# Table B08201- Household size by vehicles available

I'm trying to understand this table better.

Take for example Cass County, MO which has a population count at just at 100,000.  We have extrapolated a number of datasets to arrive at an available workforce defined as 18 to 64, have a HS / GED, removed those w/a Grad School education or higher to arrive at a population count of 40,806 for this county.

There are 28,283 families in this county, 12,466 with both spouses in the workforce and Other Families containing single parent home of 5,464.

I am providing the above numbers as a point of reference for my question.  The 37,945 total doesn't seem out of line for what is being reported, but I guess I'm just needing to ensure I understand what these numbers are saying.  They just seem to be out of balance with the above referenced numbers.

Can anyone provide insight on this?  Thank you.

• I don't understand your question. There no specific relationship between vehicles available and labor force participation. Many households with no participants (having only retired people, for example) have cars. The only correlation I'd expect is that a household with two LF participants is more likely to have two vehicles than a household with only one LF participant, or none. What IS weird about this table, though, is the number of households with more vehicles than people. That doesn't make a lot of sense.
• In reply to Patty Becker:

Thanks Patty. There is a correlation in the sense that we are looking at individuals who may need assistance to get to work, particularly what is classified as the non-traditional labor pool. So, households with no vehicle, 2 person households with 1 vehicle means that there would be a need for transportation to get to work if that job opportunity was not easily accessible with public transportation. Granted, we don't know if the individuals in these households are retired or fit the criteria I mentioned earlier. We are just trying to draw some broad assumptions based on the data that is available.

I'm not sure what you mean by the reference to having more vehicles that you say show more vehicles that people unless I'm not understanding this table correctly.

What are they implying that 37, 945 means and likewise are they saying only 8,836 households are a 1-person household? If so, that is not consistent with the data showing 5,464 families for the same county. I can go look up the table name in a bit if your interested.
• In reply to KC_Researcher:

If you could provide links to all the tables you mention, that would help. You are picking bits and pieces of three or four tables, and make some strong assumptions regarding the population of interest to "extrapolate". Something is clearly falling between the cracks of your extrapolation. (In AFF, you can get the link using the "Bookmark" button.)
• In reply to Stas Kolenikov:

So, I don't see the ability to upload a saved query.  Here is a link to the table I'm most interested in understanding.   ACS Table B08201- 2017

As you know the query doesn't save the geography being studied.  I'm looking at a total of 8 counties, but the same question applies to all of these counties.  The county referenced above is Cass County, Missouri.

• In reply to KC_Researcher:

It is all available when you pick the specific table under bookmark:

factfinder.census.gov/.../0500000US29037

The CEEDSCI URL is arguably more ugly as it tries to write the whole browsing history in (it is also a different estimate):

data.census.gov/.../table
• In reply to Stas Kolenikov:

Well, I finally figured this table out.  The top grouping is a summary for the 1, 2, 3, and 4 person households.  What's weird about what they did is if you look at the cells I highlighted in pink roll up to the # highlighted in yellow.  The same follows suit for the other categories.  And, the top # is the # of households for this county.  It would be nice if they would identify the fields a little better but I now understand what they are doing with this table.