UK plunges down economic wellbeing league, while US remains top

[alp227]

Source: The Guardian

The UK has plunged down an economic wellbeing league, falling from fifth place to 12th over six years, according to a new report that underlines the pressure on Britons' finances amid rising unemployment.

The Office for National Statistics ranked OECD countries in terms of disposable household income from 2005 to 2011, but on a separate ONS labour-market ranking Britain dropped even further, falling 12 places over the six years.

The ONS looked at various economic factors that might affect wellbeing across the OECD club of mostly rich nations as part of its scheme to measure national wellbeing. It ranked the United States top in terms of disposable household income, followed by Luxembourg. Chile was ranked bottom out of 30 countries.

Statisticians said part of the UK's drop down the disposable household income table was due to the devaluation of the pound, which raised the price of goods and services in the UK relative to other countries. But the ONS also noted other factors including changes to taxes and benefits.

Read more: http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2013/may/14/uk-drops-down-economic-wellbeing-league

---

Household actual drop in income per head 2011. Source: OECD

[Nye Bevan]

1. I couldn't tell from the article whether this accounts for healthcare costs.

Nobody in the UK is ever bankrupted by an unexpected hospital stay.

[closeupready]

2. I haven't looked at the underlying data/study, but I will.

I'd wager that it was data compiled and studied by RW think tanks, like the Heritage or Cato Foundations.

[closeupready]

3. Okay, so it's a study by a UK gov't. office - it does not appear

however, that they accounted for income inequality.

Thus, at first blush (for example), it looks like a typical Goldman Sachs' employee is making $500,000 per year.

Then you look more closely, and you see that the MEDIAN is actually more like $60,000.

If you aren't accounting for that inequality, then your study (which purports to measure a typical standard of living) is essentially useless, and is more creative than truthful.