And so to irk these nazis further I've decided to post another chart from The Economist which, once again, seems to betray its namesake in that it didn't adjust for certain simple economic factors. This chart shows the median income of (essentially) married people versus single children. They cite the incomes of people with a spouse and two children versus that of a single person. They then herald this "amazing" discovery that single people do not make as much as married and child-full people.
And that natural question I ask;
"Did you adjust for this income on a per capita basis?"
I didn't think so.
The CIA World Factbook lists per capita GDP in the United States in 2008 at $47,000. With the Economist citing figures more than $10,000 below that based on purchasing power parity, they must really be doing some pretty big adjusting for purchasing power.
ReplyDeleteI don't even had to think about what they forgot to adjust for this time. As soon as I saw Germany and Britain on top, I knew something was wrong.
ReplyDeleteSo, if I am reading that chart correctly, in the US if you make $51K, with kids you would net $36K, with no kids you would net $30K (approx.)
ReplyDeleteAnd, how much of your net income would go toward raising that child? If it is more then $6K a year, then you are at a net loss for having a child, aren't you?
Correct CBMTTek
ReplyDeleteAnd yeah, not that I'm a big cheerer for the US, but I want to see what the GDP per capita was for the US versus other countries.
Of course that doesn't account for salary variation due to age either. Single/childless people typically are younger and less experienced and thus draw lower salaries. If they corrected for that factor, I wonder what the results would be?
ReplyDeleteYour per capita income comparison isn't the best measure of what your trying to get at. What would be better would be a per capital disposable income comparison.
How about providing a link to the article so we can read it and see if there is further information therein. Without reading the article, I have to guess that they are discussing how various tax regimes subsidize children and families.
ReplyDeleteSorry for the typo above. Meant $41K, not $51K.
ReplyDeleteAnd, I agree, I would be quite interested in learning how the US compares versus per capita earnings.
I would also be interested in knowing what exactly they are including in net income? In the UK they have a child care benefit that every mother receives whether they need it or not. I have a sister in law over there that gets a check for around 300 pounds a month for her two girls. Is that included in the net? Does Germany have a similar program?
Wouldn't this higher average income result from people with kids being forced to go after positions with better pay because they've more mouths to feed?
ReplyDeleteA chart which makes is obvious why so many married women work outside the house.
ReplyDeleteYou want to maintain a lifestyle even semi-like you had when single once you get married and have kids...