Family Economics Review [1974, Number 3]

              HIGHLIGHTS /SUMMER 1974
USDA CLOTHING BUDGETS
TEXTILE NEWS
THE COST OF CONVENIENCE FOOD
VEGETARIAN DIETS
YOUNG ADULTS
OTHER F AM ILlES
PROPERTY Of 1\\t.
UBR~R'{
"'2 197S D447A
Jf\,-. " a . ~ ~orth caro,\0
U nNers~{ greensboro
ARS-NE-36
Consumer and Food Economics Institute
Agricultural Research Service
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
FAMILY ECONOMICS REVIEW is a quarterly
report on research of the Consumer and Food
Economics Institute and on information from
other sources relating to economic aspects of
family living. It is prepared primarily for home
economics agents and home economics
specialists of the Cooperative Extension
Service.
Authors are on the staff of the Consumer and Food
Economics Institute unless otherwise noted.
Editor: Katherine S. Tippett Assistant Editor: Marilyn Doss Ruffin
Consumer and Food Economics Institute
Agricultural Research Service
U.S. Department of Agriculture
Federal BuilJing
Hyattsville, Md. 20782
USDA CLOTHING BUDGETS: ANNUAL COSTS
by Virginia Britton
Children's and adults' clothing budgets at
three cost levels have been developed by the
Department for population groups by region
and by urbanization. Data from the 1960-61
Survey of Consumer Expenditures on pur­chases
of clothing for individual persons were
used in constructing these budgets. Using these
data recognizes that clothing needs are, for the
most part, socially determined and that group
behavior, which determines what is socially
acceptable, is most readily ascertained from
statistical studies of the behavior of many per­sons
selected to represent a given level of living.
The budgets reflect the practices of individuals
at the time of the Survey in 1960 and 1961.
(This is the latest Survey for which data are
available). The annual costs of the budgets
were updated to 1972 by adjusting for price
changes for clothing since the Survey years.
The seasonally adjusted price indexes for June
1972, published by the U.S. Bureau of Labor
Statistics, were used to represent 1972. Table
values may be multiplied by 1.04 to estimate
budget costs at the 197 3 price level.
The economic levels of the clothing budgets
are those at which, on the average, family food
spending was at the levels of the USDA food
plans-economy, low-cost, and moderate­cost-
modified as needed to locate comparable
levels of living in all regions. Too few families
in the sample had food spending at the level of
the USDA liberal-cost food plan to permit
computation of budgets at that level.
The costs of these clothing budgets are not
· pie averages. The method of computation is
based on practices of families at the same level
of living in various regions and urbanizations. A
comparison of simple averages by region and
tion might show quite different
The costs of garments and shoes are included
the budgets. Costs of clothing materials
-~ ,. ~ ... ,u·\. and notions) and clothing upkeep,
are not included, might add 10 to 15
.a.I"JPr.~o .... t to the cost of a given budget. The value
items received as gifts or pay was not avail­and
was therefore not included in the bud-
1974
The budgets for children (table 1) are based
on data for the children in families of a hus­band
and wife with one to five children and no
other persons. The budgets for adults (tables 2
and 3) are based on the data for all adults,
regardless of the type of family in which they
lived, unless otherwise noted. The estimates for
the children's budgets were presented in the
HOME ECONOMICS RESEARCH JOURNAL
(HERJ), March 1973. 1 That paper gives com­plete
information on the background and
methodology of the USDA clothing budgets,
including the assumptions, the sample, the
method of computation, and the procedure for
updating costs. Also included in that paper are
references to more detailed explanations of the
methodology.
The USDA clothing budgets are designed to
describe the needs of various population groups
and are useful tools in teaching management of
resources in school and adult education pro­grams,
in counseling families on budgetary and
management problems, and in developing
action programs focused on improvement in
the level of living of families.
Children's Budgets
Table 1 presents annual costs for children's
clothing budgets. These estimates were des­cribed
in detail in the HERJ paper (see foot­note
1) and are therefore not discussed here.
Adult Budgets
Annual costs of clothing budgets for women
are presented in table 2 and the costs for men
in table 3. Adults are grouped by family status
and by age. Also, women are further classified
by their employment status.
1 Britton, Virginia, "Clothing Budgets for Children
from the USDA : Annual Costs at Three Levels in Four
Regions," HOME ECONOMICS RESEARCH
JOURNAL, March 1973, pp. 173·184. Reprints are
available from the Sales Office, American Home
Economics Association (AHEA), 2010 Massachusetts
Ave., NW, Washington, D.C. 20036. Single copies are
$1. Remittance must accompany orders of $10 and
under. For 100 or more reprints, please write to AHEA
for a quotation of quantity prices.
3
Table 1. -Children's clothing budgets: Annual .cost of .clothing purchases (or ~hildren
at 3 cost levels, by urbanization and regwn, Unzled States, 1972 pnces
Girls Boys
Urbanization, Infants
I I 2 to 5
I
6 to 11
region, and under 2 to 5 6 to 11 12 to 15
years years years
cost level 2 years years years
Dollars Dollars Dollars Dollars Dollars Dollars
FARM
North Central:
80 121 61 92
Economy ............... 24 63
37 97 137 232 79 125
Low-eost ••••••• 0 ••••••• 373 96 179
Moderate-cost ............ - - 211
South: Economy 33 62 98 127 54 106 •••••••••••••• 0 Low-eost 52 99 155 224 87 136 ••••••••• 0. 0 0 •• 318 -- 184
Moderate-cost ............ - - 210
RURAL NONFARM
North Central:
45 78
Economy 38 39 82 - • 0 ••••••••••••• Low-eost 47 66 111 219 66 113 ••••• 0 •••••• 0 0. 101 164 Moderate-cost ............ 59 114 161 336
South:
Economy 112 59 82 0 •• 0 •••••••• 0 0. 35 56 75
Low-eost ............... 55 96 128 214 85 123
Moderate-cost ............ 75 160 210 321 126 196
Northeast:
Low-cost 133 0 •••••••••••••• 57 85 141 183 84
Moderate-cost ............ 71 147 231 318 131 209
West:
Low-eost 0 ••• • •••••• •••• - 89 151 211 101 116
Moderate-cost ..........•. - 132 223 338 - 159
URBAN
North Central:
Economy ••••••••• 0 ••••• 41 48 76 - 52 91
Low-eost ••••• 0 •••••••• 0 56 96 139 205 81 130
Moderate-cost ............ 68 134 199 304 113 176
South:
Economy •••••••••• 0 •••• 36 64 97 103 63 96
Low-eost ............... 58 98 131 188 86 133
Moderate-eost ............ 78 146 203 328 129 200
Northeast:
Economy ............... 32 75 92 - 81 122
Low-eost ••••• 0 ••••••••• 51 96 134 178 102 128
Moderate-eost ............ 71 151 224 334 147 194
West:
Economy ••••• 0 ••••••••• 32 53 90 - 59 88
Low-eost •••••••••••• 0 •• 52 87 140 167 85 117
Moderate-cost ............ 67 134 209 283 123 176
112 to 15
years
Dollars
110
163
228
118
180
260
-
150
209
101
166
253
185
259
167
237
-
141
200
-
152
235
-
155
245
-
139
207
1 Estimates based on expenditure data from the 196Q-61 Survey of Consumer Expenditures by the U.S. Bureau of Labor
statistics and the U.S. Department of Agriculture and on changes in prices paid by urban families since the Survey date.
Budget levels: The economic levels of the budgets are those at which families spent for food at the levels of 3 USDA food
plans-economy, low-eost, and moderate-eost.
Computation: The budgets were based on the data for all children in families of husband and wife with 1 to 5 children and no
other persons. Budgets are not shown for categories that had data on less than 30 individual children. Estimates could not be
computed at any of the 3 budget levels for farm children in the Northeast and West, and at the economy level for rural nonfarm
children in the Northeast and West. Urban budgets at low-eost and moderate-eost were derived from categories with 100 or more
children. Most of the other budgets were derived from categories with 30 to 99 children.
Items covered: The budgets show costs for garments and shoes, but exclude clothing materials and clothing upkeep, as data for
individual persons are not available for these 2 categories. On the basis of family data from the 1960-61 Survey, costs of clothiM
materials and upkeep might add 10 to 15 percent to the cost of a given budget.
Updating costs: Annual costs of the clothing budgets were updated to 1972 by adjusting for price changes for clothing since
the Survey dates. The Apparel and Upkeep Index, and the price indexes for women's and girls' garments, men's and boys'
garments, and footwear, subgroups of the Consumer Price Index published regularly by the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, were
used for adjusting components. The seasonally adjusted indexes for June 1972 were used to represent 1972. Table values maY be
multiplied by 1.04 to estimate budget costs at the 197 3 price level.
4 FAMILY ECONOMICS REVIEW
'
tJ
Table 2.-Women 's clothing budge~s: Annual cost of clothing purchases for women at 3 cost
levels, by urbanzzatzon and region, United States, 1972 prices'
Urbanization,
region, and
cost level
FARM
North Central:
Economy ...•...•...
Low-cost .......... .
Moderate-cost ......•
South:
Economy ..........•
Low-cost •..........
Moderate-cost ......•
Northeast:
Economy ..•.•......
Low-cost ........ . , .
Moderate-cost ...•...
RURAL NONFARM
North Central:
Economy . . ........ .
Low-cost , •.........
Moderate-cost ...... .
South:
Economy .......... .
Low-co$t .......... .
Moderlite-cost ...... .
Northeast:
Economy ........•..
Low-cost .......... .
Moderate-cost ..•....
West:
Economy .......... .
Low-cost ..••......•
Moderate-cost ..•....
~BAN
North Centr~U:
Economy .•..... , ...
Low-cost •.....•. , ..
Moderate-cost ...... .
South:
Economy •...•..•...
Low-cost .....•.....
Moderate-cost .•.....
Northeast:
Economy •..........
Low-cost .•..•.•..•.
Moderate-cost
West: · • · · · · ·
Ec~nomy ........•..
