Figure 6: Personal Income Measures for Portland and Comparator Regions, 2006
Sources: U.S. Census Bureau Tables P53, P77, P82, 2006 American Community Survey Tables B19013, B19113, B19301.
Figure 7: Median Household Income, Portland Metro Area Counties, 2000 to 2006
Sources: U.S. Census Bureau Table P53, 2006 American Community Survey Tables B19013.[1]
Figure 8: Median Family Income, Portland Metro Area Counties, 2000 to 2006
Sources: U.S. Census Bureau Table P77, 2006 American Community Survey Table B19113. Note: ACS Income data for 2000-2006 not available for Skamania County.[2]
Figure 9: Per Capita Income, Portland Metro Area Counties, 2000 to 2006
Sources: U.S. Census Bureau Table P82, 2006 American Community Survey Table B19301. Note: ACS Income data for 2000-2006 not available for Skamania County.[3] Figure 10 shows median household income by census block group for the entire region. This level of detail is only available for the decennial census data, which reflects money income in 1999.
Figure 10: Median Household Income by Census Block Group, 1999
Sources: U.S. Census Bureau, Decennial Census, Metro Regional Land Information System, Oregon Geospatial Enterprise Office.
Figure 11: Poverty Rates by Census Block Group, 1999
Sources: U.S. Census 2000, Table P87, Metro Regional Land Information System, Oregon Geospatial Enterprise Office.[4]
2.3 Sources of Income
Table 6 breaks down each region’s personal income into the five components tracked by the Bureau of Economic Analysis:
- Income from dividends, interest, and rent.
- Income from transfer payments (mostly social security and other retirement income, but also unemployment insurance and other social welfare payments).
- Income from wages and salaries.
- Proprietor’s income.
The data show that Austin has the highest proportion of income from wages and salaries at 52.1 percent. San Diego sits at the low end with 45.5 percent of personal income coming from wages and salaries. The Portland Metropolitan region falls in the middle of the spectrum in terms of the percentage of regional personal income wages and salaries at 48.4 percent. Denver has the highest proportion of income from proprietor’s income at 14.7 percent, which reflects a prevalence of self-employment and small businesses in the city. Phoenix has the highest percentage of income from transfer payments at 13.4 percent, reflecting its status as a retirement community. Portland follows with 12.2 percent of personal income from transfer payments.
Table 6: Sources of Income for the Portland and Comparator Metropolitan Areas, 2007 Preliminary Estimate
| Region | Total Personal Income (in Thousands) |
Percent Income from Dividends, Interest and Rent | Percent Income from Transfer Payments | Percent from Wage and Salaries | Percent from Proprietor’s Income |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Austin-Round Rock, TX | $55,664,599 | 16.30% | 8.40% | 62.40% | 9.90% |
| Charlotte-Gastonia-Concord, NC-SC | $60,483,496 | 14.50% | 11.30% | 65.50% | 9.90% |
| Denver-Aurora, CO | $107,787,570 | 15.90% | 8.30% | 57.00% | 15.30% |
| Las Vegas-Paradise, NV | $68,031,588 | 21.10% | 10.20% | 58.10% | 7.60% |
| Minneapolis-St. Paul-Bloomington, MN-WI | $140,320,340 | 18.60% | 10.20% | 62.00% | 6.70% |
| Phoenix-Mesa-Scottsdale, AZ | $138,465,088 | 15.80% | 12.80% | 59.30% | 9.00% |
| Portland-Vancouver-Beaverton, OR-WA | $78,618,336 | 18.10% | 12.10% | 58.10% | 8.20% |
| Salt Lake City, UT | $37,883,269 | 17.90% | 9.30% | 64.70% | 10.70% |
| San Diego-Carlsbad-San Marcos, CA | $126,193,721 | 18.00% | 11.50% | 54.50% | 9.90% |
| San Jose-Sunnyvale-Santa Clara, CA | $97,685,451 | 19.10% | 7.70% | 73.60% | 8.90% |
| Seattle-Tacoma-Bellevue, WA | $148,015,040 | 17.80% | 10.00% | 61.10% | 8.90% |
Source: U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis Regional Economic Accounts. Personal Income and Employment Summary 1969-2007 (Table CA04)[5]
2.4 Money Income
As explained above, money income, calculated by the U.S. Census Bureau from data gathered in their surveys, offers an alternative set of data on how well individuals are faring in our community. Table 7 provides several money income measures reported from the 2006 American Community Survey (see also Figure 6. Median Household Income, median family income, and per capita income are all highest in the San Jose area. The Portland region falls in the lower end just below Austin, but higher than both Phoenix and Charlotte and, in the case of family and per capita income, Salt Lake City.
