' '
Dt·.~. - 1- ( '
f'.PR G 1259
U. i( G. Llljtlr ... , y
MC
E
Institute of Home Economics, Agricultural Research Service,
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE lflil~]!.~;Ji®u:4iill!ill!l
Prepared for home agents and home economics specialists of the Agricultural
Extension Service, this publication reports current developments in family
and food economics, and economic aspects of home management.
CONTENTS
OLDER PEOPLE PARTICIPATE IN FOOD SURVEY•••••••••••••••••••••• 1
NEW POULTRY INSPECTION LAW IN EFFECT••••••••••••••••••••••••• 4
TRENDS IN PER CAPITA FOOD SUPPLIES••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 5
RECENT CHANGES IN CONSUMER PRICES............................ 9
HUSBANDS AND WIVES AS DECISION MAKERS........................ 12
CHANGES IN OCCUPATIONS, 1920- 1950•••••••••••••••••••••••••• 14
CENSUS ESTIMATES FUTURE POPULATION........................... 17
TRA.VEL SlJRVEY - 1957 .. .................. • • • • • • · • • • • • • · • • · • • • • 19
ESTIMATED COST OF ONE WEEK'S FOOD•••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 21
CONSl.Jl.!E:R. PRICES. • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 22
INDEX OF ARTICLES APPEARING JUNE 1957 - DEC:EMBER 1958........ 25
ARS 62-5
March 1959 Washington, D. C.
OLDER PEOPLE PARTICIPATE IN FOOD SURVEY
Many older people are being independent these days, and continuing
to maintain their separate establisr~ents instead of doubling up with
the younger generation. What kind of households are these where one or
two older people live in their own home or apartment and do their own
cooking? How well are they getting along?
The Institute of Home Economics conducted a survey of this group
in Rochester, New York, in the spring of 1957, mainly to learn about
the diets and food practices of older persons. Each household in the
stu~ included at least one member who was 65 years of age or over who
was a beneficiary of Old Age and Survivors Insurance. The Social Security
Administration had provided a sample of OASI beneficiaries, from
which had been eliminated all those receiving lump sum payments only,
benefits for children, or benefits for disabilities. Interviewers visited
this sample of households to determine eligibility for the dietary
stu~ . The eligible group included only those that (1) lived alone or
with one other person 55 years old or over 1 and ( 2) kept house in the
sense that they prepared at least 10 meals from home food supplies during
the week pr~ceding the interview.
Half of the households visited failed to meet the eligibility
re~uirements given above. In this group were 33 percent that had more
than 2 members (including 6 percent with all members 55 or over, and
27 percent with 1 or more under 55); 10 percent that would have been
eligible except that they did not eat their meals at heme; and 7 percent
that met all requirements except that they had one member under 55.
About three-fifths of the 1- or 2-person older housekeeping households
eligible for the food study had two members. (See table 1.) A
little under two-fifths were persons--mostly women--keeping house alone.
Still, some elderly men do manage alone--8 percent of the total group
were single, housekeeping men as compared with 30 percent who were women
living alone. Nearly half of all the households were husband-wife families
. There were some other male-female (mostly brother-sister) households--
6 percent of the total--and about the same number made up of two
women . No households with two older men doing their own cooking were
found in this sample.
Home ownership was greater in the 2-person than the 1-person households-
-72 percent of the 2-person and 42 percent of the 1-person households
were homeowners. Car ownership was more apt to depend on whether or not
there was a man in the household. Only 12 or 15 percent of the households
in which one or two women lived alone owned a car, compared with 40 to 50
percent of those in which there -was a male member.
Households that rented their homes paid $54 a month on the average.
The amount averaged about the same for both the 1- and 2-person families.
Homemakers in the husband-wife group had less education, on the
average, than those in the other groups. Fifty-five percent of them did
not graduate from elementary school, as compared with 24 to 32 percent
-2-
Table 1.--Characteristics of households eligible for food survey,!/
by household composition
£Households of selected OASI beneficiaries in Rochester, New York,
spring 1951]
Percent of
Number Diatrl- Percent homemakers Percent of
of but ion Percent owning Average not gra.du- homemakers
Household composition house- by owning auto- monthly ates of employed
holds type home mobile rent elementary away from
school home
Percent
~11 households ••••••••• 337 100 I 61 32 $54 44 18
2-persons •••..•••.••• 2o8 62
I
72 39 52 49 17
Husband-wife ••••••• 166 49 70 41 52 55 17
Other male-female •• 20 6 80 50 56 24 16
2 females ••••••• . ,. 22 7 85 15 53 26 21
1-person ••....••...•. 129 38 42 20 54 32 19
Male ••••••.••• ,, .•• zr 8 56 48 49 -- --
Female .•.••••• , ..•• 102 30 39 12 56 32 19
!/ Housekeeping (10 or more meals from household food supplies), l or
2 persons, neither less than 55 years of age and one at least 65. At
least one of members entitled to OASI benefits as of December l, 1955.
in the other groups. The groups differed little with respect to the employment
status of the homemaker. About a fifth of the homemakers were
employed away from home full or part time.
Although in general the households were very cooperative, not all of
those eligible for the food study provided the requested information on
food. Sixteen percent pleaded illness, failed to understand, were suspicious
and refused to answer the questions, or for other reasons were not
able to participate. The characteristics of the households participating
in the food study were very similar, however, to those described above
for households eligible for the study. Somewhat more of the homemakers
in the nonparticipating than in the participating group were employed,
and their average educational level was somewhat lower.
The average money value of the food used in a week by the 2-person
households reporting on their food practices was $16.44. (See table 2. )
This amounted to 32 percent of their average weekly money income after
tax. The average money value of food used in a week by the 1-person
households was $8.Z(, or 26 percent of income. In comparison, the 2-per son
urban families in the Northeast region in the 1955 Household Food
Consumption Survey had a money value of $24.83 for food used in a week--
30 percent of income--and 1-person households a value of $12.35--33 percent
of aversge weekly income.
Table 2.--Average income, money value of food from each source, and percent of families having expense
for food away from home and food obtained without direct expense at home in a week, by household
composition
[Households of selected OASI beneficiaries in Rochester, New York, spring 19517
Money value of food ?}
Money per family in a week
income
(after Purchased Obtained Total
Household composition households tax), Total Used without
1957 Away direct y Total hoamt e from expense
]} home 1:J
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8)
Number Dollars Dollars Dollars Dollars Dollars Dollars
All households •••••••••• 283 2,274 13.29 12.96 12.50 0.46 0.33
2-persons ••••••••••••• 174 2,666 16.44 16.06 15.54 .52 .38
Husband-wife •••••••• 143 2,641 16.77 16.38 15.89 .49 -39
Other male-female ••• 13 2,921 14.91 14.66 14.23 .43 .25
2 females ••••.•••••• 18 2,880 15.14 14.76 13.74 1.02 .38
1-person •••••••••••••• 109 1,649 8.27 8.02 7-65 -37 .25
Male .••• .•..•••••••• 23 1,669 8.59 8.38 7.62 .76 .21
Fe.ma.le • ••••••••••••• 86 1,643 8.18 7.92 7.66 .26 .26
-- ------ --- --~- --- ------ --
!/ Based on households reporting income. A total of 231 out of 283 reported income.
~ Includes alcoholic beverages.
