Family Economics Review [1987, Number 1]

              [Fo; Building Use Only 1
Editor
Joan C. Courtless
Managing Editor
Sherry Lowe
Family Economics Review is
published each quarter by the
Family Economics Research
Group. Agricultural Research
Service. United States
Department ol Agriculture.
Washington. D.C.
The Secretary ol Agriculture has
determined that the publication
ol this periodical is necessary in
the transaction ol the public
business required by law ol this
Department. Use ollunds lor thlS
periodical has been approved
by the Director ol the Ollice ol
Management and Budget
through March 31. 1987.
Contents may be reprinted
without permission. but credit to
Family Economics Review
would be appreciated. Use ol
commercial or trade names
does not imply approval or con-stitute
endorsement by USDA
Family Economics Review is
lor sale by the Superintendent ol
Documents. U.S. Government
Printing Ollice. Send subscrip-tion
orders. change ol address.
and single copy requests to
Superintendent ol Documents.
U.S. Government Printing Ollice.
Washington. D.C. 20402. (See
subscription form in back ol this
issue.)
Suggestions or comments con­cerning
this publication should
be addressed to:
Joan C. Courtless. Editor.
Family Economics Review,
Family Economics Research Group.
USDNA.RS. Federal Building.
~ Economics
Review
1987 No. 1
Contents:
Recent Trends in Clothing and Textiles
Joan C. Court less
Diets of American Women by Income, Spring 1977 and
Spring 1985
Katherine S. Tippett and Howard A. Riddick
Abstracts
Recent Developments in Automobile Financing
Measures of Compensation
Using Consumer Expenditure Survey Data
Spending Patterns of U.S. Households
Money Income of Households, Families, and Persons in 1984
Regular Features
New Publications
Cost of Food at Home
Consumer Prices
Room 442A. Hyattsville. Md. 20782. Issued February 1987
1
10
18
19
24
26
30
29
32
33
Recent 'fiends in Clothing
and 'Iextiles 1
By Joan C. Courtless
Family economist
Clothing Expenditures and Prices
In 1986 apparel and upkeep prices, as
measured by the Consumer Price Index, rose
1. 9% over 1985 (table 1), a small increase
but still greater than the 0.6% increase in
prices for the "all items" category. For the
most part, increases or decreases in the
various clothing categories were modest;
only prices for girls' separates and sports­wear
increased by as much as 10%. Prices for
men's coats and jackets declined for the
second consecutive year.
Annual spending for clothing and shoes in
1986 is estimated at $682 per person accord­ing
to preliminary figures for the first
three quarters of 1986 (table 2). This
amount exceeds 1985 spending by $32 per
person; all of this increase can be attri­buted
to increased buying--higher prices
were not a factor as in previous years.
Since 1982, per capita expenditures for
clothing and shoes have increased by $146;
only 24% of this increase can be attributed
to higher prices. This real increase in
clothing purchases by consumers over the
last several years may have both demographic
and economic explanations: The baby boom
cohort is maturing into an age group with
higher earnings and spending power; the
number of two-earner families is increasing;
and the educational level for women entering
the work force is higher (increasing their
earnings potential) (~). In addition, clothing
has been a good value in recent years
because, until 1985, prices overall increased
faster than prices for clothing (!_;!) •
1 This article is adapted from a paper
presented at the Annual Agricultural Outlook
Conference in December 1986 in Washington,
DC.
Trade in Textiles, Apparel, and Footwear
Although the total U.S. apparel market
expanded at a rate of 4.7% during 1985,
imports grew at a rate of 8.8% (~_). Apparel
imports had a 43% market share in 1985 (!!!_);
shoe imports took 77% of the U.S. market,
and sweater imports comprised 70% (1).
The trade deficit in textiles and apparel
reached $13.6 billion in 1985, the largest
deficit in history and 10% higher than in
1984. The combined textile and apparel trade
deficit for 1986 will probably exceed this
amount; for the first 8 months of 1986 it
was 22% higher than during the same period
in 1985. The trade deficit for textiles for
the January-August 1986 period was up 42%
from the same period in 1985; the trade
deficit for apparel was 19% higher for the
first 8 months of 1986 than during the same
period in 1985. Volume of textile and apparel
imports (in square yards equivalent) was up
24% for the first 8 months of 1986 compared
with the same period in 1985. Corresponding
increases in volume by fiber were cotton,
28%; wool, 8%; and manmade, 23%.
In February 1986 President Reagan an­nounced
a new textiles and apparel program
for Caribbean nations. This program is
designed to provide increased access to the
U.S. clothing market by increasing quotas
for apparel assembled in a Caribbean nation
from cloth woven and cut in the United
States. Participating countries include
Jamaica and Haiti, with preliminary agree­ments
(memoranda of understanding) with the
Dominican Republic, Trinidad/Tobago, and
Barbados. Any increase in Caribbean imports
by the United States is to be balanced by a
corresponding decrease in import levels for
all other countries.
In March 1986 President Reagan determined
that the global quotas maintained by the
Government of Japan on imports of leather
and leather footwear, (1) denied benefits
due the United States under the General
Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT),
(2) were unreasonable, and (3) constituted
a burden and restriction on U.S. commerce.
Consequently, the United States has agreed
1987 No.1 Family Econom ic s Re view
Table 1. Percent change in prices of apparel and upkeep,
September 1986 1
December 1985 to
Group and i tern
All i terns •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••
Apparel and upkeep ..................................... .
Men's and boys' clothing ............................... .
Men's
Suits, sport coats, and jackets •••••••••••••••••••••
Coats and jackets •.....•.•...•..•.......••.•...•..•
Furnishings and special clothing •••••••••••••••••••.
Shirts .......................................... • .. •
Dungarees, jeans, and trousers •••••••••••••••••••••
Boys' ....................•................... · · · • • • • ·
Coats, jackets, sweaters, and shirts ••••••••••••••••
Furnishings ....................................... .
Suits, trousers, sport coats, and jackets •••••••••••
Women's and girls' clothing ............................ .
Women's
Coats and jackets •..•.......•...........•....•.•...
Dresses ........................ · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · • • • • ·
Separates and sportswear •••••••••••••••••••••••••••
Underwear, nightwear, and hosiery •••••••••••••••••
Suits ............... • · . · · · · · • • • • • · • • • · • · · · · · · · · · · · · ·
Girls' .........., .......................................
Coats, jackets, dresses, and suits
Separates and sportswear •••••••••••••••••••••••••••
Underwear, nightwear, hosiery, and accessories ••••
Infants' and toddlers' clothing
Other apparel commodities ............................. .
Sewing materials and notions ••••••••••••••••••• ~ •••••
Jewelry and lug gage . ................................ .
Footwear
Men's
Boys' and girls' ............•.........................
Women's .......................... · • • · · · •. •. • • · · · • • · · ·
Percent change
(annualized)
.6
1.9
.1
.4
7.4
-3.5
.3
-.6
-2.2
-1.0
l.O
-1.0
-2.7
2.8
2.6
-.4
7.7
5.2
-1.3
4.5
3.1
-2.4
10.2
.1
3.8
4.4
.6
6.0
-1.0
.2
1.6
-4.4
1Consumer Price Index for Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers ( CPI-W).
Source: Calculated from the CPI Detailed Report, December 1985 and September 1986,
U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics.
2 Family Economics Review 1987 No.1
to accept compensation from Japan (an esti­mated
value to the United States of $236
million) and to increase duties on $24
million of U.S. imports from Japan. The
settlement also involves tariff concessions
on $2 • 3 billion worth of U • S • ex ports to
Japan in 1984. Because Japan notified GATT
of its intent to remove global quotas on
leather and leather footwear imports and
replace them with new tariff measures, the
settlement will increase opportunities for
American producers to sell products in
Japan.
On July 31, 1986, the Arrangement
Regarding International Trade in Textiles
(Multi-Fiber Arrangements) was extended
until July 31, 1991. The new agreement
provides that almost all textile imports are
available for quota control, including linen,
ramie, and silk blends. However, renegotia­tion
of bilateral agreements prior to their
expiration date is no longer permitted.
Before signing the new trade pact, the
United States cancelled bilateral areements
with Hong Kong, Taiwan, and South Korea,
and replaced them with new agreements limit­ing
annual import growth rates to 1%, 0.5%,
and 0.8%, respectively (!).
Table 2. Annual expenditures on clothing and shoes 1
Percent of Aggregate
Per capita personal expenditures
expenditures 2 consunption
Year expenditures B'i ll ions Bill ions
of of
Constant Current Constant Current constant current
dollars dollars dollars dollars dollars dollars
(1982) (1982) (1982)
1982 ............. 536 536 6.1 6.1 124.4 124.4
1983 ............. 566 577 6.2 6.0 132.6 135.1
1984 ............. 603 622 6.4 6.1 142.7 147.2
1985 ............. 612 650 6.3 6.0 146.0 155.2
1986 3 ............ 647 682 6.5 6.0 155.9 164.3
1 Includes yard goods, but excludes services such as cleaning and repairing clothing and
shoes.
2 Calculated by dividing aggregate expenditures for each year by population figures for July
of each year.
3Preliminary figures--average of estimates for first 3 quarters of 1986 (i.e., seasonally
adjusted quarterly totals at annual rates).
Sources: Calculated from U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census, 1986,
Population estimates and projections, Current Population Reports, Series P-25, and personal
communication; and U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of Economic Analysis, 1986, Survey
of Current Business 66(7) :37 (tables 2.2 and 2 .3), and personal communication.
1987 No.1 Family Economics Review J
Supplies, Prices, and Consumption of Fibers
World production of fibers was 3% lower in
1985 than in 1984. Natural fiber production
(primarily cotton) was down by 7%, decreas­ing
from 58% of all fiber production in 1984
to 55% in 1985 (11).
The 1986 U.S. mill consumption of total
fibers is estimated at 49.8 pounds per
capita. This includes 13.3 pounds of cotton,
0 .6 pound of wool, and 35 .9 pounds of man­made
fibers. Per capita use in 1985 was 46.6
pounds, including 11.8 pounds of cotton, 0.5
pound of wool, and 34.3 pounds of manmade
fibers.
Cotton. The 1986 U.S. cotton crop is
expected to be about 10.7 million bales,
down 21% from 1985. Cotton prices dropped
sharply (from 66 cents to 26 cents a pound)
when the 1985 farm bill went into effect on
August 1, 1986. Since the world price has
been around 23 cents a pound, U.S. cotton
will be competitive in international markets.
Exports for 1986-87 are estimated at 6.3
million bales, giving the United States a
29% share of world cotton trade (compared
with 10% in 1985-86). Although cotton tex­tile
imports were up only 2% in 1985 over
1984, during January to August 1986 cotton
imports were up 17% over the same period in
1985. Hong Kong, China, Taiwan, and Korea
supplied 50% of ~ .S. cotton textile imports
during 1985.
For the first time since 1970 (14, 15, 19),
cotton's share of the apparel market ~ached
40% in 1985.
Wool. Mill consumption of apparel wool
during the first 6 months of 1986 was 28%
above the 1985 level but 4% below the 1984
level. Average U.S. farm prices for wool in
1986 are expected to be unchanged from 1985,
about 65 cents per pound (greasy).
Imports of raw wool during the first
6 months of 1986 were 26% above imports a
year earlier but 4% below the 1984 level.
Over 68% of all wool consumed domestically
in 1985 was imported. Wearing apparel and
carpets or rugs represented 40% and 27% of
U.S. wool textile imports in 1985.
4 Family Economics Review 1987 No.1
Mohair. U.S. mohair exports in 1986 are
expected to be about 3% higher than in 1985 .
During January to June, 71% of mohair
exports went to the United Kingdom. World
production of mohair is expected to be about
50 million pounds, 13% above the 1985 level.
About 14 million pounds, 28% of this amount,
will be produced in the United States.
Manmade fibers. Shipments of manmade
fibers by U.S. producers during the first
8 months of 1986 were 2% above shipments a
year earlier (.!1_) and 3% above the 1984
level (~). Demand has increased for acrylic
staple fibers, used in active sportswear;
polyester staple fibers, used in knit
bottomweight apparel; and for nylon, used in
carpets. Shipments of polyester filament
decreased because of lower demand for tex­tured
yarn in slacks, dresses, and skirts.
Developments in Fibers and Fabrics
The official name for a newly developed
American wool/ cotton blend fabric is
"Alamera." The method for blending wool and
cotton fibers on the cotton spinning system
was developed by the American Wool Council.
An Alamera label can be used only on fabric
made in America from American wool and
cotton. The fabric offers a luxurious hand
and year-round versatility by combining
thermostatic qualities of wool with the com­fort
of cotton (~_). Intimate blends ranging
from 50% cotton/50% wool to 80% cotton/20%
wool can be achieved. "Valhalla, 11 a new
fabric incorporating 80/20 Supima cotton and
American wool, was available in 1986 in
men's slacks (!.Q) •
A new family of fabrics, to be sold under
the certification mark 11 Coo1Max, 11 is designed
to regulate body temperature during pro­longed
physical exertion by increasing the
air flow through the fibers to rapidly
evaporate perspiration. Hydrophobic polymer
fibers (for minimum absorption and maximum
ventilation) have four channels that trans­port
moisture away from the body along
the fiber's surface. This shape of fiber
increases surface area by 20% over that of a
round fiber, and encourages air flow for
fast moisture evaporation <.V.
