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.
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.
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 165 countries was 79.81 index points. The highest value was in Bermuda: 212.7 index points and the lowest value was in Syria: 33.25 index points. The indicator is available from 2017 to 2021. Below is a chart for all countries where data are available.
https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/
The US Family Budget Dataset provides insights into the cost of living in different US counties based on the Family Budget Calculator by the Economic Policy Institute (EPI).
This dataset offers community-specific estimates for ten family types, including one or two adults with zero to four children, in all 1877 counties and metro areas across the United States.
If you find this dataset valuable, don't forget to hit the upvote button! 😊💝
Employment-to-Population Ratio for USA
Productivity and Hourly Compensation
USA Unemployment Rates by Demographics & Race
Photo by Alev Takil on Unsplash
Attribution 4.0 (CC BY 4.0)https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
License information was derived automatically
Cost of Living Index data was reported at 7,726.308 1913=1 in 2017. This records an increase from the previous number of 7,642.160 1913=1 for 2016. Cost of Living Index data is updated yearly, averaging 5.167 1913=1 from Dec 1861 (Median) to 2017, with 157 observations. The data reached an all-time high of 7,726.308 1913=1 in 2017 and a record low of 0.766 1913=1 in 1865. Cost of Living Index data remains active status in CEIC and is reported by National Institute of Statistics. The data is categorized under Global Database’s Italy – Table IT.I030: Cost of Living Index: 1913=1.
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.
CC0 1.0 Universal Public Domain Dedicationhttps://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/
License information was derived automatically
We adjust SNAP maximum allotments, deductions, and income eligibility standards at the beginning of each Federal fiscal year. The changes are based on changes in the cost of living. COLAs take effect on October 1 each year.
Maximum allotments are calculated from the cost of a market basket based on the Thrifty Food Plan for a family of four, priced in June that year. The maximum allotments for households larger and smaller than four persons are determined using formulas that account for economies of scale. Smaller households get slightly more per person than the four-person household. Larger households get slightly less.
Income eligibility standards are set by law. Gross monthly income limits are set at 130 percent of the poverty level for the household size. Net monthly income limits are set at 100 percent of poverty.
Attribution 4.0 (CC BY 4.0)https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
License information was derived automatically
Russia Living Cost: Average per Month data was reported at 10,213.000 RUB in Dec 2018. This records a decrease from the previous number of 10,451.000 RUB for Sep 2018. Russia Living Cost: Average per Month data is updated quarterly, averaging 3,050.000 RUB from Mar 1992 (Median) to Dec 2018, with 108 observations. The data reached an all-time high of 10,451.000 RUB in Sep 2018 and a record low of 1.423 RUB in Jun 1992. Russia Living Cost: Average per Month data remains active status in CEIC and is reported by Federal State Statistics Service. The data is categorized under Russia Premium Database’s Household Survey – Table RU.HF001: Living Cost.
VITAL SIGNS INDICATOR Poverty (EQ5)
FULL MEASURE NAME The share of the population living in households that earn less than 200 percent of the federal poverty limit
LAST UPDATED December 2018
DESCRIPTION Poverty refers to the share of the population living in households that earn less than 200 percent of the federal poverty limit, which varies based on the number of individuals in a given household. It reflects the number of individuals who are economically struggling due to low household income levels.
DATA SOURCE U.S Census Bureau: Decennial Census http://www.nhgis.org (1980-1990) http://factfinder2.census.gov (2000)
U.S. Census Bureau: American Community Survey Form C17002 (2006-2017) http://api.census.gov
METHODOLOGY NOTES (across all datasets for this indicator) The U.S. Census Bureau defines a national poverty level (or household income) that varies by household size, number of children in a household, and age of householder. The national poverty level does not vary geographically even though cost of living is different across the United States. For the Bay Area, where cost of living is high and incomes are correspondingly high, an appropriate poverty level is 200% of poverty or twice the national poverty level, consistent with what was used for past equity work at MTC and ABAG. For comparison, however, both the national and 200% poverty levels are presented.
For Vital Signs, the poverty rate is defined as the number of people (including children) living below twice the poverty level divided by the number of people for whom poverty status is determined. Poverty rates do not include unrelated individuals below 15 years old or people who live in the following: institutionalized group quarters, college dormitories, military barracks, and situations without conventional housing. The household income definitions for poverty change each year to reflect inflation. The official poverty definition uses money income before taxes and does not include capital gains or noncash benefits (such as public housing, Medicaid, and food stamps). For the national poverty level definitions by year, see: https://www.census.gov/hhes/www/poverty/data/threshld/index.html For an explanation on how the Census Bureau measures poverty, see: https://www.census.gov/hhes/www/poverty/about/overview/measure.html
For the American Community Survey datasets, 1-year data was used for region, county, and metro areas whereas 5-year rolling average data was used for city and census tract.
To be consistent across metropolitan areas, the poverty definition for non-Bay Area metros is twice the national poverty level. Data were not adjusted for varying income and cost of living levels across the metropolitan areas.
