Fifteen Years From Now, Elderly Population 

Growth Will Explode

Average annual growth rate (in percent) of the elderly population: 

1910-30 to 2030-50

1910-30 1930-50 1950-70 1970-90 1990-2010 2010-30 2030-50

2.6

3.1

2.4

2.2

1.3

2.8

0.7

Bureau

of the

Census

Sixty-Five Plus in the United States

America’s elderly population is now

growing at a moderate pace. But

not too far into the future, the

growth will become rapid. So rapid,

in fact, that by the middle of the

next century, it might be completely

inaccurate to think of ourselves as a

Nation of the young: there could be

more persons who are elderly (65 or

over) than young (14 or younger)! 

The elderly population has grown

substantially in this century ....

During the 20th century, the number of persons in the United States

under age 65 has tripled. At the

same time, the number aged 65 or

over has jumped by a factor of 11!

Consequently, the elderly, who

comprised only 1 in every 25

Americans (3.1 million) in 1900,

made up 1 in 8 (33.2 million) in

1994. Declining fertility and

mortality rates also have led to a

sharp rise in the median age of our

Nation’s population — from 20

years old in 1860 to 34 in 1994.

.... and will continue to rise well

into the next century .... 

According to the Census Bureau’s

“middle series” projections, the 

elderly population will more than

double between now and the year

2050, to 80 million. By that year, as

SB/95-8

Issued May 1995

U.S. Department of Commerce

Economics and Statistics Administration

BUREAU OF THE CENSUS

many as 1 in 5 Americans could be

elderly. Most of this growth should

occur between 2010 and 2030,

when the “baby boom” generation

enters their elderly years. During

that period, the number of elderly

will grow by an average of 2.8 percent annually. By comparison,

annual growth will average 1.3 percent during the preceding 20 years

and 0.7 percent during the following 20 years. (See graph above.)

.... especially for the oldest old.

The “oldest old” — those aged 85

and over — are the most rapidly

growing elderly age group. Between 1960 and 1994, their numbers rose 274 percent. In contrast,

the elderly population in general

rose 100 percent and the entire U.S.

population grew only 45 percent.

The oldest old numbered 

3 million in 1994, making them 

10 percent of the elderly and just

over 1 percent of the total population. Thanks to the arrival of the

survivors of the baby boom generation, it is expected the oldest old

will number 19 million in 2050.

That would make them 24 percent

of elderly Americans and 5 percent

of all Americans.

We’re living longer.

Back when the United States was

founded, life expectancy at birth

stood at only about 35 years. It

reached 47 years in 1900, jumped

to 68 years in 1950, and steadily

rose to 76 years in 1991. In 1991,

life expectancy was higher for

women (79 years) than for men 

(72 years).

Once we reach age 65, we can expect to live 17 more years. During

the 1980’s, post-65 life expectancy

improved for all race/sex groups.
BUREAU OF THE CENSUS STATISTICAL BRIEF May 1995

Which States Are the Grayest?

Percentage of the population that is aged 65 years and over, by State: 1993

$%"%!&!%

&$	

&$	

# !%












 

 




























  







	




  






 







	


























	



The biggest improvement (a rise

of over 1 year) belonged to 

White men.

The elderly are becoming more

racially and ethnically diverse.

In 1994, 1 in 10 elderly were a race

other than White. In 2050, this proportion should rise to 2 in 10. Similarly, the proportion of elderly who

are Hispanic is expected to climb

from 4 percent to 16 percent over

the same period.

California has the largest 

number of elderly, but Florida has

the highest percentage.

Our most populous States are also

the ones with the largest number of

elderly. In 1993, nine States had

more than 1 million elderly.

California, with 3.3 million, led the

way, followed by Florida, New

York, Pennsylvania, Texas, Ohio,

Illinois, Michigan, and New Jersey.

Meanwhile, the States with the

greatest proportion of elderly are

generally different from those 

with the greatest number. Two 

exceptions, however, were Florida,

where 19 percent of residents were

elderly, and Pennsylvania, where 16

percent were. These 2 States led the

Nation percentage-wise and, as just

mentioned, ranked in the top 4 numerically. In-migration of the elderly contributed to Florida’s high

rankings. Joining Florida and Pennsylvania in having high proportions

of elderly (14 percent or more)

were 10 other States, including several sparsely populated Farm Belt

States, such as North Dakota and

Nebraska. (See map above.) Outmigration of the young contributed

to the high proportions in these

States and in Pennsylvania.

