When people talk about the cost of living, they often rely on national averages to explain how affordable or expensive life is in America. But those averages can mislead. Averages flatten out the highs and lows, hiding regional extremes that shape real experiences with housing, food, healthcare, and income. For many Americans, the number that matters isn’t the national average — what they face at the grocery store, in rent, or on their monthly utility bill.
Contents
Why National Averages Don’t Tell the Full Story
National statistics are helpful for spotting trends, but they’re a poor mirror for how people live day-to-day. A $70,000 salary might stretch comfortably across rent, groceries, and savings in some areas. In others, it can leave a household treading water.
The International Monetary Fund explains that traditional indexes miss key factors affecting consumer experience. Cost comparisons often fail to reflect local purchasing power, hidden fees, or access to public services. In other words, even if two cities have similar prices for goods, what people get for their money can vary wildly. This can make it challenging to assess affordability unless localized, ground-level data is used to paint a fuller picture.
Boise, Idaho: A Clearer Lens on Affordability
Boise offers a sharp contrast to high-cost coastal metros. People living there benefit from lower expenses across categories like housing, healthcare, and transportation — without necessarily sacrificing quality of life. This kind of balance is increasingly rare.
A cost-of-living breakdown for Boise shows that median home prices, utility costs, and other key expenses are well below those of cities like Seattle or San Francisco. These savings compound across daily life, from lower energy bills to more accessible healthcare.
While Boise’s cost of living has risen recently, it remains attractive for people looking to stretch their dollar further—especially for remote workers or retirees leaving higher-cost states.
The Gap Between Income and Quality of Life
A recent CBS News report on cost of living draws attention to a growing problem: rising incomes don’t always mean better living conditions. In many cities, salaries have increased modestly—but rent, childcare, food, and gas have jumped even faster. That imbalance puts many Americans in financial strain, even when earning above-average wages.
The disconnect between earnings and experience is now a central issue in understanding economic well-being. For example, a monthly rent of $1,400 might seem reasonable on paper. Still, in many metro areas, that amount barely covers the cost of a modest one-bedroom — while in lower-cost regions, it could secure a much larger space or even a mortgage. National averages don’t capture that contrast.
Looking Beyond the Numbers: How People Actually Live
The IMF outlines how cost-of-living metrics often ignore what affects people’s lives: access to education, health outcomes, commute times, and job opportunities. These quality-of-life factors can’t be summed up in a single number. Two people earning the same income in different cities might have drastically different access levels to essential services or time for family and leisure.
Economists are calling for a more nuanced approach to understanding affordability that looks at both price levels and personal outcomes. This includes evaluating whether a household has access to decent housing, healthy food, and safe neighborhoods, not just whether prices are technically within the range of the average salary.
A Better Framework for Cost Comparisons
What would it look like to measure affordability in a way that accounts for these differences? First, local data must be prioritized. One-size-fits-all statistics are out of step with real-world challenges. Second, comparisons must reflect how much value people get from what they spend — not just the raw costs.
A recent IMF article on accurate cost-of-living metrics stresses that averages don’t capture the disparity between households that may technically live in the same income bracket but experience entirely different realities. It’s not just about inflation but distribution, access, and lived conditions.
Rethinking Affordability in a Changing Economy
As housing markets shift and inflation continues to ripple through essential goods, individuals and families reevaluate what affordability means. Cities like Boise are examples of how location can impact financial flexibility.
Understanding these differences is essential for renters, homebuyers, and policymakers alike. Recognizing the flaws in national cost-of-living averages pushes the conversation toward more equitable solutions — where affordability isn’t measured in theory but in how well people live.
