Skip to main content

窮人一定是基本生活花費高.因收入有限

Where the poor and rich really spend their money April 14 at 8:15 AM  


Lawmakers in several states are urging limits on how welfare recipients use public benefits, suggesting that the poor are buying things like lobster, filet mignon, vacations aboard cruise ships and visits to psychics. It's an open question whether the problem these proposals aim to solve actually exists, but the Bureau of Labor Statistics just helpfully released new data on how the poor -- and the rich -- spend their money.
For the first time, the bureau released this data for ten equally sized classes of U.S. households, sorted by income. While the bureau doesn't have data on lobster and filet mignon, the survey does provide a fascinating level of detail.
As the chart above shows, the rich spend more in almost every category, because they can. As a percentage of their total incomes, which are larger, the rich generally spend less. The result is that the rich have relatively more to spare after covering essentials such as housing, despite their more extravagant budgets in these categories. The chart below reveals the differences.

One exception was transportation. As a share of total spending, the middle class spent the most on getting around. Biking or walking to work is something that the wealthy and the destitute do. The middle class apparently commutes by car. The bureau's data show that people with moderate incomes spend the most on auto loans, gas, repairs and car insurance relative to overall spending. (The rich still spend more in these categories in absolute terms.)
Another way of examining the data is to compare spending in each category to the household budget for food at home. This comparison makes clear how much the rich or the poor are spending on something relative to the weekly grocery list.
The survey provides no evidence that the poor are wasting their money on delicacies. Indeed, the results show that regardless of income, Americans make very similar choices at the grocery store. The wealthy spend more overall, of course, and less as a share of their total spending. Yet the rich, the poor and the middle class all spend about 19 percent their grocery budget on fruits and vegetables, about 22 percent on meats, and about 13 percent on breads and cereals.
Other categories of food also show no variation with income. What about that lobster? Fish and seafood account for between 3 percent and 4 percent of the grocery budget for all groups -- $80 per year for the poor, and $222 per year for the wealthiest group.
It's comforting that when it comes to their choices at the grocery store, Americans have so much in common, given the other factors dividing the country along economic lines.
Unsurprisingly, the rich spend relatively more of their money eating out and buying alcohol, compared to the grocery budget. The poor still smoke, while the affluent have largely given up the habit.
The rich have more to spend on other luxuries, too. The richest tenth spent $2,239 over the year on fees and admissions, likely to sporting events, museums and concerts, and $1,084 on their pets. The poorest group spent $162 and $220 in these categories, respectively.
The greatest difference by far between rich and poor is not in how they spend, but how they save. For every dollar they spend at the grocery store, the poorest households save 12 cents, while the wealthy sock away $3.07 in pensions and life insurance.
This is one reason that some economists are concerned about rising levels of inequality. The rich save more than the poor, and the more they have, they more they'll save. Money that's being saved isn't being spent, which means less business for everyone from the dry cleaner on the corner to the owner of a five-star hotel. In turn, that means less work for everybody anda lethargic economy.
To be sure, banks can invest the money that the wealthy save, which can stimulate the economy as well. Yet many observers, including former Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke, are worried that as a global society, we've accumulated too much in the way of savings already.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

工程排水量設計 與 暴雨量

  獨家/直擊大巨蛋落下「瀑布」 民眾疑惑問:排水系統呢? 14:35 2021/06/04   中時   張穎齊 中央氣象局發布豪大雨特報,有民眾直擊拍下大巨蛋從「蛋頂」沖下的瀑布影片,疑惑直呼「排水系統呢?」。(民眾提供/張穎齊台北傳真) 木柵路2段109巷口淹水。(北市府提供/張穎齊台北傳真) 南湖大橋下淹水。(北市府提供/張穎齊台北傳真) 北市消防局門口淹水。(北市府提供/張穎齊台北傳真) 六張犁信安街淹水。(北市府提供/張穎齊台北傳真) 中央氣象局發布豪大雨特報,受颱風及鋒面接近影響,北市中午12時起開始有持續性的強對流發展,市中心有瞬間強降雨,文山、大安及信義區時雨量均超過100毫米,大安及信義區最大10分鐘雨量均超過30毫米,多處積淹水。不過也有民眾直擊拍下大巨蛋從「蛋頂」沖下的瀑布影片,疑惑直呼「排水系統呢?」 北市府表示,目前測得最大累積雨量為大安區福州山站127.5毫米,水利署已發布南港區淹水一級警戒及松山區一級警戒,水利處稍早通知南港區南深陸閘門因為逼近警戒水位,可能隨時關閉。 此外,水利處也已通知各區里,因目前瞬間強降雨遠大於下水道的容量,會有積水狀況發生,如有地下室的應盡速關上防水閘門,減少積水進入地下室造成損失。而木柵路2段109巷口淹水,深約20公分,範圍約100平方公尺,南湖大橋下淹水長度約50公尺、寬度約10尺、深度約50公分。

