Chart of the Week

Prices Are Skyrocketing, But Only For Things You Actually Need

Published

3 years ago

October 28, 2016

Jeff Desjardins

Chart: Prices Are Skyrocketing, But Only For Things You Actually Need

Prices Skyrocketing, But Only For Things You Actually Need

Everything else has fallen in price over the years

The Chart of the Week is a weekly Visual Capitalist feature on Fridays.

The way that economic data is presented, we often think of inflation as a singular number representing a general increase in prices.

For example, it might be reported that nominal GDP growth was 3%, and that inflation was 2%. Since the inflation represents a rise in price levels, we subtract it from the nominal rate to get a real GDP growth of 1%.

But in reality, price changes do not affect products and services in such a uniform and simple fashion. In the above example, all goods aren’t increasing in price at a 2% rate – that’s just an average. What really happens is that there is a full spectrum of price changes: some goods end up falling in price, while other goods get more expensive.

What’s Actually Getting More Expensive?

This week’s chart looks at the change in prices of consumer goods since 1996, using data provided by Mark J. Perry of AEI’s Carpe Diem blog.

Here’s his original chart, which is also very telling:

Price changes from 1996 to 2016

The average price increase, as shown by the CPI (Consumer Price Index), is 55% over the last 20 years. Meanwhile, the prices of individual sub-categories have a much wider variance.

The good news is that the price of technology is generally getting cheaper. Software, TVs, wireless, and new cars have all come down in price relative to the CPI. Clothing, toys, and furniture are also way more affordable than they were 20 years ago.

The bad news? Most of the above items are not the ones that really matter to most of us. The things we actually need to live healthy and fruitful lives – education, food, healthcare, childcare, and housing – are all skyrocketing in cost.

Tuition costs have soared 197%. Textbooks have more than tripled in price, going up 207% since 1996.

Taking care of our loved ones is more expensive. Healthcare and childcare costs have risen almost as much: 105% and 122% respectively.

Meanwhile, basic necessities such as shelter and food have increased at rates higher than the CPI as well. Housing costs are 61% higher and food is 64% more expensive.

Related Topics:costs CPI healthcare inflation prices

Up Next

The Times They Are A-Changin’

Don't Miss

Explaining the October Flash Crash in the British Pound

Comments

Chart of the Week

At Risk: The Geography of America’s Senior Population

The U.S. senior population is much more vulnerable to COVID-19. Which states and cities have the most people in this at-risk age group?

Published

6 days ago

April 3, 2020

Jenna Ross

At Risk: The U.S. Senior Population

The U.S. now has the largest number of confirmed COVID-19 cases globally, and modelling predicts that the country could see about 100,000 to 200,000 total deaths. Unfortunately, adults aged 65 or older—about 16% of the U.S. population—are at much higher risk of both severe illness and death.

Today’s chart uses U.S. Census Bureau data to map the percentage of the population that is 65 years or older by state. It also outlines the urban areas that are most heavily skewed towards this older age group.

Proportion of Seniors by State

Below is the full breakdown of the U.S. senior population by state, using the latest available data from 2018.

Maine tops the list with 20.6% of its population comprising adults age 65 or older. At the other end of the scale, Utah’s seniors make up only 11.1% of its population.

Rank	State	65+, % of Population	65+, Total Population
1	Maine	20.6%	276,069
2	Florida	20.5%	4,358,784
3	West Virginia	20.0%	361,216
4	Vermont	19.8%	123,875
5	Montana	18.8%	200,239
6	Delaware	18.7%	180,756
7	Hawaii	18.4%	261,467
8	Pensylvannia	18.2%	2,332,369
9	New Hampshire	18.1%	245,156
10	South Carolina	17.7%	899,754
11	Oregon	17.6%	739,611
12	Arizona	17.6%	1,259,103
13	New Mexico	17.6%	368,480
14	Rhode Island	17.3%	182,645
15	Conneticut	17.2%	613,147
16	Michigan	17.2%	1,720,453
17	Ohio	17.1%	1,996,163
18	Iowa	17.0%	537,818
19	Wisconsin	17.0%	986,483
20	Alabama	17.0%	829,663
21	Missouri	16.9%	1,035,074
22	Arkansas	16.8%	507,676
23	Wyoming	16.7%	96,557
24	South Dakota	16.6%	146,358
25	Massachusetts	16.5%	1,137,541
26	Kentucky	16.4%	731,392
27	New York	16.4%	3,212,065
28	Tennesse	16.3%	1,104,797
29	North Carolina	16.3%	1,688,574
30	New Jersey	16.1%	1,438,289
31	Idaho	15.9%	279,441
32	Kansas	15.9%	462,191
34	Mississipi	15.9%	474,423
33	Minnesota	15.8%	888,634
36	Nebraska	15.8%	303,998
35	Indiana	15.7%	1,051,146
37	Nevada	15.7%	475,120
38	Oklahoma	15.7%	619,601
39	Illinois	15.6%	1,990,548
40	Louisiana	15.5%	720,610
42	Virginia	15.5%	1,318,225
41	Maryland	15.4%	931,041
43	Washington	15.4%	1,163,987
44	North Dakota	15.3%	116,433
45	California	14.3%	5,667,337
46	Colorado	14.2%	807,855
47	Georgia	13.8%	1,456,428
48	Texas	12.5%	3,599,599
49	Alaska	11.9%	88,000
50	Utah	11.1%	351,297

