrinking the economy 2.8 percent. The U.S. economy rebounded in 2021, however, growing by nearly six percent. Why real GDP per capita matters Real GDP per capita takes the GDP of a country, state, or metropolitan area and divides it by the number of people in that area. Some argue that per-capita GDP is more important than the GDP of a country, as it is a good indicator of whether or not the country’s population is getting wealthier, thus increasing the standard of living in that area. The best measure of standard of living when comparing across countries is thought to be GDP per capita at purchasing power parity (PPP) which uses the prices of specific goods to compare the absolute purchasing power of a countries currency.

This table contains data on the living wage and the percent of families with incomes below the living wage for California, its counties, regions and cities/towns. Living wage is the wage needed to cover basic family expenses (basic needs budget) plus all relevant taxes; it does not include publicly provided income or housing assistance. The percent of families below the living wage was calculated using data from the Living Wage Calculator and the U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey. The table is part of a series of indicators in the Healthy Communities Data and Indicators Project of the Office of Health Equity. The living wage is the wage or annual income that covers the cost of the bare necessities of life for a worker and his/her family. These necessities include housing, transportation, food, childcare, health care, and payment of taxes. Low income populations and non-white race/ethnic have disproportionately lower wages, poorer housing, and higher levels of food insecurity. More information about the data table and a data dictionary can be found in the About/Attachments section.

Assessment of economic and social conditions in the USA in comparison to the FRG.

Topics: Judgement on development of personal economic situation; evaluation of cooperation between the German and the American economy; evaluation of German and American commercial life, the economic strength of America, the German and American standard of living as well as the influence of American ideas on the FRG; reasons for the economic strength of America and the high standard of living as well as for American aid for European countries; differences between German and American trade unions and assumed political influence of American trade unions; economic strength of European countries; comparison of shopping habits of Germans and Americans; attitude to America and the Americans; use of sources of information about America; assessment of the best form of provision for one´s old age; naming the American film city and automobile city; estimate of quota of vehicle possession in the FRG and the USA.

Demography: age (classified); marital status; religious denomination; school education; occupation; employment; household income; party preference; self-assessment of social class; state; refugee status; present and past offices held; membership.

Interviewer rating: social class and willingness of respondent to cooperate; number of contact attempts.

Also encoded were: age of interviewer and sex of interviewer; city size.

The gross domestic product (GDP) of California was about 3.23 trillion U.S. dollars in 2023, meaning that it contributed the most out of any state to the country’s GDP in that year. In contrast, Vermont had the lowest GDP in the United States, with 35.07 billion U.S. dollars. What is GDP? Gross domestic product, or GDP, is the total monetary value of all goods and services produced by an economy within a certain time period. GDP is used by economists to determine the economic health of an area, as well as to determine the size of the economy. GDP can be determined for countries, states and provinces, and metropolitan areas. While GDP is a good measure of the absolute size of a country's economy and economic activity, it does account for many other factors, making it a poor indicator for measuring the cost or standard of living in a country, or for making cross-country comparisons. GDP of the United States The United States has the largest gross domestic product in the world as of 2023, with China, Japan, Germany, and India rounding out the top five. The GDP of the United States has almost quadrupled since 1990, when it was about 5.9 trillion U.S. dollars, to about 25.46 trillion U.S. dollars in 2022.

Forecast: Expenses of Life and Health Insurance in the US 2024 - 2028 Discover more data with ReportLinker!

The "Regional Economic Information System" from the Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA) contains information for all counties, States, metropolitan statistical areas, and BEA Economic Areas, 1969-99, for personal income by major source, per capita personal income, population, earnings by 2-digit Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) industry, full-time and part-time employment by 1-digit SIC industry, regional economic profiles, transfer payments by major program, farm income and expenses, and the BEA Regional Fact Sheet (BEARFACTS). It also includes State quarterly personal income estimates; county-level gross commuting flows for 1981-99; Census Bureau estimates on intercounty commuting flows for 1960, 1970, 1980, and 1990; and Census Bureau county-level commuting flows and average wage estimates at the 1-digit SIC level for 1980 and 1990.