Low-cost
Moderate-do.st · : : : : : : :
Unmarried
living in families
16 to 17
years
Dollars
154
275
262
409
297
280
400
267
412
266
430
217
328
18 to 24
years
Dollars
456
656
292
428
311
315
406
527
176
414
598
389
545
395
503
18 to 24
years,
not
employed
Dollars
131
142
107
90
139
241
198
274
132
218
333
198
325
96
175
272
Married
25 to 64
years,
not
employed
Dollars
101
128
212
86
129
232
76
100
180
63
106
203
66
111
227
66
118
235
66
113
221
72
156
240
80
149
260
74
157
270
69
157
263
25 to 64
years,
employed
Dollars
163
194
335
237
445
196
298
165
322
180
335
166
311
Independent
consumers
25 to 64
years,
employed
Dollars
179
264
273
419
163
282
216
295
25 to 64
years,
employed
Dollars
49
114
137
90
201
172
65
years
and
over
Dollars
60
92
63
72
48
73
147
41
67
149
43
62
47
101
159
53
79
139
69
104
153
61
95
144
1
Estimates based on expenditure data from the 1960-61 Survey of Consumer Expenditures by the U.S. Bureau of Labor
Statistics and the U.S. Department of Agriculture and on changes in prices paid by urban families since the Survey date.
Budget levels: The economic levels of the budgets are those at which families spent for food at the levels of 3 USDA food
Plans-economy, low-cost, and moderate-cost.
. Computation: The budgets for unmarried women, living in families, and for married women were based on the data for women
m families of various types. Independent consumers are persons living alone or in a household with others but independent
financially-not pooling income and expenditures. The group 65 years and over includes both independent consumers and family
members. Budgets are not shown for categories that had data on less than 30 individual women. Estimates could not be computed
at any of the 3 budget levels for farm women in the West.
. !terns covered: The budgets show costs for garments and shoes, but exclude clothing materials and clothing upkeep, as data for
mdiVlduaJ Persons are not available for these 2 categories. On the basis of family data from the 1960-61 Survey, costs of clothing
materials and upkeep might add 10 to 15 percent to the cost of a given budget.
Updating costs: Annual costs of the clothing budgets were updated to 1972 by adjusting for price changes for clothing since
the Smvey dates. The Apparel and Upkeep Index, and the price indexes for women's and girls' garments, men's and boys'
garments, and footwear, subgroups of the Consumer Price Index published regularly by the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, were
~d _fo.r adiusting components. The seasonally adjusted indexes for June 1972 were used to represent 1972. Table values may be
hplied by 1.04 to estimate budget costs at the 1973 price level.
SUMMER 1974 5
Table 3.-Men's clothing budgets: Annual cost of clothing purchases ~or men at 3 cost levels,
by urbanization and region, United States, 1972 prrces'
Urbanization,
region, and
cost level
FARM
North Central:
Economy ............ .
Low-cost ............ .
Moderate-cost ........ .
South:
Economy ............ .
Low-cost ............ .
Moderate-cost ........ .
Northeast:
Economy ............ .
Low-cost ............ .
Moderate-cost ....•....
RURAL NONFARM
North Central:
Economy .... .. ...... .
Low-cost .....••......
Moderate-cost ....•....
South:
Economy ............ .
Low-cost •............
Moderate-cost ........ .
Northeast:
Economy ............ .
Low-cost ............ .
Moderate-cost ........ .
West:
Economy •............
Low-cost ............ .
Moderate-cost ....••...
URBAN
North Central:
Economy ....•...•....
Low-cost ............ .
Moderate-cost ......••.
South:
Economy ............ .
Low-cost •..•.....•...
Moderate-cost ........ .
Northeast:
Economy .•.......•...
Low-cost .....•...•..•
Moderate-cost ........ .
West:
Economy ..........•..
Low-cost .•..•..•..•..
Moderate-cost ...•.....
Unmarried
living in families
I 16 to 17 18 to 24
years years
Dollars Dollars
- -
190 217
291 276
138 -
182 212 - 328
- -
- -
- -
- -
- 216 - -
- -
161 204
- 335
- - - 269 - 343
-- -- - -
- -
204 226
265 293
- -
165 239
238 323
- -
178 201
255 283
- -
153 211
211 268
Married
18 to 24 years I
Dollars
175
-
208
255
-
205
268
-
174
251
-
199
246
25 to 64
years
Dollars
112
148
222
107
153
230
99
112
168
78
125
204
85
145
246
74
154
242
111
163
240
74
154
219
87
155
245
80
142
234
93
167
244
Independent
consumers,
25 to 64
years
Dollanr
111
124
137
246
103
227
178
264
65
years
and
over
Dollars
67
86
127
63
82
127
76
41
60
102
55
75
122
49
70
86
39
82
123
43
70
121
38
68
111
46
66
99
1 Estimates based on expenditure data from the 1960·61 Survey of Consumer Expenditures by the U.S. Bureau of Labor
Statistics and the U.S. Department of Agriculture and on changes in prices paid by urban families since the Survey date.
Budget levels: The economic levels of the budgets are those at which families spent for food at the levels of a USDA food
pl.a.ns--1:conomy, low-cost, moderate-cost.
Computation: The budgets for unmarried men, living in families, and for married men were based on the data for men in
families of various types. Independent consumers are persons living alone or in a household with others but independent
financially-not pooling income and expenditures. The group 65 years and over includes both independent consumers and familY
members. Budgets are not shown for categories that had data on less than ao individual men. Estimates could not be computed at
any of the a budget levels for farm men in the West.
Items covered: The budgets show costs for garments and shoes, but exclude clothing materials and clothing upkeep, as data for­individual
persons are not available for these 2 categories. On the basis of family data from the 1960·61 Survey, costs of clothing
materials and upkeep might add 10 to 15 percent to the cost of a given budget.
Updating costs: Annual costs of the clothing budgets were updated to 1972 by adjusting for price changes for clothing since
the Survey dates. The Apparel and Upkeep Index, and the price indexes for women's and girls' garments, men's and boys'
garments, and footwear, subgroups of the Consumer Price Index published regularly by the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, were
used for adjusting components. The seasonally adjusted indexes for June 1972 were used to represent 1972. Tables values may be
multiplied by 1.04 to estimate budget costs at the 1973 price level.
6 FAMILY ECONOMICS REVIEW
In general, clothing costs for urban men
were lower than costs for employed urban
women, but about the same as costs for non­employed
urban women. A smaller degree of
fashion interest in men's clothing than in
women's clothing, at least at the time of the
Survey, may help account for the higher cost
of employed women's clothing. The highest
clothing costs were for unmarried men and
women age 18 to 24 who live in families.
Thereafter, costs generally declined as age
increased, regardless of family and employment
status.
Relative needs for clothing for work and
street wear between farm and urban areas pro­bably
influence budget costs. At the low- and
moderate-cost levels, farm budgets for wives
were substantially less (by more than 10 per­cent)
than corresponding urban budgets, but
for husbands, farm budgets were about as
much as urban budgets in two of the three
regions for which comparisons were possible.
At the economy level, farm budgets for wives
were about equal to corresponding urban bud­gets
in two of the three regions, but for hus­bands,
farm budgets were substantially above
the urban budgets in all three regions. Work
clothing costs may be higher for these farm
men than for other men because of heavy use
and the custom of supplying their own work
clothing, whereas some urban workers at the
economy level may have uniforms provided by
their employers.
Notes on the classifications of adults: "Inde­pendent
consumers" (living alone or in a house­hold
with others, but independent financially)
may be widowed, divorced, or separated per­sons,
as well as those who have never been mar­ried.
The age range, 25 to 64, probably con­ceals
some variation that would have been
shown by the use of narro·wer age groupings;
however, the data made available to CFEI for
development of the clothing budgets did not
include narrower groupings. Budgets were ori­ginally
planned for women and men indepen­dent
consumers 18 to 24 years and for
employed wives 18 to 24 years. These budgets
had to be omitted because of insufficient num­bers
of persons in these categories. Also, bud­gets
were not developed for unmarried women
and men family members age 25 to 64 because
of the difficulty of estimating the cost of food
plans for the miscellaneous types of families in
which these persons live. (These unmarried per­sons
may be single, widowed, or divorced
women or men living with their young child­ren,
their adult children, their parents, or other
relatives.)
TEXTILE NEWS: THE ENERGY SITUATION
by Nancy G. Harries
A major issue facing the textile industry in
197 4 revolves around the energy situation,
especially uncertainties regarding the avail­ability
of petrochemical feeder stocks for the
production of man-made fibers. Man-made
fibers are by no means the only ones besieged
with shortages, however. In the area of natural
fibers, notably cotton, the shortage of raw
materials has been critical. Both natural and
man-made fiber producers are exploring ways
to continue to provide adequate supplies of
fibers in light of these uncertainties. Besides
the raw materials required in fiber production,
all aspects of fabric production, from fiber to
Yarn, to fabric structuring, to finishing and
color/design applications require energy con­sumption,
and shortages ~feet all of these pro­cesses.
Consumers, therefore, can expect trends
SUMMER 1974
in modifications of fibers, fabric structures,
and finishes to be influenced by the projected
availability of raw materials.
Will the consumer be faced with a choice
between natural and man-made fibers in terms
of energy conservation and energy shortages?
Not likely. There is simply not enough of
either natural or man-made fibers to use one to
the exclusion of the other. The consuming
public will best be served by using both natural
and man-made fibers singly and in combination
in textile products.
In fact, tips for energy saving that were cir­culated
by the Federal Energy Office in March
and April 197 4 suggesting that consumers buy
natural-fiber fabrics to save energy have been
revised. The purchase of cotton and wool
instead of man-made fibers would not in itself
7
solve the energy situation-too many other
consumer-use factors are involved besides the
raw materials that go into the fibers. Even with
a projected increase in cotton production,
there would not be enough cotton to supply
consumer demand. During 1973, cotton
accounted for about 29 percent of the fibers
used by U.S. textile mills (the other natural
fibers accounted for negligible amounts-wool,
1 percent; and silk and linen, even less), while
man-made fibers accounted for 70 percent of
mill consumption. 1
The focus of energy conservation on choice
of fiber may have resulted from the fact that
man-made fibers are generally based on petro­chemical
ingredients, and the assumption
followed that decreasing the use of manufac­tured
fibers would help solve the shortage of
petroleum. About 1 percent of the Nation's
petroleum demand is used in the production of
man-made fibers. This percentage includes not
only the raw-material petrochemical feed­stocks,
but also the fuel and energy needed to
convert these raw materials into finished fibers
(see footnote 1). Thus, a decrease in man-made
fiber production alone would have little effect
on the total petroleum shortage.