A dual-denier staple polyester fiber will
be used in blended knit fabrics to be sold
under the certification mark "Great
Feelings." These fabrics (for top-weight
knits) must be made of at least 50% Great
Feelings fibers. Each fiber consists of two
strands, one more dense than the other,
which produces a fabric that is loose, airy,
soft, lightweight, and shrink resistant.
Several manufacturers will feature this
fabric in 1987 (_~).
Fabrics knitted of "Celebrate" acetate
will be monitored and tested on a continuing
basis and then licensed if they meet perfor­mance
specifications. Celebrate acetate is a
filament yarn with excellent draping and
dyeing characteristics. Fabrics are color­fast,
moisture-absorbent, static-free, and
have a silky hand <.~).
A new cellulosic solvent-spun fiber is
being developed in England. Known as
Genesis, the new fiber will be classified
separately from viscose or rayon. In
testing, Genesis has exhibited good wash
stability, wet strength, dyeability, static
resistance, and absorbency (~_).
"Courcel" is a hollow, inflated rayon
fiber with a capacity to absorb 40% more
water then regular rayon. The hollow core
provides good wicking (even after repeated
washing and drying) and thermal insulation.
Courcel was developed for blending with
polyester, acrylic, or cotton--it is not
used alone because it lacks yarn strength.
In blends with manmade fibers, Courcel
adds softness and absorbency; in cotton
blends, it also adds a lustrous appearance.
J.P. Stevens & Co., Inc., has produced
"Thermosoft" yarn, consisting of 50% Courcel
rayon and 50% Kodel polyester, for use in
thermowear, sports or leisure wear, conven­tional
undergarments, and sleep wear (~_).
The Orion division of E.I. du Pont de
Nemours & Co. Inc., has decided to stress
the functional properties of Comfort 12 for
the activewear (including socks) and
children's markets. Marketing strategy for
Comfort 12 had previously focused on fashion
characteristics related to women's wear
applications. In addition, Du Pont is
broadening its specifications for Comfort 12
certification in women's knitwear to include
blends of 75% Comfort 12 with 25% of another
fiber such as rayon, silk, linen, or nylon.
In the past, such certification indicated
100% Orion content (1_).
A new acrylic fiber with a round cross­section
has been produced for use in socks,
called Acrilanll Hi-Bulk. Socks made of this
fiber have 50% longer wear life, superior
softness, and superior dyeability, compared
with socks knitted of other acrylic fibers (!) •
"Thermax" hollowcore polyester, introduced
in 1985 and widely accepted for thermo
underwear applications, is now being used in
gloves, hats, socks, and sock liners. These
accessories will be available in fashion
colors and designs (1_).
USDA Research on Fibers and Fabrics
Scientists at Texas Tech University have
grown cotton fibers in the laboratory
directly from single cotton cells, without
growing any other part of the cotton plant.
Financed in part under a cooperative
research agreement with USDA's Agricultural
Research Service, further research will
focus on determining the best media for
cotton cell fiber differentiation. Test-tube
cotton provides an opportunity for studying
the growth and development of cotton plants,
but it is unlikely to replace field-grown
cotton in the foreseeable future (_§).
On-going research at USDA's Southern Re­search
Center in New Orleans has developed
a method for binding cotton and polyester
fabrics with polyethylene glycols, or PEG's.
These chemicals can absorb and store heat
when surrounding temperatures rise, and
then release heat when temperatures fall. By
adjusting the amount of the various PEG's
1987 No.1 Family Economics Review 5
incorporated into the fabrics, scientists
hope to produce protective materials
suitable for firefighters, Artie survival
gear, building insulation, draperies, and
packaging materials. A previously developed
thermal fabric proved unable to withstand
laundering or exposure to moisture.
Two fabric treatments invented by USDA
scientists have recently been granted
patents and are available for licensing. One
gives cotton/polyester and other blended
fabrics a finish that is both permanent
press and flame retardant by chemically
binding the treatment compounds inside
the fabric. The other covers several
nonformaldehyde finishing agents that allow
cotton fabrics to be dyed after the cloth is
made and treated to be wrinkle resistant
and permanent press.
A process for curing leather by radiation
has been developed by scientists at the
USDA's Eastern Regional Research Center in
Philadelphia. The radiation is less powerful
than x rays and poses no hazard to people
wearing the cured leather. The leather is
covered with a wet film containing chemicals
composed of small molecules such as acryl­ics.
A conveyor belt carries the leather
through radiation equipment (which has
built-in shielding), where an electron beam
solidifies the mixture by linking the small
molecules into polymer chains that fix to
the leather as a tough coating. Advantages
to this method include superior scuff resis­tance
for the consumer, and elimination of
chemical pollution for the industry (instead
of evaporating, the chemicals become part of
the coating). Also, because savings in
energy costs, plant space, and labor will
permit prices to decrease, U.S. products
will be more attractive to both domestic and
foreign co~sumers of leather, thus reducing
a current multibillion-dollar trade deficit
in the leather industry.
6 Fa mi ly Econom i cs Rev i ew 1987 No. 1
Trends in Retailing
In order to offset the price advantages of
imports, the American textile and apparel
industries should be able to respond quickly
to market needs. Several major textile and
apparel manufacturers are cooperating in an
effort to reduce the time it takes to place
a retailer's order in the store. (Industry
average time has been estimated at 66
weeks--including time required to make both
the fiber and cloth.) By sharply reducing
the time garments spend on warehouse
shelves or in transit, apparel prices can
become more competitive with imports·
Benefits to the retailer would include lower
inventory costs and increased opportunities
to correctly assess consumer demand,
reducing the need for markdowns of slow
selling apparel. Methods by which production
time can be decreased include the use of
computer systems that will measure, color
code, and inspect fabric as it comes off the
looms, and then transmit this information to
eliminate the need for a second inspection,
so that the fabric goes directly to the
cutting room. Also, computers that design
patterns for knitted garments and program
the knitting machines decrease total
production time by several days (!1) •
The popularity and large numbers of
off-price, discount, or factory outlet
stores have led to frequent sales and price
slashing by department and specialty
stores in an effort to remain competitive.
Many consumers rarely shop "full price" and
seldom buy anything that is not on sale·
Real value is not easily determined, how­ever.
Merchandise in an off-price store can
be several seasons old, counterfeit, discon­tinued
goods, or factory overruns. Fake
markdowns are sometimes written on the price
tag before the item ever reaches the sales
floor. A "comparable price" is supposed to
mean the item has been sold somewhere at
that price. Federal Trade Commission guide­lines
define deceptive practices (such as
phony sales and false savings claims) as
those that are likely to mislead the con­sumer
and influence his choice of product·
Monitoring and enforcement in several States
has led to fines, lawsuits, and statewide
rules as to what constitutes a sale.
Gro~th in off-price retailing is slowing,
however. New retailing approaches will
emphasize service and ambiance, and some
foreign retail chains will compete with
department stores for customers.
Retail use of electronic displays is in­creasing;
video tapes help promote products
and services on site. Some success has been
achieved using electronic means as an aid to
buying. In-store ordering of merchandise not
in stock, but seen in an electronic catalog ,
is accomplished with assistance from store
sales personnel. Transactional systems, in
which consumers complete a sale electroni­cally,
are not developing as quickly as
informational systems; consumers remain
uncomfortable about buying goods through
a computer. Some firms that anticipated a
market for purchasing via computer are no
longer in that business.
A chain of television channels, known as
the Home Shopping Network Inc., sells
between 30,000 and 40,000 different items to
viewers through cable and satellite. Most of
the merchandise (jewelry, housewares, appli­ances,
china, and electronics) is acquired
through liquiq_ations and closeouts, and is
advertised as deeply discounted from regular
prices. A toll-free number for placing an
order is flashed on the television screen as
the merchandise is described. Although less
than 5% of potential viewers actually pur­chase,
net income amounts to millions of
dollars each year.
Federal Legislation, Regulations, and
Dissemination of Information Related to
Textiles and Apparel
Both houses of Congress have passed
legislation requiring the U.S. Department of
Commerce to collect and publish quarterly
statistics on the domestic apparel and tex­tile
industries, and requiring apparel and
textile manufacturers to take part in these
surveys. Currently, the Commerce Depart­ment
collects annual data on these indus­tries,
and information needed to administer
import restraint programs is often too late
to be optimally effective.
Since December 1984, the employment of
homeworkers in the knitted outerwear
industry has been permitted, provided the
employer first obtained a certificate from
the U.S. Department of Labor. The certifica­tion
program in knitted outerwear was imple­mented
to permit law-abiding employers to
employ homeworkers who want or need to
work in their homes, and to enable the
Department to effectively enforce the Fair
Labor Standards Act (FLSA) with respect to
these homeworkers. 2 A review of the investi­gations
conducted by the Department to en­sure
compliance with the FLSA demonstrated
that the knitted outerwear certification
program is an acceptable alternative to a
total ban on homework. However, homework in
the women's apparel, jewelry manufacturing,
gloves and mittens, button and buckle
manufacturing, handkerchief manufacturing,
and embroidery industries remains prohibited
by regulations that have not been substan­tively
changed since the forties. In the
belief that the existing prohibition against
homework in these six industries is counter­productive
(employers have little incentive
to comply with FLSA wage provisions because
their very existence violates the FLSA), the
Department proposes to apply the same
certification procedure to the remaining
restricted industries.
The Federal Trade Commission (FTC)
amended the Rules and Regulations under the
Textile Fiber Products Identification Act,
effective July 9, 1986, to include generic
names and definitions for two new manufac­tured
fibers. From Celanese Corporation
comes "PBI," a manufactured fiber in which
the fiber-forming substance is a long-chain
aromatic polymer having reoccurring
imidazole groups as an integral part of the
polymer chain. 11Sulfar, 11 from Phillips
Fibers Corporation, is a manufactured fiber
in which the fiber-forming substance is a
2 For further information, see "Recent
Trends in Clothing and -Textiles, 11 by Joan C.
Courtless, Family Economics Review 86(2) :25.
1987 No.1 Family Economics Review 7
long-chain synthetic polysulfide in which at
least 85% of the sulfide linkages ( -S-) are
attached directly to two aromatic rings.
Petitions for new generic names must provide
sufficient information to meet the following
three criteria established by the FTC:
The fiber must have a chemical composi­tion
radically different from other
fibers, and that distinctive chemical
composition must result in distinctive
physical properties of significance to
the general public.
The fiber must be in active commercial
use or such use must be immediately
foreseen.
The grant of the generic name must be
of importance to the consuming public
at large, rather than to a small group
of knowledgeable professionals such as
purchasing offices for large Government
agencies.
Under current Federal Trade Commission
(FTC) rules, manufacturers must list only
one safe-care method on a label, even if
other methods are also safe. Manufacturers
are required to test only once any care
method they put on a clothing label. When
garments are returned to the retailer
because they failed to survive recommended
cleaning procedures, the retailer usually
requests restitution from the manufacturer.
To minimize such returns, some manufacturers
have been using "dry clean only" labels on
garments that are washable because in most
instances dry cleaning is preferable to
incorrect laundering; exceptions exist,
however, and the consumer must rely on the
dry cleaner to advise him accordingly.
The U.S. Department of Treasury has
announced a new "textile fraud hotline" in
Georgia, North Carolina, and South Carolina.
The number is toll free and available 24
8 Family Economics Review 1987 No.1
hours a day to receive anonymous tips of
textile fraud from people in the textile
industry or from concerned citizens. The
U.S. Customs Service will pay cash rewards
ranging from $250 to $2,500 for anonymous
information (depending on the circumstances
and outcome) and up to $250,000 to persons
who come forward. Examples of textile fraud
include false country of origin labels,
removing country of origin labels and
substituting "made in the U.S.A." labels,
false description of merchandise (weight,
quantity, or fibers) to circumvent quotas,
and altering the appearance of merchandise
to avoid higher duties.
A Fiber and Textile Information Center has
been created in the National Agricultural
Library (NAL) at Beltsville, Maryland, to
maximize service and support for the U.S.
Department of Agriculture's research, educa­tion,
and extension programs. Resources
on textile production, use, and care in cloth­ing
and in the home or work environment
may be accessed through AGRICOLA, the
library's computerized database system. In
addition, current publications (including
over 75 periodicals, newspapers, and
research journals that relate to fibers,
textiles, clothing, home furnishings,
sewing, and needlework) are maintained at
the center. A unique feature of the Fiber
and Textile Information Center is the
collection of historical records of USDA
research on natural fiber crops dating back
to the early 1900's that was obtained from
Agricultural Research Service laboratories.