During the 1980’s, the greatest percent increases in elderly population

were mostly in Western States and

Southeastern coastal States.

Elderly women outnumber 

elderly men ....

Men generally have higher death

rates than women at every age. 

As a result, elderly women outnumbered elderly men in 1994 by 

a ratio of 3 to 2 — 20 million to 

14 million. This difference grew

with advancing age. At ages 65 to

69, it was only 6 to 5. However, at

age 85 and over, it reached 5 to 2.

As more men live to older ages

over the next 50 years, these differences may narrow somewhat.

.... consequently, while most 

elderly men are married, most

elderly women are not.

In 1993, noninstitutionalized elderly men were nearly twice as likely

as their female counterparts to be

married and living with their spouse

(75 percent versus 41 percent). Elderly women, on the other hand,

were more than three times as likely as elderly men to be widowed

(48 percent versus 14 percent). The

remaining men and women were either separated, divorced, had never

married, or had absent spouses.

Thus, while most elderly men have

a spouse for assistance, especially

when health fails, most elderly

women do not.
The Need for Personal Assistance With 

Everyday Activities Increases With Age

Percentage of persons needing assistance with everyday 

activities, by age: 1990-91

(Civilian noninstitutional population)

85 and over

80-84

75-79

70-74

65-69

15-64

50%

31%

20%

11%

9%

2%

BUREAU OF THE CENSUS STATISTICAL BRIEF May 1995

Many elderly live alone.

Another consequence of the relative

scarcity of elderly men is the fact

that elderly women were much

more likely than men to live alone.

So much more likely, in fact, that 8

in 10 noninstitutionalized elderly

who lived alone in 1993 were

women. Among both sexes, the 

likelihood of living alone increased

with age. For women, it rose from

32 percent for 65- to 74-year-olds to

57 percent for those aged 85 years

or more; for men, the corresponding

proportions were 13 percent and 

29 percent.

More of us may face 

dependency ....

Many assume health among the 

elderly has improved because they,

as a group, are living longer. Others

hold a contradictory image of the

elderly as dependent and frail. The

truth actually lies somewhere in between. Poor health is not as prevalent as many assume. In 1992,

about 3 in every 4 noninstitutionalized persons aged 65 to 74 considered their health to be good. Two in

three aged 75 or older felt similarly.

On the other hand, as more people

live to the oldest ages, there may

also be more who face chronic, limiting illnesses or conditions, such as

arthritis, diabetes, osteoporosis, and

senile dementia. These conditions

result in people becoming dependent on others for help in performing the activities of daily living.

With age comes increasing chances

of being dependent. For instance,

while 1 percent of those aged 65 to

74 years lived in a nursing home in

1990, nearly 1 in 4 aged 85 or older

did. And among those who were not

institutionalized in 1990-91, 9 percent aged 65 to 69 years, but 50

percent aged 85 or older, needed assistance performing everyday activities such as bathing, getting

around inside the home, and preparing meals. (See graph at right.)

... and increasing numbers of

people will have to care for very

old, frail relatives.

As more and more people live long

enough to experience multiple,

chronic illnesses, disability, and dependency, there will be more and

more relatives in their fifties and

sixties who will be facing the concern and expense of caring for

them. The parent-support ratio

gives us an approximate idea of

things to come. This ratio equals

the number of persons aged 85 and

over per 100 persons aged 50 to 64.

Between 1950 and 1993, the ratio

tripled from 3 to 10. Over the next

six decades, it could triple yet

again, to 29.

Heart disease, cancer, and stroke

are the leading causes of death

among the elderly.

Of the 2.2 million Americans who

died in 1991, 1.6 million (or 7 in

10) were elderly. Seven in 10 of

these elderly deaths could be attributed to either heart disease, cancer,

or stroke. Though death rates from

heart disease have declined for the

elderly since the 1960’s, this malady remains the leading cause of

death among them. Death rates

from cancer, on the other hand,

have increased since 1960. 