Notably, Florida has the second highest percentage and number of seniors nationwide. Its governor just announced the state’s stay-at-home order on April 1st, after taking criticism for refusing to do so earlier.

New York, the current global hot spot of COVID-19, is close to the national average with 16.4% of its population aged 65 or older. However, with over 3.2 million seniors, the sheer volume of individuals needing hospitalization has already put a strain on the state’s healthcare system. Governor Andrew Cuomo says the state will run out of its current supply of ventilators in less than a week.

The Most Vulnerable Urban Areas

On a local level, which places have the highest proportion of seniors? Based on all urban areas* with a population of 250,000 or more, here’s how the top 50 looks:

Rank	Urban Area	65+, % of Population	65+, Total Population
1	Bonita Springs, FL	38.2%	135,286
2	Sarasota–Bradenton, FL	33.2%	242,613
3	Barnstable Town, MA	29.4%	74,614
4	Palm Coast–Daytona Beach–Port Orange, FL	28.3%	110,355
5	Myrtle Beach–Socastee, SC–NC	27.3%	74,783
6	Cape Coral, FL	27.0%	175,483
7	Indio–Cathedral City, CA	26.0%	95,054
8	Port St. Lucie, FL	25.6%	110,883
9	Palm Bay–Melbourne, FL	22.9%	114,347
10	Youngstown, OH–PA	21.0%	78,739
11	Asheville, NC	20.9%	65,540
12	Pittsburgh, PA	19.6%	335,546
13	Canton, OH	19.6%	54,214
14	Scranton, PA	19.1%	71,876
15	Mission Viejo–Lake Forest–San Clemente, CA	19.0%	115,891
16	Tampa–St. Petersburg, FL	18.9%	516,269
17	Tucson, AZ	18.8%	165,399
18	Lancaster, PA	18.5%	77,538
19	Cleveland, OH	18.4%	324,707
20	Miami, FL	18.3%	1,117,926
21	Buffalo, NY	18.1%	168,121
22	Dayton, OH	18.0%	130,722
23	Harrisburg, PA	18.0%	83,201
24	Wilmington, NC	17.8%	45,457
25	Urban Honolulu, HI	17.7%	148,045
26	Akron, OH	17.6%	99,010
27	New Haven, CT	17.6%	97,888
28	Rochester, NY	17.5%	125,516
29	Peoria, IL	17.5%	44,722
30	Allentown, PA–NJ	17.4%	119,508
31	Concord, CA	17.4%	115,460
32	Chattanooga, TN–GA	17.4%	69,098
33	Flint, MI	17.2%	59,525
34	Santa Rosa, CA	17.1%	55,094
35	Lakeland, FL	17.1%	51,107
36	Davenport, IA–IL	17.1%	48,387
37	Providence, RI–MA	17.0%	204,148
38	Rockford, IL	16.9%	48,370
39	Springfield, MA–CT	16.8%	105,694
40	Knoxville, TN	16.8%	101,332
41	Albany–Schenectady, NY	16.8%	100,756
42	Albuquerque, NM	16.7%	126,081
43	Hartford, CT	16.6%	153,367
44	Toledo, OH–MI	16.6%	82,480
45	Pensacola, FL–AL	16.6%	62,216
46	Bridgeport–Stamford, CT–NY	16.5%	156,035
47	Syracuse, NY	16.4%	66,818
48	Detroit, MI	16.2%	608,427
49	St. Louis, MO–IL	16.2%	347,537
50	Trenton, NJ	16.2%	47,803

*Urban areas consist of a downtown core and adjacent territories

With 6 areas in the top 10, Florida is quite vulnerable at the local level as well. Other states with multiple areas on the list include Ohio, Pennsylvania, and New York.