Table 7: Money Income for Portland and Comparator Regions, 2006
| Region | Median Household Income |
Median Family Income |
Per Capita Income |
|---|---|---|---|
| Austin-Round Rock, TX | $52,882 | $65,568 | $27,918 |
| Charlotte-Gastonia-Concord, NC-SC | $50,367 | $61,061 | $27,094 |
| Denver-Aurora, CO | $54,994 | $68,081 | $29,363 |
| Las Vegas-Paradise, NV | $53,536 | $60,859 | $26,735 |
| Minneapolis-St. Paul-Bloomington, MN-WI | $62,223 | $77,066 | $30,737 |
| Phoenix-Mesa-Scottsdale, AZ | $51,862 | $61,107 | $25,818 |
| Portland-Vancouver-Beaverton, OR-WA | $52,480 | $64,316 | $27,271 |
| Salt Lake City, UT | $53,587 | $62,168 | $22,985 |
| San Diego-Carlsbad-San Marcos, CA | $59,591 | $69,099 | $28,763 |
| San Jose-Sunnyvale-Santa Clara, CA | $80,638 | $92,563 | $36,600 |
| Seattle-Tacoma-Bellevue, WA | $60,663 | $73,802 | $31,737 |
Sources: U.S. Census Bureau Tables P53, P77, P82, 2006 American Community Survey Tables B19013, B19113, B19301. Note: MSAs listed are those designated in the 2006 American Community Survey. It should be noted that there are significant differences in the geographic extent of MSAs designated in the 2000 Decennial Census.[6]
Portland Metropolitan Area Counties
Figures 7, 8, and 9 show the median household income, median family income, and per capita income for each of the Portland Metro counties. While Washington County has the highest median household and family income, Clackamas County is highest in per capita income. Multnomah County has the lowest household income, but Yamhill County has the lowest per capita income, probably reflecting Multnomah County’s smaller household sizes.
How the Poverty Threshold Is Measured
The current poverty thresholds were originally developed in 1963-1964 by Mollie Orshansky who worked at the Social Security Administration. Orshansky took the dollar costs of the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s economy food plan for families of three or more persons and multiplied the costs by a factor of three. She used a factor of three because the USDA’s 1955 Household Food Consumption Survey found that for families of three or more persons, the average dollar value of all food consumed during a week accounted for about one third of their total money income after taxes.
For smaller families, she followed somewhat different procedures to calculate poverty thresholds in order to allow for the relatively larger fixed costs that small family units face. In May 1965, the U.S. Office of Economic Opportunity adopted Orshansky’s poverty thresholds as a working or quasi-official definition of poverty. Poverty thresholds for years since 1963 have been updated for price changes only using the Consumer Price Index.
For more information, please visit the United State Department of Health and Human Services[7]
2.5 Poverty Rates
Poverty is the result of an economy that is not performing well for some segment of the population. While there are multiple causes of poverty, a rising poverty rate clearly demonstrates that the economy is not serving some individuals and families. The Census Bureau measures the percentage of individuals, families, and households with incomes that fall below the federally defined poverty standard. Table 8 shows the poverty standard for 2006.
Table 8: 2006 U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Poverty Thresholds
| Persons in Family or Household |
48 Contiguous States and D.C. |
Alaska | Hawaii |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | $9,800 | $12,250 | $11,270 |
| 2 | 13,200 | 16,500 | 15,180 |
| 3 | 16,600 | 20,750 | 19,090 |
| 4 | 20,000 | 25,000 | 23,000 |
| 5 | 23,400 | 29,250 | 26,910 |
| 6 | 26,800 | 33,500 | 30,820 |
| 7 | 30,200 | 37,750 | 34,730 |
| 8 | 33,600 | 42,000 | 38,640 |
| For each additional person, add |
3,400 | 4,250 | 3,910 |
Source: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.[7]
Table 9 shows for the Portland region and its competitors the percentage of individuals with incomes below the poverty rate for 1999 and 2006. Although we must be careful when comparing the 1999 Census data and the 2006 American Community Survey data (detailed below), the trend is generally toward higher rates of poverty in each of the metropolitan areas except San Diego and Las Vegas, which each experienced decreases in the percentage of individuals below the poverty line by 0.8 percent. The Portland region’s poverty rates are at the median at 11.5 percent. The rates by census block group for the Portland Metropolitan region for 2000 are shown in Figure 10 and Figure 11 .
