U.s. DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Bureau of Labor Statistics

MAY 1968

Bulletin No.1543

# 2$$ J J&SfeSiiSry Gc 

• • ® l i b * # C l b i c J t / 

• • • • • • • • • • •

•••••••••••

W M W M fW W to il

• • • • • • • • • • •

• • • • • • • • • • •

• • • • • • • • • • •

• • • • • • • • • • •

i i N M i m i

• • • • • • • • • • •

• • •

• • •

• • •

• • •

• • •

• • •

• • •

• • •

• • •

• • •

• • • 

• • •

• • • 

• • • 

• • • 

• • • 

• • • 

• • •

• • •

• • • 

• • • 

• • • 

• • • 

• • • 

• • • 

• • • 

• • • 

• • • 

• • • 

• • • 

• • •

• • •

• • •

• • • 

• • •

• • •

• • •

• • •

• • •

• • •

• • •

• • •

• • •

• • •

• • •

• •

• • •

• • •

• • •

• • •

• • •

• • •

• •

• •

• •

• •

• •

• •

• •

• •

• •

• •

• •

• •

• •

• •

• •

• •

• •

Digitized for FRASER • •

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
-- -* m m m m m m * * : z # & ■& ^•^####^####'% < ' *••#•"* ' * * * ^ v * ***??.? * **#* #*•# •# # & 000000####### •••!•••••••#••••••••••••• •••••••••••••*•••••••••••••*••••••••••••??

*. m. m & t • • • % % m % 0 • %»##*#♦♦•• % •••••••••••• •

::::: :: : :: :: :: :: : :: : f ; *, •••••••• » -

::::::::::: ::::::::::::

«•••••••••••••*••••••••**

: :: :: :: : :: :: ::

► ••••

•••••••••••••

• •••-« *<*#*••••#

: ::::::::::::: ::::::::::::: <8 & # ® •* * S' * «* '''»<**» '„*■$*•*''*

WWWWWWWWWWWW^«WW*

::::::::::::: :::

**” ***’ !•«•« «••••••••••••*>

: :: :: :::::r :j ::::::« :n :i :::::::::::: __•••###♦• *

________.•«•••••>*-"•>•*

MAY 1968

BULLETIN NO. 1543

U.S. DEPARTMENT OP l a d u h

Willard Wirtz, Secretary

BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS

Arthur M. Ross, Commissioner

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office 

Washington, D.C. 20402 - Price 45 cents

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
PREFACE

The 1965-66 p rice advance, which brought the first threat of inflation in a 

decade, posed a cru cia l problem still faced by this country at the end of 1967. 

In P r ic e P e rs p e ctiv e , 1965-67 b a sic inform ation and an alyses are presen ted 

for policym akers as well as for all persons concerned with recent price trends 

and their im plications. Retail and w holesale p rice developm ents between 1965 

and 1967 are placed in perspective and the reasons for the price trends in the 

agricultural, industrial, and service sectors of the econom y are analyzed.

Detailed appendix and text tables are supplied for key W holesale P rice 

Indexes and Consum er P rice Indexes. The tables have been organized to show 

meaningful relationships among price index series. Special emphasis has been 

given to those series where important price m ovem ents have taken place since 

1964.

This bulletin was planned and prepared by Pearl Ravner W illiams under the 

general direction of Arnold E. Chase, Assistant C om m issioner of P rices and 

Living Conditions. Toshiko Nakayama perform ed much of the research, and 

Floyd Coyne was responsible for the appendix tables.

111

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
C O N T E N T S

Page

Chapter I. P r ic e s in P e r s p e c t i v e .................................................................................. 1

M ajor D e v e l o p m e n t s ......................................................................................................... 2

1967 T r e n d s ............................................................................................................................. 5

A L on ger P e r s p e c t i v e ...................................................................................................... 7

Chapter II. F a rm P ro d u cts and F ood P r i c e s ........................................................... 14

Supply and D e m a n d ............................................................................................................ 14

Rising Costs and the Farm -R etail S p r e a d ............................. 16

S p ecific P r i c e T r e n d s ...................................................................................................... 17

Livestock, meats, and p o u l t r y ........................................................................... 19

Milk and d airy p r o d u c t s ............................................................................................ 19

Wheat, flour, and b r e a d ........................................................................................ 20

Fruits and v e g e t a b l e s ................................................................. 20

F ood away fro m h o m e ............................................................................................... 22

Chapter III. C h arges fo r C on su m er S e r v i c e s ........................................................ 23

