Just to add - the HBAI is based on the same survey as Family Spending - the Family Resources Survey. The HBAI dataset has fewer variables but more derived ones (relating to the income and equivalisation issues).
I'd guess that the median figures between FES/Living costs and food and FRS/HBAI would be closer because of the impact of high earning couples.
In terms of re-evaluation of the poverty figures, the equivalisation scales and how this relates to the family or household income-sharing may be a focus for investigation.
Another issue seems to be the unforeseen long-term consequences of the Fowler benefits review removing under-18s from the benefit system (except in defined rare circumstances).
It seems to be the case that 18 and 19 year olds (and older) are also not claiming in significant numbers - which means they aren't being supplied with what Jobcentre Plus calls 'help towards the labour market'. There's an issue relating to support within the family being less effective (and certainly less research-based) than external help. This does impact on the poverty figures in multi-family (over 18s) households if increased numbers are supported within the family.
The Fowler changes to young people's benefits clearly relate to the unresolved NEET issues - one can't imagine the Employment Service or Jobcentre Plus allowing the numbers to fester.
Paul
---------------------------------------------------------
Paul Bivand
Head of Analysis and Statistics
Direct Line: 020 7840 8335
Inclusion
3rd floor, 89 Albert Embankment, London SE1 7TP
Tel: 020 7582 7221
Fax: 020 7582 6391
Inclusion website: http://www.cesi.org.uk/
Consider the environment - do you really need to print this email?
The contents of this e-mail and any attachment(s) are intended solely for the use of the addressee. If you are not the intended recipient please return the e-mail to the sender and delete from your mailbox.
The Centre for Economic & Social Inclusion is a company limited by guarantee. Registered in England & Wales number 2458694. Registered address: 89 Albert Embankment, London SE1 7TP
-----Original Message-----
From: email list for Radical Statistics [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Mike Brewer
Sent: 07 June 2010 09:36
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Definitions - Family Resources Survey and Family Spending
You are indeed comparing apples with oranges.
Table 2.3 in HBAI merely says that the average household equivalised income amongst ALL family types is £407/wk. For a couple with no children, that corresponds to an unequivalised income of £407/wk {sic).
The FES finding is that the average household UNequivalised income amongst couples with no children is £607/wk.
I don't know if HBAI reports the average household income amongst couples with no children.
Mike
Paul Spicker wrote:
> Could someone explain a discrepancy to me? In Family Spending 2009,
> the mean weekly income for a couple (consisting of one man and one
> woman) gives mean weekly income in 2008 as £746 gross and £607
> disposable (Table A40). A small downward adjustment can be made for
> same -sex couples, but mean disposable income is still be over £600.
> In Households Below Adequate Income 2009, based on a different survey
> - the old FES, now I think called the Living Costs and Food Survey -
> the mean weekly disposable income for a couple in 2007-08 is given as
> £487 per week (Table 2.3). A couple without children provide the
> reference figure used as the basis for equivalised incomes.
>
> There is probably a very simple answer to this - it's likely to be a
> difference in definitions - but without knowing just what the basis of
> the calculation is in both reports, I'm guessing. Can someone tell me
> what it is?
>
> Paul Spicker
>
> ****************************************************** Please note
> that if you press the 'Reply' button your message will go only to the
> sender of this message. If you want to reply to the whole list, use
> your mailer's 'Reply-to-All' button to send your message automatically
> to [log in to unmask] Disclaimer: The messages sent to this list
> are the views of the sender and cannot be assumed to be representative
> of the range of views held by subscribers to the Radical Statistics Group.
> To find out more about Radical Statistics and its aims and activities
> and read current and past issues of our newsletter you are invited to
> visit our web site www.radstats.org.uk.
> *******************************************************
--
Mike Brewer
Programme Director, Direct Tax and Welfare Institute for Fiscal Studies, www.ifs.org.uk, 020 72914800
******************************************************************
The Institute for Fiscal Studies is registered in London,
Company number 954616, limited by guarantee.
Registered Office: 7 Ridgmount Street, London. WC1E 7AE
IFS is a registered charity, number 258815
Please note that the IFS may monitor email traffic data as well
as the content of email.
******************************************************************
******************************************************
Please note that if you press the 'Reply' button your
message will go only to the sender of this message.
If you want to reply to the whole list, use your mailer's
'Reply-to-All' button to send your message automatically
to [log in to unmask]
Disclaimer: The messages sent to this list are the views of the sender and cannot be assumed to be representative of the range of views held by subscribers to the Radical Statistics Group. To find out more about Radical Statistics and its aims and activities and read current and past issues of our newsletter you are invited to visit our web site www.radstats.org.uk.
*******************************************************
******************************************************
Please note that if you press the 'Reply' button your
message will go only to the sender of this message.
If you want to reply to the whole list, use your mailer's
'Reply-to-All' button to send your message automatically
to [log in to unmask]
Disclaimer: The messages sent to this list are the views of the sender and cannot be assumed to be representative of the range of views held by subscribers to the Radical Statistics Group. To find out more about Radical Statistics and its aims and activities and read current and past issues of our newsletter you are invited to visit our web site www.radstats.org.uk.
*******************************************************
|