Man-Made Fibers
The textile apparel industry is the largest
manufacturing employer in the United States,
employing one out of every eight persons
engaged in manufacturing. If an adequate
supply of man-made fibers cannot be made
available to domestic textile manufacturers,
employment in the textile industry will suffer.
However, with the Administration's announced
policy of attaching a high priority to job pre­servation,
industry representatives feel that
they will get an equitable allocation of energy
in the future.
Spring reports from large textile mills
indicate that sufficient petrochemicals have
been available. 2 Fiber producers are also
reporting improvement in the man-made fiber
raw-material supply situation. However,
demand for fibers still outstrips supply and
there have been difficulties in predicting which
1 MAN-MADE FIBER FACT BOOK, Man-Made
Fiber Producers Association, Inc. , 1974, p. 11.
2MODERN TEXTILES, vol. IV, No. 3, March 1974,
p. 8.
8
chemicals will be more or less plentiful for
fiber production. In April 197 4, for example,
the supplies used in making polyester improved
slightly, while those ne~ded for nylon became
tight. The consumer can expect price increases
for fibers where the greatest shortages occur,
but there will continue to be confusion and
uncertainty in the near-term predictions of
fiber raw-material availability. 3
Although the man-made noncellulosic fibers
have been affected by the petrochemical feed­stock
shortage, production was 3 percent
higher during the first quarter of 1974 com­pared
with the first quarter of 1973.4 An even
better availability of petrochemical feedstocks
is anticipated in the second half of 1974. Yet,
despite the increased availability of man-made
fiber raw materials, industry sources expect
prices to continue to rise because of the inevit­able
price increases of raw materials, brought
on in large measure by inflation in the general
economy, as well as by the more direct effects
of the energy shortage. Inevitably some of
these increased costs will be passed along the
entire production chain to the consumer.
Natural Fibers
Energy-related shortages of fuel, fertilizers,
and chemicals have contributed to cotton prob­lems.
Also, weather conditions, in particular a
major flood in the Mississippi Delta, have
inhibited the cultivation of cotton. As a result,
prices for cotton, once relatively low, rose
significantly in 1973, making cotton higher
priced than many man-made fibers.
Cotton prices are expected to decrease, and
in fact, have declined sharply since January
1974. The USDA reported in the April 1974
OOTTON SITUATION that nearly one-fifth
more acreage was planned for the 1974 upland
cotton crop, which should provide needed
increases in cotton production. Also, research
programs are underway to eradicate the boll
weevil, which has been a major deterrent to
increased cotton production. Yet unknown
facts will affect cotton output. Weather condi·
tions are variable, and supplies of fuel, chemi·
cals, and machinery will determine the
3 DAILY NEWS RECORD, vol. IV, No. 82, April 26,
1974, p. 3.
4 Textile Economic Bureau, TEXTILE ORGANON,
May 1974.
FAMILY ECONOMICS REVIEW
amounts of actual acreage planted. Spot ferti­lizer
shortages and the planting of less suitable
land for cotton production may mean that
increased planting will not result in additional
yield per acre, but total pounds of cotton har­vested
will be above 197 3 levels.
Cotton producers are planning on . higher
cotton production, and they are promoting
new marketing programs designed to expand
the uses of cotton and help meet the increasing
demand for serviceable textile products. For
example, cotton is being expanded into new
flame-retardant fabric markets, which have
every indication of increasing as additional
products must meet flammability standards.
Also, "Naturalspun," a cotton/polyester blend
developed for double knits with 60 percent or
higher cotton content is promoted as having
advantages over 100-percent polyester content
formerly associated with double knits. The
blending of cotton with polyester has resulted
in double-knit products that have greater absor­bency,
air permeability, and static resistance,
resulting in more comfort than the 100-percent
polyester double knits. Further, the
cotton/polyester double-knit blends are
reported to have better snagging resistance than
the polyester double knits and a fabric hand
(more cottonlike) that presents aesthetic
characteristics desired by some consumers.
Besides the use of high percentages of cotton
in blended double-knit fabrics, man­made/
natural fiber blends are also being used in
place of 100-percent cotton. For instance,
industrial knitters turned to polyester/cotton
blends to replace 100-percent cotton knits as
cotton prices rose last year.
The increase in the blending of natural and
man-made fibers in knits is due not only to
new marketing programs and fluctuations in
prices, but also to increased consumer accept­ance
of the more serviceable knits that have
increased strength and resiliency over lOO-per­cent
cotton fabrics and increased comfort over
100-percent polyester fabrics.
Extensive industry research programs are
underway to determine the best blend levels to
improve knit fabric comfort and performance
properties. Polyester/cotton blends have been
around for some time in woven fabrics, but
experimentation with the blended double-knit
market is beginning to expand and show pro­mise
in both men's and women's apparel
SUMMER 1974
fabrics. Only time will tell what the consumer
can expect in natural/man-made fiber blend
levels if polyester and cotton reach equivalent
price points, which is a possibility with man­made
fiber prices on the rise and cotton prices
due for decreases.
Consumer Decisions
Beyond fiber and fabric production energy
requirements, there are energy factors con­sumers
must consider in evaluating total energy
consumed through selection and use of various
textile items. Energy costs for fabric mainte­nance,
fabric durability, and suitability for end
use contribute to overall energy consumption.
The man-made fibers are associated with
ease-of-care-they typically are faster drying
and require less pressing than unfinished cotton
products. Substantial energy savings may be
expected from the reduced drying time and
elimination of ironing and pressing of many
fabrics made from man-made fibers. Therefore,
cotton garments would require more energy for
normal maintenance than do comparable gar­ments
from synthetic fibers.
The greater durability of man-made than
natural cellulosic fibers may mean longer use­life-
thus, fewer replacements if consumers are
satisfied with comfort and aesthetic factors of
the fabrics made from man-made fiber. Wear
test and laboratory data from the Quarter­master
Labs., 5 Institute of Industrial Laun­derers
6 Linen Supply Association, 7 and Con­sumer~
Union8 indicate that the durability of
garments made of man-made fibers or poly­ester/
cotton blends is substantially greater than
for garments of all cotton. The selection of
durable man-made fiber products, therefore,
could result in lower per capita consumption of
textile items.
However, durability cannot be considered in
isolation- it must be evaluated in terms of end
use. Certain textile items do not require high
sTEXTILE ENGINEERING REPORTER,
September 1972, pp. 47-50. ·
6 "A Performance Evaluation of 65/35
Polyester/Cotton Industrial Uniform Pants and Shirts,"
Research and Development Committee, Institute of
Industrial Launderers, October 1967.
7 Linen Supply Association, THE HOT BOX, March
1966.
s"Boys Jeans," CONSUMER REPORTS, May 1974,
pp. 415-417.
9
measures of durability for satisfactory perform­ance.
Some items are not intended for long
term use; rather, comfort or aesthetic appear­ance
may be more important considerations.
When comfort or a natural-fiber hand is a
priority serviceability factor, the more absor­bent,
though less durable, cottons or cotton
blends are probably more satisfactory than
100-percent man-made products, despite the
increased energy requirements for maintenance
resulting from slower drying and need for
ironing. Aesthetic appearance problems related
to snagging, pilling, and staining of certain
fabrics made from man-made fibers also may
contribute to consumer preference for use of
natural fibers or blends.
Different fibers have advantages and dis­advantages
that can be offset to some extent
by the selection of the most appropriate fiber
content, fabric structure, and finishing-design
application to meet specific end uses. Energy
shortages have not altered the need for match­ing
fiber performance to use expectation. To
conserve energy, consumers can alter consump­tion
patterns in terms of amounts and types of
textile products selected: purchasing fewer,
more durable items when long term use and
service are important; selecting ease-of-care
items to conserve maintenance energy when
comfort or aesthetic needs are not sacrificed;
and most important, choosing items that will
satisfy end-use performance and aesthetic
requirements so that dissatisfaction does not
mean more frequent replacement purchases.
All of these factors point to the selection of
both natural and man-made fibers, chosen for
the serviceability characteristics desired in the
specific textile product.
CONVENIENCE AND THE COST OF PLATE DINNERS
AND SKILLET MAIN DISHES
by Cynthia Cromwell and Dianne Odland
Many busy consumers like the convenience
of frozen-plate dinners and skillet main-dish
mixes, but they think that they cost more than
similar foods from home recipes. In Washing­ton,
D.C., supermarkets in April1974, selected
frozen-plate dinners were found to cost more
than the ingredients needed to prepare similar
dinners from scratch. However, some skillet
main dishes made from mixes cost about one­fifth
less than their home-prepared counter­parts
(see table). The commerical and home­made
products were studied in the foods
laboratory of the Consumer and Food Econo­mics
Institute to obtain yields. The costs pre­sented
in the table are based on these data.
Plate Dinners
The costs of frozen, ready-to-heat fried
chicken and meat-loaf dinners weighing 11
ounces were compared with the costs of similar
dinners prepared at home. The fried-chicken
dinner with a breast and drumstick (2.4 ounces
meat) cost 20 percent more, and the dinner
with a wing and back section (1. 7 ounces meat)
cost 55 percent more than comparable home-
10
prepared chicken dinners. The frozen meat loaf
dinner cost 69 percent more than one made at
home.
The costs for the home-prepared dinners
were based on an amount of meat, potatoes,
and a second vegetable comparable with
amounts in the commercial dinners and the
ingredients used in their preparation. A whole,
ready-to-cook frying chicken was used to pro­vide
the chicken for the home-prepared dinner.
The commercially prepared meat loaf con­tained
some textured vegetable protein; the
home-prepared one did not.