M ajor 1965-67 D e v e lo p m e n ts ................ 23

Service Industries: Labor-Intensive S e r v ic e s ................................................. 29

Demand T ren d s and P r i c e s ..................................................................................... 29

P r o d u c tiv ity ...................................................................................................................... 30

C o s t s ................................................................................................................................... 31

Interest, Insurance, Taxes, and R e n t..................................................................... 31

U tilities and P u blic T r a n s p o r t a t i o n ........................................................................ 33

Chapter IV. P r ic e s o f Industrial M aterials and P r o d u c t s .............................. 34

Underlying E c o n o m ic I n f l u e n c e s ............................................................................... 35

S p ecific P r i c e T r e n d s ...................................................................................................... 37

Steel M ill P r o d u c t s ...................................................................................................... 37

N on ferrou s M e t a l s ...................................................................................................... 44

M a c h in e r y ......................................................................................................................... 44

Lu m ber and W ood P r o d u c t s .................................................................................. 45

Hides, Leather, and F o o t w e a r ........................................................................... 45

Textiles and A p p a re l.......................... . .................................................................... 46

A u to m o b ile s ...................................................................................................................... 46

Oil and P e tro le u m P r o d u c t s .................................................................................. 47

C harts:

Frontispiece, W holesale and Consum er P rices, 1961-67 .......................... vi

1. W holesale and C on su m er P r ic e s , 1 9 6 4 -6 7 ..................................................... 2

2. W h olesale P r ic e s , 1 9 6 4 -6 7 ..................................................................................... 4

3. C on su m er P r ic e s , 1 9 6 4 -6 7 ..................................................................................... 4

4. W holesale Industrial P r ic e s by Stage of P r o c e s s in g , 1964-67 . . . . 6

5. F ood P r i c e s : F a rm , W holesale, and Retail, 1964-67 .......................... 14

6. Y e a r -t o - Y e a r Changes in C on su m er S e rv ice P r ic e s , 1 9 6 3 -6 7 . . . . 23

7. Finished C on su m er G oods, 1964-67 .................................................................. 35

IV

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
C O N T E N T S -C o n tin u e d

Page

T a bles:

1. W h olesale P r ic e Indexes fo r F a rm P ro d u cts, P r o c e s s e d

Foods, and Industrial Com m odities, Quarterly Percent

Changes, 1966-67 .................................................................................................. 9

2. C on su m er P r ic e Indexes fo r S elected C o m m o d itie s,

Q u arterly P e r c e n t Changes, 1966-67 ........................................................ 12

3. W h olesale P r ic e Indexes fo r F a rm P rod u cts and C on su m er

P rice Indexes for Foods, Annual Averages and Percent

Change, 1 9 6 4 -6 7 ...................................................................................................... 18

4. Selected C on sum er S erv ice P r ic e s , Annual A v e ra g e s and

P e r c e n t Change, 1964-67 .................................................................................. 24

5. Selected C on su m er S e rv ice P r ic e s , Q u arterly P e r c e n t

Changes, 1 9 6 6 - 6 7 . ; ............................................................................................... 26

6. W h olesale P r ic e Indexes fo r S elected Industrial C om m o d itie s,

Annual Averages and Percent Change, 1964-67.................................. 38

7. W h olesale P r ic e Indexes fo r S elected Industrial C om m o d itie s,

Q u a rterly P e r c e n t Changes, 1966-67 ........................................................ 40

8. C on su m er P r ic e Indexes fo r Selected Industrial C o m m o d itie s,

Annual Averages and Percent Change, 1964-67.................................. 43

Appendix Tables

Table A - l . C on su m er P r ic e Indexes by M ajor G rou ps, 1954-66 . . . . 51

Table A -2 . C on su m er P r ic e Indexes fo r F ood , 1 9 5 4 -6 6.............................. 52

Table A -3. Consumer P rice Indexes for All Com m odities and

for Key Durables, 1954-66 53

Table A -4. Consumer P rice Indexes for Nondurable Com m odities,

1954-66 .................................................................................................. 54

Table A -5. Consum er P rice Indexes for Services, 1954-66 55

Table A - 6. A ll-it e m s C on su m er P r ic e Indexes fo r 23 C ities,

Annual Averages and Percent Changes,

1954-66 ................................................................................. 56

Table A -7 . W h olesale P r ic e Indexes, by Stage of P r o c e s s in g ,

1954-66 ................................................................................................... 57

