Q1: For meaningful cashflow (income and expenses) comparison between households, should we use per-household or per-capita?
A: Most economists, policy makers, marketing teams,,, prefer per-household. For a household size up to 5, I agree the per-household metric is better. I think this yardstick is invalid if a special household has “unusual” size.

Level of (resource) provision is determined by per-household (not capita) cash flow. Most of the “provisions” are shared within a household — shelter/utilities, car, nutrition, healthcare, vacations, gadgets+toys, parenting as a “benefit”

Q2: why do I bother with this theoretical question?
A: for example, see PAP’s tilt towards the vulnerable #per-capita

Other examples:

• [18] peers’ family burn rate=USD 6k
• struggl`families earning SGD7k @@
• S$2500 family burn rate excl.hous`driv` #BizTimes