Skillet Main Dishes
Ground-beef stroganoff, lasagna, and maca­roni-
chili-beef dinners, each made from a low·
cost and a high-cost brand of skillet-dinner mix
and from a home recipe with separate ingred·
ients, were compared for cost. The directions
for preparation on the package or in the home
recipe for each main dish called for one pound
of ground beef, but the total amount of pre­pared
food obtained using the mixes or home
recipe differed. Costs are shown in the table for
the total amount of food prepared, for a ser·
FAMILY ECONOMICS REVIEW
ving as specified on the package or in the home
recipe, for a cup of the mixture, and for that
part of the mixture that contained 2 ounces of
cooked ground beef. The most meaningful
comparison depends on what you are looking
for-the least expensive main dish to prepare
for your family; the cost of a serving, as speci­fied
or as a cup, for each family member; or
the relative costs of a 2-ounce portion of
cooked ground beef in several main dishes.
Ground-beef stroganoff and noodles made
from one brand of mix cost 16 percent less,
but from another brand, 7 percent more than
the home-prepared dish. Both commerical
skillet dinners and the home-prepared mixture
made four servings as specified on the package
or in the recipe. Each contained 3 ounces of
cooked ground beef per serving. A serving of
the low-cost brand weighed 8.7 ounces (1.2
cups); the high-cost brand, 9.5 ounces (1 cup);
and the home-prepared stroganoff, 9.4 ounces
(1.2 cups).
One macaroni-chili-beef dinner made from
mix cost 17 percent less and one 7 percent less
than a similar dinner made from scratch. All
mixtures made five servings as specified on the
package or in the recipe. Each serving con­tained
approximately 2.4 ounces of cooked
ground beef. (one pound of raw ground beef
produced slightly different amounts of cooked
beef in each of the macaroni-chili-beef
dinners.) A serving of each commercial entree
weighed 9.2 ounces (1 cup), and the home-pre­pared,
11.0 ounces (1.2 cups).
Both brands of skillet lasagna made five
servings, but the home-prepared lasagna made
six servings. On a per serving basis, one skillet
dinner cost 6 percent less, the other 9 percent
more than the home-prepared lasagna. A ser­ving
of the low-cost brand weighed 9.2 ounces
(1 cup), and the high-cost brand, 6.6 ounces
(0.8 cup), and both contained 2.4 ounces of
cooked ground beef. The homemade entree
weighed 8.7 ounces (1 cup) and contained 2
ounces of cooked ground beef per serving.
In all comparisons, each entree made from
the lower cost brand was less expensive than
the home-prepared dish. The three higher-cost
skillet dinner entrees were more expensive on a
one-cup serving basis than their homemade
counterparts.
SUMMER 1974
The lower and higher priced brands of skillet
dinner mixes selected for the study were avail­able
in Washington, D.C., area stores in April
197 4. These commercial mixes contained some
dehydrated ingredients such as onions, green
peppers, mushrooms, and tomatoes; the home­made
recipes called for fresh or canned ones.
The recipes (see below) for homemade ground­beef
stroganoff, macaroni-chili-beef dinner, and
skillet lasagna were chosen to approximate but
not exactly duplicate the skillet dinners from
mixes. They were quick and easy to prepare.
Each contained 1 pound of ground beef and
the same kinds, but possible different amounts,
of other main ingredients as in the convenience
products. For example, the home-prepared
ground-beef stroganoff contained about the
same amount of noodles as the higher cost stro­ganoff,
but it had about half the noodles found
in the low-cost brand. The cooked convenience
products were not necessarily the same in
flavor or appearance as the homemade dishes.
The Choice Is Up to You
Partially-prepared dinners, such as the skillet
mixes, may be a good buy if you and your
family like them and if your time or cooking
skills are limited. They do not represent as
much of a time savings as the frozen-plate din­ners
when compared with homemade counter­parts;
however, they are convenient because
most of the major ingredients for an entree are
assembled in one package. You may even save
money by choosing some of them.
The time spent in heating a frozen-plate din­ner
is much less than that spent in boiling and
mashing potatoes, cooking a vegetable, and pre­paring
either a meat loaf or fried chicken.
Many consumers find the convenience worth
the added cost.
Before attempting to calculate the cost for
these foods, you will probably want to try the
convenience item and see if the amount and
quality of the product suit you and your
family.
If the home-prepared food has been counted
on to provide a specific nutritional need for the
day (a serving of meat and two vegetables, for
example), the convenience item replacing it
should also meet this need.
11
RECIPES USED FOR HOME PREPARED DISH ES
Ground-beef stroganoff1 Macaroni-chili-beef2
4 servings, about 3/4 cup each 5 servings, about 1 cup each
Ground beef .......................... 1 pound Ground beef ......... . ................ 1 pound
Onion, chopped ........................ 1/2 cup Onion, sliced ......................... 1 medium
Mushrooms, stems and Green pepper, chopped ........ . ...... . ... 1/2 cup
pieces, drained ................... 4-ounce can Tomato sauce ............... 2 cans, 8 ounces each
Cream of mushroom soup, Water ................... . ............. 2 cups
condensed ................... 10-1/2-ounce can Macaroni, uncooked ...................... 2 cups
Water ................................ 1/4 cup Sugar ........................... 2 tablespoons
Sour cream ............................ 1/2 cup Salt .......... . ................... 2 teaspoons
Brown ground beef and onion in a fry pan;
drain off excess fat.
Brown ground beef in a large fry pan. Drain
off excess fat.
Stir in mushrooms, soup, and water. Cover
and simmer for 15 to 20 minutes.
Add onion and green pepper; continue cook­ing
until tender .
Stir in sour cream; heat through, but do not
boil.
Add remaining ingredients. Cover; reduce
heat.
Serve over cooked noodles. Simmer 15 to 20 minutes until macaroni is
Noodles used in costing home-prepared tender.
recipe: 1-1/3 cups cooked (2.4 oz. raw). 2 Macaroni Goulash from PILLSBURY'S CREA­TIVE
COOKING IN MINUTES. Copyright 1971,
reprinted with permission.
1 PILLSBURY'S CREATIVE COOKING IN MIN­UTES,
Copyright 1971, reprinted with permission.
12
Quick skillet lasagna3
6 servings, about 1 cup each
Ground beef .......................... 1 pound
Onion, chopped ........................ 1/2 cup
Garlic, minced ......................... 1 clove
Tomatoes ........................ 16-ounce can
Tomato paste ...................... 6-ounce can
Parsley flakes ...................... 1 tablespoon
Oregano ....................... 1·1/2 teaspoons
Salt ........................... 1-1/2 teaspoons
Water ............................. 1-1/2 cups
Noodles, uncooked ................... 2-1/2 cups
Cottage cheese, creamed .................. 3/4 cup
Parmesan cheese, grated .................. 1/4 cup
Cook beef, onions, and garlic in a heavy
frypan until beef is brown and onion is tender.
Drain off excess fat.
Add tomatoes, tomato paste, parsley flakes,
oregano, salt, and water. Bring to a boil.
Stir in noodles and cook until noodles are
tender and sauce is thickened, about 25 min­utes.
Stir only to prevent sticking.
Mix cheeses. Drop by teaspoonfuls onto
lasagna mixture. Cover and heat 5 minutes.
3 Consumer and Food Economics Institute.
FAMILY ECONOMICS REVIEW
Cost of home-prepared and convenience plate dinners and skillet main dishes'
Cost Cost relative to cost
of home prepared
Food
Home Convenience Home Convenience
prepared prepared
Cents Cents Percent Percent
Plate dinners:
Fried chicken with 1. 7
to 2.4 oz meat ....... 2 38-49 59 100 120-155
Meat loaf with 3 oz
meat loaf ........... 35 59 100 169
Low- High- Low- High-cost•
cost4 cost4 cost4
Skillet main dishes: 3
Ground-beef
stroganoff:
Total food pre-pared
............ 171 143 183 100 84 107
Serving as per pkg
or recipe .......... 43 36 46 100 84 107
Cup . ... .. ......... 36 31 45 100 86 124
Serving containing 2
oz cooked ground
beef ••• 0 •••• • 0 •• 29 24 31 100 84 107
Macaroni-chili-beef:
Total food pre-pared
............ 172 143 159 100 83 93
Serving as per pkg
or recipe .......... 34 29 32 100 83 93
Cup ............... 29 28 32 100 96 111
Serving containing 2
oz cook ground
beef ............ 31 25 27 100 80 88
Lasagna:
Total food pre-pared5
........... 203 159 184 100 79 91
Serving as per pkg
or recipe ... .. ..... 34 32 37 100 94 109
Cup • • ••••••••••• 0. 34 32 45 100 94 133
Serving containing 2
oz cooked ground
beef . .... ....... 34 27 31 100 79 91
lp.
2 nces from 3 Washington, D.C., supermarkets, April 1974.
_Low-cost homemade dinner corresponds to plate dinner yielding 1.7 ounces of cooked meat (wing and back
section); high-cost homemade dinner corresponds to plate dinner yielding 2.4 ounces of cooked meat (breast and
drumstick) 3 .
4 1 pound raw ground beef was used in all main dishes.
The lowest and highest priced brand of each of the skillet dinner mixes available in the Washington, D.C.,
sto~es were selected for the study.
Homemade recipe yields 6 servings; mixes yield 5 servings.
SUMMER 1974 13
VEGETARIAN DIETS
by Nancy R. Raper
In recent years, there has been an increased
number of individuals who subscribe to vege­tarian
diets, particularly among young people.
A vegetarian diet is often thought of as a
diet that contains no meat, poultry, or fish.
However, vegetarian diets differ in the kinds of
foods that they contain. They usually include
some or all of the following foods-vegetables,
fruits, enriched or whole grain breads and
cereals, dry beans and peas, lentils, nuts and
nutlike seeds, peanuts, and peanut butter. They
may also include other foods, but some diets
are more strict than others in the foods permit­ted,
for example:
• A pure or strict vegetarian diet. This diet
excludes all foods of animal origin-meat,
poultry, fish, eggs, and dairy products
such as milk, cheese, and ice cream.
• An ova-lacto-vegetarian diet. This diet
includes eggs and dairy products, but
excludes meat, poultry, and fish.
• A lacto-vegetarian diet. This diet includes
dairy products, but excludes meat,
poultry, fish, and eggs.