Table A - 8. W h olesale P r ic e Indexes fo r S elected F a rm P ro d u cts,

1954-66 ................................................................................................... 58

Table A -9. W holesale P rice Indexes for Selected P rocessed

F ood s, 1954-66 .................................................................................. 59

Table A - 10. W holesale P r ic e Indexes for Selected Industrial

C om m odities, 1954-66 .................................................................... 60

v

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
NDURABLE COMMODITIES

ABLE COMMODITIES

INDEX (1957-59=100)

115

110

105

100

130

125

120

115

110

105

1 0 0

1961

CONSUMER PRICES

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
CHAPTER I

Prices in Perspective

Although the current long-term 

econom ic expansion began early in 

1961, p r ic e s rem a in ed r e la tiv e ly 

stable until early 1965 when they 

turned upward. By the spring of 

1966, the Nation was faced with the 

first threat of inflation in a decade. 

The pause in econom ic activity in 

late 1966 and early 1967 lessened 

price pressures only m oderately. 

When econom ic activity accelerated 

again after m id -1967, upward p r e s ­

sures on prices began to intensify.

The problem of how to maintain 

full utilization of resou rces while 

restoring price stability which con ­

fronted policym akers in early 1966 

becam e even m ore acute at the end 

of 1967. M ajor potentials for inflation rem a in ed —high le v e ls of 

civilian and m ilitary spending and 

rising costs which, increasingly, 

w ere reflected in higher prices.

In 1967, the W h olesale P r ic e 

Index av era ged 5 1 /2 p e rce n t higher 

than in 1964, and the Consumer 

P r ic e Index 7 1 /2 percen t. O ver the 

3-year period, p rices advanced in 

response to varying combinations of 

demand, supply, and cost factors. 

Supply bottlenecks for certain farm 

products and industrial raw m aterials w ere the chief sources of upward push on p rices in 1965. A lthough spending in the private sector 

had been expanding rapidly for several years, available resou rces w ere 

sufficient to m eet overall demand.

3y late 1965, however, price adnces becam e m ore general when

demand pressu res intensified as 

stepped up m ilitary requirem ents w ere 

superim posed on spending in the p rivate sector.

In the fir s t half o f 1966, u se of m a n ­

power and industrial resou rces was approaching capacity, and cost-push as 

well as dem and-pull factors began to 

influence the price structure. Rising 

costs which had been absorbed in the 

previous few years of below -capacity 

operations w ere being passed on.

P rices of consum er services also 

began to rise faster, due in part to 

com petition fo r available labor. In 

addition, the tight money situation 

caused m ortgage interest rates to 

advance.

After m id -1966, tight money as 

well as government actions helped to 

reduce demand pressu res in the civ ilian sector and the pace of econom ic 

activity had m oderated by late 1966.

At the same time, som e of the earlier 

supply bottlenecks for farm products 

and industrial raw m aterials w ere 

resolved, and these prices declined. 

However, stronger evidence of "co stpush" pressures began to appear and 

wholesale prices of finished goods rose 

in spite of the slowdown in business 

activity in the first half of 1967.

When the econom y resum ed its expansion after m id -1967, farm and food 

prices w ere the m ajor exceptions to 

rising prices although they, too, rose 

sharply at yea r end. Again, as in 1965, 

som e significant increases w ere triggered by special situations such as the 

copper strike and the short supply of

1

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
raw cotton. Cost pressures, however, w ere a significantly stronger 

influence on prices than 2 years ago. 

Although demand in m ost industries 

was far from pressing against capacity, it was strong enough to perm it 

prices to be raised in response to 

higher costs.

Major Developments

Unlike the previous postwar e c o ­

nom ic expansions, the first 4 years 

of prosperity following the 1960-61 

r e c e s s io n represen ted a period of 

relative price stability. W holesale 

prices in 1964 w ere no higher than 

in I 960, and the r is e in co n s u m e r 

prices was held to an annual rate of 

slightly o v e r 1 percen t. Unit la b or 

costs showed no general increase 

over the 4-year period as productivity gains matched average wage advances. Unemployment rates w ere 

relatively high, and the rate of use 

of manufacturing capacity was r e latively low.

Although demand increased substantially after the 1960-61 r e c e s ­

sion, the econom y's capacity to p ro ­

duce was not overtaxed. M oreover, 

balanced growth among the different 

econom ic sectors prevented the development of production bottlenecks 

and manpower shortages which often 

stimulate wage and price increases-. 