3/ Includes food eaten in the home by nonfamily members. !/ Food home-produced or received as gift or as paym~nt ~or services rendered.
Families having
Food at
Expense home
for obtained
food without
away direct
expense 1:J
(9) (10)
Percent Percent
18.1 41.0
19.1 42.0
17.5 4o.6
25.0 30.8
36.4 61.1
16.5 39.4
17.4 26.1
16.3 43.0
I
VJ
I
-4-
Of course the lesser food needs of the Rochester families would
account for some of this difference. All of the persons in the Rochester
study were 55 years of age or over1 and the average age was 72 years.
In the Northeast urban households in 19551 only 46 percent of the meals
in the 2-person and 70 percent in the l-person households were served to
persons 55 years and older.
Another factor in the relatively low expense for food by the
Rochester group was the limited extent to which they had expense for
meals away from home. Only 19 percent of the 2-person and 17 percent
of the l-person households had such expenditures1 as contrasted with
78 percent of the 2-person and 66 percent of the l -person Northeast
urban households in the 1955 study.
An appraisal is underway of the diets of the Rochester group in
terms of the re~uirements for their age and activity and as related to
some of their health problems as they reported them.
--Janet Murray.
NEW POULTRY INSPECTION LPM IN EFFECT
On January 11 19591 the poultry inspection law passed in August 1957
went into effect. Now all poultry and poultry products moving in interstate
commerce are re~uired to be inspected for wholesomeness. This
means that each bird must be examined thoroughly for evidences of disease
or other conditions that would make it unfit for food . Inspected poultry
and poultry products eligible "for movement in interstate commerce are
identified by a mark in the form of a circle containing the words "Inspected
for Wholesomeness by U. S. Department of Agriculture . " The
Department of Agriculture provides this inspection service free.
Previously1 all poultry inspection was voluntary--that is 1 the
processor could have it done if he wished1 but was not obliged to do so.
It is still voluntary for processors not engaging in interstate commerce.
The processor electing to have his products inspected pays a fee for the
service.
Consumers who buy inspected poultry and poultry products bearing
the Federal inspection mark can be sure they are getting meat from healthy
birds processed in sanitary surroundings 1 and that it is labeled truthfully.
Further information about poultry inspection1 as well as about poultry
grading1 is available in Poultry - Grading and Inspection1 Agricultural
Information Bulletin No. 1731 USDA.
-5-
TRENDS IN PER CAPITA FOOD SUPPLIES
The American food supply contains a wider variety of foods and more
of certain important nutrients today than at the beginning of the century.
Several factors have played a part in bringing about these changes.
Technological advances in agriculture and marketing have increased the
quanti ties and kinds of foods in the market. Higher incomes have enabled
more people to buy the kinds of foods they want. Furthermore, people
have become more aware of the importance of nutrition.
The national food supply figures, a historical series dating back
to 1909, are a means of measuring longtime trends in consumption of food
and nutrients. They provide a basis for judging what is happening to
the average level of consumption for the country as a whole, though not
for evaluating the diets of groups within the population. For the latter
type of information we use data obtained directly from families or other
groups of consumers.
How we arrive at food supply estimates
Commodity specialists in the U. S. Department of Agriculture provide
yearly per capita estimates of the number of pounds of the various foods
brought into the Nation's kitchens. These estimat~s are obtained by ad&~
together the total quantities of food produced in this country each
year, the quantities of food carried over from the previous year, and all
imported foods. From this total available for consumption are deducted
the quantities of foods that are exported, left over at the end of the
year, taken by the Armed Forces, or used for feed, seed, or nonfood purposes.
Estimated losses occurring in distribution channels are also
deducted. The remaining food is considered to have "disappeared" into
civilian channels and to approximate annual consumption. This represents
economic consumption rather than food actually eaten, since the food
supply is measured at the retail level.
These per capita estimates generally reflect year to y~ar changes
satisfactorily. However, they may be less satisfactory at times when
there is abnormal accumulation or depletion of retail stocks. For example,
the years 1945 and 1946 appear to b~ years of high food consumption
and consequ~ntly peak years for most of the nutrients. Economists explain
these peak years as being partly due to abnormally high stock accumulation
by both retailers and consumers.
!!ends in food consumption
In brief, the trend has been toward more milk and milk products
(other than butter), more meat and poultry, eggs, fats, and sugars. (See
charts 1, 2, 3.) We are also eating more green and yellow vegetables
and citrus fruits and tomatoes, but less of many of the other kinds of
vegetables and fruits, especially potatoes. (See charts 4, 5.) Consumption
-6-
of grain products has been steadily downward. (See chart 3 . ) What effect
have these shifts had upon the nutritional value of the food supply1
Total calories are down.--The food supply in 1909 was almost 3~600
calories per person per day, compared with about 3,200 in 1957 . The
lowered caloric value of the food supply reflects a reduced caloric need.
During the past half century we have had a marked decrease in the percentage
of the population doing farm work or other kinds of heavy labor.
We have had increasing numbers of laborsaving devices on farms , in factories,
and in homes. Conse~uently, people's activities re~uire less
energy than formerly . Also contributing to a reduced caloric need is
the increasing proportion of elderly persons in the population .
Calories from fat are up .--The share of the total calories derived
from nutrient fat increased from 32 percent in 1909 to 41 percent in
1956. Meanwhile the share from carbohydrates decreased from 56 percent
to 47 percent. Protein has stayed around 11 to 12 percent .
The average ~uantity of nutrient fat in the food supply was 126 grams
per person per day in 1909-13. In 1935-39 it was 133 grams and by 1956
had reached the high level of 148 grams~ an increase of 17 percent since
1909-13. (See chart 6.)
The increase in total fat from 1935-39 to 1956 is derived about
e~ually from animal and vegetable sources. In the contribution to fat
of foods from animal sources~ the large increase in use of meat~ poultry,
and fish is somewhat offset by the decrease in use of butter . Lard consumption
has decreased slightly and butter consumption is about half of
what it was in 1935-39 . Although margarine provides 3 times as much fat
as in 1935-39, its increase has not ~uite e~ualed the decrease of butter.
Together the table fats, butter and margarine ~ are down almost 15 percent
as sources of fat. However~ salad dressings are now contributing
one and a half times as much nutrient fat as two decades ago .
Animal foods move up as source of protein . - -At the beginning of the
century~ flour and cereal products stood first among food groups in
supplying protein; the meat~ poultry~ fish group was second. Consumption
of grain products has decreased steadily until now it is only one-half
as great as in 1909. As a result~ grains have shifted to third place in
importance in providing protein. The meat, poultry~ fish group has moved
to first place and dairy products to second .
All animal products combined have been providing an increasing
share of the protein! Two-thirds of the total protein in the food supply
today ·comes from animal sources , compared with one -half in earlier years.
The protein in the food supply was at its highest level in 1909 and
again in 1945-46--about 103 grams per person per day . Protein was lowest
(88 grams per person per day) in 1935 when meat ~ poultry~ fish consumption
dropped to its lowest point. By this time consumption of grain products
had declined to a level considerably below what it was in 1909 . Since
1946 protein available for consumption has fluctuated between 94 and
97 grams per person per day.