Table 9: Individuals with Income Below Poverty Level for Portland and Comparator Regions, 1999 and 2006
| Region | 1999 | 2006 |
|---|---|---|
| Austin-Round Rock, TX | 11.10% | 13.00% |
| Charlotte-Gastonia-Concord, NC-SC | 9.30% | 11.50% |
| Denver-Aurora, CO | 8.60% | 11.50% |
| Las Vegas-Paradise, NV | 11.10% | 10.30% |
| Minneapolis-St. Paul-Bloomington, MN-WI | 6.70% | 8.90% |
| Phoenix-Mesa-Scottsdale, AZ | 12.00% | 12.70% |
| Portland-Vancouver-Beaverton, OR-WA | 10.00% | 11.50% |
| Salt Lake City, UT | 7.70% | 10.30% |
| San Diego-Carlsbad-San Marcos, CA | 12.40% | 11.70% |
| San Jose-Sunnyvale-Santa Clara, CA | 8.70% | 9.00% |
| Seattle-Tacoma-Bellevue, WA | 8.50% | 9.60% |
Sources: U.S. Census 2000, Summary Tape File 3, Table P87. American Community Survey 2006 Table B17001. Note: Regions listed are those designated in the 2006 American Community Survey and may vary compared to those designated in the Census 2000 Summary File 3.[8]
Can we compare the 2000 Census Data to the ACS Data?
Comparisons between 2006 American Community Survey (ACS) Data and 2000 Decennial Census Data (Summary File 3) must be approached with caution. In 1999, the Census Bureau changed American Community Survey questions to be consistent with the questions for the Census 2000. The instructions are slightly different to reflect differences in the way each survey references time. The census asks for responses about the past 12 months, and the questions for the Census 2000 ask about the previous calendar year (from 2006 ACS Subject Definitions, 53). According to data comparison guidelines provided on the American Community Survey website, certain measures should be “compared with caution.” These include:
- Median household income.
- Median family income.
- Earnings and income measures for individuals (per capita income).
The American Community Survey guidance goes on to state that 1999 income dollar amounts included in Summary File 3 should be adjusted to 2006 dollars by using the Bureau of Labor Statistics Inflation Adjustment Calculator for comparison purposes. Additionally, the geographic extent of designated Metropolitan Statistical Areas (MSAs) differs between the 2000 Decennial Census and the 2006 American Community Survey.
The following table summarizes these differences:
| 2000 Decennial Census | 2006 American Community Survey |
|---|---|
| Austin–San Marcos, TX MSA | Austin-Round Rock, TX Metro Area |
| Charlotte–Gastonia–Rock Hill, NC–SC MSA | Charlotte-Gastonia-Concord, NC-SC Metro Area |
| Denver–Boulder–Greeley, CO CMSA | Denver-Aurora, CO Metro Area |
| Las Vegas, NV–AZ MSA | Las Vegas-Paradise, NV Metro Area |
| Minneapolis–St. Paul, MN–WI MSA | Minneapolis-St. Paul-Bloomington, MN-WI Metro Area |
| Phoenix–Mesa, AZ MSA | Phoenix-Mesa-Scottsdale, AZ Metro Area |
| Portland–Salem, OR–WA CMSA | Portland-Vancouver-Beaverton, OR-WA Metro Area |
| Salt Lake City–Ogden, UT MSA | Salt Lake City, UT Metro Area |
| San Diego, CA MSA | San Diego-Carlsbad-San Marcos, CA Metro Area |
| San Francisco–Oakland–San Jose, CA CMSA | San Jose-Sunnyvale-Santa Clara, CA Metro Area |
| Seattle–Tacoma–Bremerton, WA CMSA | Seattle-Tacoma-Bellevue, WA Metro Area |
3. Summary and Conclusion
The Portland Metropolitan region has seen steady growth since 2001 in both Metropolitan GDP and personal income. When compared with similar regions in the United States, the Portland region shows healthy growth rates, though the overall numbers still show Portland with lower levels of income in both the aggregate and per capita measures. Within the Portland region, there are significant income differences between urban and more rural counties. Skamania County in particular has a lower level of income than do other more urban counties.