司法改革心

中時社論》司法改革 制度要改心更要改 2017/6/11 下午  司法改革國是會議第1分組第4次增開會議在司法院開會。(黄世麒攝) 司法改革國是會議5個分組分別進行了3個月的會議,已全部結束。5個分組各自提出數十件改革提議,總量非常可觀,多項分組決議曾引起社會高度爭議,且司法院、法務部、律師團體間顯然有嚴重的價值觀與職務立場衝突,接下來幕僚人員如何進行議題綜整,全體會議如何達成總結性結論,事關改革成敗與國家民主發展,身為媒體必須關注,並適時對社會發出建言與警語。 分組討論議題牽涉甚廣,從金字塔式的訴訟制度、賦予大法官違憲裁判審查權、保障司法程序弱勢方權利、修復式司法法制化,到研究設立商業法院、特別勞動訴訟程序、稅務法庭,到高度政治性的增訂妨害司法公正罪,以切斷政治干擾司法的可能性。此外,還包括調整法官晉用制度、終審法院行公開言詞辯論、研議法庭直播提高司法透明度,及檢察體系的性格定位、刑事訴訟程序從起訴的方法開始改變,到改善判決文書格式以求易懂等。 司法的重要性,這裡就不必再行強調。司法的社會公信力嚴重不足,到達需要召開司法改革國是會議來開藥方治病的地步,本身就令人痛心疾首。其實司法改革大業,一方面固然有制度上需要調整的地方,另一方面也有司法人員行為、文化必須大幅檢討改進之處。改革制度需要協調立法、行政、司法甚至考試諸院配合行事,但相對司法相關人員的「革心」,還是比較容易,人的行為與文化改變更困難。台灣民主體制下司法獨立,不受行政及政治干預,為了追求司法獨立的提升而改變司法人員的行為與文化,尤其困難。 改變司法人員的行為與文化具有先天性的困難,在這次司改會議過程中已一覽無遺。這次會議特別引進了半數不具法律背景的委員參與討論,其實就是希望避免法界人士研議司法改革時,閉門造車、諱疾忌醫,甚至護短,成為改革的障礙,但諱疾忌醫甚至護短的毛病仍然不時出現,雖不令人意外,但仍然對會議的進行與成果形成負面的影響。法界人士包括官員、教授、司法從業人士,因為諱疾忌醫甚至護短而在媒體上攻訐,不惜傷害司改會議的社會形象,令人感到遺憾。 諱疾忌醫甚至護短的現象,從議題處理方式的輕重選擇,也可看得出來。關說司法,特別是政治人物包括民意代表關說司法,問題普遍而且觀念嚴重偏頗的程度,從前立法院長王金平加上前檢察總長黃世銘的訴訟案件中,就足以一覽...

業界對抑制房價手段 的 反映

  不動產聯盟總會林正雄:高房價政府也是推手 應停止重稅 2023-01-16 22:02   經濟日報/  中華民國不動產聯盟總會理事長林正雄今(16)日指出,這波房價高漲主因惡性通膨所致,尤其政府重稅也是推手之一。他呼籲,政府要「解決缺工」、「停止重稅」等,才能促進房市發展健康化。中華民國不動產聯盟總會提供。 中華民國不動產聯盟總會理事長林正雄今(16)日指出,這波 房價 高漲主因惡性 通膨 所致,尤其政府重稅也是推手之一,政府接連打房只會讓台灣經濟出現破口。他呼籲,政府要「解決缺工」、「停止重稅」等才能促進房市發展健康化。 他指出,近年房價高漲係因通貨膨脹,使各項原物料大幅上漲,全國缺工已經不只是民間 營建業 的大問題,連政府的公共工程都面臨人力短缺的難解課題,尤其營建署在2020年發布的營造業經濟調查報告顯示,全國營建業已缺工近12萬人,2022年以來,營建業的缺工的數字更是呈倍數成長。 他表示,營建業缺工問題亦使工資不斷墊高,在工料雙漲情況下,業者只能反映成本,這也是目前房價居高不下的原因;然而營造物價高漲是國際貿易問題,不易緩解,但「缺工」問題,政府可以透過制度適度鬆綁,修正外籍移工引進規定來解決,如此才能根本解決高房價問題,才是各黨能否獲得「執政」的關鍵! 另外,林正雄強調,政府歷次打房政策與金融限縮,以及大環境通膨,使得業者經營成本增加,諸多限制與稅制閉鎖期違反市場自然運作,連帶使消費者選擇減少。經過兩年多來的強力打房,民眾們應該要清醒了,政府以加徵重稅來打房,其實無助平抑房價,反而重重傷害了眾多相關從業人員的生計。 林正雄呼籲,政府要「解決缺工」、「停止重稅」,不要再以重稅打房,尊重市場機制,才是房市健康化的開始。