Attribution 4.0 (CC BY 4.0)https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
License information was derived automatically
This table contains data on the percent of households paying more than 30% (or 50%) of monthly household income towards housing costs for California, its regions, counties, cities/towns, and census tracts. Data is from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Consolidated Planning Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) and the U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey (ACS). The table is part of a series of indicators in the [Healthy Communities Data and Indicators Project of the Office of Health Equity] Affordable, quality housing is central to health, conferring protection from the environment and supporting family life. Housing costs—typically the largest, single expense in a family's budget—also impact decisions that affect health. As housing consumes larger proportions of household income, families have less income for nutrition, health care, transportation, education, etc. Severe cost burdens may induce poverty—which is associated with developmental and behavioral problems in children and accelerated cognitive and physical decline in adults. Low-income families and minority communities are disproportionately affected by the lack of affordable, quality housing. More information about the data table and a data dictionary can be found in the Attachments.
VITAL SIGNS INDICATOR
Poverty (EQ5)
FULL MEASURE NAME
The share of the population living in households that earn less than 200 percent of the federal poverty limit
LAST UPDATED
January 2023
DESCRIPTION
Poverty refers to the share of the population living in households that earn less than 200 percent of the federal poverty limit, which varies based on the number of individuals in a given household. It reflects the number of individuals who are economically struggling due to low household income levels.
DATA SOURCE
U.S Census Bureau: Decennial Census - http://www.nhgis.org
1980-2000
U.S. Census Bureau: American Community Survey - https://data.census.gov/
2007-2021
Form C17002
CONTACT INFORMATION
vitalsigns.info@mtc.ca.gov
METHODOLOGY NOTES (across all datasets for this indicator)
The U.S. Census Bureau defines a national poverty level (or household income) that varies by household size, number of children in a household, and age of householder. The national poverty level does not vary geographically even though cost of living is different across the United States. For the Bay Area, where cost of living is high and incomes are correspondingly high, an appropriate poverty level is 200% of poverty or twice the national poverty level, consistent with what was used for past equity work at MTC and ABAG. For comparison, however, both the national and 200% poverty levels are presented.
For Vital Signs, the poverty rate is defined as the number of people (including children) living below twice the poverty level divided by the number of people for whom poverty status is determined. The household income definitions for poverty change each year to reflect inflation. The official poverty definition uses money income before taxes and does not include capital gains or non-cash benefits (such as public housing, Medicaid and food stamps).
For the national poverty level definitions by year, see: US Census Bureau Poverty Thresholds - https://www.census.gov/data/tables/time-series/demo/income-poverty/historical-poverty-thresholds.html.
For an explanation on how the Census Bureau measures poverty, see: How the Census Bureau Measures Poverty - https://www.census.gov/topics/income-poverty/poverty/guidance/poverty-measures.html.
American Community Survey (ACS) 1-year data is used for larger geographies – Bay counties and most metropolitan area counties – while smaller geographies rely upon 5-year rolling average data due to their smaller sample sizes. Note that 2020 data uses the 5-year estimates because the ACS did not collect 1-year data for 2020.
To be consistent across metropolitan areas, the poverty definition for non-Bay Area metros is twice the national poverty level. Data were not adjusted for varying income and cost of living levels across the metropolitan areas.
Subscribers can find out export and import data of 23 countries by HS code or product’s name. This demo is helpful for market analysis.
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 322.56 points in June from 321.46 points in May 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.
VITAL SIGNS INDICATOR Poverty (EQ5)
FULL MEASURE NAME The share of the population living in households that earn less than 200 percent of the federal poverty limit
LAST UPDATED December 2018
DESCRIPTION Poverty refers to the share of the population living in households that earn less than 200 percent of the federal poverty limit, which varies based on the number of individuals in a given household. It reflects the number of individuals who are economically struggling due to low household income levels.
DATA SOURCE U.S Census Bureau: Decennial Census http://www.nhgis.org (1980-1990) http://factfinder2.census.gov (2000)
U.S. Census Bureau: American Community Survey Form C17002 (2006-2017) http://api.census.gov
METHODOLOGY NOTES (across all datasets for this indicator) The U.S. Census Bureau defines a national poverty level (or household income) that varies by household size, number of children in a household, and age of householder. The national poverty level does not vary geographically even though cost of living is different across the United States. For the Bay Area, where cost of living is high and incomes are correspondingly high, an appropriate poverty level is 200% of poverty or twice the national poverty level, consistent with what was used for past equity work at MTC and ABAG. For comparison, however, both the national and 200% poverty levels are presented.
For Vital Signs, the poverty rate is defined as the number of people (including children) living below twice the poverty level divided by the number of people for whom poverty status is determined. Poverty rates do not include unrelated individuals below 15 years old or people who live in the following: institutionalized group quarters, college dormitories, military barracks, and situations without conventional housing. The household income definitions for poverty change each year to reflect inflation. The official poverty definition uses money income before taxes and does not include capital gains or noncash benefits (such as public housing, Medicaid, and food stamps). For the national poverty level definitions by year, see: https://www.census.gov/hhes/www/poverty/data/threshld/index.html For an explanation on how the Census Bureau measures poverty, see: https://www.census.gov/hhes/www/poverty/about/overview/measure.html
For the American Community Survey datasets, 1-year data was used for region, county, and metro areas whereas 5-year rolling average data was used for city and census tract.