Summarizing the situation, the Council of E con om ic A d v isers stated in 

January 1965 that "Sustained e c o ­

nom ic expansion during the past 4- 

yea rs was accom panied by a healthy 

balance among wages, p rices and 

p rod u ctiv ity . . . . The p e r io d was, e s ­

sentially, inflation fre e .” 1/

A year later, circum stances had 

changed significantly. In the spring 

of 1965, price increases resulting

Chart 1. Wholesale and Consumer Prices

1964 1965 1966 1967

from shortages of three basic co m ­

modities-pushed the price indexes 

up—farm ers had cut back hog produ ction drastically because of depressed 

1963-64 hog and pork prices, strikes 

at home and abroad as well as political 

difficulties in som e producing countries 

had created a copper shortage, and the 

drought that had destroyed Argentine 

herds resulted in a severe lim itation of 

the world supply of cattlehides and 

leather.

M ore basically, the step-up of our 

m ilitary effort in Viet Nam after several years of limited involvement not 

only created som e special imbalances 

but also caused a spurt in demand. The 

new layer of demand, im posed on an 

already prospering econom y, pushed 

p rice s up further. The late 1965 upturn in p rices for farm products, foods, 

and crude industrial m aterials continued into early 1966, and was join ed by 

substantial advances in charges for

j-^The Annual R eport of the Council of E co n o m ic A d v is e r s . 

U. S. G overn m en t Printing O ffice, Washington, D. C. P. 54.

January 1965,

2

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
consum er services as well as higher 

prices for many industrial products. 

For the first tim e in nearly a decade, 

the threat of inflation appeared in this 

country.

To counteract the inflationary p otential, m onetary authorities took 

steps to tighten the money supply in 

D ecem ber 1965, and the Federal 

Governm ent resorted to a variety of 

fiscal m easures the following year. 

Early in 1966, the Government r e ­

scinded the January 1 e x c is e tax r e ­

duction for autom obiles and telephone 

services, increased withholding rates 

for personal incom e taxes, speeded 

the collection of corporate taxes, and 

intensified efforts to apply the w ageprice guideposts to key wage and 

price decisions. Later in the year,

the investment tax credit and certain 

accelerated depreciation allowances 

w ere suspended. 2/

The growth in demand slowed, as 

can be seen from the following tabulation. C onsum er spending (in 

constant dollars) fell slightly in the 

second quarter of 1966 and, subsequently advanced at a much slow er 

pace than in 1965. Housing activity 

sank to a p o s t-W o r ld War II low, and 

the rate of growth in plant and equipment expenditures decreased substantially. Fears of inflation abated and 

late in the year concern began to develop over the effects of the econom ic 

slowdown. In N ovem b er 1966, m o n e ­

tary restrictions w ere eased and, the 

follow in g June, the 7 p e rce n t in v e stment tax credit was restored.

Personal Personal W holesale Consumer

Disposable Consumption P rice P rice

Income Expenditures Index Index

(1958 dollars)

1959 - 6 0 ............. 2. 2 2. 9 0. 1 1. 6

I 960 - 6 1 ............. 3. 1 2. 0 -0 .4 1. 1

1961 - 6 2 ............. 4. 7 4. 9 0. 3 1. 2

1962 - 6 3 ............. 3. 8 4 .4 -0. 3 1. 2

1963 - 6 4 ............. 7. 0 5. 8 0. 2 1. 3

1964 —6 5 ............. 6. 6 2. 0 1. 7

1965 - 6 6 ............. 5. 0 4. 9 3. 3 2. 9

1966 - 6 7 ............. 4. 3 2. 8 0. 2 2. 8

The National Income and Product Accounts of the United States, 1929-

1965, and Survey o f C u rrent B u s in e s s , January 1968. O ffice o f B u sin ess 

E conom ics, Department of C om m erce.

Although the slackening pace of the 

econom y no doubt had a moderating 

influence on p rices, the p rice impact 

in 1966 stemmed mainly from other 

factors. Most of the substantial price 

d e c r e a s e s w hich took p la ce after ea rly 

1966 resulted from the easing of supply

shortages for the same farm products 

and crude industrial m a te r ia ls —hogs, 

cattlehides, and c o p p e r —w hose p r ic e s 

had jumped upward earlier. No sim ­

ilar price decreases occurred in 

charges for consum er services which 

began to advance at the fastest pace

2/ A m ore com prehensive account of econom ic developments in 1966 may 

be found in "T h e E conom y in 1966: The E conom ic Setting" by Hyman L. 