The Senior Population of Current U.S. Hotspots

To determine the vulnerability of current COVID-19 hotspots, we compared U.S. counties with a high number of cases per capita against their percentage of seniors.

Counties at the bottom left have low readings on both metrics. Conversely, counties in the top right have a dangerous combination: a high concentration of cases and vulnerable seniors.

senior population vs covid-19 outbreak

Multiple counties in New York occupy the top right quadrant, with Yonkers being the worst off. Los Angeles county, which has a similar population to all counties in New York City, has fewer cases and a smaller proportion of seniors.

To date, outbreaks have been mostly focused in urban areas where populations tend to be younger. However, as COVID-19 begins infiltrating rural areas, healthcare systems will need to contend with both older age groups and fewer resources.

Chart of the Week

Global Shutdown: Visualizing Commuter Activity in the World’s Cities

Amid the COVID-19 crisis, cities are dramatically slowing down. Today’s chart demonstrates the impact of lockdowns on commuter activity worldwide.

Published

2 weeks ago

March 27, 2020

Iman Ghosh

Staying Put: The COVID-19 Commuter Decline

Every day, millions of people worldwide rely on public transport networks to get around. But in times of crisis, bustling cities with high volumes of commuter traffic can come to a dramatic halt.

Today’s chart breaks down daily data from Citymapper’s Mobility Index, according to trips planned on the transport app across 41 select cities.

The results paint a unique picture of how social distancing and lockdown measures are impacting commuter and economic activity in major urban hubs.

Cities With the Biggest Drops in Activity

As the government response to the COVID-19 pandemic intensifies and people are urged to stay home, transit activity is dropping everywhere.

However, some areas are seeing more of a reduction in activity than others. Where has activity declined the most over the month?

Rank	City	Country	04-Mar	11-Mar	18-Mar	25-Mar	Total Change (%)
#1	Vienna	🇦🇹 Austria	128%	92%	9%	6%	-122%
#2	Lisbon	🇵🇹 Portugal	128%	108%	24%	12%	-116%
#3	Istanbul	🇹🇷 Turkey	117%	103%	20%	10%	-107%
#4	Barcelona	🇪🇸 Spain	105%	86%	6%	4%	-101%
#5	Brussels	🇧🇪 Belgium	107%	96%	15%	7%	-100%
#6	São Paolo	🇧🇷 Brazil	112%	113%	33%	12%	-100%
#7	New York City	🇺🇸 USA	104%	85%	17%	7%	-97%
#8	Madrid	🇪🇸 Spain	100%	65%	5%	4%	-96%
#9	Los Angeles	🇺🇸 USA	108%	81%	23%	13%	-95%
#10	Melbourne	🇦🇺 Australia	113%	110%	53%	20%	-93%

*Note: Data measures the % of city moving compared to 100% baseline.

Overall, Vienna and Lisbon are the cities with the biggest average drop in commuter activity over the past few weeks. This decline in mobility is correlated with a spike in the proportion of COVID-19 cases in the population:

Austria
March 4: 2.6 per million
March 25: 586 per million
Portugal
March 4: 0.4 per million
March 25: 232 per million

That said, not every city is seeing a precipitous decline in activity — let’s look at those next.

Standing Still, or On Guard

Cities that saw lower decreases in commuter activity over recent weeks can generally be slotted into three categories:

Cities that were already on or near shutdown (Seoul, Milan)
Cities that have so far avoided major impacts from the virus (St. Petersburg)
Cities that successfully mitigated spread (Singapore)

Here are the 10 cities on the list that saw the lowest changes in activity:

Rank	City	Country	04-Mar	11-Mar	18-Mar	25-Mar	Total Change (%)
#1	Seoul	🇰🇷 South Korea	48%	43%	41%	37%	-11%
#2	Hong Kong	🇭🇰 China (SAR)	50%	52%	48%	37%	-13%
#3	Singapore	🇸🇬 Singapore	90%	88%	79%	62%	-28%
#4	Milan	🇮🇹 Italy	43%	10%	5%	3%	-40%
#5	Tokyo	🇯🇵 Japan	63%	54%	42%	21%	-42%
#6	St Petersburg	🇷🇺 Russia	114%	114%	85%	69%	-45%
#7	Moscow	🇷🇺 Russia	112%	113%	75%	54%	-58%
#8	Rhine-Ruhr	🇩🇪 Germany	75%	72%	28%	15%	-60%
#9	Stockholm	🇸🇪 Sweden	97%	83%	34%	32%	-65%
#10	Lyon	🇫🇷 France	75%	97%	6%	4%	-71%

*Note: Data measures the % of city moving compared to 100% baseline.