This comprehensive collection contains
manuscript materials, reference cards and
reprints, photographs, and specimens
relating to more than 300 species of plants
(excluding cotton). New books, journals,
audiovisual materials, and computer software
will be identified and acquired as NAL staff
and funding permit. Also, historical collec­tions
and oral and video histories, which
will help enrich the national collection,
will be located and acquired.
REFERENCES
1. American Textile Manufacturers
Institute, Inc., Economic Information
Division. 1986. Textile Hi Lights.
14.
15.
Textile Organon.
P• 156. . 1982.
P• 214.
1974. Vol. 45, No. 11,
Vol. 53, No. 11,
September issue. 16. . 1985. Vol. 56, No. 9,
2. Cressy, Terrence. 1986. E.I. du Pont P· 203.
de Nemours & Co. Inc. [Personal commu- 17. . 1986. Vol. 57, No. 7'
nication on September 18.] P· 156.
3. Federal Trade Commission. 1986. Textile 18. . 1986. Vol. 57' No. 8,
Fiber Products Identification Act;
request for establishment of a generic
name. Federal Register 51(110) :20803-
20809.
4. Halpern, Mitchell. 1986. U.S. produc­tion
figures show decline in outerwear,
except sweaters. Knitting Times 55(8):
16-18.
5. Hunter, N. Alan. 1986. The apparel
market of the 1990s--A demographic
view. Apparel World 7 (1): 20-21.
6. Knitting Times. 1985. Vol. 54, No. 11,
p. 82.
7. 19 8 6 • Vol. 55 , No. 5 ,
pp. 87-88.
8. • 1986. Vol. 55, No. 6,
p. 72.
9. Lettich, Jill. 1986. Courtauld's re­search
aimed at new fiber to debut next
year. Knitting Times 55(8):61-64, 89.
10. • 1986. Heavier constructions
give newer knits more tailored looks.
Knitting Times 55(9) :77-79.
11. Reagan, Ronald. 1986. Presidential
Documents: Increase in the rates of
duty on certain articles from Japan;
Determination under Section 301 of the
Trade Act of 197 4. Federal Register
51(53):9435-9438.
12. Sease, Douglas R. 1985. Move to fight
apparel imports is set. The Wall Street
Journal, December 17 issue.
13. Slater, Courtenay. 1986. Markets: Slug­gish
spending. American Demographics
8(5):4.
P• 184.
19. . 1986. Vol. 57, No. 9,
PP· 205, 226.
20. U.S. Department of Agriculture,
Agricultural Research Service. 1986.
Electron beam puts a shine on leather.
~ricultural Research 34(2):14.
21. • 1986. Agricultural Research
34(3):16.
22. • 1986. Agricultural Research
34(4):16.
23. • 1986. Quarterly Report of
Selected Research Projects. April-June
issue.
24. , Economic Research Service.
1986. Cotton and Wool Situation and
Outlook Report. CWS-45.
25. • 1986. Cotton and Wool
Situation and Outlook Yearbook. CWS-46;
and personal communication with John
Lawler.
26. , The National Agricultural
Library. 1986. Information Alert, April
30 issue; and personal communication
with Kate Hayes.
27. U.S. Department of Commerce, Interna­tional
Trade Administration. 1986.
Textile and Apparel Import Report; and
personal communication with Shirley
Hargrove.
28. U.S. Department of Labor, Employment
Standards Administration. 1986.
Employment of homeworkers in certain
industries. Federal Register 51(162):
30036-30043.
29. U.S. Department of the Treasury,
United States Customs Service. 1986.
Customs regulations amendments relating
to Caribbean Basin initiative and
generalized system of preferences.
Federal Register 51(110) :20810-20811.
1987 No.1 Family Economics Review 9
Diets of American Women by
Income, Spring 1977 and
Spring 1985
By Katherine S. Tippett and
Howard A. Riddick
Home economist and nutritionist
Nutrition Monitoring Division
Human Nutrition Information Service
Food selections made by low-income women
in 1985 differed somewhat from those made by
high-income women. Nevertheless, both low­and
high-income women had nutrient intakes
that were above the Recommended Dietary
Allowances (RDA) for 8 of 15 nutrients
examined and below the RDA for vitamin B6 ,
calcium, magnesium, iron, folacin, and zinc.
In general, mean intakes by women for
nutrients that were below the RDA in 1977
were also below the RDA in 1985.
The findings presented here are from the
Continuing Survey of Food Intakes by Indivi­duals
(CSFII) conducted by USDA's Human
Nutrition Information Service (HNIS). 1 The
results are group means for women 19 to 50
years of age based on 1 day of dietary
information collected by personal interview
in the spring of 1985. The income categories
used in this article are based on the
poverty guidelines provided by the U.S.
Department of Health and Human Services (7).
Women living in households with before-tax­incomes
for the previous year at or below
130% of the poverty guidelines are classi-fied
in this article as low income, those
with incomes between 131% and 300% of the
guidelines are classified as middle income;
and those with incomes of greater than 300%
of the guidelines are classified as high
income. The data exclude 191 women living in
households that did not report income. Black
women accounted for 30% of the low-income
group, 5% of the middle-income group, and 3%
of the high-income group. (For a comparison
of diets of black and white women, see box
on p. 11.)
1More detailed information about the pur­pose,
methodology, and results of the CSFII
may be found in references l• ~. and 6.
10 Family Economics Review 1987 No.1
The CSFII data are compared with data
collected from women of the same ages in the
spring of 1977 as part of USDA's Nationwide
Food Consumption Survey 1977-78. 2 Counts of
women for 1977 and for 1985 are as follows:
Income 1977 1985
(number)
Low ..•....•......
Middle .........••
High ............ .
350
693
814
293
512
508
The nutrient contents of foods reported in
the survey were estimated using nutrient
data developed by the HNIS' Food Composition
Research Branch (!_, 1). Nutrient intakes in
1977 reflect food composition data available
at the time of the 1977 survey. Those in
1985 reflect the availability of new data,
as well as certain changes in the nutrient
content of foods attributable to new varie­ties
and species, and new enrichment and
fortification levels of foods on the market.
The 1980 RDA were used to evaluate both
the 1977 and the 1985 data.
FOOD AND NUTRIENT INTAKES IN 1985
Food intakes. Food intakes by women were
measured in two ways--the percentage of res­pondents
using selected food items (table 1,
p. 12) and mean intakes (in grams) of food
ingested (table 2, p. 13). Considering both
of these measures, low-income women had
higher intakes of meat, poultry, and fish;
and eggs, but lower intakes of milk and milk
products; vegetables; fruits; fats and oils;
sugars and sweets; and beverages than high­income
women. This generalization, however,
obscures differences within food groups:
Within the meat, poultry, and fish
food group, low-income women compared with
high-income women had higher mean intakes
of all meat, poultry, and fish subgroups
except meat mixtures. Low-income women had
lower mean intakes of meat mixtures than
2 For information on the survey, see "The
1977-78 Nationwide Food Consumption Survey,"
by Robert L. Rizek, Family Economics Review,
fall 1978. pp. 3-7.)
DIETS OF BLACK AND WHITE WOMEN
In the CSFII, information on race was self-reported. Of the 1, 486 women who reported race, 1, 275 were
white, 143 were black, and 68 were of another race. Of the white women who reported income, 16% were
low-income; of the black women, 68%. In several categories of food and nutrient intakes, blacks and whites
differed. Although some of the differences may be attributable to income rather than to race, the small
sample of blacks precludes direct comparisons of blacks and whites by income group. Group means in small
sample sizes may be affected by particularly high or low intakes of certain foods. Therefore, the food and
nutrient intakes for black women presented below should be used with caution.
In 1985, the mean intake by black women of meat, poultry, and fish was 226 gm, compared with the
mean intake by white women of 172 gm. Meat, poultry, and fish was reported by 93% of black women,
compared with 88% of white women. Black and white women had similar intakes of beef. Black women had
higher intakes of pork; poultry; fish and shellfish; and frankfurters, luncheon meats, sausages, and
slightly lower intakes of meat mixtures than white women.
The mean intake of milk and milk products by black women was substantially lower than that for white
women (80 gm and 221 gm, respectively). Fewer than one-half of black women compared with four-fifths
of white women, reported using a milk product on the surveyed day. Almost all of the fluid milk drunk
by black women was whole milk (49 gm), rather than lowfat or skim milk (4 gm). White women reported
drinking both whole and lowfat or skim milk, although their mean intake of low fat or skim milk was
higher than their mean intake of whole milk (88 gm and 66 gm, respectively).
The mean intake of eggs by black women was 26 gm, compared with 17 gm by white women. A higher
proportion of black than of white women reported using eggs (36% vs. 23%).
Black women had lower intakes of vegetables than did white women (128 gm and 176 gm, respectively).
Of the black women, 69% reported vegetables; of the white women, 85%. Among the vegetable subgroups,
black women had a higher intake of dark green vegetables than did white women.
The mean intake of fruits by black women was 107 gm, compared with the mean intake of white women
of 114 gm. Fruits were reported by 37% of black women and 46% of white women.
The mean intake of grain products by black women was 247 gm compared with 200 gm for white women.
A lower percentage of black (90%) than white (94%) women, however, reported a grain produc t on the
surveyed day.
Black women had lower intakes than white women of fats and oils, sugars and sweets, and total
beverages. Compared with white women, black women had lower intakes of coffee, tea, and low-calorie
carbonated soft drinks, and higher intakes of fruit drinks and ades. Black and white women had similar
intakes of regular soft drinks.
Mean intakes by women of both races were above the RDA for protein, vitamin A, ascorbic acid, thiamin,
riboflavin, niacin, vitamin B
12
• and phosphorus. Mean intakes of both groups were below the RDA for the
following:
White
(percentage of RDA)
Food energy ••••••••••••• 81 82
Vitamin B6 .............. 58 62
Calcium ................. 58 82
Magnesium ••••••••••••••• 60 73
Iron .................... 64 61
Folacin •••••••••••••••••• 47 51
Zinc .................... 61 59
Vitamin E ............... 93 98
In 1985, black women obtained 17% of their food energy from protein; white women, 16%. The contribution of
fat to food energy was also similar--36% for black women and 37% for white women. The mean intake of fiber
by black women was 10 gm; by white women, 12 gm.
Between 1977 and 1985 both black women and white women increased their mean intakes of fish and shell­fish,
meat mixtures, total grain products, all grain products subgroups, and total beverages , and decreased
their mean intakes of meat, whole milk, eggs, vegetables, and fruits. The mean intake of skim milk by
white women increased by 60% between 1977 and 1985, but the mean intake of skim milk by black women did
not change.
1987 No.1 Family Economics Review 11
Table 1. Percentage of women 1g to 50 years of age using selected foods in a day, by
household income level, spring 1985
Food group
Meat, poultry, and fish ••••••••••••••••••••••
Beef ...................................... .
Pork
Frankfurters, luncheon meat, sausages •••••
Poultry ..... ............................... .
Fish and shellfish ......................... .
Mixtures 1
••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••
Milk and milk products •••••••••••••••••••••••
Fluid milk
Whole milk
Skim milk .....••................•..•••...
Cheese
Yogurt
Cream/ milk desserts ....................... .
Eggs ••.•.•••••••••.•. • • • • • • • · • • • • • • • • • • • • · • • •
Legumes, nuts, seeds ....................... .
Vegetables .............................. • ... .
White potatoes ............................. .
Tomatoes .............................•.....
Dark green . ............................... .
Deep yellow ............................... .
0 th er ..................... • • · · · · · · · · · · · · · · ·
Fruits
Citrus fruits and juices ••••••••••••••••••••
Other fruits and juices •••••••••••••••••••••
Grain products ............................•..
Yeast breads, rolls ••••••••.••••••••••••••••
Other baked goods ......................•..
Cereals, pasta ..•...........................
Mixtures 2
••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••
Fats and oils . ..... •• .........................
Sugars and sweets ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••
Beverages ................................... .
Alcoholic beverages ........................ .
Coffee ..................................... .
Tea ...•............ ........................
Fruit drinks and ades ••••••••••••••••••••••
Carbonated soft drinks •••••••••••••••••••••
Regular ...•..................•.•..••.....
Low-calorie •..........•.•...•.............
Low
89
24
24
31
22
11
30
68
46
31
13
27
1
19
29
17
74
44
19
6
5
54
36
15
25
93
67
40
38
25
58
54
91
7
47
26
24
49
41
9
Income
Middle
(percent)
90
24
20
27
20
12
36
77
52
26
27
34
5
25
27
22
87
46
30
10
10
71
48
27
33
94
74
54
31
28
66
55
91
14
48
33
12
55
36
21
1 Mixtures that are mainly meat, poultry, or fish, such as stews and sandwiches.
2 Mixtures that are mainly grains, such as pizza and pasta with sauce.
High
87
22
20
20
19
11
44
83
52
23
31
38
6
29
21
24
85
44
30
10
12
69
55
30
42
95
70
62
30
28
67
56
96
22
60
34
11
58
34
27
Source: Unpublished data from the Continuing Survey of Food Intakes by Individuals, 1985,
Human Nutrition Information Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture.
