Per-capita income, personal income rise in Durham MSA '07

The latest data from the U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis has released updated data on income levels in the Triangle, and the news is good for the region.

Per-capita personal income grew by 6.1% in the Durham-Chapel Hill MSA last year, up from 5.5% in 2006 and well ahead of the 5.2% national average.

Personal income overall (factoring out the per-capita data) rose by 8.4% in Durham's MSA, versus a 6.2% national mean.

In the Raleigh-Cary MSA, per-capita personal income rose 3.8% (vs. 4.6% in '06) and overall personal income rose 8.7%.

Of course, the data are positive findings for the entire reason. That said, it's still interesting to see how this gets portrayed in local media.

The Triangle Business Journal ran a straight-up report focusing on the per-capita numbers under the headline "Raleigh area's per-capita income growth lags nation's; Durham does better." TBJ's was a short report focused on the population-adjusted data.

WRAL saw the variance as an interesting story, too, and also focused on the fact that Durham's per-capita income levels rose above Raleigh's:

Which metro area has the higher per capita income, Durham or Raleigh-Cary?

The Bull City – and that’s no bull, according to the Bureau of Economic Analysis.

In figures released Thursday, the BEA says Durham’s metro statistical area, or MSA, individual income moved past Raleigh-Cary in 2007 at $38,923 vs. $38,648 for Raleigh-Cary.

The news caught N.C. State University economist Dr. Mike Walden by surprise.

“That’s notable,” Walden told WRAL.com. “This gives the leaders of Durham something to crow about. Hopefully this is something they will promote.”

(On a side note, a tip of the hat to 'RAL, whose Durham coverage has gotten a little more robust, at least to this observer, in the last few weeks under new reporter Erin Hartness, with the station recently covering stories ranging from downtown revitalization and the DAP to the Watts-Hillandale July 4 celebration.)

The N&O, on the other hand, focused only on the total personal income levels, listing Raleigh's 8.7% growth versus Durham's 8.4% growth level. The only mention of the per-capita levels?

"Per capita personal income growth was smaller than the growth rate of total income," the N&O writes, six grafs into the story.

Which it certainly was -- but with one MSA below the national average, and another above it, wouldn't that be interesting and relevant?

No less so, of course, than examining why that might be. Are larger families with multiple children living disproportionately in the Raleigh MSA? What about the number of retirees in an area? Are there differences between the Raleigh-Cary core and the drive-till-you-qualify residential areas in southern Wake and Johnston Counties?

That's the kind of insight I'd like to see out of a paper of the N&O's stature. Note that I'm not suggesting that the Durham-Raleigh focus was the right or only one for this story. Actually, WRAL's coverage (via the WRAL LocalTechWire) was perhaps the most robust of any of the outlets on the subject, covering all the factors at hand -- including a look at total regional income and the relative salary levels between the two counties.

(Meanwhile, the Herald-Sun covered this story--nowhere.)

Comments

[Steve]

If you look at the table next to this story in the print version of the N&O (I couldn't find the table online) it has a title of "Per Capita Personal Income" but then lists Raleigh-Cary at number one. If you actually read the data you'll see that the MSAs seem randomly listed -- they're not listed alphabetically, by 2006 or 2007 income, or by % change. I suspect they used the order of total income, since Raleigh is first after the U.S. average, but those numbers aren't listed, so it doesn't make sense.

Someone who just glances at the headline ("Triangle's personal income growth beats U.S. average for '07") and sees R-C listed first would assume they'd done the best in that category, and they didn't.

[Michael Bacon]

Kevin -- your WRAL link goes to the N&O story.

One not so great side of this story which I can't confirm but that I suspect is that while the Durham MSA's per capita income is higher than Raleigh-Cary's, our median household income is likely lower.

In 2006 American Community Survey reports, Durham and Orange counties had MHIs of 46.6k and 46.1k, respectively, whereas Wake County had a MHI of 60k.

What this means is that while Durham's per capita income is higher, our income inequality is even greater. That's something we really ought to try to address.

[mcdemc]

“This gives the leaders of Durham something to crow about. Hopefully this is something they will promote.”

Statistics from the NC Employment Security Commission and the Bureau of Labor Statistics are much more telling of the real employment and compensation situation in the Triangle in either MSA. Per capita incomes are a measure of the total output of our economy, divided by the number of people here. While some folks may think Durham has nothing to "crow" about unless it "beat" Raleigh in some ranking or statistic, those of us that spend our time in this community know all too well that Durham is an economically successful community, but that has so much more to offer its residents than "higher pay". Let's pay attention to all of the statistics describing Durham and not compare them to Raleigh. Instead, we could take an empirical look at the State of Durham and have intelligent conversations about how to better this community.