Lewis in Monthly Labor Review, February 1967. (Reprint No. 2522)

3

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Chart 2 . Wholesale Prices

Index (1967-59 = 100)

1964 1965 1966 1967

since the Korean conflict period. 

Among industrial com m odities, 

w holesale prices of finished products 

continued upward throughout 1966 

and w ere reflected, in turn, in higher retail prices (tables 1 and 2).

Although rising incom e levels and 

growing consum er and m ilitary demand w ere important factors, the 

1965-67 price advance is not fully 

explainable by excessive demand 

pressing against productive capacity. 

The sharp 1965 to early 1966 price 

increase was triggered by supply 

bottlenecks for certain farm products 

and crude industrial m aterials. Despite such tem porary supply shortages, there was no genuine inflationary gap caused by continued lack 

of capacity to m eet the needs of 

expanding demand.

Nor w ere the p rice in creases in 

1965 and 1966 p rim a rily part of a 

"cost-pu sh " inflation sim ilar to that 

resulting from the 1955-57 investment boom. The large 1965 and 

early 1966 increases did not com e 

from those sectors of the econom y 

subject to concentrated wage and 

market power. Not until late 1966

did evidence of "cost-pu sh " pressu re 

begin to appear, as rising costs 

pushed w holesale prices of finished 

goods upward in spite of the slow ­

down in business activity. When the 

econom y resum ed its interrupted 

expansion in m id -1967 cost factors 

becam e increasingly important. P rice 

increases spread and becam e pervasive towards yearend. Although 

demand in m ost industries was far 

from pressing against capacity, it 

was strong enough to perm it prices 

to be raised in response to higher 

costs.

Although the magnitude of price 

rise varied among the different s e c ­

tors of the econom y, prices for all 

sectors averaged substantially higher in 1967 than in 1964 before the 

current upturn began. Charges for 

consum er services which advanced 11 

percent increased the most. Despite 

the decreases in late 1966 and in 1967, 

agriculturally-based prices w ere still 

sign ifica n tly above their 1964 le v e ls — 

reta il and w h o le sa le food 7 and 9 p e r ­

cent respectively, and farm products 

6 p ercen t. In the industrial s e cto r , 

w h o le sa le p r ic e s a v era ged 5 p e rce n t

Chart 3. Consumer Prices

4

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
higher in 1967 than in 1964, and retail 

p rices for m anufactured goods 4 1/2 

percent.

1967 Trends

P rice advances in 1967 w ere no 

doubt m od e ra te d by the lo s s of fo rw a rd 

momentum of the econom y in the first 

half of the year. At the same time, 

continuing high levels of civilian and 

m ilitary demand, rising production 

and marketing costs, attempts to 

maintain profit m argins, easing of 

credit restriction s, and a p sy ch ological clim ate conducive to wage and 

p rice in creases supplied a m arked 

upward impetus.

In e a rly su m m e r, the e co n o m y 

resum ed its interrunted expansion as 

the sharp cutback in inventory a ccu ­

mulation which had retarded industrial production in the first half of 

1967 cam e t6 a halt. Final demand 

advanced at about the sam e pace in 

the third quarter of 1967 as earlier 

in the year, but real output began to 

rise at an annual rate of 4 percent 

(from 2 percent the previous quarter 

and no gain in the first quarter).

Once m ore, industrial production, 

m an-hours worked, and interest rates 

moved upward

Throughout the year, price 

tren d s—p articu larly at the w h olesale l e v e l —w e r e a ffected stron gly by 

agricultural developments which 

w ere largely independent of the general course of business activity. The 

following tabulation shows the effects 

of farm products and food prices on 

the overall wholesale and consum er 

price le v e ls :

Sept. 1966 Dec. 1966 Mar. 1967 June 1967 Sept. 1967 

to to to to to

Dec. 1966 Mar. 1967 June 1967 Sept. 1967Dec. 1967

(In p ercen t)