St. Petersburg is still seeing commuter activity at 69% of normal levels as of March 25th, as the proportion of confirmed COVID-19 cases in Russia remains low, at roughly 3.4 per million.

Milan has the lowest activity of any city at 3%, and has been in shutdown for most of the month.

Although Singapore’s total COVID-19 cases grew from 18.8 to 95.4 per million, it still has 62% commuter activity. Interestingly, Singapore is one of the few countries that has been able to properly control and manage its COVID-19 outbreak.

Biggest Weekly Declines

As the month progressed, various cities showed stark one-week declines in commuter activity based on official healthcare recommendations and growing case numbers.

After a government lockdown announced on March 9, Rome experienced the sharpest decline of -75% commuter activity in the week from March 4 to March 11. Currently, there is only 5% activity compared to usual, similar to Milan.

In the second week of March, COVID-19 cases in France jumped fourfold, from 27.3 per million to 118.4 per million people. As a result, Lyon saw a whopping -91% drop in commuter activity—going from 97% on March 11 to 6% on March 18.

Over the past week, as cases in Australia reached 95 per million, Sydney and Melbourne exhibited the highest average declines at -36% and -33% in commuter activity respectively.

Full List of 41 Cities

Here’s the full list of cities, courtesy of Citymapper.

City, Country	March 4	March 11	March 18	March 25	Total Change (%)
Vienna, Austria	128%	92%	9%	6%	-122%
Lisbon, Portugal	128%	108%	24%	12%	-116%
Istanbul, Turkey	117%	103%	20%	10%	-107%
Barcelona, Spain	105%	86%	6%	4%	-101%
Brussels, Belgium	107%	96%	15%	7%	-100%
São Paulo, Brazil	112%	113%	33%	12%	-100%
New York City, U.S.	104%	85%	17%	7%	-97%
Madrid, Spain	100%	65%	5%	4%	-96%
Los Angeles, U.S.	108%	81%	23%	13%	-95%
Melbourne, Australia	113%	110%	53%	20%	-93%
Amsterdam, Netherlands	98%	86%	13%	6%	-92%
Washington DC, U.S.	97%	82%	15%	6%	-91%
San Francisco, U.S.	96%	65%	9%	6%	-90%
Boston, U.S.	97%	77%	16%	7%	-90%
Chicago, U.S.	97%	92%	16%	7%	-90%
Montréal, Canada	103%	104%	31%	14%	-89%
Paris, France	95%	89%	8%	6%	-89%
London, UK	100%	91%	36%	12%	-88%
Manchester, UK	100%	91%	42%	13%	-87%
Sydney, Australia	106%	99%	56%	20%	-86%
Mexico City, Mexico	109%	110%	53%	23%	-86%
Rome, Italy	91%	16%	6%	5%	-86%
Copenhagen, Denmark	97%	80%	11%	11%	-86%
Berlin, Germany	93%	86%	26%	12%	-81%
Birmingham, UK	99%	91%	45%	18%	-81%
Toronto, Canada	97%	91%	32%	19%	-78%
Vancouver, Canada	94%	89%	38%	16%	-78%
Philadelphia, U.S.	89%	85%	22%	13%	-76%
Monaco, Monaco	81%	50%	12%	7%	-74%
Hamburg, Germany	85%	72%	20%	12%	-73%
Seattle, U.S.	80%	51%	19%	8%	-72%
Lyon, France	75%	97%	6%	4%	-71%
Stockholm, Sweden	97%	83%	34%	32%	-65%
Rhine-Ruhr, Germany	75%	72%	28%	15%	-60%
Moscow, Russia	112%	113%	75%	54%	-58%
St Petersburg, Russia	114%	114%	85%	69%	-45%
Tokyo, Japan	63%	54%	42%	21%	-42%
Milan, Italy	43%	10%	5%	3%	-40%
Singapore, Singapore	90%	88%	79%	62%	-28%
Hong Kong, Hong Kong	50%	52%	48%	37%	-13%
Seoul, South Korea	48%	43%	41%	37%	-11%

*Note: Data measures the % of city moving compared to 100% baseline.

The COVID-19 pandemic is affecting everything from the stock market to the environment. With cities actively working to keep populations in isolation and healthy during this time, it may take a while before commuter activity returns to normal.