DAIRY PRODUCTS*
Of 1909-13 I - ' "IDOlr -~---~-1
.il I I I .I I I .I i I
0
1910 1920 1930 1940 1950 1960
Chart 1
I
~ ~-------------------------.
GRAINS AND SUGARS
I
OF 1909-13-------------~
0 Sugar, sirup ~
I
0 ... _
I
...... .... ..._ ___
Groins/-... _______ ..... ~
0 l 'I I .L..........L..u . .L...w.J.......~ ---
1910 1920 1930 1940 1950 1960
-7-
MEAT AND FATS
% OF 1909-13 ----------------,
I
150
Fats and oils* '- .../' - ~ ~' ""'.,._ .... _.,_. . _- --1
100 ' ---- ................. _.. . _. ...,,."
I
Meat, poultry, fish
so ~I~~~~~~~~~~J~~~~~~~~~~~~'~· ~
1910 1920 1930 1940 1950 1960
• ""( LUOC:J II. CCIIII, U LT 1>0 .. :, • •D l lltTLI
Chart 2
VEGETABLES AND FRUIT
%OF 1909-13---------------,
Green, yellow veg. ' _.... _,,.. .. '
150 .... ---" ' - I'I '., ""' ' "'. .....
100L/~,?~ I
~-----
50 II " " I " " I " " I " " I " " I" " I " " I " " I " " I " ,1 1910 1920 1930 1940 1950 1960
"'fG. U I ·!«J .,,lt,CULtU•"l •fU ,.lltC" U I'~ Cl ._u_. •_ .••••_•_•·-•o _o•_•<_><_cc_<c_••;,-----";.G;_·..";__•·>>u_ •_. ._' "_" _"'-" -" -"'-''-" -'"-'•C_o,
Chart 3
CITRUS, POT A TOES
OF 1909-13---------
-~ 0
Citrus* and tomatoes
0 _,...- _ Potatoes, sweetpotatoes I
.... ' I
,,,.._ ... _ --.... ..,-._ ............ -,
PO ll.J I I I I I I, I I I I I I I I I, I I I I ' I I • .L...u I It ;-:- :';";', ... ...: ' I I I 1910 1920 1930 1940 1950 1960
• •oon.uou CIJII.IJ JtJICf ON JlfoiGLI! n rrwcr" •~ su.
J , f~ •· • O"IJ"C "' '""''• I'll (ll#'lf.J (1\111.1"" CO.,JU•I'J tOOI, UU,
~•IHlOf olCI!CUl1Uif
Chart 5
Chart 4
PROTEIN, FAT, CARBOHYDRATE
%OF 1909 -13----------------,,I
150 -j
I Fat
\ -
100 - - -------""'-~;;;;-·----- -11
Protein / Carbohydrate /'
50 I I I 1- I I I I I
1910 1920 1930 1940 1950 1960
Chart 6
-8-
Mor e calcium and riboflavin.--Some nutrients follow the trend of
specific foods more closely than others. Calcium and riboflavin are two
of these. The qua..r1ti ty of these nutrients in the food supply is closely
associated with the total consumption of milk and its products. Milk
products (excluding butter) provide three -fourths of the calcium and one.
half of the riboflavin in the food supply. Available supplies of these
nutrients were at their peak level in 1945-46 when consumption of milk
products was highest. The two nutrients dropped to a lower level in
1947-49, and have maintained this lower level since.
Enriched bread and flour provide B-vitamins and iron.--In the ear~
forties iron) thiamine, riboflavin, and niacin were added. to bread and
flour under the enrichment program. Consequently, available supplies of
these nutrients markedly increased at that time.
In 1956 the enrichment of grains added the following to the food
supply:
Percent
Iron. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
Thiamine. . • • . • . • . . • . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • • • . . 30
Riboflavin. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
Niacin. . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
Not all of the increases in supplies of iron and B-vitamins since
the early forties were due to enrichment. steady increases in the consumption
of dairy products increased the supply of riboflavin. Increased
consumption of meat and poultry since the midthirties contributed greatly
to the supply of iron and B-vitamins.
Despite the important contribution which enrichment of grain products
has made to national food supplies of the B-vitamins and iron, these
nutrients have been declining in recent years. A major force in counter·
balancing the effect of the enrichment program has been the decreasing
consumption of grain products which, even before enrichment, were an
important source of the B-vitamins and iron. Use of another good source
of some of these nutrients--dry beans and nuts--has also lessened. Moreover,
recent decreased consumption of pork has had a lowering effect on
supplies of thiamine.
Vegetables and fruits increase; vitamins A and C too.--While vegetables
and fruits are good sources of iron, calcium, and some of the
B-vitamins, their major contribution to the food supply is in vitamin A
value and ascorbic acid. They provide about 60 percent of the vitamin A
value and 90 percent of the ascorbic acid in the food supply.
Large increases in green and yellow vegetables are chiefly responsible
for the improvement in the vitamin A value of the food supply.
The supply of this vitamin was highest in the years 1943 to 1946 when
vict ory gardens were popular. The contribution of the potato-sweetpotato
-9-
group to vitamin A in the food supply dropped from 27 percent in 1909-13
to about 10 percent in 1956 because sweetpotato consumption dropped by
two-thirds over this period.
Large increases in consumption of citrus fruit and tomatoes and
green and yellow vegetables accounted for the large and steady upward
trend in ascorbic acid from 1909 to 1946. The ascorbic acid level increased
more than one-fourth during this period. Increases in the
aforementioned foods more than compensated for the marked decreases in
potatoes and sweetpotatoes, once major contributors of ascorbic acid.
Since 1946 the decrease in the total consumption of fruits ana
vegetables has lowered the vitamin A value and ascorbic acid available
in the food supply. In 1956 the ascorbic acid content of the food
supply was estimated to be only about 8 percent higher than in 1909-13,
the vitamin A value 6 percent higher.
--Berta Friend.
Glossy prints of charts on page 7 may be obtained from:
Division of Photography
Office of Information
U. S. Department of Agriculture
Washington 25, D. c.
Prices:
8 x 10 inches, $1.00 each
5 x 7 inches, $0.75 each
4 x 5 inches, $0.60 each
1.
0
List negative number, title, and size.
~- Make check or money order payable to "Office of Information, USDA"
Other charts avialable, with negative numbers, are:
Food Energy
Calcium
Thiamine
58 (4)
58 (4)
58 (4)
5537
5540
5542
Vitamin A Value
Ascorbic Acid
RECENT CHANGES IN CONSUMER PRICES
58 (4) 5544
58 (4) 5546
The Economic Report of the President, transmitted to Congress January 20
this year, focused attention on recent changes in prices paid for family
living. ~ Consumer prices, as measured by the Consumer Price Index, rose
2.6 percent between July 1957 and November 1958,in spite of the moderate
recession that marked the early months of the period. General reasons
for the rise in prices during the last few years, and the continuing increase
during the depression months were: (1) heavy and rapidly mounting
demands for goods and services; (2) forces not closely related to the
immediate business situation, such as delayed adjustment of prices in
service industries to earlier increases in prices and costs in other industries,
and unfavorable supply conditions for foods; and (3) increases in
~ Full report available f~om the Superintendent of Documents, Government
Printing Office, Washington 25, D. C. for 75 cents.
-10-
costs of production without commensurate gains in output, due to (a)
large additions to and replacement of plant and eq_uipment; (b) rapidly
enlarging number of professional and technical personnel; and (c) increased
wages, salaries, and fringe benefits.
