Average SD family 2000 vs 2010

[sdduuuude]

Interesting view. I’m wondering if “household income” has gone up due to more houses having two income earners.

I consider “free time” to be a major factor in determining quality of life. Has the amount of free time reduced to gain this extra income ? If so, we may not be in such good shape.

Also, it might be interesting to look at average mortgage costs of current owners rather than housing prices available to new buyers.

[patb]

health insurance, medical expenses.

Huge runups.

[patb]

health insurance, medical expenses.

Huge runups.

[patb]

health insurance, medical expenses.

Huge runups.

[patb]

health insurance, medical expenses.

Huge runups.

[patb]

health insurance, medical expenses.

Huge runups.

[an]

[quote=Eugene]Housing does not sound quite right. Could be the usual detached vs. attached confusion. $230k to $328k is +43%. The real change should be closer to 60%.

Low-end car comparison is also off. Camry is midsize, Elantra is compact. You have to compare Camry to Sonata (188-189 in. length) and Elantra to Corolla (178-180 in. length).[/quote]
Do you have data to backup your 60% claim on housing? Since the Census for 2010 is not out yet, I don’t have data from the same source for 2 time period, so I have to do w/ what I have. Data from the same source would be best.

With regards to cars, cars grew over the last 10 years, so going strictly by the classification of midsize and compact isn’t very useful. You have to compare the interior space and trunk space, not just pure length, since some of that length is for the engine and it’s not very usable. Here are the interior dimensions for both cars and I add in the Sonata as well (Camry on the left and Elantra in the middle and Sonata on the right):

Front Legroom 43.5 ” / 43.6 ” / 45.5 ”
Rear Legroom 35.5 ” / 33.1 ” / 34.6 ”
Front Headroom 38.6 ” / 40.0 ” / 40.0 ”
Rear Headroom 37.6 ” / 37.1 ” / 37.8 ”
Front Hiproom 54.0 ” / 53.5 ” / 55.2 ”
Rear Hiproom 54.1 ” / 52.7 ” / 54.9 ”
Front Shoulder Room 56.2 ” / 55.9 ” / 57.9 ”
Rear Shoulder Room 56.1 ” / 54.8 ” / 56.7 ”
Passenger Volume 97 cu.ft. / 96 cu.ft. / 104 cu.ft.
Maximum Cargo Volume 14.1 cu.ft. / 14.8 cu.ft. / 16.4 cu.ft.

[an]

[quote=Eugene]Housing does not sound quite right. Could be the usual detached vs. attached confusion. $230k to $328k is +43%. The real change should be closer to 60%.

Low-end car comparison is also off. Camry is midsize, Elantra is compact. You have to compare Camry to Sonata (188-189 in. length) and Elantra to Corolla (178-180 in. length).[/quote]
Do you have data to backup your 60% claim on housing? Since the Census for 2010 is not out yet, I don’t have data from the same source for 2 time period, so I have to do w/ what I have. Data from the same source would be best.

With regards to cars, cars grew over the last 10 years, so going strictly by the classification of midsize and compact isn’t very useful. You have to compare the interior space and trunk space, not just pure length, since some of that length is for the engine and it’s not very usable. Here are the interior dimensions for both cars and I add in the Sonata as well (Camry on the left and Elantra in the middle and Sonata on the right):

Front Legroom 43.5 ” / 43.6 ” / 45.5 ”
Rear Legroom 35.5 ” / 33.1 ” / 34.6 ”
Front Headroom 38.6 ” / 40.0 ” / 40.0 ”
Rear Headroom 37.6 ” / 37.1 ” / 37.8 ”
Front Hiproom 54.0 ” / 53.5 ” / 55.2 ”
Rear Hiproom 54.1 ” / 52.7 ” / 54.9 ”
Front Shoulder Room 56.2 ” / 55.9 ” / 57.9 ”
Rear Shoulder Room 56.1 ” / 54.8 ” / 56.7 ”
Passenger Volume 97 cu.ft. / 96 cu.ft. / 104 cu.ft.
Maximum Cargo Volume 14.1 cu.ft. / 14.8 cu.ft. / 16.4 cu.ft.

[an]

[quote=Eugene]Housing does not sound quite right. Could be the usual detached vs. attached confusion. $230k to $328k is +43%. The real change should be closer to 60%.

Low-end car comparison is also off. Camry is midsize, Elantra is compact. You have to compare Camry to Sonata (188-189 in. length) and Elantra to Corolla (178-180 in. length).[/quote]
Do you have data to backup your 60% claim on housing? Since the Census for 2010 is not out yet, I don’t have data from the same source for 2 time period, so I have to do w/ what I have. Data from the same source would be best.