12 fam i ly Economics Review 1987 No.1
Table 2. Mean intakes by women 19 to 50 years of age, of selected foods in a day, by
household income level, spring 1985
Food group
Meat, paul try, and fish ..................... .
Beef
Pork
Frankfurters, luncheon meat, sausages ••••
Poultry ......... .......................... .
Fish and shellfish ..••....•.................
Mixtures 1 •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••
Milk and milk products •••••••••••••••••••••••
Fluid milk
Whole milk •.......•...................•.
Skim milk •••.•..•.••....•..••.....••....
Cheese
Yogurt
Cream/ milk desserts ...................... .
Eggs •••••••••.••••.•• · • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •
Legumes, nuts, seeds ....................... .
Vegetables .................................. .
White pot a toes ...•.•.•....•..•.•...........
Tomatoes .••...... . ........................
Dark green . .............................. .
Deep yellow .............................. .
Other ............................... · · · · · ·
Fruits
Citrus fruits and juices •••••••••••••••••••
Other fruits and juices ••••••••••••••••••••
Grain products .............................. .
Yeast breads, rolls ....................... .
Other baked goods ....................... .
Cereals, pasta .. .......................... .
rdixtures 2 •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••
Fats and oils ................................ .
Sugars and sweets ......... .................. .
Beverages ... ................ · · · · · · • • • · · • · • · · ·
Alcoholic beverages . ...................... .
Coffee . .............................. • • · · · ·
Tea ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••..•••
Fruit drinks and ades •••••••••••••••••••••
Carbonated soft drinks ••••••••••••••••••••
Regular ................ · • • · • • • · · · · · · · • • •
Low- calorie .............................
188
31
16
15
29
13
77
163
121
77
43
12
1
20
22
21
144
58
13
10
3
60
86
36
49
234
47
42
61
84
10
15
819
50
276
150
90
253
210
42
Incane
Middle High
(grams)
180 179
27 26
14 13
15 9
19 22
14 12
84 94
212 206
151 136
65 50
86 86
14 20
11 11
22 28
19 16
20 19
177 186
47 48
19 21
12 10
7 8
91 99
121 140
59 68
62 72
210 209
52 44
48 54
39 32
71 79
16 21
23 18
919 1,019
94 110
309 394
174 169
57 38
285 309
164 170
118 138
1 Mixtures that are mainly meat, poultry, or fish (such as stews and sandwiches) .
2 Mixtures that are mainly grains (such as pizza and pasta with sauce).
Source: Unpublished data from the Continuing Survey of Food Intakes by Individuals, 1985,
Human Nutrition Information Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture.
1987 Ho. 1 Fam ily Ec onomics Review 13
did high-income women (77 gm and 94 gm,
respectively). 3 Also, a lower proportion of
low-income than high-income women reported
meat mixtures on the surveyed day (30% and
44%, respectively).
Low-income women reported lower
intakes of all milk and milk products (fluid
milk yogurt, cream and milk desserts, and
cheese) than did high-income women. One
exception, within the fluid milk subgroup,
was the higher mean intake of whole milk
by low-income women (77 gm) than by
high-income women (50 gm).
Low-income women reported a higher
intake of eggs than did high-income
women (22 gm and 16 grams, respectively).
Eggs were reported by 29% of the low-income
women, compared with 21% of the high-income
women.
Intakes of vegetables by low-income
women were lower than those for high-income
women. This was generally true for all
subgroups except white potatoes, for which
the mean intake by low-income women was
slightly higher than that of high-income
women; and dark-green vegetables, for which
the mean intake by low- and high-income
women was the same. (Intakes of vegetables
exclude vegetables eaten as part of meat or
grain mixtures.)
The mean intake of fruits by low­income
women (86 gm) was lower than that
of h igh-income women (140 gm). Fruits were
reported by 36% of the low-income women,
compared with 55% of high-income women.
This pattern was true for both citrus and
noncitrus fruits and juices.
The proportion of low- and high-income
women reporting grain products was similar.
However, the mean intake of grain products
by low-income women was higher than that of
women in the high-income group (234 gm and
209 gm, respectively). Low-income women
compared with high-income women had higher
mean intakes of cereals and pasta and grain
mixtures and lower mean intakes of baked
goods other than yeast breads and rolls.
3 Meat mixtures--such as stews, casseroles,
sandwiches (including hamburgers), and
frozen dinners--are mixtures having one or
more types of meat, poultry, or fish as a
major ingredient.
1• fa mJ.ly Economi cs Re vi ew 1987 No.1
Low-income women compared with high­income
women had lower intakes of total
beverages and of the beverage subgroups
for alcohol, tea, coffee, and low-calorie
soft drinks; and higher intakes of fruit
drinks/ ades and regular soft drinks. Women
in all income groups reported higher intakes
of regular compared with low-calorie soft
drinks, but the difference in intakes be­tween
the two categories of soft drinks was
much smaller for the high-income women.
Nutrient intakes. Low-income women
reported food intakes that were lower in
food energy than those reported by high­income
women. Women in all three income
levels had mean food energy intakes that
were below the midpoint of the RDA:
-In-co-m-e Calories Percentage of RDA
Low •••••.••• 1,598 78
Middle ••••••• 1,665 81
High ..•.... · 1,736 86
Mean intakes by women in all three income
groups were above the RDA for protein,
vitamin A, ascorbic acid, thiamin, ribo­flavin,
niacin, vitamin B12 , and phosphorus;
and below the RDA for vitamin B6, calcium,
magnesium, iron, folacin, and zinc (table 3).
Intakes of vitamin E were below the RDA for
low-income women but not for middle- or
high-income women. Of the six nutrients
below RDA for all income groups, low-income
women had lower intakes of vitamin B6,
calcium, magnesium, and folacin than did
high-income women. This may reflect some of
the differences in food consumption men­tioned
earlier: Lower intakes of dairy pro­ducts,
fruits, and vegetables for low-income
women than for high-income women. Intakes
below RDA are not necessarily inadequate
because the RDA, to be safe, are set above
the needs of most people. However, the risk
of having an inadequate intake is greater
for groups of people with intakes well below
the RDA (!).
The mean copper intake of low-income
women was 1 • 0 m g; of middle-income women,
1.1 mg; and of high -income women, 1.1 mg.
All of these intakes were well below the
range of intakes (2.0 mg to 3.0 mg) sug­gested
by the Food and Nutrition Board,
National Academy of Sciences (1).
The CSFII provides data for several nutri­ents
and dietary components for which no
RDA are published. The mean intake of
dietary fiber was lower for low-income women
(10 gm) than for high-income women (13 gm),
reflecting low-income women's lower intakes
of vegetables and fruits, which are the
largest source of dietary fiber. Low-income
women had a mean cholesterol intake of
341 mg, compared with 305 mg for middle­income
women, and 295 mg for high-income
women. Cholesterol is provided by foods of
animal origin such as eggs, beef, poultry,
and milk. Grain products containing eggs and
milk or milk products also include cholestrol.
Women at all three income levels obtained
16% of their food energy from protein. Low­and
middle-income women obtained 36% of
their food energy from fat; high-income
women obtained 38%.
CHANGES BETWEEN 1977 and 19854
Food intakes. Within the meat, poul-try,
and fish food group, survey results
indicate two major shifts by women ages 19
to 50 between 1977 and 1985. First, previous
food consumption surveys have shown the con­sumption
of meat (beef; pork; frankfurters,
sausages, luncheon meats; lamb, veal, game;
and organ meats) is higher at successively
higher income levels. In 1985, however,
high-income women reported 25% less meat (in
grams) than low-income women, compared with
1977 when high-income women reported 20%
more meat (see figure, p. 16.). Although meat
intake by all three income groups was lower in
1985 than in 1977, the decline was greatest for
"Changes in data collection procedures,
probing techniques, and food composition
data between 1977 and 1985 may have affected
increases or decreases in the intake of
certain foods and nutrients.
Table 3. Mean intakes by women 19 to 50 years of age, of selected nutrients below the 1980
RDA, by household income level, spring 1985 and spring 1977
Vitamin Calciun Magne- Iron Folacin Zinc Vitamin
Incane level B6 sium E
(percentage of liD\)
1985
Low •••••• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 58 66 63 62 45 61 83
Middle ................... 62 79 71 62 52 59 102
High ...... · · · · · · · • • • • • • • • 64 84 77 61 53 61 102
All ...................... 61 78 72 61 51 60 97
1977
Low •••••• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 57 67 65 55 * * *
Middle ................... 58 71 70 55 * * *
High .••... · • · • • • • • • • • • • • • 63 71 75 59 * * *
All ...................... 60 69 71 56 * * *
*Not examined in NFCS, 1977-78.
Source: u.s. Department of Agriculture, Human Nutrition Information Service, .1~85,
Nationwide Food Consumption Survey, Continuing Survey of Food Intakes by IndiVIduals:
Women 19-50 Years and Their Children 1-5 Years, 1 Day, Report No. 85-1, 102 PP·
1987 No.1 Family Economics Review 15
Meat:
Mean Intakes (grams) by Women 19-50 Years,
by Income, One Day, Spring 1977 and 1985
91
Low-income Middle-Income High-income
Unpubllehed d•te from CSFII-85 end HFCS 77-78, USDA, HNf8
-1977
~1985
the high-income group (table 4). Second, the
data indicate a shift by women in all three
income groups away from meat reported sepa­rately
(beef; pork; lamb, veal, and game;
and frankfurters, sausages, and luncheon
meats) toward mixtures such as stews and
sandwiches . Mean intakes of meat mixtures
increased by 33% for low-income women and
by 38% for high-income women.
Between 1977 and 1985 women in all three
income groups decreased their mean intake of
whole milk and increased their intake of
lowfat or skim milk. Despite this shift,
low-income women in 1985, as in 1977, con­tinued
to have higher intakes of whole milk
than of lowfat or skim milk. Middle-income
and high-income women, however, had higher
intakes of lowfat or skim milk than of whole
milk--a reversal of their 1977 pattern .
The mean intakes of eggs by all income
groups decreased. Intakes of vegetables
and fruits decreased for both the low-and
high-income women but increased slightly
for middle-income women.
Women in all income groups increased their
intakes of grain products and beverages.
Within the grain products group, the cate­gory
with the largest gain for all income
groups was grain mixtures such as pizza,
spaghetti, and macaroni and cheese. Within
the beverage group, carbonated soft drinks
16 Family Economics Rev iew 1987 No.1
increased for women in all three income
groups.
Nutrient intakes. Food energy intakes
by women in all three income groups were
higher in 1985 than in 1977. Nutrient
intakes by women of vitamin B6, calcium,
magnesium, iron, folacin, and zinc were
below the RDA in 1977 for women in all three
income groups and were still below the RDA
in 1985 (table 4). Thiamin intakes for
middle- and high -income women were slightly
below the RDA in 1977 but above the RDA in
1985.
Of the nutrients below RDA in both 1977
and 1985, most improved were the nutrient
intakes of calcium by middle- and high­income
women and iron intakes by low- and
middle-income women.
REFERENCES
1. Hepburn, Frank N. 1982. The USDA
National Nutrient Data Bank. American
Journal of Clinical Nutrition. Vol. 3 5 ,
No. 5 (supplement), pp. 1297-1301.
2. Posati, Linda P., and Robert L. Rizek.
Nutrient Data Base for Continuing Food
Intake Survey. Family Economics Review
1985(3):4-16.
3. Rizek, Robert L., and Linda P. Posati.
Continuing Survey of Food Intakes by
Individuals. Family Economics Review
1985(1):16-17.
4. National Academy of Sciences, National
Research Council, Food and Nutrition
Board. 1980. Recommended Dietary
Allowances, 9th edition, 18 5 pp.
National Academy Press.
5. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Agricul­tural
Research Service. 1985. Food and
nutrient intakes by women and children.
Family Economics Review 1986 (2): 26-27.
6. , Human Nutrition Information
Service. 1985. Nationwide Food Consump­tion
Survey, Continuing Survey of Food
Intakes by Individuals: Women 19-50
Years and Their Children 1-5 Years,
1 Day. Rpt. No. 85-1, 102 PP•
7. U.S. Department of Health and Human
Services. 1985. Annual Revision of the
Poverty Income Guidelines. Federal
Register 46:9517.
Table 4. Percentage change in mean intake by women 19 to 50 years of age, of selected
foods on 1 day in spring 1977 and in spring 1985, by household income level
Food group
Meat, poultry, and fish ••••••••••••••••••••••
Meat 1
•••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••
Poultry ....... ............................ .
Fish and shellfish •••••••••• , ••••••••••••••
Mixtures 2
•••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••
Milk and milk products •••••••••••••••••••••••
Whole milk ..•..•.••.......•....•.••.•.•..•
Skim /lowfa t milk •..........•..........•.•.•
Cheese ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••
Eggs •••••••••.••••••••••••••••••••••••.••••••
Legumes, nuts, seeds ....................... .