Prices of some items making up the Consumer Price Index contributed
much more to the rise in the index than did others . Higher prices of
various kinds of consumer services and of food were major factors in the
increase. Prices of manufactured products with the major exception of
automobiles, on the other hand, were reasonably stable . (See table 3. )
Services. --The greatest change among major i terns in the Consumer
Price Index was the sharp rise in the price of services, especially services
other than rent. (See chart 7.) Service costs were steady during
World War II, but have been going up ever since , both absolutely and in
relation to comm.odi ties. An indication of the growing importance of
service costs to consumers is the fact that serrices including rent
accounted for 34 percent of the cost of the entire "market basket" of
ite~q making up the index at the end af 1958, compared to 31 percent
early in 1950. The change for services less rent was even greater. These
services made up 38 percent of the index last year, 20 percent in 1950.
Prices of services provided by public utilities, like el~ctricity,
gas, water, telephone, and public transportation, which are government
regulated, tend to adjust to inflationary pressures with some time lag.
Prices of this group have risen sharply since mid-1957. Such service
charges as real estate taxes, car registration fees, postage rates,
mortgage interest, and car and property insurance premiums have also
made substantial gains.
Another group of consumer services, such as laundry and dry cleaning,
domestic help, medical care, personal care, and TV repair, owe much of
their total cost to payment for labor. Prices for this group have risen
steadily, and considerably more than those of the regulated utilities,
because of wage and salary increases.
Rent rose 2.4 percent in the 18 months after mid-1957 . This was
well below the annual increase just after the war.
Food prices.--Food prices rose sharply in the first q_uarter of 1958,
leveled off in the second q_uarter, then declined somewhat. The rise
early in the year was due largely to the fact that fewer livestock were
marketed and unfavorable weather reduced the supply of fresh fruits and
vegetables. Also, food marketing costs continued their uvNard trend
because of higher wage rates, freight charges, and expenses incurred in
increasing the q_uality and variety of foods offered consumers in the
market.
Commodities other than food.--Increased prices of automobiles, both
new and used, were the cause of most of the rise in the index of prices
for consumer durables. Prices of appliances continued to decline and
~~rniture prices fell slightly.
-11-
Chart 7
CONSUMER PRICES ON A RECENT BASE
Index, 1953-54:100
115r--.--.--,---.--,--,,--.--.--.---.--.-/~
r---
110 /
/ Services /
less Ren /
105
100
95
90 1954 1955 1957
Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics.
Table 3.--Changes in the Consumer Price Index,
July 1957 - November 1958
Item
.Al.l items . ...........•.••......
Food • ....••••...•••...••...••
Other commodities ••••••••••••
Durable goods ••••••••••••••
New automobiles ••••••••••
Used automobiles •••••••••
Other durables ~··••••••
Appliances •••••••••••••
Furniture, bedding •••••
Nondurable goods •••••••••••
Serv-ices ..........•....•..•.•
Rent • ••••••••••••••••••••••
Services less rent •••••••••
Relative importance
in index,
December 1957 l}
100.0
28.6
36.4
13.6
3.0
1.6
9.0
3.1
1.7
22.8
34.2
5.8
28.4
Percent change,
July 1957 -
November 1958
2.6
1.7
2.0
4.3
13.6
9.0
·7 11. -1.9
ll - ·9
.7
4.0
2.4
4.2
!/ Detail will not add to total because a small number of items could
not be allocated to any individual group.
~ Includes groups not shown separately.
lJ Change from June 1957 to September 1958.
- 500 ~0 5 0-59 -2
-12-
The index for nondu~bles other than food changed very little between
July 1957 and November 1958. Prices of apparel, gasoline, fuel oil, and
textile housefurnishings fell, while those of tires, cigarettes, snaps
and detergents, prescriptions and drugs, and other miscellaneous consumer
nondurables moved higher.
HUSBANDS AND WIVES AS DECISION MAKERS y
Home management is concerned with decision making. One of the important
areas for decision of families is in the use of funds for buying
goods and saving for the future. The questions of how decisions about
the use of money are made and what family members make them are of considerable
interest to those who teach home management or counsel with
families on management problems. Results of a study made by the Survey
Research Center of the University of Michigan provide some information
about the decision making practices of husbands and wives.
This study is based on a cross section of families in all parts of
the United States. The data are from a panel study in which 5 successive
interviews were made over a period of 2-1/2 years (1954-1956) and from
2 other studies made in 1955 and 1956. In the interviews, the husbands
and wives were questioned as to which made the decision about (1) buying
a car; (2) buying household furnishings and equipment; (3) saving; and
(4) handling money and bills. Results of the questioning are summarized
in table 4.
In urban families the husband was the main decision maker when it
came to buying a car. He alone decided about the purchase in 51 percent
of the c~ses, while the wife alone made the decision in only 3 percent.
Husband and wife were equally responsible for this decision in 28 percent
of the families.
When the purchase of household furniture and equipment was involved
it was a different story. This usually took a joint decision of both
husband and wife. In 54 percent of the families the two shared equally
in the decision. In another 15 percent both took part, but one or the
other (usually the wife) took the major responsibility. In cases where
one family member alone made the decision it was almost always the wife
(25 percent of the cases, compared to 4 percent for the husband).
Decisions about saving were a joint undertaking in approximately
half of the families. When such decisions were left to one partner alone
it was more frequently the wife than the husband (27 and 15 percent,
Y Adapted from "Do Husbands or Wives Make the Purchasing Decisions'?"
by Elizabeth H. Wolgast, in the Journal of Marketing, quarterly publication
of the American Marketing Association, Vol. 23, No. 2 (October 1958),
pp. 151-158 . Printed with permission of the author.
-13-
Table 4 .--Reported decision making patterns in urban families
Who in your family decides . . . 7
When it's
When it's About time to
time to About money buy house-buy
savings and hold goods
a car bills !/ and
furniture
Percent Percent Percent Percent
Wife only ......... . ..•.. 3 Z7 40 25
Wife predominantly •••••• l I 4 2 11
Both equally •• • ••••••••• 28 48 28 54
Husband predominantly ••• 7 3 2 4
Husband only •••••••• • ••• 51 15 Z7 4
Don't buy (don't save) .~ 8 3 l/ 1
Not ascertained ••••• •• •• 2 5I 1 1
Number of cases .....•. 651 644 959 661
!/ This question did not appear in the panel study. Comparison of the
panel and nonpanel study was made on the savings question, however, and
it showed that the two studies matched very closely in this respect.
5./ "Not ascertained's" were excluded here. lJ Less than 0 .5 percent .
respectively) . In the more general area of handling money and bills,
decision making was the province of the wife alone in 40 percent of the
families, of the husband alone in Z7 percent, and of both together in
28 percent .
The general pattern, then, is this: Car purchases are determined
by husbands and almost never by wives alone. Decisions to purchase household
goods are made jointly or by wives singly. In handling money and
bills and saving, responsibility is often shared; where it is not, the
wife is more likely than the husband to play the dominant role.
In general, answers from husbands and wives were in agreement about
the person or persons who made the decisions. This indicates that family
roles were well defined and well understood among family members. The
number of responses to the effect that both partners participated in a
decision but that one predominated over the other was relatively small.