Some vegetarian diets-for example, the
higher levels of the Zen macrobiotic diet-are
dangerous, because food selection is so restric­ted
that the diet becomes severely inadequate
in nutrients. Others, particularly if they con­tain
foods of animal origin, such as milk, other
dairy products, and eggs, can be nutritionally
acceptable.
Planning the Diet
Vegetarian diets need to include a variety of
foods to ensure that all the required nutrients
are obtained. Most foods provide more than
one nutrient, but since no single food furnishes
all the nutrients in the amounts required for
good health, it's a good idea to select foods
daily from each of the following groups:
Dry beans, dry peas, lentils, nuts and nutlike
seeds. Among foods of vegetable origin, these
1 Condensed from the July-August 1973 issue of
NUTRITION PROGRAM NEWS. Consumer and Food
Economics Institute, Agricultural Research Service,
U.S. Department of Agriculture.
14
foods are valued for- their protein. As a group,
they also supply iron, thiamin, riboflavin,
niacin, and other nutrients but vary in amounts
provided by a serving.
Whole grain and enriched breads and cereals.
Foods in this group provide worthwhile
amounts of protein, iron, and several of the
B-vitamins.
Vegetables and fruits. Fruits and vegetables
are valuable because of the vitamins and
minerals that they contain. Some are especially
good sources of vitamin C. Citrus fruits and
strawberries are rich sources. Dark-green and
deep-yellow vegetables and deep-yellow fruits
furnish important amounts of vitamin A. In
addition, dark-green leafy vegetables are
dependable sources of a number of other nutr­ients.
Fruits and vegetables also provide rough­age,
or fiber, which promotes motility and
health of the gastrointestinal tract.
Milk and milk products (especially for child·
ren and pregnant and nursing women), eggs.
Milk provides calcium, protein, riboflavin, vita­min
A (if the milk is whole or fortified), vita­min
B12 , and other nutrients. Cheese, ice
cream, and ice milk supply these nutrients, too,
but in different proportions. Also, milk may be
fortified with vitamin D, making it a reliable
source of this vitamin. Eggs are a good source
of many of the same nutrients found in milk,
although calcium is a notable exception. They
are also a worthwhile source of iron, found
only in trace amounts in milk.
Besides the foods listed above, other foods
may be used in meals. These foods include
sugar or other sweeteners; table fats, other fats,
and oils, including salad dressings; and unen·
riched refined breads, cereals, flours, and
meals. Often, these are ingredients in a recipe
or are added to other foods during preparation
or at the table. Although many of these foods
provide some protein, minerals, vitamins, or
essential fatty acids, the main contribution of
the listed foods is often food energy (calories).
The use of these foods may need to be cur·
tailed in order to achieve a well-balanced diet.
The volume of food required to meet energY
and nutrient needs may be greater with a vege·
tarian diet than with a traditional diet. This is
FAMILY ECONOMICS REVIEW
because many foods of animal origin are more
concentrated sources of energy and certain
nutrients than are foods of vegetable origin,
and when these are omitted from the diet, a
larger quantity of food is needed to replace
them. Eating large quantities of food may be
particularly difficult for young children: This is
one of the reasons for including milk and other
foods of animal origin in a child's diet if at all
possible.
Nutritional Adequacy of Vegetarian Diets
Certain nutrients are likely to be short in
vegetarian diets, especially in strict vegetarian
diets, unless care is taken in selecting foods.
These nutrients are:
Vitamin B1 2 • This vitamin is found only in
foods of animal origin~meat, fish, eggs, and
dairy products. It is not believed to occur in
foods of vegetable origin. This means that a
person eating a pure vegetarian diet will need
to take a vitamin preparation containing this
vitamin or to include vitamin B., -fortified
foods in his diet-for example, some breakfast
cereals have this vitamin added. A deficiency of
this vitamin may cause nerve damage to strict
vegetarians. Symptoms may take years to
appear in some persons, but may appear in a
much shorter time in others.
Calcium. Milk is the leading source of cal­cium.
Unless milk in some form is included in
the diet, it is difficult to get enough calcium.
Certain dark-green leafy vegetables-collards,
dandelion greens, kale, mustard greens, and
turnip greens-are worthwhile sources of cal­cium.
Other foods that supply valuable
amounts include broccoli, spoon cabbage, okra,
rutabaga, some legumes (particularly soy­beans),
most dried fruits, and certain nuts
(especially almonds). However, dried fruits and
nuts usually do not contribute substantial
amounts to the diet, because they are likely to
be eaten only in small quantities. If milk and
milk products are omitted from the diet, daily
~e of these better vegetable sources of calcium
IS essential. However, children and pregnant
and lactating women should include milk in
their diet if at all possible, because their need
for calcium is relatively greater than the needs
of other persons.
Vitamin D. This vitamin occurs naturally in
Worthwhile amounts in only a few foods, and
SUMMER 1974
these are all foods of animal origin-egg yolk,
butter, liver, and fish such as sardines, salmon,
herring, and tuna. However, milk is often forti­fied
with vitamin D. Other foods such as
margarine and breakfast cereal may also have
vitamin D added to them. Another source is
the vitamin D formed by the action of sunlight
on the skin. If all food sources of vitamin D are
eliminated fr9m the diet, use of a vitamin pre­paration
or of fish liver oils may be advisable,
particularly for infants, young children, preg­nant
and nursing women, and for persons who
seldom get out of doors and into the sunlight.
However, care must be taken in the use of vita­min
preparations and fish liver oils, because
excessive amounts of vitamin D can be toxic.
Riboflavin, possibly. Milk and meat are
among the best sources of riboflavin. If both of
these foods are eliminated from the diet,
obtaining an adequate supply of riboflavin may
become a problem. Good sources of riboflavin
are yeast2
, eggs, green leafy vegetables, aspara­gus,
broccoli, brussels sprouts, okra, and winter
squash. Legumes provide fair amounts. Some
nuts and seeds contain worthwhile amounts,
but because they are usually eaten in relatively
small quantities, may not contribute much
riboflavin. Whole grain and enriched breads and
cereals, whose riboflavin content is compara­tively
small, will provide significant amounts in
the diet if eaten several times daily.
Iodine, possibly. Foods grown in soils away
from the seacoast are sometimes deficient in
iodine. A lack of this mineral can cause goiter,
which is a swelling of the thyroid gland. The
use of iodized table salt is a practical way to
insure getting enough iodine in the diet.
There is some concern about the amount
and quality of protein in vegetarian diets.
Getting enough protein in a vegetarian diet is
usually not a problem for adults. However,
obtaining adequate amounts may be difficult
for children, particularly young children, if
milk in some form is not a part of their diet.
Important amounts of protein are found in
dry beans, dry peas, lentils, and nuts and
nutlike seeds. Bread, cereals, vegetables, and
fruits contain smaller amounts. However, the
2 Active baker's yeast, such as that used in baking,
should not be eaten directly. However, cooking or
heating inactivates the yeast and makes it suitable for
use.
15
quantity of bread-and perhaps of cereal~aten
daily may be large enough to make these foods
important sources.
Although many foods of vegetable origin
provide important amounts of protein, the
quality of the protein differs from animal pro­tein.
Proteins differ in quality, because they
differ in the kinds and amounts of amino acids
(the building blocks of protein) that they con­tain.
Proteins from animal muscle, milk, and
eggs are rated highest, because they supply
amino acids in about the same proportions in
which they are needed by the body. The pro­teins
from fruits, vegetables, grains, and nuts
supply important amounts of many amino
acids, but they do not provide as good an
assortment as animal proteins do. However, the
proteins from some legumes, particularly soy­beans
and chickpeas, are almost as good as
those from animal sources.
Combining a small amount of animal protein
with cereal and vegetable proteins helps to
improve protein quality. Examples of nourish­ing
combinations are cereal with milk or maca­roni
with cheese.
Foods of vegetable origin can also be com­bined
to improve protein quality. Knowing
how to do this takes special knowledge if only
a few foods are eaten. A rough guide to follow
is to combine legumes and cereals, such as
beans with corn, beans with rice, and peanuts
with wheat. These food combinations do not
need to be prepared together and eaten as a
mixture to get the benefit of an improvement
in protein quality, but they do need to be
eaten at the same meal. Some seed and legume
proteins combine well, for example, soybeans
and sesame seeds. Nevertheless, to safeguard
protein quality, a good idea is to have a variety
of sources of vegetable protein at a meal.
Meat Analogs
Meat analogs are simulated meat products
made from vegetable protein sources and tex­tured
and flavored to resemble meats such as
beef, ham, chicken, and fish. They are suitable
for use by persons who omit meat from their
diets. However, some contain egg white or non­fat
dry milk and, therefore, would not be
appropriate if egg or milk is to be omitted,
such as in the pure or strict vegetarian diet. The
ingredient list on the label of the meat analog
shows what it contains.
Meat analogs currently on the market may
not be equivalent in nutritive value to the
meats that they resemble~ither in protein
quality or in their vitamin and mineral content.
However, the U.S. Food and Drug Administra­tion
is developing guidelines that will require
analogs to provide nutrient levels at least as
high as those of the meat that they are
intended to replace.
YOUNG ADULTS
by Lucile F. Mork
Young adults1 of today value many, if not items that were unknown or unavailable not so
most, of their parents' goals: education, many years ago. A list of essentials for a young
careers, marriage, children, home purchase, adult might include such things as a color tele-education
of children, financial security, and vision or stereo set and tape recorder. On the
time for leisure activities or travel. However, list of "must" goals for young married couples
many of these young people are not pursuing may be the purchase of a home of their own
these goals in the same sequence followed by for their first (or at least secondJ residence.
their parents; they are reordering the priorities The life style of these young adults represents
among these goals over the life cycle, and their the desire to participate immediately in the
possibilities are increasing for pursuing these higher level of living achieved by their parents
goals in a way they see as compatible with their later in their life cycle. Other young adults
interests. place a high value on achieving financial
Material goals are important to many young security at an early age.
adults. They consider basic to their life style The major goal of still other young adults is
1 The term "young adults" refers to persons age 18
to 34, married or unmarried, and with or without
children.