Poverty rates vary greatly 

among subgroups ....

The perception of “elderly” and

“poor” as practically synonymous

has changed in recent years to a

view that the noninstitutionalized

elderly are better off than other

Americans. Both views are simplistic. There is actually great variation

among elderly subgroups. For example, in 1992 —

 The poverty rate, 15 percent for

those under age 65, rose with age

among the elderly, from 11 percent for 65- to 74-year-olds to 16

percent for those aged 75 

or older.

 Elderly women (16 percent) had

a higher poverty rate than elderly

men (9 percent).

 The rate was higher for elderly

Blacks (33 percent) and Hispanics (22 percent) than for Whites

(11 percent).

As the graph on the next page

shows, poverty became less prevalent during the 1980’s for every 

elderly sex/race/ethnic group. In
During the 1980’s, Poverty Was Reduced Among the Elderly

Percent of persons aged 65 and over who were poor, by sex, race, and Hispanic origin: 1979 and 1989 1979

1989

White

Black

Asian and

Pacific

Islander

Hispanic

origin

Note: Persons of Hispanic origin may be of any race. This graph is based on 1980 and 1990 census sample data.

Men Women

15.4

13.4

39.4

36.1

34.2

31.9

16.4

12.8

28.1

26.6

9.0

6.6

29.1

24.3

29.2

24.3

12.3

10.7

22.4

19.6

American Indian,

Eskimo, and

Aleut

BUREAU OF THE CENSUS STATISTICAL BRIEF May 1995

addition, within each race/ethnic

group, poverty was more common

for women than for men at both the

decade’s beginning and end.

.... as does median income.

In constant 1992 dollars, the median income for elderly persons

more than doubled between 1957

and 1992 (from $6,537 to $14,548

for men, from $3,409 to $8,189 for

women).

However, income disparities persist

among various elderly subgroups.

Age, sex, race, ethnicity, marital

status, living arrangements, educational attainment, former occupation, and work history are characteristics associated with significant

income differences. For instance,

elderly White men had much higher

median incomes than other groups.

In 1992, their income was more

than double that of elderly Black

and Hispanic women ($15,276 versus $6,220 and $5,968, respectively). The difference in median income between Black and Hispanic

women was not statistically significant.

The elderly of the future will 

be better educated.

Research has shown that the better

educated tend to be healthier 

longer and better off economically.

In 1993, noninstitutionalized elderly were less likely than those aged

25 to 64 to have completed at least

high school (60 percent versus 85

percent) and more likely to have

only an eighth grade education or

less (24 percent versus 6 percent).

The percent with less than a 9thgrade education rose with age for

the elderly.

Fortunately, the proportion of 

elderly with at least a high school

education will increase in the coming decades. That’s because nearly

8 in 10 persons aged 55 to 59 in

1993 had at least a high school

education; the same was true for

nearly 9 in 10 persons aged 45 

to 49. Additionally, while only 

12 percent of the elderly had college degrees, 20 percent of 55- to

59-year-olds and 27 percent of 45-

to 49-year-olds did.

More information: 

Sixty-Five Plus in the United States,

an upcoming report supported by

funding from the National Institute

on Aging (NIA), greatly expands on

the information in this Brief. It will

be released in summer 1995. Call

Customer Services (301-457-4100)

then for ordering information. In

addition, “Housing of the Elderly,”

Statistical Brief 94-33, contains

information on topics such as the

chances of elderly householders

owning their home, the type of

structures they lived in, and the

odds of their lacking amenities such

as plumbing and telephones in their

homes. Customer Services can send

you a free copy.

Contacts:

Elderly population —

Frank Hobbs or 

Bonnie Damon

301-457-2378

Statistical Briefs —

Robert Bernstein

301-457-1221

This Brief, supported by funding

from the NIA, is one of a series that 

presents information of current

policy interest. It includes data from

censuses, surveys, and other

sources. Survey statistics in this

Brief are subject to sampling variability, as well as survey design

flaws, respondent classification errors, and data processing mistakes.

The Census Bureau has taken steps

to minimize errors, and analytical

statements have been tested and

meet statistical standards. However,

because of methodological differences, use caution when comparing

these data with data from other

sources.