To be consistent across metropolitan areas, the poverty definition for non-Bay Area metros is twice the national poverty level. Data were not adjusted for varying income and cost of living levels across the metropolitan areas.
Attribution 4.0 (CC BY 4.0)https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
License information was derived automatically
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.
Attribution 4.0 (CC BY 4.0)https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
License information was derived automatically
Living Cost: Average per Month: CF: Ryazan Region data was reported at 10,785.000 RUB in Dec 2020. This stayed constant from the previous number of 10,785.000 RUB for Sep 2020. Living Cost: Average per Month: CF: Ryazan Region data is updated quarterly, averaging 5,785.000 RUB from Mar 2001 (Median) to Dec 2020, with 80 observations. The data reached an all-time high of 10,785.000 RUB in Dec 2020 and a record low of 1,187.000 RUB in Mar 2001. Living Cost: Average per Month: CF: Ryazan Region data remains active status in CEIC and is reported by Federal State Statistics Service. The data is categorized under Russia Premium Database’s Household Survey – Table RU.HF001: Living Cost.
https://dataverse.harvard.edu/api/datasets/:persistentId/versions/1.0/customlicense?persistentId=doi:10.7910/DVN/B9TEWMhttps://dataverse.harvard.edu/api/datasets/:persistentId/versions/1.0/customlicense?persistentId=doi:10.7910/DVN/B9TEWM
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.
Attribution 4.0 (CC BY 4.0)https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
License information was derived automatically
Living Cost: Average per Month: FE: Kamchatka Territory data was reported at 21,524.000 RUB in Dec 2020. This records a decrease from the previous number of 21,797.000 RUB for Sep 2020. Living Cost: Average per Month: FE: Kamchatka Territory data is updated quarterly, averaging 12,478.000 RUB from Sep 2001 (Median) to Dec 2020, with 78 observations. The data reached an all-time high of 21,797.000 RUB in Sep 2020 and a record low of 3,014.000 RUB in Sep 2001. Living Cost: Average per Month: FE: Kamchatka Territory data remains active status in CEIC and is reported by Federal State Statistics Service. The data is categorized under Russia Premium Database’s Household Survey – Table RU.HF001: Living Cost.
The dataset is a catalog of major residential development projects in Somerset County, NJ. This includes Affordable Housing, Senior housing options, and Market-rate rentalsAffordable Housing Options: With New Jersey having some of the highest housing costs in the county, the state government has implemented several initiatives and programs to provide housing options for low- and moderate-income eligible households. In addition, several municipalities have implemented inclusionary zoning laws, that require property developers to allocate a certain percentage of the units for affordable housing. Somerset county has several affordable housing programs to help low-and moderate-income eligible households and first-time homebuyers, including the Mt. Laurel Doctrine, New Jersey Balanced Housing Program, HUD Public Housing Program, HUD Housing Choice Voucher Program (Section 8). This dataset provides a comprehensive list of all affordable housing projects in the county. The dataset includes ‘inclusionary’ developments that are comprised of both market-rate units and affordable units. It also includes municipality-sponsored and other 100% affordable housing projects, as well as affordable housing created through the redevelopment process. The total number of market rate and affordable housing units in each project is provided. Some projects include a blend of both rental and for-purchase units. Senior Housing Options: There are several housing options in Somerset County for older adults seeking assistance with daily living or those who want to maintain their independence or those who seek to live in communities designed for older adults. These options include – Active Adult Communities: These are communities designed for older adults who can live independently but want to live in a community specifically for older adults. They typically offer amenities such as fitness centers, swimming pools, and social activities. Many independent living communities also offer additional services such as transportation, housekeeping, and meals. Assisted Living Communities: These communities aid with daily living activities such as bathing, dressing, and medication management. They offer a range of services, depending on the level of care needed. Some assisted living communities also offer memory care services for individuals with dementia or Alzheimer's disease. Continuing Care Retirement Communities: These communities offer a continuum of care that includes independent living, assisted living, and skilled nursing care. This allows residents to "age in place" and receive additional care as needed without having to move to a different community. Senior Residence: These communities are restricted to residents who are 55 years of age or older. They typically offer amenities like active adult communities and may have additional features such as golf courses, community centers, and events. Market Rate Rentals: These properties are typically owned/operated by private landlords and are not considered affordable housing and are not subject to government subsidies. These include apartments, condominiums, town homes, single-family homes. The information included in this dataset represents a point-in-time (November 2023) and is subject to change. Furthermore, new, or alternative housing projects may be proposed in future years, which will be incorporated into subsequent dataset updates. Updates to this dataset will take place on an as-needed basis.
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.