16
the development of themselves as an invest­ment
in human resources. They prefer to forgo
owning a home until they are settled in a career
or until children arrive, or perhaps they prefer
FAMILY ECONOMICS REVIEW
living in a rented apartment as a permanent
way of life. These young people may want the
freedom to move in order to take advantage of
educational or job opportunities as they arise.
They may wish to expand their experiences by
traveling. Included in the practices of an
increasing number of young families 1s the
opportunity for the wife to pursue an educa­tion
and a career, and a postponement or a
forgoing of children.
Like the young people of the early 1960's,
most young adults are employed; however, the
young adults of the seventies are unique in
some of their charactertistics. These charac­teristics
reflect the changing priorities of this
group as well as the changing life style of all
families in the United States and the growing
number of opportunities to choose from.
Young adults are:
• marrying older
• anticipating fewer children
• moving more often
• getting more education
• reasonably prosperous
The median age at first marriage has
increased for both men and women. Between
1960 and 1973, the median age at first mar­riage
increased from 20.3 to 21.0 years for
women and from 22.8 to 23.2 years for men.
In 1973, the proportion of both men and
women between 20 and 24 who were single
was 4 percent and 10 percent, respectively,
above the proportion in that age group who
were single in 1960. Also, a greater proportion
of women age 18, 19, and between 25 and 29
were single in 1973 than the proportion in the
corresponding group 13 years earlier. Whether
this change reflects a simple trend toward later
marriage or whether it reflects, especially for
women, a preference for remaining single will
not be known until this group reaches 30 or
35.
Present-day young wives plan to have fewer
c~ildren than young wives of a few years ago
?ld. Based on data for June 1973, young wives
m the 18-to-24 age group plan to limit their
family size to an average of about 2.3 children.
The plans of these young wives are consider­ably
below the average anticipation of 3.1
2
fe .~t ~rese~t levels of mortality, replacement-level
(
. rtlhty IS estimated at about 2.1 children per woman
including single women); but 2.2 per wife. About 95
percent of all women become wives.
SUMMER 1974
children by wives in the years 1960 and 1965.
Thus, young wives now plan to keep their
family size at or near the level needed to re­place
persons of one generation with those of
the next. 2 Wives between 25 and 34 also
expect to have fewer children. The average
number of births anticipated by wives 25 to 29
years was 3.4 in 1960, compared with 2.4 in
1973, and by those 30 to 34 years, 3.3 and 2.8,
respectively.
The young people who make up young
families are a mobile group as they strive to
increase their education, establish a career, up­grade
their family housing, or simply take
advantage of the social aspects of living. About
three out of five persons 20 to 34 moved bet­ween
1970 and 1973 (table 1.). The majority
of the moves were made in metropolitan areas,
either within the same Standard Metropolitan
Statistical Area or from one SMSA to another.
Career opportunities in general are more
plentiful in urban areas and no doubt account
for some of the moves. Persons livirlg outside
metropolitan areas on both dates made the
next largest share of moves, while persons
moving into and those moving out of metro­politan
areas balanced out at about the same
proportion each. A small proportion, about 3
percent, moved from abroad.
Young adults are staying in school longer.
Among persons 25 to 29 years old who would
have recently completed their schooling, about
80 percent were at least high school graduates
Table 1. -Mobility of persons 20 to 34 years
of age, 1970-731
Mobility status
Total .. .. ........ ... .
Same house .. .... .. .
Different house in the
United States ...... .
Within same SMSA 2
Between SMSA 's . ...
From outside SMSA 's
to SMSA's ...... .
From SMSA's to out-side
SMSA's ..... .
Outside SMSA's at
both dates ...... .
Moved from abroad .. .
No report .... ...... .
'March
Number
Thousands
45,414
18,197
24,294
11,626
3,762
1,741
1,758
5,407
1,260
1,663
2 Standard Metropolitan Statistical Area.
Percent
100.0
40.1
53.5
25.6
8.3
3.8
3.9
11.9
2.8
3.7
17
in 1972, compared with about 61 percent in
1960. Nineteen percent had completed 4 years
of college or more in 1972, compared with 11
percent in 1960.
The total number of students enrolled in col­lege
in October 1972 was about 8.3 million
(7 .0 million at the undergraduate level and 1.3
million in graduate school). Approximately one
out of four of these college students was
married. Most of the students who were
married and living with a spouse lived in their
own households rather than with parents.
College students today are receiving more
education than their parents. Among students
enrolled in college in 1971 who were living
with their families, 59 percent were from
families in which the head had not attended
college, including 24 percent in which the head
had not completed high school. The opening of
many 2-year community colleges has increased
the opportunity for college education for
minority students and also for older students.
Enrollment in 2-year colleges increased by
about 80 percent between 1966 and 1972.
With the emphasis on training that exists
today, there might be some concern among
young adults about getting a job with good
enough pay to justify completing a college
education. The employment situation of recent
college graduates does not indicate a need for
concern. A survey conducted by the Bureau of
the Census indicated that about 93 percent of
the men and women who received degrees in
1970 and 1971 and were available for work in
October 1971 were employed. Among the full­time
employed, the median annual income was
about $7,000 for those with bachelor's degrees
and $10,290 with higher degrees. Men's earn­ings
were about $1,000 higher than women's at
the bachelor degree level. Three-fifths of the
men and two-fifths of the women with bacca­laureates
had income of $7,000 a year or more.
Among young adults 20 to 24 years old in
1972, about three-fourths of the men and more
than one-half of the women were working or
looking for work. About 12 percent of the men
were in the Armed Forces. The majority of
men this age not in the labor force or Armed
Forces were going to school, while the majority
of women not in the labor force were home­makers.
The median income in 1972 of young
families (husband and wife only) with head of
household under 25 years of age was about
$8,500. For three-person families with head
under 25, the median income was about
$7,900. Many young wives work and contri·
bute to the family income.
A smaller proportion of young families had
income below the low-income level or poverty
threshold in 1972 than in 1960. Among
families with head under 25, about 16 percent
were below the low-income level in 1972, com­pared
with about 30 percent in 1960.
Sources: U.S. Department of Commerce, CUR·
RENT POPULATION REPORTS, Series P-20, "Living
Arrangements of College Students: October 1971,"
No. 245, January 1973; "Birth Expectations of Ameri·
can Wives: June 1973," No. 254, October 1973;
"Marital Status and Living Arrangements: March
1973," No. 255, November 1973; "Mobility of the
Population of the United States: March 1970 to March
1973," No. 256, November 1973; "Undergraduate
Enrollment in 2-Year and 4-Year Colleges: October
197 2," No. 257, November 1973. Series P-23, "Charac·
teristics of American Youth: 1972," No. 44, March
1973. Series P-60, "Low-Income Families and
Unrelated Individuals in the United States : 1963,"
No. 45, June 1965; "Characteristics of the Low·
Income Population: 1972," No. 88, June 1973;
"Money Income in 1972 of Families and Persons in the
United States," No. 90, December 1973.
OTHER FAMILIES: FAMILIES WITHOUT SPOUSES
by Kristin L. Kline
Families that are headed by a man or a
woman without a spouse present are a minority
among U.S. families, but they are increasing as
a proportion of all families. In 1973, such fami­lies
represented 15 percent of all families-up
from 13 percent in 1962. The increase was
entirely for families headed by a female, which
in 1973 accounted for 12 percent of all fami-
18
lies. Families headed by a male without a wife
present remained stable at 3 percent of all
families between 1962 and 1973.
Families without spouses include single·
parent families with children under 18, a
parent living with an adult child, or various
combinations of adult brothers and sisters or
other adult relatives living together. In 1973,
FAMILY ECONOMICS REVIEW
there were 8 million of these families, an
increase of more than 2 million (36 percent)
between 1962 and 1973.
More than one-half of these "other" families
are single-parent families. These 4.2 million
families had 9.1 million children under age 18
in 1973. More than 9 out of 10 of these child­ren
were living with their mother. From 1962
to 1973, the rate of increase in single-parent
families has been much faster than for hus­band-
and-wife families with children (table 1).
Other families, particularly single-parent
families, may have special problems in the
management of money, time, and energy
resources. These families generally have more
limited money resources than do husband-and­wife
families; they are more highly concen­trated
in lower income brackets than are hus­band-
and-wife families (table 2). Besides
limited financial resources, families without a
full-time homemaker have a limited supply of
time and energy available for the performan€e
of household tasks. This is particularly true for
those single parents who are the only adult
member of the family and who are employed
outside the home.
When money, time, and energy available to a
family are limited, these resources become
more valuable. Trade-offs in the types of goods
and services purchased may result. For
example, when time is at a premium, changes
may occur in patterns of meal preparation.
Higher priced convenience foods may be substi­tuted
for food items requiring long preparation
time. Other alternatives are for the family to
dine out more frequently or to hire someone to
prepare the meals. Also, families may pay for
someone else to perform the tasks of laundry
work, general housework (cleaning and meal
preparation), and child care. Families with
lower incomes may find it particularly difficult
to make these adjustments.
Time allocated to household management is
not an undifferentiated block of hours that can
be placed any time during the day. For
example, if deliveries are to be made or if a
repair person comes to service an appliance, a
household member must be in the home. If
Table 1. -Families with own children less than 18 years, by type,
United States, 1973 and 1962
Increase between
Type of family 1973 1962 1962 and 1973
Number Number Percent
All families ....... . 29,571,000 26,227,000 13
Husband-wife .. .. . 25,387,000 23,748,000 7
Other . ......... . 4,184,000 2,479,000 69
Male head ..... . 386,000 254,000 52
Female head ... . 3,798,000 2,225,000 71
Source: U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census, Current
Population Reports, Series P·20, Nos. 125 and 258.
Table 2. -Income of families in 1969, by type, United States, 1970
Type of family
All families
Husband-~if~ · · · · · · · · ·
0
........
ther
Male. h~a·d· .. · · · · · · · ·
---Female he;d· .. · . · · · · ....... .
Total
100
100
100
100
Less than
$4,000
15
12
20
41
Percent distribution
$4,000 to $7,000 to
$6,999 $9,999
17 21
16 21
20 21
25 16
~ources: U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census, 1970 Census, PC(2)-8A.
ote: F1gures may not add to total because of rounding.