This also seems to indicate that family roles were well defined, and that
decisions were usu~ly made either by both husband and wife equally or by
on~ of them alone without undue influence from the other.
Variations in' the pattern . --The division of the .decision making
function seemed to vary little among families at different income levels,
except in the case of savings . Higher income increased the husband's
-14-
importance on matters of saving, and decreased the wife's. The wife was
the sole decision maker on savings in 36 percent of the families with
incomes u_~der $3,000, but in only 9 percent of families with $10,000 or
more. Husbands were somewhat more influential in decisions about car
buying and wives in decisions about homefurnishings in higher than in
lower income families.
Age had a more marked effect than income in determining who made
decisions. With advancing age 1 and perhaps increased length of marriage,
reports of joint decisions declined. In rural families, joint decisions
were more frequent than in urban families 1 and the wife' s role seemed
somewhat less important. This may be because farm and family finances
are usually combined in farm homes.
The fact that the wife was employed seemed to have no effect on her
decision making in the areas covered in this study. Wives with children
under 6 years of age had considerably less independent responsibility
for economic decisions than other wives.
CHANGES IN OCCUPATIONS, 1920 - 1950
The twentieth century has brought many changes in ways U. S. residents
earn a living. These occupational shifts reflect social and
economic trends of the period, such as (1) the decreasing number of
farms; (2) technological advances in industry and agriculture; (3) the
rising level of education; (4) improving economic conditions; and (5)
increasing employment of women. ·
The total number of persons in the '!economically active civilian
population" or work force increased from 42.2 million to 59.0 million
during the 30 years from 1920 to 1950. ~ The distribution of these persons
among the 3 major occupational groups used in the census classification
was as follows:
Occupational group:
Perc~nt of the economically
active population
.All •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••
White-collar workers ••••••••••
Manual and service workers ••••
Farii'IWorkers • ••••••••••••••••••
1920 1950
100
25
48
zr
100
37
51
12
~ U. S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census. Occupational
Trends in the United States, 1900 to 1950. Working Paper No. 5 (1958).
In the report above , 1920 rather than 1900 is compared with 1950 because
of greater comparability of data and because the 1920's are closer to
the experience of readers.
-15-
Thus, as the importance of farmworkers in the labor force decreased,
people moved into other occupations. The greatest actual and relative
increase was in the white-collar group, made up of professional and technical
workers, managers and officials, clerical workers and sales people.
A smaller growth occurred in the manual and service occupations, including
craftsmen, operatives , laborers (except farm and mine), household and
other service workers.
Changes among men workers
During the 30 years between 1920 and 1950 the number of employed
men increased from 33.6 million to 42.6 million, or 27 percent. (See
table 5.) This growth represents increase in the number of males of
working age almost entirely, for the rate of employment of men remains
fairly constant --in other words, most men of employable age work in normal
times.
The drop from 10.2 to 6.4 million farmworkers represented a 38 percent
decrease. Manual and service workers increased from 16.2 million
in 1920 to 23.2 million in 1950, and white-collar workers from 7.2 to
Table 5.--Distribution by major occupational ~roup for men and women
in the economically active civiliru1 population, 1920 and 1950 y
Number of workers
(millions ) 5J Percent of workers
Occupational group
1920 1950 1920 1950
Male !Female Male Female Male Female Male Female
I
.......................... 33.61 8 .6 42 .6 16.4 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0
White-collar workers ••••••• 7.21 3.4 13.0 8.6 21.4 38.8 30.5 52.5
Professional, technical. . 1.3 1.0 3.1 2.0 3.8 11.7 7.2 12.2
Managers , officials, etc. 2.6 .2
I
4 .5 1 .7 7.8 . 2.2 , 10.5 4.3
Clerical and kindred ••••• 1.8 1.6 2.7 4.5 5.3 18.7 6.4 27.4
Sales workers •••••••••••• 1.5 .5 2 .7 1.4 4.5 6.3 6.4 8.6
~ual and service workers. 16.2 4.1 23.2 7 .2 48.2 47.6 54.6 43.9
Craftsmen ....••••.••••••• 5.4 . l 8.1 .3 16.0 1.2 19.0 1.5
Operatj_ves •••.••••••••••• 4.8 1.7 8.7 3.3 14.4 20.2 20.5 20.0
Laborers (except farm / ••• 4.7 .2 I 3.7 .l 14.0 2.3 8.8 .8
Private household •••••••• .l 1.4 . l 1.5 .2 15.8 .2 8.9
Other service •••••••••••• 1.2 .7 2 .6 2.1 3.6 8.1 6.o J 12.6
Farmworkers • ••..••.••••.••• 10.2, 1.2 6 .4 .6 30 .4 13.5 14.91 3.7
!/ Due to changes in Census definitions the "economically active civilian popution'vas
slightly different in makeup in 1920 and 1950. In 1920 it included all
ainf'ul workers" 10 years old or over; in 1950 all persons 14 years old or over
the "experienced labor force." The 10-13 age group was retained in the 1920
ta because, the author states, "This approach provides a more accurate picture of
e Pre-1940 work force ••• " Y Figures rounded to the nearest tenth.
-16-
13.0 million. Percentagewise, the increase in white-collar workers ~s
t he more important (81 percent, compared to 44 percent for manual and
service jobs). In the white-collar category the increase in profession
and technical men was outstanding. About 7 percent of all male civiliBl!
workers were in professional and technical jobs in 1950, compared to
4 percent in 1920.
Changes in women's occupations
During the 30 years the number of economically active civilian women
increased from 8.6 to 16.4 million, or 90 percent. In the same years
the population of females in the working age groups increased from 41 to
57 million, 2/ or approximately 40 percent. Thus the growth in then~ber
of working women reflects not only population growth, but a substMtially
higher rate of employment among women in 1950 than in 1920.
In actual numbers, women in white-collar jobs more than doubled
(rising from 3.4 million to 8.6 million); those in manual and service
jobs increased by about 3/4 (from 4.1 to 7.2 million); and the relative~
small group in farmwork was cut in half. In 1950, 52 percent of t he
employed women were in jobs classed as white-collar work, compared to
39 percent in 1920.
The proportion of all women workers who were doing professional
and tecP-nical work--a subgroup of the white-collar category--was about th
same in 1950 as in 1920 (12 percent). But because the number of men in
professional and technical jobs had increased relatively more than that
of women, women were a somewhat less important part of the entire professional
-technical group in 1950 than 3 decades earlier. They held
40 percent of these jobs at the midcentury, compared with 44 percent in
1920. The following shows the change in three subgroups of professional
and technical workers:
Female workers as a
Occupational group: percent of total
1920 1950
All professional and technical workers.. ~ ~
College teachers and presidents •••••••
Other teachers (except art, music,
d.ancingJ etc.) . ...............•.....
Technicians (medical, dental, etc.) •••
30
84
57
23
75
36
On t he gain among professional women were physicians and surgeons,
who increased from 5 percent of all physicians and surgeons in 1920 to
6 percent in 1950. But women in these professions were a small group
at both pe riods--some 7,000 in 1920 and 12,000 30 years later--and l ess
5} U. S. Department of Commerce., Bureau of the Census, Current PQpul5l!:tion
Reports. Populat i on Estimates, Series P-25, Nos. 114 and 146.