Vegetables ........ ............... · · · · · · · · · · • · ·
Fruits
Grain products .............................. .
Bread, other baked goods •••••••••••••••••
Cereals, pasta . ........................... .
Mixtures 3
•••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••
Beverages .............................. · .. • ..
Coffee . ................................... .
Tea ..••..... ., ...........•.................
Carbonated soft drinks ••••••••••••••••••••
Low
8
-16
0
18
33
-21
-42
43
-8
-29
-16
-21
-15
31
5
9
127
32
16
18
44
Incane
Middle
(percentage change)
-3
-31
-14
40
22
-3
-40
62
-12
-14
-5
3
5
30
16
56
45
22
-2
5
52
High
-8
-47
-12
20
38
6
-32
59
0
-30
12
-6
-6
28
11
14
68
25
15
-6
65
1 Beef; pork; frankfurters, sausages, luncheon meats; lamb, veal, game; and organ meats
(cooked edible parts only).
2 Mixtures that are mainly meat, poultry, or fish (such as stews and sandwiches).
3 Mixtures that are mainly grain, such as pizza and pasta with sauce.
Source: Unpublished data from the Continuing Survey of Food Intakes by Individuals, 1985,
Human Nutrition Information Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture.
1987 No.1 Fam ily Ec onom1cs Review 17
Recent Developments in
Automobile Financing
Automobile purchases constitute the largest
single category of expenditures financed by
consumer installment credit. Changes in the
terms or availability of auto credit can in­fluence
shortrun movements in auto sales and
aggregate consumer spending. Auto credit
demand is derived mainly from the demand for
cars. The demand for cars is dependent on
the transportation needs of potential buyers,
car prices and financing costs, and the gap
between the desired stock of cars and the
actual stock owned by the public.
Economic conditions have caused alternate
patterns of weakening and resurgence in the
growth of automobile credit in recent years.
Between 1976 and 1979, car sales totaled
between 10 and 11 million units each year,
and auto credit expanded at annual rates of
about 20 percent. Back-to-back recessions
followed in the years 1980 through 1982 that
decreased the demand for cars. Domestic car
sales were hit particularly hard, and used
car sales slumped as well. Commercial banks
(which account for the largest share of auto
credit) cut back on lending to consumers in
the 1980-82 period, reducing their portfolio
of auto loans by 12-1/2 percent. Auto credit
outstanding expanded at annual rates of only
4 percent. In response to this constriction
of auto credit by banks, auto manufacturers
supported the credit market through their
finance company subsidiaries. One incentive
was to offer loans at below-market rates on
certain slow-selling models.
In 1982 sales of new cars hit a 20-year
low of 8 million units. During the next
3 years auto sales and credit activity
increased vigorously as the economy began
to expand again. New car sales rebounded
to 9-1 I 4 million units in 1983, and auto
credit outstanding increased 16 percent.
Sales reached 10-1/2 million units in 1984
and 11 million units in 1985. Several
factors combined to create a favorable
1 B Family Economics Review 1987 No.1
car-buying atmosphere. The average age of
the existing car stock was up. Installment
debt owed by households relative to their
income had dropped to a 7 -year low of 14
percent. Gasoline prices had stabilized.
Auto loan rates were being pulled down due
to substantial declines in market interest
rates. The U.S. dollar was strong on foreign
exchange markets. Finally, commercial banks
had returned as aggressive competitors in
the auto credit market.
In the early eighties savings and loan
associations entered the auto loan market.
By the fall of 1985, savings and loans had
moved ahead of retail stores as the fourth
largest source of commercial credit, behind
commercial banks, finance companies,, and
credit unions. Holdings of auto paper by
savings and loans grew from $1 billion in
1981 to $8-1/2 billion at the end of 1985.
The supply of auto credit has further
increased since the beginning of 1985
because of the following developments:
1. Lengthening of maturities. The average
maturity of new-car loans rose from 46
months to 52 months during the 1984-85
period. Loan-to-value ratios also have edged
higher.
2. Loans with special features. Balloon
payments, for instance, reduce the size of
the down payment or the monthly install­ments,
or both, because of a large final
"balloon" payment. The balloon payment can
then be refinanced or paid for by the sale
of the car.
3. Leasing for nonbusiness purposes •
The consumer is able to obtain the use of a
car with a relatively small initial outlay
of cash and small monthly payments. Lease
plans are available from automobile finance
companies and from banks that are heavily
involved in automobile finance.
4. Reduced-rate financing programs.
The periodic offering of cut-rate financing
by auto finance companies has lifted auto
sales and credit. Low-rate financing was
first offered by the large domestic auto­makers
in 1982. The early programs provided
relatively moderate rate discounts or they
applied only to a narrow selection of slow­selling
models. By 1985 virtually all car
models were covered by the programs, and
the discounts were 4 to 5 percentage points
below market rates. In general, the low-rate
loan programs appear to affect the timing of
sales more than they affect the total volume
over a period of time.
5. Securities backed by auto loans. This
refers to the pooling together of auto loans
for sale in the secondary market in the form
of a pass-through security. Until 1985
secondary marketing of nonmortgage consumer
debt through the issuance of securities was
virtually nonexistent. The General Motors
Acceptance Corporation has beert the princi­pal
originator of securities backed by auto
loans. Banks and thrift institutions have
been the largest purchasers of auto-backed
certificates, and pension funds and insur­ance
companies also have invested in them.
Investors are attracted to auto-backed
certificates by their yield advantage over
Treasury notes, their limited default risk,
and their comparatively short and predict­able
maturity (about 2 years). Although the
influence of this new secondary market
instrument on the supply of auto credit to
date has been small, the continued develop­ment
of such securities should bolster the
overall supply of auto credit in the
future.
It was predicted that a strong basic
demand for autos and auto financing would
be maintained in 1986. The median age of
reached in 1985 for the existing car stock
(the highest reading since World War II), a
high auto scrappage rate, the recent sharp
decline in gasoline prices, and a favorable
economic outlook with generally lower
interest rates and minimal inflationary
pressures should combine to support auto
demand.
Source: Luckett, Charles A., 1986, Recent
developments in automobile finance, Federal
Reserve Bulletin, 72(6):355-365, Board of
Governors of the Federal Reserve System •
Measures of Compensation
In 1984 approximately 100 million persons
were employed as wage or salary workers in
the United States. Their earnings and
benefits accounted for 75% of our national
income. These numbers underscore the impor­tance
of a comprehensive statistical program
covering employee compensation. In response
to the diverse needs of data users, the
U.s. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor
Statistics (BLS), has developed nine series
on compensation, as described in this ab­stract.
These series provide information on
rates of pay, earnings, compensation, labor
costs, and income.1 Differences among the
series are from variations in concept;
worker, geographic, and industrial coverage;
sampled establishment size;2 timing of data
collection ; unit of measurement; collection
and estimating techniques; and sample size
and variability.
Occupational Wage Surveys
Occupational wage surveys are used to
summarize the rate of pay for individual
workers and develop averages and distribu­tions
of straight-time earnings for a number
of jobs at a given time. Depending on the
survey, data may be collected from a speci­fic
industry, labor market, or the Nation as
a whole. Field representatives visit sample
establishments and collect data from payroll
1 The rate of pay is the basic money return
to a worker for a unit of time worked or
output produced, plus various employee bene­fits.
Earnings are employer payroll outlays
to a worker. Compensation is earnings plus
employer payments on behalf of a worker to
public and private pension, health, and
welfare funds. Income is total receipts of
individuals and includes payments from a
variety of sources but is not limited to
payments for work.
2 An establishment refers to a single phys­ical
location in manufacturing industries
and to all outlets of a company within an
area or county in nonmanufacturing
industries.
1987 No.1 Fam i ly Econom i cs Review 19
records, company booklets, and labor­management
agreements. Occupational wage
surveys are used for a variety of purposes,
such as wage and salary administration,
plant location studies, collective bar­gaining,
cost evaluations, and Federal
wage-policy formulation. Data are useful in
studies of both levels of pay and variations
in pay according to occupation, industry,
and geographic area.
Data are collected in industrial wage
surveys from selected occupations that
represent a range of activities performed by
workers during a specified payroll month.
These surveys provide information on
straight-time, first-shift wage rates; pay
distributions for broad employee groups
(such as all production or all nonsuper­visory
workers); weekly work schedules;
shift operations and pay differentials; em­ployee
benefits; cost-of-living adjustments;
estimates of workers covered by labor
management agreements; and proportions of
workers employed under incentive pay plans.
Area wage surveys provide employment and
wage data for office clerical, professional,
technical, maintenance, toolroom, power­plant,
materiaJ movement, and custodial
occupations that are common to a variety of
industries. Surveys are limited to selected
metropolitan areas, which when properly
weighted, yield employment and wage esti­mates
at the national and regional levels.
The National Survey of Professional,
Administrative, Technical, and Clerical Pay
(PATC) provides information on white-collar
salary levels and distributions in medium
and large firms of private industry. In 1985
approximately 100 occupations were studied
in accounting, legal services, personnel
management, engineering, chemistry, pur­chasing,
-photography, crafting, computer
science, and clerical fields. Data from the
PATC are used as a principal element in
setting the pay for Federal white-collar
employees.
20 Family Economics Review 1987 No.1
Average Hourly and Weekly Earnings:
Establishment Data
The Current Employment Statistics Survey
collects employment, hours, and earnings
data monthly from a nationwide sample of
nonagricultural establishments in coopera­tion
with State employment security
agencies. These agencies mail surveys to a
sample of business establishments each
month, develop estimates from the returned
surveys, and forward the data to BLS.
Earnings data are used by private and public
organizations in monitoring the economic
well-being of Americans dependent on
salaries and wages, and as input in other
time-series and economic models used for
analyzing and projecting trends in the
economy. Hourly earnings data are commonly
used by both labor and management in
contract negotiations, since the series not
only furnishes current and historical
information on a given industry but provides
comparative data on related industries.
Earnings Statistics From the Current
Population Survey
The Current Population Survey (CPS) pro­duces
data on the labor force, employment,
unemployment, and persons not in the labor
force; data are classified by demographic,
social, and economic characteristics. The
CPS is conducted for BLS by the U.S. Bureau
of the Census. Census sends questionnaires
to about 59,500 households throughout the
country. Hourly and weekly earnings of wage
and salary workers and their families are
published on a quarterly basis. Also, annual
earnings and some total income data are
published in conjunction with data on the
economic status of families and employment
problems of workers. Because it is a house­hold
survey, the CPS is able to provide
substantial detail on the demographic,
social, and economic characteristics of
workers and their families.
Wages of Workers Covered by Unemployment
Insurance Programs
The Employment and Wages Program
(ES-202) is carried out in cooperation with
State employment security agencies. Unem­ployment
insurance tax reports, required
from employers for the administration of
unemployment insurance laws, are collected
and summarized quarterly by these State
agencies. The summaries are aggregated by
BLS to provide national data on employment
and wages. The ES-202 is a comprehensive
source of employment and wage data by
industry at the national, State, and county
levels for agricultural and nonagricultural
employees. Included among the data collected
are total wages, taxable wages, unemployment
insurance contributions, and employment
characteristics. Average annual and weekly
wages also are derived from the series.
Data are used to measure unemployment
insurance revenues and disbursements;
national, State, and local area employment;
and total taxable wage trends. ES-202 data
also are used in actuarial studies of the
unemployment insurance system; for
determining employer tax rates, maximum
unemployment insurance benefit levels, and
areas needing Federal unemployment insurance
assistance; and to evaluate the solvency of
State unemployment insurance trust funds.
Income and Earnings Data From the Consumer
Expenditure Survey
The Consumer Expenditure Survey (CES)
collects data related to consumer expendi­tures
for goods and services, amounts and
sources of family income, changes in assets
and liabilities, and demographic and socio­economic
characteristics of consumers. Con­ducted
by Census, the CES is a continuous
household survey and the only nationwide
survey that links the levels of consumer
income to patterns of consumer expenditures
and savings. The data allow users to
classify expenditures by income or other
demographic and socioeconomic characteris­tics;
economists and market researchers can
analyze consumer demand for groups of goods
and services. Data are useful to private and
public agencies studying the welfare of
certain segments of the population, such as
the elderly, low-income consumers, or food
stamp recipients. The Internal Revenue
Service has used the data as the basis for
revising the average State sales tax tables,
which taxpayers may use in preparing
Federal income tax returns.
The Employment Cost Index
The Employment Cost Index (ECI) is a com­prehensive
measure of change in employers'
costs for employee compensation and includes
costs for employee benefits, as well as
wages and salaries. Each quarter the ECI
measures changes in the price (wage plus
benefit costs) of a standardized mix of pur­chased
labor services. BLS economists visit
sample establishments to obtain the initial
information. Additional data are collected
through forms mailed to each establishment.