~UMMER 1974
.J
$10,000
+
47
51
38
18
19
stores and business offices are open only during
normal working hours, time must be available
during these particular hours to carry out
necessary transactions. When all members of a
family are away from home during normal
business hours (working, attending school,
etc.), special arrangements must be made to
leave work, possibly losing pay, or to adjust
working hours to accomodate these other time
demands.
Studies of wives gainfully employed outside
the home have noted the importance of paid
services for the performance of household tasks
as an extra cost of their employment, that is,
beyond the expenditures of otherwise com­parable
nonemployed wives. Those women
who spent the most for paid services were
mothers of preschool children who were
employed outside the home. Their average at
$510 was almost five times the expenditure of
their nonemployed counterparts. Urban aver­ages
for expenditures on paid service were
$283 for the employed and $139 for the non­employed.
Single-parent families may find the cost of
providing child care their most specific prob­lem.
Over 60 percent of all nonmarried women
with children participate in the labor force.
Although many married women with children
are employed outside the home, their participa­tion
in the labor force is generally at a lower
rate than nonmarried women with children
(table 3). The dollar cost of child care arrange­ments
to working mothers varies with the type
of arrangements made, the number of children
needing care, whether the mother is a full-time
or part-time worker, and the mother's rate of
pay. From 1967 to 1968, employed mothers
reported daily costs averaging $2.85 and $2.75
(white women 14 to 24 years old and 30 to 44
years old, respectively) and $1.84 and $0.99
(black women 14 to 24 years old and 30 to 44
years old, respectively). For 1 year, the cost of
child care per family could amount to over
$700 {projected for a white woman 14 to 24
years old working full time).
Sources: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Agricul·
tural Research Service, JOB-RELATED EXPENDI­TURES
AND MANAGEMENT PRACTICES OF
GAINFULLY EMPLOYED WIVES IN FOUR
GEORGIA CITIES, Home Economics Research Report
No. 15, 1962; JOB-RELATED EXPENDITURES AND
MANAGEMENT PRACTICES OF GAINFULLY
EMPLOYED WIVES IN NORTH CAROLINA, Home
Economics Research Report No. 34, 1967; JOB·
RELATED EXPENDITURES AND MANAGEMENT
PRACTICES OF GAINFULLY EMPLOYED WIVES
IN OHIO, Home Economics Research Report No. 27,
1965. U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the
Census, CONSUMER INCOME, Series P-60, No. 91 ,
December 1973, pp. 104-105; CURRENT _POPULA­TION
REPORTS, Series P-20, Nos. 125 and 258; 1970
CENSUS, PC(2)-8A, pp. 1-3. U.S. Department of
Labor, DUAL CAREERS, Vol. 1, Manpower Research
Monograph No. 21, 1970; YEARS OF DECISION,
Vol. 1, Manpower Research Monograph No. 24, 1971.
Table 3.-"Working mothers"-Women with own
children under 18 years old who worked in
1972, by age of children and marital status
Mothers by age
of children
All mothers .............
Mothers with all children
under 6 ....... . .......
Mothers with some children
under 6, some 6 to 17 ...
Mothers with all children
6 to 17 .......... . ....
Married Nonmarried
Percent Percent
51 63
49 59
39 48
57 70 -
Source: U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of
the Census, Consumer Income, Series P-60, No. 91.
INGREDIENT LABELING FOR COSMETICS
As of March 31, 1975 all manufacturers of
cosmetics will be required to list ingredients on
product labels. This requirement comes under
the authority of the Fair Packaging and Label­ing
Act, which is regulated by the Food and
Drug Administration. Listing ingredients on
product labels will facilitate comparisons by
consumers and will help those with known
20
allergies avoid products whose ingredients
could cause reactions. The regulation requires
that ingredients be listed prominently and con·
spicuously on the label in decreasing order of
prevalence. With the exception of fragrances
and flavors, all ingredients will be listed bY
standardized names. A dictionary developed bY
the Cosmetic, Toiletries, and Fragrances
FAMILY ECONOMICS REVIEW
Association will be used as the standard name
reference. Small packages will be required to
have a tag or card with the required informa­tion
attached to the container.
In addition to the labeling requirement, the
Food and Drug Administration has established
a procedure for voluntary twice-a-year · report­ing
of complaints received by manufacturers
about their products. This information will be
used to pinpoint products or ingredients that
are causing allergic reactions or injuries, and to
determine any need for product reformulation
or regulatory action.
Source : U.S. Department of Health, Education, and
Welfare, Food and Drug Administration, HEW NEWS.
October 12, 1973.
SOME NEW USDA PUBLICATIONS
(Please give your ZIP code in your return address when you order these.)
The following are for sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing
Office, Washington, D.C. 20402:
• FATS IN FOOD AND DIET. AB 361. January 1974. 25 cents.
• DIETARY LEVELS OF HOUSEHOLDS IN THE UNITED STATES, SEASONS AND
YEAR 1965-66. HFCS Report No. 18. March 1974. $2.90.
• USED FURNITURE CAN BE A GOOD BUY. PA 1061. September 1973. 25 cents.
Single copies of the following are available free:
From Office of Communication, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Washington, D.C. 20250:
• COOKING FOR SMALL GROUPS. AB 370. (formerly G 197) February 1974.
• GROWING FLOWERING ANNUALS. G 91. Revised October 1973.
• LAMB IN FAMILY MEALS. G 124. Revised February 1974.
• SOAPS AND DETERGENTS FOR HOME LAUNDERING. G 139. Revised October
1973.
• COMO SER VIRSE DE LOS GRADOS DEL USDA AL COMPRAR LOS
COMESTIBLES (How to Use USDA Grades in Buying Food). G 196-S. November
1973.
• SELECTING AND GROWING SHADE TREES. G 205. December 1973.
From Economic Research Service, Division of Information, Washington, D.C. 20250:
• INCOME OF FARM WAGEWORKER HOUSEHOLDS IN 1971. AER 251. March
1974.
• CONSUMERS' PREFERENCES, USES, AND BUYING PRACTICES FOR SELECTED
VEGETABLES: A NATIONWIDE SURVEY. MRR 1019. April1974.
From Forest Service, Southern Forest Experiment Station, T-10210 Federal Building, 701
Loyola Avenue, New Orleans, La. 70113:
• CONTROLLING WOOD-DESTROYING BEETLES IN BUILDINGS AND
FURNITURE. L 558. Revised July 1973.
SUMMER 197 4 21
KNOW YOUR PENSION PLAN
Employees enrolled in a pension plan at
their place of work but unsure about what the
plan provides and the circumstances under
which benefits will or will not be paid may find
useful a recent pamphlet issued by the U.S.
Department of Labor. The pamphlet "Know
Your Pension Plan" discusses some basic
aspects of pension plans and suggests questions
that employees could ask about their own
plans. The pamphlet includes information on
normal or early retirement benefits, disability
retirement benefits, survivors' benefits,
credited service, vesting (pension rights before
retirement age), circumstances under which
benefits will not be received, where the money
for benefits comes from, how to apply for
benefits, and Federal laws pertaining to pen­sion
plans. The format is an aid in helping
employees to plan intelligently for retirement
years by learning what income can be expected
after retirement and how current decisions
about employment can affect this income.
The pamphlet "Know Your Pension Plan" is
available for 55 cents from the Superintendent
of Documents, U.S. Government Printing
Office, Washington, D.C. 20402. Stock No.
2900-00186.
GROWTH IN CONSUMER CREDIT
All major types of installment and nonin­stallment
consumer credit outstanding
increased substantially between the end of
1971 and the end of 1973. Total consumer
credit outstanding rose more than $42 billion
or by 30 percent during this period (see table).
The largest increase-both in dollar amount and
on a percentage basis-was for consumer goods
other than automobiles. Charge-account credit
increased the least.
Mobile homes, bank-credit cards, and recrea­tional
vehicles accounted for much of the
increase for consumer goods other than auto-mobiles.
Credit outstanding for both mobile
homes and for bank-credit cards increased by
50 percent during the 2-year period. Much of
the growth in mobile homes is attributed to the
limited number of conventional low-priced,
single-family dwellings constructed in recent
years. Also, mobile home construction stan­dards
and parks have been upgraded to make
mobile homes a more readily acceptable type
of shelter.
The growth in bank-credit cards indicates
the growing importance of "open-end" credit
to consumers. In "open-end" credit, extensions
Consumer credit outstanding
22
Type of credit
Total ........ .. .. .
Installment ...... .
Automobile .... .
Other consumer
loans ...... .. .
Home improve-ment
loans ... .
Personal loans .. .
Noninstallment ... .
Single payment
loans ........ .
Charge accounts ..
Service credit ....
End of 1971
Million
dollars
138,394
111,295
38,664
34,353
5,413
32,865
27,099
10,585
8,350
8,164
End of 1973 Increase
Million Percent
dollars
180,486 30
147,437 32
51,130 32
4 7,530 38
7,352 36
41,425 26
33,049 22
13,241 25
9,829 18
9,979 22
Source: Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System. "The Pattern
of Growth in Consumer Credit," Federal Reserve Bulletin, March 1974,
table 54.
FAMILY ECONOMICS REVIEW
and repayments are subject more to borrower
discretion than are conventional forms of bor­rowing.
Consumers have been increasing their
use of bank-credit cards in lieu of cash for
retail purchases of goods and services and also
as a substitute for small short-term personal
loans. Growth in consumer financing of recrea­tional
vehicles was high during 1972, but
slowed when the energy supply problems
affected the sales of motor homes, travel
trailers, and campers. Financing of furniture
and appliances was also slowed during 1973 by
the decrease in the number of new dwellings
and the reduced turnover in resale housing.
Automobile credit is the largest single com­ponent
of total consumer credit outstanding­accounting
for 34.7 percent of the to1tal. The
growth of automobile credit, which led the
advance in installment borrowing during 1972
and early 1973, came to a near halt toward the
end of 1973 reflecting declines in unit sales of
new and used cars and reductions in the aver­age
size of automobile installment contracts as
CQnsumers shifted their buying to less expen-sive
and more economical new cars as a result
of the gas shortage.