-17-
than l percent of all women workers. Women in managerial~ official~ and
proprietary capacities (another subgroup of the white-collar category)
made more progress~ increasing from 7 percent of the total number in
these jobs in 1920 to 14 percent in 1950.
Although the number of women in manual and service jobs increased~
the proportion dropped from 48 percent of all working women to 44 percent.
Notable in this connection is the decline in household servants. In
1920~ 16 percent of all employed women were in service in private homes;
at midcentury only 9 percent were domestics. Counterbalancing this drop
was the rise in employment as other types of service workers~ such as
waitresses and cooks in places other than private homes, as beauticians,
charwomen, and practical nurses. Such service jobs took 8 percent of
women workers in 1920, and 13 percent in 1950.
CENSUS ESTIMATES FUTURE POPULATION y
Those concerned with long-range planning may want to take another
look at their plans, if they are based on projections of U. S. population.
The Bureau of the Census has modified its 1955 estimates and come
up with higher figures. It sees the possibility of total U. S. population
reaching 244 million by 1975 instead of 228 million, the earlier
estimate. Looking ahead to 1980, our population may be up as high as
273 million, or half again as much as the 174 million of July 1958.
Changing age groups
No let-down for schools.--The number of children of elementary
school age will continue to grow. By 1975, there may be nearly 12 million
more between 5 and 13 years old. (See table 6.) Since nearly all
children between these ages go to school~ it will require careful planning
to accommodate them. Percentagewise, this age group will increase
somewhat less than population as a whole (38 percent and 40 percent,
respectively), and considerably less than the next two age groups.
Classrooms for high school age persons will be a problem, too.
This group (between 14 and 17 years) is expected to increase 6 million
(60 percent) by 1975. The largest percentagewise increase of all--
79 percent--is expected in the college-age group, those between 18 and
21 years of age. Assuming that the same proportion as now tries to
enter college, there can be no let-down in planning for college facilities
and faculty. If the proportion grows, as it is likely to do, the
needs will be even greater.
~From: U. S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census, Current
Population Reports. Series P-25, No. 187 (November 1958) and Series P-
20, No. 90 (December 1958).
-18-
Table 6.--Growth in school age population
Age group Total number
Increase, 1958-1975
(years) 1958 1975 1)_
Millions Millions Millions Percent
5 to 13 •••••••••••• 31.1 42.9 11.8 38
14 to 17 . .......... 10.6 17.0
I
6.4 60
18 to 21 ••••••••••• 9.1 16.3 7.2 I 79
!j Assumes fertility will remain constant at the 1955-57 level.
Many of these young people will not go to college, of course, but
will enter the labor force instead. Persons in the college-age group
and those slightly older, 22 to 24 years of age, make up the majority
of new workers in the labor force. In about 10 years this group will
consist entirely of persons bo1~ since the end of World War II, the
beginnir~ of the sharp increase in birth rates. The high rate of growth
in this group is expected to lower the average age of workers by 1980.
Number of oldsters on increase.--Persons 65 years and over will
continue to increase in number and as a proportion of total population.
Estimates indicate that by 1980 there will be about 25 million oldsters 1
almost 10 million more than in 1957. g)
The proportion of increase expected in our adult population is:
Percent of increase over 1957
25 to 44 years ••••••••• ~·····
45 to 64 years •••••••••••..•.
65 years and over ••••••••••••
1975
15
27
48
1980
32
27
66
The ratio of men to women in the 65 years and over group will continue
to decline. Women now tend to live longer than men by an average
of six years and the spread between death rates of men and women is
increasing. Also, the proportion of men to women among immigrants has
changed. Early in the century immigrants were mainly men. Beginning
about 1930, and after World War II when serviceme~ began bringing home
their war brides, more vomen than men have come.
The middle years.--The number of adults between 25 and 44 is expected
to be about one-third larger in 1980 than in 1957. Since this
is a lower rate of growth than expected for the total population, this
group will be a relat ively less important part of the population than
at present--24 percent as compared to 28 percent.
~ 1958 figures not given.
-19-
The 45 to 65 year age group will also increase at a lower-thanaverage
rate, becoming a smaller proportion of total population by 1980.
It will probably be about 17 percent compared to 20 percent in 1957.
Other changes coming
Here are some additional changes we can look for~ard to:
• The number of households is expected to increase
from the 50 million existing in 1958 to about 69
to 76 million in 1980 (40-50 percent).
• Women living alone or as heads of households including
no relatives are becoming more numerous
and are expected to increase even faster than heretofore.
These households were 9 percent of the
total in 1958, but may be 10 to 13 percent in 1980.
Only about 4 percent of households are maintained
by men living alone or with unrelated persons; this
proportion is not expected to change.
• The number of families--groups of related persons
living together--is expected to increase from the 1958
total of 44 million to 60-63 million in 1980. The
number of families is less than the number of households
because some households are composed of a
single person, or of a group of unrelated persons.
• Family size, on the average, is likely to increase.
It was 3.65 persons in 1958, and may be 3.7 or 3.8
within the next 15 years or so. There will be an
increase in the average number of children under 18
years per family during this time, but not much change
in the proportion of families with children under 18.
This ranges between 56 and 58 percent.
TRAVEL SURVEY - 1957 ij
During 1957, U. s. residents took 231 million trips. This amounts
to an average of about 1-1/3 trips per person. Our trips were fairly
short in duration and distance. We were away from home an average of
approximately 5-1/2 days for each trip. Thirty-nine percent of our trips
took us less than 100 miles from home. Ten percent took us 500 or more
miles away, and 2 percent extended beyond continental United States.
Y Adapted from U. S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census,
Travel Survey- 1957. September 1958.
Other source materials include: Current Population Reports. Series P.
25, Nos. 168 and 191; Series P-66, No. 29.
-20-
These are estimates based on the first systematic nationwide survey
of the t r aveling habits of people tn this country. This survey was made
by the U. S. Bureau of the Census at the request and expense of the
National Association of Travel Organizations.
Ea ch mont h during l957, personal interviews were made in 2,000 households,
making a total of 24,000 interviews for the year . Individuals
from these households were questioned about the number and kinds of trips
they had taken--those out of town overnight, or l-day trips of at least
200 miles for the round trip. If two or more persons took a trip together)
each person counted as having tak~n a trip.
Why do we go?--The Census report groups reasons for making trips
under four main headings--business, visiting friends and relatives, other
vacation and pleasure, and other personal. Visiting friends and relatives
is the most important ·one, accounting for ~st half of the trips.
The number of trips of each kind made during the survey year is shown:
Reason for trip
Total . ........•...................•......
Business .••...•...... ..................
Visit friends and relatives ••••••••••••
Other vacation and pleasure ••••••••••••
Other personal •....•..•.••....•••••.•••
Number of trips
Millions
230.9
44.0
l06.8
6l.l
l9.0
How do we travel?--Private automobiles were used for the largest
share--87 percent--of all trips. Other means of travel--bus, rail, ai r ,
or a combination--made up l3 percent. The auto was used for 72 percent
of business trips, and 90 percent of each of the other kinds of trips.
Ninety-three percent of the trips under lOO miles were made by auto.
When the ~rip was 500 or more miles, 69 percent were made by this means
of t ravel. The auto was used relatively less often for trips extending
more than 5 days than for those lasting a shorter time.