Income levels are just one way to assess the prosperity of a region. Future Metropolitan Knowledge Network issue papers will delve into the dynamics of income disparities both within the region and between regions by looking at other economic indicators.
Bibliography
- MetroPolicy: Shaping a New Federal Partnership for a Metropolitan Nation.
- Pearce, D. M. 2008. The Self-Sufficiency Standard For Oregon 2008: Worksystems, Inc.
- United States Census Bureau. Income Overview.
- United State Department of Health and Human Services.
Tables & Figures
- Figure 1: 2007 Population Estimates of Comparator Metropolitan Areas from the Census Bureau
- Figure 2: Portland Metropolitan Area GDP (2001-2006)
- Figure 3: GDP for Portland and Comparator Metropolitan Areas, 2006
- Figure 4: Personal and Per Capita Income, Portland-Vancouver MSA (1969 to 2007)
- Figure 5: Per Capita Personal Income for Portland and Comparator Metropolitan Areas (2007 Preliminary Estimate)
- Table 1: 2007 Population Estimates of Comparator Metropolitan Areas from the Census Bureau
- Table 2: Metro Level GDP for Portland and Comparator Metropolitan Areas
- Table 3: Metropolitan GDP Growth for the Portland Metropolitan Region and Comparator Regions (2001-2006)
- Table 4: Personal and Per Capita Income for the Portland Metro Area (1969 to 2006)
- Table 5: Personal and Per Capita Income by County, Portland Metropolitan Region, 2006
- Figure 6: Personal Income Measures for Portland and Comparator Regions, 2006
- Figure 7: Median Household Income, Portland Metro Area Counties, 2000 to 2006
- Figure 8: Median Family Income, Portland Metro Area Counties, 2000 to 2006
- Figure 9: Per Capita Income, Portland Metro Area Counties, 2000 to 2006
- Figure 10: Median Household Income by Census Block Group, 1999
- Figure 11: Poverty Rates by Census Block Group, 1999
- Table 6: Sources of Income for the Portland and Comparator Metropolitan Areas, 2007 Preliminary Estimate
- Table 7: Money Income for Portland and Comparator Regions, 2006
- Table 8: 2006 U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Poverty Thresholds
Footnotes
- U.S. Census 2000: Table P53. Median Household Income in 1999 (Dollars) [1] – Universe: Households.
American Community Survey 2007 estimates: Table B19013. Median Household Income in the Past 12 Months (in 2006 Inflation-Adjusted Dollars) – Universe: Households (↩) - U.S. Census 2000: Table P77. Median Family Income in 1999 (dollars) [1] – Universe: Families.
American Community Survey 2007 estimates: Table B19113. Median Family Income in the Past 12 Months (in 2006 Inflation-Adjusted Dollars) – Universe: Families (↩) - U.S. Census 2000: Table P82. Per Capita Income in 1999 (Dollars) [1] – Universe: Total population.
American Community Survey 2007 estimates: Table B19301. Per Capita Income in the Past 12 Months (in 2006 Inflation-Adjusted Dollars) – Universe: Total Population (↩) - U.S. Census 2000: Table P87. Poverty Status in 1999 by Age [17] – Universe: Population for whom poverty status is determined. (↩)
- http://www.bea.gov/regional/reis/ (↩)
- U.S. Census 2000: Table P53. Median Household Income in 1999 (Dollars) [1] – Universe: Households; Table P77. Median Family Income in 1999 (Dollars) [1] – Universe: Families; Table P82. Per Capita Income in 1999 (Dollars) [1] – Universe: Total population.
American Community Survey 2007 estimates: Table B19013. Median Household Income in the Past 12 Months (In 2006 Inflation-Adjusted Dollars) – Universe: Households; Table B19113. Median Family Income in the Past 12 Months (In 2006 Inflation-Adjusted Dollars) – Universe: Families; Table B19301. Per Capita Income in the Past 12 Months (In 2006 Inflation-Adjusted Dollars) – Universe: Total Population. (↩) - http://aspe.hhs.gov/POVERTY/faq.shtml#official (↩) (↩)
- U.S. Census 2000: Summary Tape File 3, Table P87. Poverty Status in 1999 by Age [17] – Universe: Population for whom poverty status is determined.
American Community Survey 2006: Table B17001. Poverty Status in the Past 12 Months by Age – Universe: Population for whom poverty status is determined. (↩)
