Headlines
Money Stretches Further in Mississippi, Report Says
In Mississippi, money seems to go a little further than in other states. According to data from the Bureau of Economic Analysis, the relative value of $100 in Mississippi is equal to $115.21, meaning you can buy considerably more for your money in the state than you can in more “expensive” states.
The Tax Foundation reports that the real purchasing power in Mississippi is 36 percent greater than it is in the most expensive U.S district, the District of Columbia, where $100 has a relative value of only $84.96.
“In other words: by this measure, if you have $50,000 in after-tax income in Mississippi, you would have to have after-tax earnings of $68,000 in the District of Columbia just to afford the same overall standard of living,” reports the Tax Foundation.
Mississippi currently has the highest relative value for $100 in the country, with Arkansas, South Dakota, Alabama and West Virginia following closely behind. One hundred dollars has significantly less value in Hawaii, New York, New Jersey and California.
According to the Tax Foundation, there is a relationship between income levels and price levels. “In places with higher incomes, the prices of finite resources like land get bid up,” the Tax Foundation reports. “But the causation also runs in the opposite direction. Places with high costs of living pay higher salaries for the same jobs. This is what labor economists call a compensating differential; the higher pay is offered in order to make up for the low purchasing power.”
Mississippi had a median household income of $37,963 in 2013 – more than $14,000 less than the U.S. median income of $52,250 in 2013. Purchasing power is high in the state because finite resources are more easily available and cost less money. This could
account for being able to purchase more with less.
See which states offer more bang for your buck here.
Beth Harmon is managing editor for HottyToddy.com. Email her at beth.harmon@hottytoddy.com.
SlickRick
July 14, 2015 at 6:23 pm
This is of course why our income rankings are misleading.