With regards to cars, cars grew over the last 10 years, so going strictly by the classification of midsize and compact isn’t very useful. You have to compare the interior space and trunk space, not just pure length, since some of that length is for the engine and it’s not very usable. Here are the interior dimensions for both cars and I add in the Sonata as well (Camry on the left and Elantra in the middle and Sonata on the right):

Front Legroom 43.5 ” / 43.6 ” / 45.5 ”
Rear Legroom 35.5 ” / 33.1 ” / 34.6 ”
Front Headroom 38.6 ” / 40.0 ” / 40.0 ”
Rear Headroom 37.6 ” / 37.1 ” / 37.8 ”
Front Hiproom 54.0 ” / 53.5 ” / 55.2 ”
Rear Hiproom 54.1 ” / 52.7 ” / 54.9 ”
Front Shoulder Room 56.2 ” / 55.9 ” / 57.9 ”
Rear Shoulder Room 56.1 ” / 54.8 ” / 56.7 ”
Passenger Volume 97 cu.ft. / 96 cu.ft. / 104 cu.ft.
Maximum Cargo Volume 14.1 cu.ft. / 14.8 cu.ft. / 16.4 cu.ft.

[an]

[quote=Eugene]Housing does not sound quite right. Could be the usual detached vs. attached confusion. $230k to $328k is +43%. The real change should be closer to 60%.

Low-end car comparison is also off. Camry is midsize, Elantra is compact. You have to compare Camry to Sonata (188-189 in. length) and Elantra to Corolla (178-180 in. length).[/quote]
Do you have data to backup your 60% claim on housing? Since the Census for 2010 is not out yet, I don’t have data from the same source for 2 time period, so I have to do w/ what I have. Data from the same source would be best.

With regards to cars, cars grew over the last 10 years, so going strictly by the classification of midsize and compact isn’t very useful. You have to compare the interior space and trunk space, not just pure length, since some of that length is for the engine and it’s not very usable. Here are the interior dimensions for both cars and I add in the Sonata as well (Camry on the left and Elantra in the middle and Sonata on the right):

Front Legroom 43.5 ” / 43.6 ” / 45.5 ”
Rear Legroom 35.5 ” / 33.1 ” / 34.6 ”
Front Headroom 38.6 ” / 40.0 ” / 40.0 ”
Rear Headroom 37.6 ” / 37.1 ” / 37.8 ”
Front Hiproom 54.0 ” / 53.5 ” / 55.2 ”
Rear Hiproom 54.1 ” / 52.7 ” / 54.9 ”
Front Shoulder Room 56.2 ” / 55.9 ” / 57.9 ”
Rear Shoulder Room 56.1 ” / 54.8 ” / 56.7 ”
Passenger Volume 97 cu.ft. / 96 cu.ft. / 104 cu.ft.
Maximum Cargo Volume 14.1 cu.ft. / 14.8 cu.ft. / 16.4 cu.ft.

[an]

[quote=Eugene]Housing does not sound quite right. Could be the usual detached vs. attached confusion. $230k to $328k is +43%. The real change should be closer to 60%.

Low-end car comparison is also off. Camry is midsize, Elantra is compact. You have to compare Camry to Sonata (188-189 in. length) and Elantra to Corolla (178-180 in. length).[/quote]
Do you have data to backup your 60% claim on housing? Since the Census for 2010 is not out yet, I don’t have data from the same source for 2 time period, so I have to do w/ what I have. Data from the same source would be best.

With regards to cars, cars grew over the last 10 years, so going strictly by the classification of midsize and compact isn’t very useful. You have to compare the interior space and trunk space, not just pure length, since some of that length is for the engine and it’s not very usable. Here are the interior dimensions for both cars and I add in the Sonata as well (Camry on the left and Elantra in the middle and Sonata on the right):

Front Legroom 43.5 ” / 43.6 ” / 45.5 ”
Rear Legroom 35.5 ” / 33.1 ” / 34.6 ”
Front Headroom 38.6 ” / 40.0 ” / 40.0 ”
Rear Headroom 37.6 ” / 37.1 ” / 37.8 ”
Front Hiproom 54.0 ” / 53.5 ” / 55.2 ”
Rear Hiproom 54.1 ” / 52.7 ” / 54.9 ”
Front Shoulder Room 56.2 ” / 55.9 ” / 57.9 ”
Rear Shoulder Room 56.1 ” / 54.8 ” / 56.7 ”
Passenger Volume 97 cu.ft. / 96 cu.ft. / 104 cu.ft.
Maximum Cargo Volume 14.1 cu.ft. / 14.8 cu.ft. / 16.4 cu.ft.

[jimmyle]

Very interesting data. I believe that the Federal govt, state govt, and a few unemployed people are having a hard time but for 90% of us it is quite good with low inflation and steadily rising income. Personally, I don’t know any one that wants to work that is not working.

[jimmyle]

Very interesting data. I believe that the Federal govt, state govt, and a few unemployed people are having a hard time but for 90% of us it is quite good with low inflation and steadily rising income. Personally, I don’t know any one that wants to work that is not working.

[jimmyle]

Very interesting data. I believe that the Federal govt, state govt, and a few unemployed people are having a hard time but for 90% of us it is quite good with low inflation and steadily rising income. Personally, I don’t know any one that wants to work that is not working.

[jimmyle]

Very interesting data. I believe that the Federal govt, state govt, and a few unemployed people are having a hard time but for 90% of us it is quite good with low inflation and steadily rising income. Personally, I don’t know any one that wants to work that is not working.

[Author]

Posts