The Real Purchasing Power of $100 by U.S. State \ stacker news ~charts_and

pull down to refresh

The Real Purchasing Power of $100 by U.S. State

259 sats \ 11 comments \ @0xbitcoiner 8 Dec charts_and_numbers

Is a dollar in your pocket the same in Albuquerque as it is in New York City?

The face value may be the same, but in reality that dollar just goes further in certain metro areas and states.

Today’s visualization shows the relative value of $100 in each U.S. state. It’s based on data from GOBankingRates, which uses publicly available federal datasets such as those from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, the U.S. Bureau of Economic Affairs, and the U.S. Census American Consumer Survey to do the calculations.

...read more at visualcapitalist.com

~econ

view all related items

33 sats \ 3 replies \ @BlokchainB 19h

Yea this data is hard to make sense of

0 sats \ 2 replies \ @0xbitcoiner OP 19h

What do you mean?

This data can greatly impact your quality of life and help you consider where you might like to settle. You might be able to live comfortably in one state on a certain salary, but struggle to make ends meet with the same paycheck in another. For example, the median household income in Kansas, Michigan and South Dakota is relatively similar. However, your dollar buys a lot more in Michigan than in Florida.

https://www.gobankingrates.com/money/economy/real-value-of-100-dollars-each-state/

33 sats \ 1 reply \ @BlokchainB 19h

$100 doesn’t equate to much in today’s economy. So $100 is worth $112 in South Dakota? That extra $12 isn’t moving the needle that much there plus you have to do a wage adjustment as well.

65 sats \ 0 replies \ @0xbitcoiner OP 19h

Maybe I'm just being super light about this, though. These figures are only about the median imcome. Like, look at your example: in SD, your cash has 12% more buying power. Or, every dollar in AR has 30% more punch than in CA.

198 sats \ 1 reply \ @optimism 22h

It’s based on data from GOBankingRates, which uses publicly available federal datasets such as those from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, the U.S. Bureau of Economic Affairs, and the U.S. Census American Consumer Survey to do the calculations.

When I read this, the thing that immediately came to mind was: Lies, damned lies, and statistics. ~lol

100 sats \ 0 replies \ @0xbitcoiner OP 21h

I also don't believe the numbers 100% because they can be manipulated, but I think they shouldn't be too far from reality. Fingers crossed! ~lol

87 sats \ 4 replies \ @SimpleStacker 8 Dec

Seems hard to compare because they don't factor in natural or social amenities, like access to the beach, variety of restaurants, etc

0 sats \ 3 replies \ @kepford 8 Dec

Those are non-tangible so don't really seem to be a factor on how much a 100 bucks will buy.

But you make a great point.

I would add that intra-state prices differ as well. San Francisco is dramatically more costly than most of California.

46 sats \ 2 replies \ @SimpleStacker 8 Dec

I'd argue that they're capitalized into real estate prices and rents. So in a sense you are paying for them.

67 sats \ 1 reply \ @kepford 22h

Yeah, in that sense 100%.

The problem with these kinds of thing is that you aren't comparing static things. But also you can't explain all the price differences in this way as the state / local gov has a massive impact on top.

IMO people make decisions on where to live based on bad over generalized data and don't focus enough on designing the life they want and using that as the criteria for comparison.

Being close to an ocean is one example factor. What's that worth to you. Do you also want as little government as possible? Do you care more about fuel or home costs?

64 sats \ 0 replies \ @SimpleStacker 22h

Heh, being close to the ocean and nice weather is just what i tell myself to make myself feel better about having to live in Los Angeles