Unlike most other types of installment
credit, borrowing for home improvements has
been bolstered by the current energy shortage.
Consumers have taken advantage of special
terms being offered by many lending institu­tions
for such improvements as conversion of
heating units or installation of storm windows
or insulation. Also, the relatively high level of
interest rates on new mortgages has prompted
some homeowners who might otherwise have
acquired a new residenct: to add to or alter
their present houses.
The rate of expansion in personal loans and
in all types of noninstallment credit has lagged,
mainly because of the increasing use of bank­credit
cards and other revolving-installment
accounts.
Source: Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve
System. "The Pattern of Growth in Consumer Credit,"
FEDERAL RESERVE BULLETIN, March 1974,
pp. 175-189.
CHARACTERISTICS OF THE LOW-INCOME POPULATION: 1972
The number of persons whose incomes were
below the low-income level decreased in 1972
after rising for several years. 1 About 24.5 mil­lion
persons or 12 percent of the population
were classified as low-income, 4.3 percent
fewer than in 1971.
The 1972 decline reflects a substantial
decrease in the number of white low-income
persons and a slight increase in the number of
black low-income persons. Only about one­tenth
of the white population was low-income
1
Families and unrelated individuals are classrfied as
being above or below the low-income or poverty level,
using the poverty index adopted by a Federal Inter­agency
Committee in 1969. This index is base'd on the
Department of Agriculture's 1961 Economy Food plan
and reflects the different consumption requirements of
families based on their size and composition, sex and
age of the family head, and farm-nonfarm residence.
. In 197 2, the low-income or poverty threshold-the
Income level which separates "poor" from "non­JlOor"-
was $4,275 for a nonfarm family of four; it was
$4,137 in 1971 and $2,973 in 1959. These thresholds
~e updated every year to reflect the changes in the
ons-umer Price Index (CPI).
SUMMER 1974
in 1972, although they made up almost two­thirds
of all low-income persons. In contrast,
one-third of the black population was low­income,
accounting for one-third of all low­income
persons as well.
More than half of the black poor were
children (52 percent), compared with about
one-third (36 percent) of the white poor. In
contrast, persons 65 years and over comprised
about 19 percent of all low-income whites but
only about 8 percent of the low-income blacks.
The sex of the family head continues to be
an important factor iu the low-income status of
families. Since 1959, the number of low­income
families with a male head has decreased
by 54 percent, whereas the number of low­income
families headed by a female has
increased by 13 percent. In 1959, families
headed by women accounted for 23 percent of
all low-income families; by 1972, these families
accounted for 43 percent.
Source : U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of
the Census, CURRENT POPULATION REPORTS,
Series P-60, No. 91, December 1973.
23
CONSUMER PRICES
Consumer Price Index for Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers
Group
All items ..................... .
Food ....... ....... ........ .
Food at home .............. .
Food away from home ....... .
Housing ........... ... ...... .
Shelter ................... .
Rent ................... .
Homeownership .......... .
Fuel and utilities ........... .
Fuel oil and coal ....... ... .
Gas and electricity ......... .
Household furnishings and
operations . . ... .. . ....... .
Apparel and upkeep .... . ..... .
Men's and boys' ............ .
Women's and girls' .......... .
Footwear ........ .... ..... .
Transportation .............. .
Private ................... .
Public .................... .
Health and recreation ......... .
Medical care ............... .
Personal care .............. .
Reading and recreation .. ..... .
Other goods and services ..... .
(1967=100)
April1974
144.0
158.6
159.4
155.6
146.0
150.2
128.8
158.2
147.0
206.5
142.0
134.0
133.6
134.2
132.4
136.3
134.4
133.1
146.3
136.3
145.6
133.1
130.4
133.6
March 1974
143.1
159.1
160.6
153.7
144.9
149.4
128.4
157.2
144.9
201.5
140.0
132.6
132.2
131.8
131.6
134.9
132.0
130.4
146.6
135.4
144.8
131.8
129.5
132.8
Source: U.S. Department of Labo~. Bureau of Labor Statistics.
Feb. 1974
141.5
157.6
159.0
152.6
143.4
148.3
128.0
155.8
143.5
202.0
137.3
130.1
130.4
129.2
130.1
133.5
129.3
127.5
146.2 .
134.5
143.4
130.8
128.9
132.3
April1973
130.7
136.5
136.4
137.0
132.8
138.1
123.0
143.6
125.1
128.3
125.5
123.6
125.8
125.9
126.0
129.7
122.6
120.3
143.9
129.2
136.2
123.8
125.2
128.2
Index of Prices Paid by Farmers for Family Living Items
(1967=100)
Item May April Mar. Feb. Jan. Dec. May
1974 1974 1974 1974 1974 1973 1973
All items .. ........ . ......... 159 157 155 153 149 147 136
Food and tobacco ............ ... --- 161 --- --- 151 ---
Clothing .................... -- -- 162 --- --- 154 ---
Household operation ......... --- --- 147 --- --- 135 ---
Household furnishings ........ -- -- 135 --- --- 130 ---
Building materials, house ...... -- -- 169 --- -- 163 ---
Source: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Statistical Reporting Service.
24 FAMILY ECONOMICS REVIEW
IJ
COST OF FOOD AT HOME
Cost of Food at Home, 1 Estimated for Food Plans at Three Cost Levels,
April1974, U.S. average
. Cost for 1 week Cost for 1 month
Sex-age groups2
Low-cost Moderate- Liberal Low-cost Moderate-plan
cost plan plan plan cost plan
Dollars Dollars Dollars Dollars Dollars
FAMILIES
Family of 2:
20 to 35 years3
.. . ...... . .. 25.70 32.20 39.00 111.30 139.50
55 to 75 years3
. .... ... ... • 20.90 26.60 31.70 90.30 115.60
Family of 4 :
Preschool children4
•••. •• .. • 37.20 46.60 56.00 160.70 201.70
School children5
•• 0 • • •• • ••• 43.40 54.50 66.10 187.70 236.20
INDIVIDUALS6
Children, under 1 year ....... . 4.90 6.10 6.80 21.10 26.40
1 to 3 years .. . ....... . .... 6.30 7.80 9.30 27.10 33.80
3 to 6 years . . . . . .. .. . .... . 7.50 9.50 11.20 32.40 41.10
6 to 9 years . . .. . . ...... . . . 9.20 11.60 14.30 39.90 50.30
Girls, 9 to 12 years ...... . .... 10.50 13.30 15.40 45.30 57.70
12 to 15 years .. .. ......... 11.50 14.80 17.60 49.90 64.00
15 to 20 years ....... . .. . .. 11.70 14.60 17.10 50.80 63.30
Boys, 9 to 12 years ......... . 10.80 13.60 16.30 46.60 59.10
12 to 15 years . ............ 12.60 16.40 19.30 54.80 70.90
15 to 20 years ............ . 14.60 18.30 21.80 ·63.30 79.40
Women, 20 to 35 years .... . .. 10.80 13.50 16.10 46.60 58.50
35 to 55 years ... . ......... 10.30 13.00 15.40 44.70 56.30
55 to 75 years .......... . . . 8.70 11.10 13.10 37.60 48.20
75 years and over ......... . 7.90 9.90 11.90 34.20 42.80
Pregnant ... . ......... . ... 12.70 15.70 18.40 54.90 68.10
Nursing .................. 14.90 18.20 21.10 64.40 79.00
Men, 20-35 years ............ 12.60 15.80 19.40 54.60 68.30
35 to 55 years . . ...... . . . .. 11.70 14.60 17.60 50.60 63.40
55 to 75 years . . .. . ....... . 10.30 13.10 15.70 44.50 56.90
75 years and over ... . ... . . . 9.60 12.60 15.10 41.60 54.70
Liberal
plan
Dollars
168.90
137.30
242.40
286.00
29.30
40.20
48.70
62.00
66.70
76.30
74.20
70.50
83.40
94.50
69.60
66.80
56.80
51.70
79.60
91.60
83.90
76.40
68.00
65.30
1 These estimates were computed from quantities in food plans published in Family Economics Reuiew, October
1964. The costs of the food plans were first estimated by using the average price per pound of each food group
paid by urban survey families at three selected income levels in 1965. These prices were adjusted to current levels
by ~se of Retail Food Prices by Cities released periodically by the Bureau of Labor Statistics.
3
Age groups include the persons of the first age 11sted up to but not including those of the second age listed.
4 Ten percent added for family size adjustment.
5Man and woman, 20-35 years; children, 1·3 and 3-6 years.
6 Man and woman, 20-35; child, 6-9 and boy 9·12 years.
. The costs given are for individuals in 4-person families. For individuals in other size families, the following
adJustments are suggested: !·person-add 20 percent; 2-person-add 10 percent; 3-person-add 5 percent;
5·person-subtract 5 percent; 6-or·more-person-subtract 10 percent.
SUMMER 1974 25
CONSUMER PUBLICATIONS IN SPANISH
Consumer publications available in Spanish
are listed in a new catalogue, free from Con­sumer
Product Information Center, Pueblo,
Colo. 81009. The catalogue, INFORMACIO'N
PARA EL CONSUMIDOR, lists about 60
26
publications; more than half are free. Topics
covered include food and nutrition, consumer
protection and education, employment, social
security, immigration, Federal income tax, and
health.
FAMILY ECONOMICS REVIEW
CONTENTS
Page
USDA Clothing Budgets: Annual Costs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
Virginia Britton
Textile News: The Energy Situation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
Nancy G. Harries
Convenience and the Cost of Plate Dinners and Skillet Main Dishes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
Cynthia Cromwell and Dianne Odland
Vegetarian Diets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
Nancy R. Raper
Young Adults . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
Lucile F. Mork
Other Families: Families Without Spouses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
Kristin L. Kline
Ingredient Labeling for Cosmetics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
Know Your Pension Plan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
Growth in Consumer Credit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
Characteristics of the Low-Income Population: 1972.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
Consumer Publications in Spanish . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
Regular Features
Some New USDA Publications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
Consumer Prices . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . 24
Cost of Food at Home . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
28 FAMILY ECONOMICS REVIEW