The ECI measures changes in the price of
labor defined as the rate of compensation
per employee hour worked. This emphasis on
the rate, rather than on average hourly
earnings, distinguishes the ECI from other
series. Data are collected on 23 separate
benefits including paid leave (such as
vacations and sick leave), supplemental pay
(such as pay for overtime), insurance
benefits, retirement and savings benefits,
legally required benefits (such as Social
Security), and other benefits (such as
severance pay) •
The ECI is used in analyzing the infla­tionary
process and the changing structure
of wage and compensation. Because the ECI
provides data for subgroups (such as by
industry, occupation, or region), it can be
used to identify the sources of pressure for
wage and compensation change.
Hourly Compensation Measures of the Office
of Productivity and Technology
The Bureau of Labor Statistics, Office of
Productivity and Technology (OPT), produces
measures of real and nominal compensation
per hour as part of its productivity and
cost measurement program. Compensation mea­sures
are in index form and are designed to
emphasize changes in labor cost over time.
To compute these measures, OPT uses a com­pensation
measure, a measure of hours, and
the Consumer Price Index of All Urban
Consumers ( CPI-U). Compensation includes
employer expenditures for employee wages
and salaries, social insurance, and private
benefits, plus estimates of these components
for the self-employed. Hours are calculated
separately for wage and salary workers, the
self-employed, and unpaid family workers,
then summed to the all-person level.
Compensation per hour equals estimated
1987 No.1 Fam i ly Econom i cs Re view 21
compensation divided by these hours. Real
hourly compensation is compensation per hour
divided by the CPI-U. The OPT measures of
hourly compensation combine BLS hours data
with compensation information obtained pri­marily
from the Bureau of Economic Analysis,
U.S. Department of Commerce.
These series are useful in forecasting and
analyzing prices, wages, profits, and pro­duction
costs. Because hourly compensation
measures are presented in index form, how­ever,
their use is limited to the analysis
of changes over time.
Measuring Negotiated Wage and Benefit
Changes
The current wage development program pro­vides
information on pay changes resulting
from collective bargaining. It measures
compensation and the size of negotiated wage
adjustments in major collective bargaining
situations. Data are obtained directly from
establishments as part of a variety of BLS
surveys and are presented separately for
three occupational groups: Professional­administrative,
technical-clerical, and
production workers. Monthly listings are
produced that describe negotiated changes
and statistical summaries of aggregate
changes. Data from private industry and
State and local governments include adjust­ments
stemming from contract settlements,
deferred changes, and changes resulting
from cost-of-living adjustments. The series
on wage and compensation adjustments from
collective bargaining is one of the Federal
Government's principal economic indicators
and is used in determining trends in compen­sation
and in forecasting changes in wage
and salary income and in the gross national
product.
The Employee Benefits Survey
The Employee Benefits Survey (EBS) pro­vides
comprehensive data on the percent of
employees covered by major employee benefits
and on the detailed provisions of benefit
plans. The annual survey is conducted by
BLS field representatives who visit each
sample establishment and obtain documents
containing the data required. Information is
developed on 11 private sector employee
benefits paid for at least in part by the
22 Fam ily Econom i cs Review 1987 No.1
employer, including: Paid lunch and rest
periods; holidays and vacations; personal
and sick leave; long-term disability,
health, and life insurance; and private
pension plans.
The EBS is a major source of information
for labor and management involved in con­tract
negotiations. Employers use the EBS
data to compare their benefit plans with
prevailing practices. Labor unions assess
potential areas for increasing nonwage com­pensation.
Social welfare planners evaluate
the ability of employees to provide for the
current and future health and welfare needs
of themselves and their dependents.
Selection of Series
To determine which statistical series
would be most appropriate, data users should
consider the following:
The concept measured (rate of pay,
earnings, compensation, labor costs, or
income).
The portion of the economy covered by
the data.
The amount of detail available in terms
of industry, area, and type of worker.
The time period covered.
The definitions given to the items
studied (for example, a survey of em­ployee
earnings may cover only regular
payroll outlays, and exclude bonuses).
Users also should be familiar with the meth­ods
of compiling the series. Some earnings
series come from surveys of establishments
that provide data on employment, earnings,
and hours; others come from household
responses.
The table on page 23 summarizes and
classifies each series in accordance with
its emphasis on industry and worker
coverage, frequency of publication, types of
compensation included, and data sources.
Source: U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau
of Labor Statistics, BLS Measures of
Compensation, Bulletin 2239, 1986.
'-D
(X) ......
z
0
...,
Ill
3 .....
......
'< ,..,
n
0
::J
0
3 .....
n
r.o
:;c
"<...'. .
"' :1:
N
"'
BLS measures of compensation--Summary of statistical series
Series
Occupational wage
surveys
Average hourly and
weekly earnings-­establishment
data
Earnings statistics
from the Current
Population Survey
Wages of workers
covered by unemploy­ment
(UI) programs
Income and earnings
data from the Consumer
Expenditure Survey
Employment Cost Index
Hourly compensation
measures of the Office
of Productivity
Technology
Negotiated wage and
benefit changes
Employee Benefits
Survey
1 Not applicable.
Coot>ensa t ion
Wages and salaries.
Wages and salaries.
Primarily wages and
salaries; also total
money income .
Wages, salaries, and
other payments
covered by UI taxes.
Wages, salaries,
and other sources of
income .
Wages, salaries, and
employer costs for
employee benefits.
Wages, salaries, and
supplements plus
estimate of labor
compensation of
self-employed •
Wages, salaries, and
private benefits.
Selected employee
benefits.
Coverage
Worker
Primarily nonsuper­visory
employees
in selected
occupations.
Production and
nonsupervisory
workers.
Wage and salary
workers, all
employed workers.
All workers covered
by Federal and
State UI Jaws.
Urban civilian
nonins titu tiona!
population.
All employees.
All employees plus
the self-employed.
Production and non­supervisory
workers
in bargaining units of
1, 000 workers or more
(5 ,000 or more for
wages and benefits
combined) •
Full-time employees.
Industry Geographic
Varies by survey. Varies by
survey-­nationwide,
selected
regions and
areas.
Private nonfarm Nationwide.
economy, excluding
households.
All industries. Nationwide.
All industries. Nationwide,
Statewide,
county level,
and area.
(1) All urban
areas.
Private nonfarm
economy, excluding
households, and
State and local
governments •
U.S. business
sector.
Private nonfarm
economy; State and
local governments.
Medium and large
private nonfarm
establishments.
Nationwide.
Nationwide.
Nation wide.
Nationwide.
Source: U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, 1986, News, USDL-86-211.
~ere
pub! ished
BLS bulletins,
news releases,
locality releases.
Employment and
Earnings, news
releases.
Employment and
Earnings, Monthly
Labor Review,
news release.
Employment and
Wages, news
releases.
BLS bulletins,
news releases.
Current Wage
Developments,
news releases.
Employment and
Earnings, news
releases.
Current Wage
Developments,
news releases.
BLS bulletin,
Monthly Labor
Review, news
releases •
Data
reported
Hourly, weekly,
monthly, or annual
straight-time earn­ings,
by occupation,
usually with inci­dence
of benefits.
Hourly and weekly
earnings, with
industry and
geographic detail.
Hourly rates, weekly
and annual earnings,
money income; demo­graphic
detail.
Weekly and annual
earnings per employee,
aggregate annual
payrolls; industry
and area detail.
Annual income, by
source.
Indexes and
quarterly and annual
changes in wages and
salaries and total
compensation costs.
Indexes and
quarterly and annual
changes in hourly
compensation.
Terms of individual
settlements; average
pay rate changes in
cents per hour and
percent.
Incidence of benefit
plans and plan pro­visions,
by broad
occupational group.
Using Consumer Expenditure
Survey Data1
One of the important uses of data from the
Consumer Expenditure Survey (CES) is to
provide information about the spending
habits of different kinds of American house­holds.
Expenditures are categorized by
household characteristics, including con­sumer
unit size, age of reference person,
region of residence, number of earners, and
income quintile. 2 Several discriminating
methods of measurement may be used to
compare or contrast spending by different
types of households.
Average expenditure levels. Levels of
expenditures refer to the average amounts
spent by each class of consumer units. The
levels can be compared to determine differ­ences
by household characteristics. For
example, units in the highest income quintile
averaged $91.16 a week for food, whereas
those in the lowest income quintile averaged
$28.08. Consumer units with reference per­sons
25 to 34 years of age spent an average
of $54.22 per week on food, compared with
$37.80 spent by units with reference persons
65 years and over. One-person units with one
earner averaged $31.39 per week for food
expenditures; one-person units with no
earner averaged $22.51. Consumer units in
the South averaged $52.24 per week for food,
whereas units in the Northeast averaged
$58.48.
1 Findings from the continuing Consumer
Expenditure Survey, Interview and Diary
Surveys, 1982-83. For additional information
on this survey and its two component parts,
see "Spending Patterns of U.S. Households,"
p. 26 of t.his issue.
2The basic reporting unit of the CES is
the consumer unit, which refers to a single
person or group of persons in a sample
household related by blood, marriage, adop­tion,
or other legal arrangement, or who
share responsibility for at least two of
three major types of expenses--food, hous­ing,
and other expenses. The consumer unit
may also be referred to as a household.
The reference person is the first person
named by the survey respondent as owning
or renting the home.
z• family Economics Review 1987 No.1
Budget shares. Budget shares are the
portion of total expenditures spent on one
component (for example, food) or the portion
of one average component expenditure spent
on one subcomponent (for example, the por­tion
of average food expenditures spent on
food away from home). Single-person units
with a wage earner spent 58% of food expen­ditures
on food away from home, compared
with 30% by two-or-more-person units with
one earner.
Aggregate expenditure shares. The aggre­gate
amount spent by one class of consumer
units for one component can be compared to
the aggregate amount spent by another class,
or by all consumer units, to determine if
those units are consuming a disproportionate
share of that expenditure item. Aggregate
expenditures for one component are calcu­lated
by multiplying the mean expenditure
for that component by the total number of
consumer units. The aggregate expenditure
share for one class of consumer units is
determined by first multiplying the class'
mean expenditure by the number of consumer
units in the class, then dividing that
number by the aggregate expenditure for all
units for that component.
The aggregate expenditure share for one
class of consumer units differs from the
budget share of that class of consumer
units. Even if the class' component budget
share is large, the class' aggregate expen­diture
share can still be relatively small
(1) if the class size is small and/or (2) if
the class' mean expenditure for the compo­nent
is relatively low compared with that of
other classes. For example, units with ref­erence
persons under 25 years of age spent
23% of their average total expenditures on
transportation, compared with 20% spent by
all consumer units (budget shares). Yet, the
aggregate expenditure share for units with
reference persons under age 25 was only
about 7%, even though these units comprise
10% of the total number of units; the dollar
value of their mean expenditure is low
relative to those of most other classes.
Per capita expenditures. Per capita expendi­tures
are frequently used because consumer
unit size may contribute to differences in
expenditures among classes. Mean expenditure
levels per consumer unit usually increase
with age up to the middle-age classes and
decrease thereafter. Per capita expendi-tures,
however, reveal a different pattern;
per capita housing expenditures are highest
for units with reference persons age 65 or
over and lowest for units with reference
persons under 25 years of age ($2,425,
compared with $1,894). Consumer units with
reference persons ages 45 to 54 have the
highest average expenditures for nonpre­scription
drugs and supplies, but per capita
expenditures are highest for units with
reference persons age 65 or over.
Changes over time. CES data are used
to record changes in U.S. consumer expen­diture
patterns over time. For example,
average weekly expenditures for food
increased 70% between 1972-73 and 1982-83,
considerably below the 104% price rise for
food as measured by the CPI. Although
changes in ex penditures and the CPI for food
away from home were similar (113% increase
in expenditures compared with 120% rise in
prices), there was a sharp difference in t he
changes for food at home (53%, compared
with 99%).
Variations in expenditure patterns over
time can be attributed to other factors ,
such as fluctuations in wage rates ; changes
in tastes, habits, and lifestyles; and the
availability of new products. Demographic
trends, such as changes in average family
size, age, and earner composition, may also
affect expenditures. The continuing CES
allows data users to note trends more
quickly than was possible in the past and to
observe trends that might have been missed
using data that were less frequently
available.
Source: Gieseman, Raymond, and John
Rogers, 1986, Consumer Expenditures:
Results from the Diary and Interview
Surveys, Monthly Labor Review 109(~) :1 4-18,
U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor
Statistics.
Subscrtption Order Or
Change 01 Address Form
FAMILY Annual subscrtption Single copies
Enclosed IsS·-------
0 Check
0 Money order
0 Charge to my Deposit Account
No _______ ___
Order No ______ _
Make check payable to
Superintendent ol Documents
CREDIT CARD ORDERS ONLY
(Visa and Mastercard)
Total charges S
Credit card No
Expiration Date Month/Year
ECONOMICS $12.00 domestic $3.25 domestic
REVIEW ($15.00 foreign) ($4.10 foreign).
Please print or type
Company or Personal Name
I I I I I I I I I I I I I
Additional Address I Attention Une
I I I I I I I I I I I I
Street Address
I I I
City
I I I
Country
I I I I
CHANGE OF ADDRESS
Please attach mailing label here and
send this torm when requesting a
change ol address.