       Regional income from REIS is available online from:
       "http://www.bea.gov/bea/regional/reis/"

       Note: Some BEA information may be available through STAT-USA:
       "http://www.stat-usa.gov/"

The statistic shows the gross domestic product (GDP) of the United States from 1987 to 2024, with projections up until 2030. The gross domestic product of the United States in 2024 amounted to around 29.18 trillion U.S. dollars. The United States and the economy The United States’ economy is by far the largest in the world; a status which can be determined by several key factors, one being gross domestic product: A look at the GDP of the main industrialized and emerging countries shows a significant difference between US GDP and the GDP of China, the runner-up in the ranking, as well as the followers Japan, Germany and France. Interestingly, it is assumed that China will have surpassed the States in terms of GDP by 2030, but for now, the United States is among the leading countries in almost all other relevant rankings and statistics, trade and employment for example. See the U.S. GDP growth rate here. Just like in other countries, the American economy suffered a severe setback when the economic crisis occurred in 2008. The American economy entered a recession caused by the collapsing real estate market and increasing unemployment. Despite this, the standard of living is considered quite high; life expectancy in the United States has been continually increasing slightly over the past decade, the unemployment rate in the United States has been steadily recovering and decreasing since the crisis, and the Big Mac Index, which represents the global prices for a Big Mac, a popular indicator for the purchasing power of an economy, shows that the United States’ purchasing power in particular is only slightly lower than that of the euro area.

This statistic shows the results of a survey among young adults in the United States on how they rank their own living standards compared to those of their parents at the same age. 34 percent think their own living standards nowadays are better than those of their parents when they were the same age.

In 2024, the annual median cost for long-term care in the United States ranged from ****** to ******* U.S. dollars, depending on the type of service. This significant financial burden highlights the importance of planning for future healthcare needs, as many older adults may face substantial out-of-pocket costs for extended care services. Nursing homes and assisted living facilities Nursing homes represent the most expensive long-term care option, with private rooms costing an estimated ****** U.S. dollars per month in 2024. Semi-private rooms are slightly more affordable at ***** U.S. dollars monthly. Assisted living facilities offer a less costly alternative, with annual expenses for a private room averaging ****** U.S. dollars. However, these costs can vary dramatically by location, with states like Hawaii, Alaska, and Washington D.C. commanding the highest prices for assisted living accommodations. Home care services and future projections For those preferring to receive care at home, the hourly rates for long-term home care services in 2024 were ** U.S. dollars for homemaker services and ** U.S. dollars for home health aide services. These costs are expected to rise significantly in the coming decades, with projections suggesting home health aide services could approach *** U.S. dollars per hour by 2060. The increasing expense of long-term care is evident across all service types, with assisted living facilities experiencing a ** percent cost increase from 2023 to 2024, while nursing home rates for semi-private and private rooms rose by * and * percent, respectively.

This paper revisits the assessment of living standards in the United States from its founding to the present, challenging the conventional portrayal of economic well-being during wartime periods. Reflecting multiple criticisms made of the quality of national accounts which include defense spending during times of both peace and war, we employ the methodological framework established by Higgs (1992) and extended by Geloso and Pender (2023) to correct national accounts by subtracting military expenditures from GDP and GNP data. This rectifies the overstatement of living standards attributed to defense spending. Our analysis uses comprehensive data from the Historical Statistics of the United States and the Measuring Worth database, adjusting for price controls during World Wars I and II, the Korean War, and the Vietnam War using a corrected price deflator based on a regression model of economic indicators. The study finds that traditional measures significantly overstate living standards during the Civil War, World War I, and World War II. Post-World War II analysis reveals a persistent overestimation of living standards, particularly pronounced during the Vietnam War years. More importantly, our results provide nuanced insights into certain stylized facts of trends in American improvements of living standards (notably inequality and the Great Depression).

Graph and download economic data for Expenses for Continuing Care Retirement Communities and Assisted Living Facilities for The Elderly, Establishments Subject To Federal Income Tax, Employer Firms (CCRCAALFFTE326233) from 2013 to 2022 about elderly, community, retirement, assistance, employer firms, establishments, tax, expenditures, federal, income, and USA.

1199 persons were interviewed in the FRG, 1228 in France, 1178 in Great Britain, 1164 in Italy and 500 in Greece. The study has the USIA-designation XX-17. The USIA-Studies of the XX-Series (international relations) from XX-2 to XX-18 are archived under ZA Study Nos. 1969-1976 as well as 2069-2074 and 2124-2127.