Who does the traveling?--Persons in families with incomes under
$3,000 do relatively less traveling than others. (See table 7.) In l 957,
Tabl e 7.--Extent of travel, by income group
Percent Percent Average number
I ncome group of of all of days
families trips per trip
All ••.••••••••••••••••• lOO lOO 5.6
Under $3,000 ••••••••• 25 l5 6.0
$3, 000 - $5, 999······ 4o 4l 4.9
$6, 000 - $9, 999 ······ 27 30 5.8
$lO, OOO and over ••••• 8 l4 6 .8
-21-
this group made up 25 percent of all families, accounted for 15 percent
of the total number of trips . People in the $10,000 and over group,
which included 8 percent of the families, took 14 percent of the trips.
Travelers in the high income group also stayed longer than others.
Persons living in the Northeast made relatively fewer trips than
those in other regions. This is indicated by the fact that persons in
this region, making up 25 percent of total population, took only 19 percent
of the trips reported. (See table 8.) Those in South and West
made more than average •
Table B.--Distribution of travel, by regions
Percent
Region of total Percent
population of trips
All .. .........•......•• 100 100
Northeast •••••••••••• 25 19
North Central •••••••• 30 30
South . ..••.••.••...•• 31 33
West ••••••• •••••••••• 14 18
Season for travel.--The peak period for trips to visit friends and
relati ves or for other vacation and pleasure was July through September.
Business travel seemed to remain practically constant throughout the
year . Personal trips that· were neither principally for business nor
for pleasure were fairly uniform throughout the year also.
ESTIMATED COST OF ONE WEEK'S FOOD
USDA food budgets revised slightly
The USDA food plans for children, boys, and girls have been revised
slightly since their issuance in Family Economics Review in October 1957,
so that the quantities of food for the different sex-age groups provide
the food energy and nutrients suggested in the 1958 revision of the
National Research Council's Recommended Dietary Allowances. Some changes
have been made in the quantities of food in the plans for pregnant and
lactating women. The plans for other adults have not been changed.
The 1958 revision of the ~C allowances suggests an increase above
the 1953 recommended allowances in food energy for the children 1-3,
4-6, and 7-9 years . The allowances for boys and girls 10-12 have been
combined as allowances for children 10-12 years. The number of calories
in the revised NRC table is slightly higher for girls 13-15 years but
-22-
lower for boys 13-15 and boys 16-19. The age brackets for men and women
now start at 20 instead of 21 as in earlier tables.
The revisions in food plan quantities are minor. They have been
made mainly in quantities of fats and oils1 sugars and sweets 1 and grain
products. Little change is noted in the total costs of the individual
plans since they have been rounded to the nearest $0.25. The estimated
costs of the food plans shown in table 9 are for these revised quantities
of food. The costs are based on averages of food prices collected
by the Bureau of Labor Statistics in 46 cities1 and may not apply to any
specific city or region.
Copies of the revised plans will be sent on request to: Household
Economics Research Division1 ARS1 Attention Mrs. Irene Deadman, U. S.
Department of Agriculture1 Washington 251 D. C.
CONEUMER PRICES
Revised Index of Prices Paid by Farmers
The Index of Prices Paid by Farmers for Family Li ving1 along with
other components of the Parity Index1 has been revised1 based upon nationwide
surveys of farm families relating to their 1955 expenditures.
Detailed information on expenditures for all groups of family living
items bought in 19551 except food, was collected by the Department of
Agriculture from about 31 800 farm families early in 1956. The Department
had conducted a nationwide survey of household food consumption in the
spring of 1955. Results of these two surveys 1 together with oth~r official
information1 were used in developing the weighting pattern for the
revised index. Some expansion in commodity coverage has been incorporated
into the revised index, reflecting recent changes in living patterns.
II
Previous weights for the
terns for the period 1937-41.
into the index as of September
from that date forward.
index were based on farm family living patThe
revised weighting pattern was linked
19521 and revised indexes are available
Table 10 on page 24 shows the revised Index of Prices Paid by Farmers
for Family Living. Under the old system1 the November index for All
Commodities was 120; the revised index for November is 118.
Consumer Price Index for City Wage-Earner and Clerical-Worker Families
The Consumer Price Index for City Wage-Earner and Clerical-Worker
Families (table 111 page 24) was 124 in January 1959. It has remained
steady since May 1958.
-23-
Table 9.--Estj~ted Cost of One Week's Food, ~January l959
Low-cost Moderate- Sex-age groups Liberal plan cost plan plan
Dollars Dollars Dollars
FAMILIES
Family of two, 20-34 years of age y ..... l5o50 2l.OO 23.50
Family of two, 55-74 years of age~····· l4.oo l9.00 2l.50
Family of four with preschool children ~ 2l.OO 28:oo 3l-50
Family of four, school age children~··· 24.00 32.50 37.00
INDrvmuAI..S
Children:
Under l yearoooooooooooooo•••••••••••• 3.00 3o75 4.25
1-3 years••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• I 3·75 4.75 5·25
4-6 years••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 4.50 5·75 6.75
7-9 years••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 5o25 6.75 7·75
10-12 years•••••••~••••••••••••••••••• 6.00 8.25 9-50
Girls , l3-l5 years •••••••••••••••••••••• 6. 50 8.75 lO.OO
16-19 years••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 6.50 8.75 lO.OO
Boys , l3-l5 years••••••••••••••••••••••• 7 -00 9·75 ll.OO
l6-l9 years••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 8 .25 llo25 l2.75
Women:
20-34 years••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 5·50 7·75 8.50
35-54 years••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 5-25 7o50 8.50
55-74 years••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 5.00 7.00 8.00
75 years and over••••••••••••••••••••• 5.00 6.50 7·50
Pregnant•••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 7.00 9.00 lO.OO
Nursing••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 8.50 ll.OO }2.25
Men:
20-34 years •••••• ~•••••••••••••••••••• I 7-25 9o75 ll.OO
35-54 yearSoo•••••••••••••••••••ooooo• 6.75 9.25 l0.25
55-74 yearSoeeoeoeeoo•••••••••••••••o• 6.50 8.75 9-75
75 years and overo•••••••••••••••••••• 6.25 8.25 9-25
' I
~ These estimates were computed from quantities in low-cost, moderatecost,
and libera.l food plans. These plans were published in tables 2, 3,
and 4 of the October l957 issue of Family Economics Review. Quantities
for children were revised Jan. l959 to comply with the l958 NRC Recommended
Dietary Allowances. The cost of the food plans was first estimated
by using the average prices per pound of each food group paid by nonfarm
survey families at 3 selected income levels. These prices were adjusted
to current levels by use of Average Retail Prices of Food in 46 Large
Cities Combined released periodically by the Bureau of Labor Statistics.
Estimates for individuals have been rounded to nearest $0.25 and for families
to the nearest half dollar.
~ Twenty percent added for small families.
3/ Man and woman 20-34 years, children l-3 and 4-6 years.
~ Man and woman 20-34 years , children 7-9 and l0-12 years.
-24-
Table 10.--Index of Prices Paid by Farmers for Commodities Used in Family Liv~g
(1947-49 = 100)
February 1958; June 1958-February 1959
--
Item Feb. June July Aug. Sept. Oct. Nov. Dec. Jan.