MAIL ORDER FORM TO,
Superintendent ol Documents
GoTemment Printing Otttce
Wash1Dgton. D.C. 20402
Slate ZIP Code
LUI I II
I I I
FOR OFFICE USE ONLY
Quantity
___ Publications
Charges
--~ Subscriptions ___ _
Special Shipping Charges __ _
International Handling ___ _
Special Charges-----­OPNR
____ UPNS
____ Balance Due
____ Discount
____ Refund
1987 No . 1 Family Economics Review 25
Spending Patterns of
U.S. Households1
The U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS)
reports that American households spent less
for gasoline in 1984 than in 1983--the first
annual decrease in a major expenditure
category since 1980. Expenditures for other
major components of transportation, however,
substantially increased. Vehicle purchases
accounted for two-thirds of the increase in
transportation expenditures. Not only did
more people buy cars, but the cost of cars
and trucks increased. Also, vehicle
financing costs (associated with increased
vehicle expenditures) rose by 25%.
Although substantial fluctuations in
dollar amounts spent on components occur
from year to year, the proportion of money
allocated to each component has been rela­tively
constant over time. Other findings of
the survey show that:
Increases in expenditures surpassed
increases in prices, as measured by the
Consumer Price Index ( CPI), for most com­ponents
in 1984 . For example, expenditures
for nonprescription drugs rose 10% from
1983, whereas prices rose a little over 5% •
Prices exceeded expenditures, however,
for education and tobacco. Both expenditures
and prices declined at a rate of 1 .5% for
gasoline and motor oil (table 1).
• From 1983 to 1984 expenditures for
retirement, pensions , and Social Security
increased 14% (table 1) because of the
general upswing in income and legislated
increases in maximum earnings to which
Social Security tax is applied •
• Homeowners and renters spent about
the same percent of total expenditures for
housing; however, renters spent a higher
share of their housing expenditures for
shelter than did homeowners (21% and 16%,
respectively) . The latter spent a greater
proportion for utilities , household opera­tions,
and equipment .
1 Findings from the continuing Consumer
Expenditure Survey: Interview and Diary
Surveys, 1984, U. S . Department of Labor,
Bureau of Labor Statistics .
26 Family Economics Review 1987 No.1
• There was a moderate rise in food
expenditures. Consumer units with reference
persons 2 under 25 years of age spent more
of their food budgets on food away from
home than units with older reference persons
(table 2).
The Survey
The current Consumer Expenditure Survey
( CES) was begun in 1979. The main objective
for the survey is to gather consumer expen­diture
data that provide a continuous source
of information on the buying habits of con­sumers.
The data are used for the periodic
revisions of the CPI and for research con­ducted
by a variety of government, business,
labor, and academic analysts. In the past
the survey was conducted about every 10
years; the new survey is ongoing, with
rotating panels of respondents participating
over time. The continuous flow of data
significantly adds to the usefulness of the
survey by providing more timely and detailed
information on household consumption pat­terns.
A new feature of the detailed tables
is the division of the 65-and-over age class
into the 65-to-74 and 75-and-over age
groups.
The CES survey consists of two components:
(1) A diary, or record keeping, survey
completed by participating consumer units
for two consecutive 1-week periods; and
(2) an interview survey in which the
expenditures of consumer units are recorded
in five interviews, each conducted every
3 months. Each component is used with an
independent sample that is representative of
the U.S. urban population. In the diary
survey, 5, 000 consumer units are interviewed
over 52 weeks. The interview sample, com­posed
of rotating panels, consists of 5, 000
consumer units each quarter.
In the interview survey respondents report
expenditures that have accrued over a period
of 3 months or longer. In general, these are
relatively large expenditures (such as those
for real property, automobiles, and major
appliances) or expenditures that occur
fairly regularly (such as rent, utilities,
and insurance premiums). Estimates of food
2 See footnotes 1 and 2 in table 1.
Table 1. Annual expenditures of urban consumer units and percent change in consumer expenditures ( CE)
and Consumer Price Index ( CPI-U) 1
Item
Number of consumer units in universe
(thousands) ••••••••••.•••••••••••••••••••••••••
Income before taxes ............................ .
Size of consumer unit ••••••••••••••.••••••••.•••
Age of reference person (years) 2
••••••••••••••••
Number in consumer unit:
Earners •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••
Vehicles •••••••••••••••••••••.••••• • ••••••••••
Children under 18 years ••••••••••••• • •••••••••
Persons 65 years and over ••••••••••••••••••••
Total expenditures ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••
Food •••••••••••••••••••••••••.••••••.•••••••••
Food at home ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••
Food away from home •••••••••.••••••••••••••
Alcoholic beverages ••••••••••••••••• ••••• •••••
Housing •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• •••
Shelter ••••••••••••••.•••••••••••••••••••••• •
Owned dwellings ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••
Rented dwellings •••••••••••••••••••••••••••
Other lodging ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••
Utilities, fuel, and public services ••••••••••
Household operations •••••••••••••••••• • ••••••
Housefurnishings and equipment ••••••••••••••
Apparel and services •••••••• ••• .•••••••••••••••
Transportation •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••
Vehicles ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• • • • • • •
Gasoline and motor oil ••••••••••••••••••••.••
Other vehicle expenses ••••••••••••••••••.••••
Public transportation •••••••••••••••••••••••••
Health care •••••••••••••••••••••• •• •••••••• • • • •
Entertainment ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• • • • • •
Personal care services ••••••••••••••••••••••••••
Reading •••••••••••••••••••••••• ••••••••••• • • • • •
Education •••••••••••••••••••• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •
Tobacco and smoking supplies •••••••••• •••• ••••
Miscellaneous •••••••• ••• •••••••••••••• • • • • • • • • • •
Cash contributions •.•••••••••••••••• • • • • • • · • • • •
Personal insurance and pensions ••••••••••••• •••
Life and other personal insurance •••••• •• •.••
Retirement, pensions, Social Security •••••••••
1983
72,531
$23,126
2.6
46.1
1.3
1.8
.7
.3
$19,692
3,198
2,224
974
286
5,980
3,349
1,958
1,063
327
1,540
284
808
1,084
3,914
1,565
1,064
1,047
239
839
919
184
131
293
215
283
588
1,777
265
1,513
1984
74,844
$24,578
2.6
46.2
1.4
1.9
.7
.3
$21,788
3,391
2,342
1,048
299
6,626
3,747
2,188
1,171
388
1,679
333
868
1,192
4,385
1,873
1,048
1,176
288
899
1,040
205
140
312
225
311
740
2,023
302
1,721
Percent change
CE CPI-U
6.3
10.6 ( 3 )
6.0 3.8
5.3 3.7
7.6 4.2
4.5 2.6
10.8 ( 3 )
11.9 ( 3)
11.7 ( 3)
10.2 5.2
18.7 4 7 .9
9.0 4 4.6
17.3 4 2.7
7.4 .8
10.0 1.9
12.0 4.5
19.7 4 8.9
-1.5 -1.5
12.3 4 4.4
20.5 6.2
7.2 6.2
13.2 3.7
11.4 3.9
6.9 4 3.3
6.5 9.7
4.7 6.5
9.9
25.9
13.8
14.0
13.7
1 Data from the Consumer Expenditure Survey (CES), interview component, 1983 and 1984. The basic
reporting unit for the CES is the consumer unit that refers to a single person or group of persons in a
sample household related by blood, marriage, adoption, or other legal arrangement, or who share responsi­bility
for at least 2 of 3 major types of expenses--food, housing, and other expenses. The term household
is used for convenience.
2 The reference person or householder is the first person named by the respondent as owning or renting
the home.
3 CPI for all items and home ownership are not conceptually comparable.
4 These figures were calculated for use in this report.
Source: U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, 1986, Consumer Expenditure Survey
results from 1984, News USDL 86-258.
1987 No.1 Family Economics Rev1ew 27
Table 2. Weekly expenditures of urban consumer units classified by age of reference person1
All Age of reference person
Item consumer
units Under 25-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65-74 75 and
25 over
Number of consumer units
(thousands) •••••••••••••••••••••••••• 74,283 8,132 17.514 13,261 10,460 10.635 7,249 6,050
Number of sample diaries •••••••••••••• 10,589 1,076 2,457 1,975 1,480 1,595 1,047 818
Average weekly expenditures:
Food, total •••••••••••••••••••••••••• $57.71 $32.27 $55.29 $75.06 $79.03 $61.20 $47.80 $31.84
Food at home (percent weekly
food expenditures) ••••••••••••••• 64.3 57.4 61.3 64.0 63.8 66.6 67 .5 74.3
Food away from home (percent) •••• 35.7 42.6 38.7 36.0 36.2 33.4 32.5 25.7
Alcoholic beverages •••••••••••••••••• $5.33 $4.49 $6.19 $5.70 $7.37 $5.94 $3.05 $1.41
Tobacco products and smoking
supplies •••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 3.41 2.05 3.15 4.00 4.79 4.42 2.54 1.57
Personal care products and services. 4.65 2.19 4.28 5.34 5.98 5 .so 4.78 3.21
Nonprescription drugs and supplies •• 1.87 .75 1.23 1.90 1.86 2.02 3.28 3.21
Housekeeping supplies ••••••••••••••• 5.78 2.46 5.10 7.38 7.88 6.58 5.86 3.37
1 Data from the Consumer Expenditure Survey ( CES), diary component, 1984. The basic reporting unit for the
CES is the consumer unit that refers to a single person or group of persons in a sample household related by
blood, marriage, adoption, or other legal arrangement, or who share responsibility for at least 2 of 3 major
types of expenses--food, housing, and other expenses. The term household is used for convenience. The
reference person or householder is the first person named by the respondent as owning or renting the home.
Source: U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, 1986, Consumer Expenditure Survey results
from 1984, News USDL:86-258.
spending are included. Expenses incurred
while on trips are reported exclusively in
the interview component. An estimated 95% of
expenditures are included in the interview
survey.
The diary survey is used to obtain expen­ditures
on small, frequently purchased
items, which are normally difficult for
respondents to recall; for example, detailed
records of expenses are kept for food and
beverages, both at home and in eating
places. Expenses incurred while away from
home overnight or longer are not included in
the diary survey and particularly affect
reported food costs. Housekeeping supplies,
nonprescription drugs, and personal care
products are exclusively reported in the
diary survey . Personal care services are
included in both components of the CES.
Source: U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau
of Labor Statistics, 1986, Consumer Expen­diture
Survey Results from 1984, News USDL:
86-258.
28 Fam i ly Economics Review 1987 No.1
PUBLICATIONS FROM BLS ON 1984
CONSUMER EXPENDITURE SURVEY
Results from the 1984 CES are found in
the following reports by the U.S. Bureau of
Labor Statistics:
Consumer Expenditure Survey: Interview,
1984, Bulletin No. 2267, contains detailed
information from the 1984 CES Interview
Survey (urban population). The report is
available from the U.S. Government Printing
Office for $4.50. Send requests to the
Superintendent of Doouments, Government
Printing Office, Washington, DC 20402. Ask
for GPO SN029-001-02905-5 and make checks
payable to Superintendent of Documents.
• News USDL 86-258, "Consumer Expenditure
Survey Results from 1984" (urban population).
News USDL 86-451, "Consumer Expenditure
Survey, 1984 Results for Both Urban and
Rural Populations."
For inquiries about the CES or free copies
of News reports, write to the Office of
Prices, Bureau of Labor Statistics, U.S.
Department of Labor, Washington, DC 20212.
New Publications
The Revised Consumer Price Index:
Changes in Definitions and
Availability
Monthly Labor Review 109(7): 15-23
Bureau of Labor Statistics
U.S. Department of Labor
The second of a series of articles on the
upcoming revisions in the Consumer Price
Index ( CP I) has been published by the U.S.
Bureau of Labor Statistics in the Monthly
Labor Review. The series provides detailed
information about the revised CPI, which
will be introduced in January 1987. This
article highlights changes that will occur
in the availability and in the definitions
of indexes. For additional information on
updating the CPI, see "Revision of the
Consumer Price Index," Family Economics
Review 1986(1): 22-23.
State and Metropolitan Area Data
Book, 1986
Bureau of the Census
U.S. Department of Commerce
The Census Bureau has updated the State
and Metropolitan Data Book (SMADB) for the
first time since 1982. Included are data
from the 1982 Economic Censuses as well as
from the 1980 Census of Population and Hous­ing.
This publication, the third edition,
provides extensive geographic comparative
data for States, metropolitan statistical
areas, and central cities. In addition, many
intercensal demographic and economic data
are included from more than 25 Federal
agencies and many non-Federal sources.
SMADB is available for $28 from the Super­intendent
of Documents, U.S. Government
Printing Office, Washington, DC 20402.
Ask for SN003-024-06334-4.
