Southern Californians Buy Into the Lifestyle

Southern Californians spend more on housing, cars, clothes and grooming and less on books, booze and cigarettes than the rest of the country.

So says a government survey released Tuesday on consumer spending that would seem to confirm some cliches about the local lifestyle.

But although L.A. denizens might be a little self-absorbed when it comes to looking good, they’re also generous, devoting a much bigger slice of their annual expenditures to charity than folks in the San Francisco area, who also spend twice as much on alcohol.

These cultural and financial glimpses come courtesy of the Consumer Expenditure Survey, a dry, numerical compilation of household spending by the Bureau of Labor Statistics that nevertheless yields some juicy details on how people in different parts of the U.S. spend money.

Tuesday’s data for the Los Angeles area, which the survey identifies as Los Angeles, Riverside and Orange counties, reflect the most recent annual spending figures based on long-term household surveys taken in 1999 and 2000.

The survey confirms some regional myths. For example, households in Dallas-Fort Worth do have Texas-size appetites, devoting $6,865, or 14.7% of their annual expenditures, to food, compared with the U.S. average of $5,094, or 13.5%.

In the South, where iced tea is the drink of choice, Atlantans, with $322 in average annual alcohol expenditures, look like teetotalers compared with consumers in Denver, where households spend an average of $621 a year heading for the rocky mountains of Coors.

“Usually cliches are based on some reality,” said Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi, a social psychologist and management professor at the Claremont Graduate University. “The presentation of self through appearance is more important in Southern California . . . so these findings aren’t really all that strange.”

Csikszentmihalyi was nonplused at the news that Southern California households spend $148 a year on books, compared with $153 nationally.

“The weather is too nice to cuddle up with a good book,” he said.

In the Los Angeles area, the average household devoted $16,550, or 37% of its annual expenditures, to shelter--more than a third above the national average.

On a percentage basis, households in the region are devoting even more of their resources to housing than pricey San Francisco or San Diego, where households earmarked just under 36% of their annual spending for shelter.

The figures come as no surprise to local economy watchers, who say L.A.’s fast-growing population, high concentration of low-wage workers and short supply of new housing add up to budget-busting expenditures on housing.

“Scarcity forces people to pay more,” said Jack Kyser, chief economist for the Los Angeles County Economic Development Corp.

If there is one image across the country that defines Angelenos, it is their love affair with the automobile.

On average, L.A.-area households shell out $7,701 annually to keep their cars on the road, compared with the U.S. average of $7,215. Still, it’s not as bad as it seems. On a percentage basis, Southlanders devote less of their spending on getting around--17.2%--than the rest of the nation--19.2%.

The focus on image and the body is evident in expenditures on booze and cigarettes, which are lower than the national average.

Households here spent $337 annually during the survey period for alcohol, compared with the U.S. average of $345. By comparison, wine-loving San Franciscans dropped $771 on alcoholic beverages. And California’s tough no-smoking laws, high tobacco taxes and health-conscious lifestyle appear to be paying off in terms of tobacco expenditures.

The average Los Angeles household spent just $204 annually on tobacco products during the survey period, compared with the U.S. average of $309.

For Angelenos, the ultimate statement of identity appears to be clothing, according to the BLS data.

During the 1999-2000 survey period, Los Angeles-area households spent an average of $2,450 annually on apparel. That’s 35% more than the U.S. average on a dollar basis and well ahead of buttoned-down cities such as Seattle ($1,918) and Portland, Ore. ($1,507).

Ilse Metchek, head of the California Fashion Assn., isn’t surprised. She says Hollywood and the city’s apparel industry make L.A. a fashion trendsetter, a place where residents are already on to the next big thing by the time the last fad hits middle America.

Although it might seem logical that people in colder climates would spend more for clothing, Metchek said balmy weather means Southern Californians feel the need to look sharp all the time. She recently returned from a trip to Seattle and pronounced it a fashion disaster area.

“I’ve never seen so many basic jeans and cloddy shoes,” Metchek sniffed. “I guess those dot-com millionaires never figured out how to dress.”

(BEGIN TEXT OF INFOBOX / INFOGRAPHIC)

Rethinking Priorities, Los Angeles Times

(text of infobox not included)