Feb, 1958 1959
All commodities ••••••••••••• 117 1 ll8 ll8 ll8 117 ll8 ll8 ll8 ll8 118
Food and tobacco •••••••••• -- ll9 -- -- 118 -- -- ll6 -- --
Clothing •••••••••••••••••• -- ll3 -- -- ll3 -- -- ll4 -- --
Household operation ••••••• -- ll6 -- -- ll7 --- -- ll6 -- --
Household furnishings ••••• -- 103 -- -- 104 -- -- lo4 -- --
Building materials, house. -- ll9 -- -- ll9 -- -- 119 -- --
Auto and auto supplies •••• -- 139 -- -- 136 -- I -- 139 -- --
i
Source: u. s. Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Marketing Service.
'rable ll.--Consumer Price Index for City Wage-Earner and Clerical-Worke:r Families
(1947-49 = 100)
J·anuary 1958; May 1958-January 1959
Item Jan. May June July Aug. Sept. Oct. Nov. Dec. Jan.
1958 1959
All items ••••••••••••••••••• 122 124 124 124 124 124 124 124 124 124
Food •••••••••••••••••••••• 118 122 122 122 121 120 120 ll9 ll9 119
Apparel ••••••••••••••••••• 107 107 107 107 107 107 107 lo8 lo8 107
Housing ••••••••••••••••••• 127 128 128 128 128 128 128 128 128 128
Rent •••••••••••••••••••• 137 138 138 138 138 138 138 138 139 139
Gas and electricity ••••• 116 ll6 ll7 ll7 ll8 118 118 ll8 us u8
Solid fuels and fuel oil 138 132 132 132 134 135 136 136 137 139
Housefurnishings •••••••• lo4 104 104 lo4 103 104 103 lo4 lo4 103
Household operation ••••• 130 131 131 131 132 132 132 133 133 133
Transportation •••••••••••• 139 139 139 140 141 141 143 144 144 144
Medical care •••••••••••••• 142 144 144 145 145 146 147 147 147 148
Personal care ••••••••••••• 128 128 129 129 129 129 129 129 129 129
Reading and recreation •••• 117 117 ll7 ll7 117 ll7 117 ll7 ll7 117
Other goods and services •• 127 127 127 127 127 127 127 127 127 127
-~
Source: u. s. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics.
-25-
INDEX OF ARTICLES APPEARING JUNE 1957 - DECEMBER 1958
This issue initiates a new feature -- an index of articles that have
appeared in past issues of Family Economics Review. The listing below
gives articles included since June l957J the date of the first issue of
this publication under its present name (it was formerly called Rural
Family Living). HenceforthJ an annual index will appear in the spring
issue .
Each issue of Family Economics Review includes the latest available
figures for "The Estimated Cost of One Week's FoodJ" "The Index of Prices
Paid by Farmers for Commodities Used in Family LivingJ" and "The Consumer
Price Index for City Wage-Earner and Clerical-Worker Families." These
are not listed separately in the index below.
The Annual Outlook issue (the winter issue) includes excerpts from
talks given at the National Agricultural Outlook Conference. Subjects
~scuss ed are usually: National Economic Outlook; Agricultural Outlook;
Outlook for Family Living; Outlook for Food; Outlook for Clothing and
Textiles; Outlook for Housing and Household Equipment.
CLOTHING AND TEXTILES
Changes in Production of Men's SuitsJ TrousersJ
B.Ild Jackets • •••••••••••.••••••••••••••••••••••••
Commercial Standards for Knitted Outerwear ••••••••
Farm Family Spending for Children's Clothing ••••••
Home Sewing .........•..•...•...•..•.•..••.•.•.•.••
Standardized Pattern Sizing •••••••••••••••••••••••
Textile Fiber Identification Act ••••••••••••••••••
Trends in Productlon of Tufted Carpets ••••••••••••
FOOD
Bargains in Food Value ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••
Can You Count on a Good Diet? •••••••••••••••••••••
Chicken As You Like It ••••••••••••••••••••••••• • • •
Dietary Levels of Households in the United StatesJ
with Some City-Farm Comparisons •••••••••••••••••
Facts About Potatoes •••••••••••••••••••••••• • • • • • •
Family Food BudgetsJ Revised 1957•••••••••••••••••
Family Meals Away from Rome •••••••••••••••••••••••
Food Additive Amendment ••••••••••••••••••••••••• • •
Home Baking .....•..•..........•..•.......•• • · · • • · •
Home Freezing and Canning by Households in the
United States ... .................... • .. • • • • • • • · •
Income Differences in Family Food Consumption
an.d Dietary I.evels . ...................•.....• • · •
Regional Differences in Family Food Consumption
Md Dietary I.,evels . ..•............•.•....• • • • • • •
Relating Size and Price of Eggs •••••••••••••••••••
Page Issue
18 March 1958
15 June 1958
13 June 1958
24 October 1957
24 June 1957
9 October 1958
22 June 1957
1 October 1958
20 June 1957
9 June 1958
11 June 1958
6 March 1958
l October 1957
4 October 1958
10 October 1958
l March 1958
12 October 1957
15 June 1957
18 June 1957
8 March 1958
-26-
FAMILY FINANCE
Additlons to Financial Assets of Consumers} 1957 ••
Changes in the Consumer Price Index} 1947-1957••••
Consumer Borrowing is Up ••••••••••••••••••••••••••
Employment of St udents ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••
Family Incomes in 1956 ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••
Farm Family Spending in 1955·•••••••••••••••••••••
Farmers and Social Security Coverage ••••••••••••••
How Much Does College Cost? •••••••••••••••••••••••
Incomes of Men and Women in 1956 ••••••••••••••••••
Incomes of Women College Gradua.tes ••••••••••••••••
Mortgage Debt on U. S. Homes ••••••••••••••••••••••
Social Security as Life Insurance •••••••••••••••••
Some Trends in Life Insurance •••••••••••••••••••••
The Social Security Amendments ••••••••••••••••••••
Trading Sta.m.ps •..•••••..••...•.•••..•••••••..••••.
Variations in Consumer Use of Installment Cr~dit ••
Working Women are Older •••••••••••••••••••••••••••
HOUSING
Housing I..a.w Revised . ....••.. , ..•....••............
Replacement Rates for Household Appliances ••••••••
MEDICAL CARE
:Den tal. Care •.•••••••••••••••.••.••••••••••••••••••
Use of General Hospitals ••••••••••••••••••••••••••
MISCELLANEOUS
Automobile Information Disclosure Act •••••••••••••
Ch~~es in Population and Family Characteristics ••
Farm Family Automobile Ownership ••••••••••••••••••
ANNUAL OUTLOOK ISSUES
Page
22
19
16
20
1
1
21
5
23
18
3
3
14
12
9
11
7
7
6
-Issue
March 1958·
October 1957
October 1957
October 1958
June 1958
June 1957
March 1958
June 1957
October 1957
October 1958
Juue 1958
June 1957
October 1958
October 1958
June 1957
October 1958
June 1957
June 1958
Juna 1958
22 October 1958
16 March 1958
10 October 1958
11 March 1958
25 October 1957
Outlook for 1958. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-28 January 1958
Outlook for 1959 .................................. l-29 December 1958
U, S. GOVI'.:RNMENT PRINTL'IG OFFICE : 1959 0-500605