How to Get Information From the
United States Department of Agriculture
Office of Information
U.S. Department of Agriculture
A recent revision of this bulletin lists
individuals who serve as information sources
for their respective program agencies or
staff offices, as well as names of agency
Freedom of Information Act contacts. For the
first time the bulletin, which has been pub­lished
for the past 10 years, is available
electronically as a menu item in USDA
ON-LINE on the Dialcom computer system and
can be updated whenever changes occur.
Copies of this publication and information
on USDA ON-LINE can be obtained by calling
(202) 447-7454 or writing to Nancy Bevis,
USDA-OGPA, Room 536A, Administration
Building, 14th Street and Independence
Avenue, SW ., Washington, DC 20250.
* • * * * * *
The following are for sale from the Super­in
tend en t of Documents, U.S. Government
Printing Office, Washington, DC 20402,
(202) 783-3238:
Composition of Food: Beef Products--
Raw, Processed, Prepared. AH 8-13.
November 1986. SNOOl-000-04482-6. $19 .00.
1986 Agricultural Chartbook. AH 663.
November 1986. SNOOl-019-00488-6. $5.50.
Disaggregated Farm Income by Type of
Farm, 1959-82. AER-558. August 1986.
SNOOl-019-00469-0. $5.50.
What Attracts New Residents to Nonmetro
Areas? RDRR-56. April 1986. SNOOl-019-
00430-4. $1.00.
Black Farmers and Their Farms.
RDRR-59. July 1986. SNOOl-019-00449-5.
$1.75.
Social and Economic Environment of
Black Farmers. RDRR-61. August 1986.
SNOOl-019-00463-1. $1.25.
A single copy of the following is avail­able
free from the U.S. Department of
Agriculture, Higher Education Programs,
Room 350A, Administration Building,
Washington, DC 20250:
Employment Opportunities for College
Graduates in the Food. and Agricultural
Sciences. July 1986.
1987 No.1 family Economics Review 29
Money Income of Households,
Families, and Persons in 1984
Increased employment and higher real
earnings levels were important factors that
helped boost real median family income
between 1983 and 1984. Median family income
increased faster than inflation for the
second year in a row, according to the
results of the March 1985 Current Population
Survey, conducted by the Census Bureau.
In 1984, median family income was $26,430,
7.1% higher than the 1983 median of $24,670.
After adjusting for the 4. 3% increase in
consumer prices between 1983 and 1984, real
median family income still showed a signifi­cant
gain of 2.8%, compared to an increase
of only 1.6% in 1983. Median household
m• come 1 rose 2.3 percent from 1983 to 1984
after adjusting for inflation.
Between 1983 and 1984 median income of
white families increased by 2.8% and the
median income of black families increased by
1. 7% (table). Families in the West, Midwest,
and South also experienced real income
increases. Married couples, regardless of
the employment status of the wife, had
significant increases in their income.
Families maintained by a college graduate
experienced a 1.8% increase in median income
between 1983 and 1984 (table). In contrast,
the median income of families with a house­holder
completing 4 years of high school
rose 3.3%.
1 Household income includes the income of
all related and unrelated persons in the
household, as well as the income of one­person
households. Family income is limited
to the income of related persons in a
household.
JO family Economics Review 1987 No.1
As stated in this report from the
U.S. Bureau of the Census, estimates
were developed from two sample frames-­one
from the 1980 census and the other
from the 1970 census. Since this sample
design did not permit the development
of estimates for area of residence that
were comparable to either the 1980 or
197 0 census definitions, figures for
those estimates were omitted. According
to the Census Bureau, publication of
data by residence categories will resume
when estimates can be derived using the
full sample from the 1980-based survey
design. Also, revised weighting proce­dures
for persons of Spanish origin in­creased
the Spanish population estimate
by approximately 1.6 million.
The number of men and women with
earnings rose substantially during 1984 as
the number of employed Americans continued
an expansion that began in 1983. The number
of men with earnings rose to 66.5 million,
up 1.5 million over 1983, and the number of
women with earnings rose by 2 .1 million to
55· 2 million. Men had median earnings in
1984 of $23,220, compared with median
earnings for women of $14,780. The earnings
level for women was 64% of the level for
men, about the same as 1983.
Source: U.S. Department of Commerce,
Bureau of the Census, 1986, Money income of
households, families, and persons in the
United States: 1984, Current Population
Reports, Consumer Income Series P-60,
No. 151.
Comparison of median family income in 1983 and 1984
[In 1984 constant dollars]
Characteristic 1984
Total ................................•.... $26,433
Race of householder:
White •. · ••...•.......••.•.•..•......•..
Black ................ · • • · • · · · · • · · • · · · ·
Spanish origin1
•••••••••••••• ; •••••••••
Region:
Northeast
Mid west .............................. .
south ................................ .
West •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• • •
Education of householder:
Elementary school •••••••••••••••••••••
High school, 4 years ••••••••••••••••••
College, 4 years or more ••••••••••••••
Number of earners:
None ............... · · · · · · · · · · · · • • · · · · ·
1 •...•..•.........•.•...•..•.••.......
2 •••••••.•••.•.•...•••.••••••••••••••.
3 .....................................
4 or more •......................•.....
Type of family:
Married-couple ....................... .
Wife in paid labor force •••••••••••••
Wife not in paid labor force •••••••••
Male householder, no wife present •••••
Female householder, no husband
present ............................. .
1 Persons of Spanish origin may be of any race.
2 Less than .05.
* Significant at the 95% confidence level.
27,686
15,432
18,833
28,487
26,753
24,094
28,077
14,937
26,528
43,169
11 '377
20,291
31,707
39,828
50,278
29,612
34,668
23,582
23,325
12,803
1983
$25,724
26,937
15,181
17,652
f-7 ,853
25,900
23,543
26,764
14,728
25 '67 4
42,400
10,974
20,284
31,101
38,914
49,824
28,543
33,518
22,991
22,858
12,339
Percent
change
(1983-84)
*2.8
*2.8
1.7
6.7
2.3
*3.3
*2.3
*4.9
1.4
*3.3
*1.8
*3.7
(2)
*1.9
*2.3
0.9
*3.7
*3.4
*2.6
2.0
3.8
Source: U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census, 1986, Money income of
households, families, and persons in the United States: 1984, Current Population Reports,
Consumer Income Series P-60, No. 151.
1987 No.1 Family Economics Re v iew J1
"" N
...,
Ill
3... .
......
'<
1"\
0
0
::l
0
.3.. .
0
CD
;:c
!D
.<.. .
!D
s;
_,
'-D
0) .....
z
0
Cost of food at home estimated for food plans at 4 cost levels, November 1986, U.S. average1
Cost for 1 week Cost for 1 month
Sex- age gr oup
Thrifty Low-cost M:xierate- Liberal Thrifty Low-cost M:xierate- Liberal
plan plan cost plan plan plan plan cost plan plan
FAMILIES
Family of 2 : 2
20 - 50 years •••••••••••••••••••••••• $38.60 $48.70 $60.30 $74.60 $167.10 $211.00 $261.00 $323.10
51 years and over •••••••••••••••••• 36.50 46.70 57.60 69.00 158.20 202.30 249.70 298.80
Family of 4:
Couple , 20-50 years and children--
1- 2 and 3-5 years •••••••••••••••• 56.10 69.90 85.70 104.80 242.90 303.00 371.00 454.10
6- 8 and 9-11 years ••••••••••••••• 64.40 82.30 103.10 123.90 278.50 356.30 446.50 536.70
INDIVIDUALS 3
Child:
1-2 years .......................... 10.10 12.20 14.30 17.10 43.70 52.90 61.80 74.10
3-5 years •••••••••••••••••••••••••• 10.90 13.40 16.60 19.90 47.30 58.30 71.90 86.30
6-8 years .......................... 13.40 17.80 22.30 26.00 57.90 77.00 96.50 112.60
9-11 years ••••••••••••••••••••••••• 15.90 20.20 26.00 30.10 68.70 87.50 112.70 130.40
Male:
12-14 years ........................ 16.60 22.90 28.60 33.60 72.00 99.40 124.00 145.70
15-19 years ........................ 17.30 23.80 29.50 34.20 74.80 103.10 127.70 148.10
20-50 years •••••••••••••••••••••••• 18.50 23.50 29.60 35.60 80.00 101.80 128.20 154.40
51 years and over •••••••••••••••••• 16.80 22.40 27.60 33.00 72.60 97.00 119 .40 143.10
Female:
12-19 years •••••••••••••••••••••••• 16.50 19.90 24.10 29.10 71.40 86.10 104.40 126.10
20-50 years •••••••••••••••••••••••• 16.60 20.80 25.20 32.20 71.90 90.00 109 .10 139.30
51 years and over ••••••••••••••••• 16.40 20.10 24.80 29.70 71.20 86.90 107.60 128.50
1Assumes that food for all meals and snacks is purchased at the store and prepared at home. Estimates for the thrifty food
plan were computed from quantities of foods published in Family Economics Review , 1984(1). Estimates for the other plans were
computed from quantities of foods published in Family Economics Review, 1983(2). The costs of the food plans are estimated by
updating prices paid by households surveyed in 1977-78 in USDA's Nationwide Food Consumption Survey. USDA updates these
survey prices using information from the Bureau of Labor Statistics, CPI Detailed Report, table 3, to estimate the costs for
the food plans.
2 10 percent added for family size adjustment. See footnote 3.
3 The costs given are for individuals in 4-person families. For individuals in other size families, the following adjustments
are s uggested: 1-person--add 20 percent; 2-person--add 10 percent; 3-person--add 5 percent; 5- or 6-person--subtract
5 percent; 7- or more-person--subtract 10 percent.
~
9.
~
0
0. a
s:
~
Consumer Prices
Consumer Price Index for all urban consumers
[1967 = 100, unless otherwise noted]
Group
All i terns ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••
Food ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••
Food at home ........................... .
Food away from horne ................... .
Housing ........................ · .......... .
Shelter ................................. .
Renters' costs 1
••••••••••••••••••••••••
Rent, residential ................... .
Homeowners' costs 1
••••••••••••••••••••
Maintenance and repairs ••••••••••••••• -
Maintenance and repair services •••••
Maintenance and repair commodities ••
Fuel and other utilities •••••••••••••••••
Fuel oil, coal, and bottled gas ••••••••
Gas (piped) and electricity ••••••••••••
Household furnishings and operation •••••
Housefurnishings ..................... .
Housekeeping supplies •••••••••••••••••
Housekeeping services •••••••••••••••••
Apparel and upkeep •••••••••••••••••••••••
Apparel commodities •••••••••••••••••••••
Men's and boys' apparel •••••••••••••••
Women's and girls' apparel ••••••••••••
Infants' and toddlers' apparel •••••••••
Footwear .......................... · · · ·
Apparel services ....................... .
Transportation ........................... .
Private transportation •••••••••••••••••••
New vehicles .....................•....
Used cars ............................ ·
Motor fuel .... .......................... .
Maintenance and repair ••••••••••••••••••
Public transportation ••••••••••••••••••••
Medical care ................. · · · • · · • · · · • • • •
Medical care commodities •••••••••••••••••
Medical care services ••••••••••••••••••••
Professional services ••••••••••••••••••
Entertainment . • .................. · · · · · · • • •
Other goods and services ••••••••••••••••••
Personal care . .................. • · · · · • • • •
Personal and educational expenses • ." •••••
1 Indexes based on December 1982 = 100 base.
Nov.
1986
330.8
324.6
309.9
365.8
361.7
410.2
124.3
285.6
121.5
377.1
433.7
272.9
371.1
452.0
426.7
251.2
201.4
320.4
348.5
213.1
197.4
205.3
175.0
307.0
215.1
339.0
304.3
295.8
230.2
361.0
260.9
368.4
431.7
444.6
278.2
481.5
399.8
277.4
354.9
293.4
448.2
Unadjusted indexes
Oct. Sept.
1986 1986
330.5
323.7
309.5
364.0
363.0
409.5
124.0
284.6
121.3
379.0
437.5
273.0
379.1
451.9
441.4
251.6
202.2
319.8
348.5
213.2
197.6
204.3
176.4
312.0
215.1
338.3
302.6
294.1
226.7
360.6
263.2
365.7
428.7
442.3
277.5
478.8
398.0
276.5
354.6
293.1
447.6
330.2
323.2
309.0
363.3
363.7
407.6
123.6
283.2
120.7
376.2
437.0
268.7
388.3
453.5
461.1
251.5
202.2
320.1
347.8
212.1
196.6
203.2
175.7
309.7
212.0
336.7
302.2
293.7
224.2
359.5
271.1
365.0
428.5
439.7
276.7
475.7
396.1
275.3
353.3
292.0
445.2
Nov.
1985
326.6
311.1
296.6
351.3
355.0
391.3
118.4
271.7
115.8
372.7
426.4
271.5
392.1
641.6
440.5
248.9
200.8
316.4
342.7
211.2
196.8
203.6
176.5
307 .o
215.5
326.3
323.2
317 .o
218.2
376.4
376.7
355.8
412.8
413.0
262.7
445.8
375.5
269.0
335.3
285.4
415.4
Source: U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics.
1987 No.1 Family Economics Review JJ