W holesale P rice

In d e x .......................... - 0. 8 - 0. 2 0. 6 - 0. 1 0. 6

Farm products. . - 6. 3 - 2. 2 2. 8 -3. 9 0. 5

P rocessed foods 

and feed s . . . -2. 3 - 2. 0 1. 8 0. 1 - 1. 1

Industrial c o m ­

m odities . . . . . 0. 3 0. 5 0 0. 5 0. 8

nsumer P rice 

Index .......................... 0. 5 0. 3 0. 9 0. 9 0. 9

F o o d .......................... -0. 7 -0. 5 0. 8 0. 7 0. 3

Food at home. . - 1.2 - 1. 0 0. 7 0. 5 0

Nonfood com m od ­

ities .................... 0. 7 0. 1 1. 0 1. 0 1. 0

S e r v i c e s ................. 1. 4 0. 9 0. 9 1. 0 1. 1

Marked changes in supply w ere caused prices to decline in late 1966

chiefly responsible for the trend of 

farm and food prices in 1967. High 

1965-66 prices brought about the 

la r g e expansion in food p rodu ction and

and early 1967. Similarly, the spring 

1967 uptrend resulted from tem porarily limited supplies of livestock and 

fresh produce, and the third-quarter

b

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
downturn in farm products prices 

cam e from record-breaking crops. 

Again, expansion and curtailment of hog production played 

a significant role.

However, the drop in prices of farm 

products did not bring a com m ensurate 

decline in food prices either at w holesale or retail. W holesale farm p ro ­

ducts p r ic e s a v era ged 5 1 /2 p ercen t 

lower in 1967 than in 1966, but food 

prices w ere down about 1 percent at 

w h olesa le and -0. 3 p ercen t at the 

grocery store. Like other finished 

goods, p rocessed foods are m ore 

resistant to price reductions than to 

price increases and also are less r e ­

sponsive to the immediate supply and 

demand situation than crude foodstuffs.

A m ajor influence which caused 

consum er prices to continue rising 

throughout those periods in 1966 and 

1967 when wholesale prices turned 

down was consum er services, which 

constitute one-third of the Consumer 

P rice Index but are not represented 

in the W holesale P rice Index. Each 

m ajor type of se rv ice represented in 

the Consumer P rice Index—rent, 

household services, transportation, 

and m ed ica l c a r e —had in creased m o r e 

in 1966 than in any of the preceding 

5 y e a rs . In p a rticu la r, m ortg a g e 

interest rates, hospital charges, 

and physicians' fees had clim bed 

steeply.

Although con su m er s e r v ic e ch arges 

continued to advance substantially in 

1967, the pace was m ore m oderate 

than in the last half of 1966. Mortgage 

interest rates, in response to the 

easing money supply, declined during 

the first half of 1967. M edical care 

costs continued to increase m ore than

Chart 4 . W holesale In d u s tria l P r ic e s by S ta g e o f Processin g

other types of services, and hospital 

charges continued to rise faster than 

any other type o f m e d ica l c o s t —even 

though the pace slackened after early 

1967.

In the industrial s e c t o r of the e c o ­

nomy, both w holesale and retail prices 

of finished products continued to increa se although probably less than if 

business activity had not slowed in the 

fir s t half of 1967. Only p r ic e s of cru d e 

industrial m aterials fell appreciably, 

and this downtrend had begun before 

m id - 1966 as specific supply bottlenecks w ere alleviated. However, 

lessening demand pressu res in early 

1967 also played a part since m aterial 

prices are generally sensitive to the 

forces of supply and demand. When 

econom ic activity quickened in the 

third quarter of 1967, m aterials prices 

advanced —p a rticu la rly in term edia te 

m aterials which include steel and nonierrous m ill products as well as 

lum ber and other construction m aterials.

6

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
At the retail level, prices of 

com m odities began to increase 

at the same substantial pace as

consum er service charges, as 

can be seen from the following 

tabulations:

Dec. 1966 Mar. 1967 June 1967 Sept. 1967 

to to to to

Mar.

W"PT: Industrial co m m o d itie s . . . . 0.

Crude m a te ria ls. . .......................... -1.

Intermediate m aterials . 0 . 0 . . 0.

Finished goods:

Consum er nondurables . . . . 0.

Consum er durables. .................

P r o d u c e r s 1 g o o d s ....................... 0.

CPI: C o m m o d itie s, excep t food . . 0.

N o n d u r a b l e s ........................................ 0.

D urables ................................................. -0.

1967 June 1967 Sept. 1967 Dec. 1967 

(In p ercen t)

5 0 0. 5 0. 8

4 -0. 8 0. 1 1. 8

5 -0. 1 0. 4 0. 8

9 0. 8 0. 7 0

0 -0. 3 0. 4 1. 6

5 0. 5 0. 4 1. 6

1 1. 0 1. 0 1. 0

4 0. 8 1. 2 1. 0

2 1. 2 0. 7 1. 2

The continuing advance in w h o le sa le 

and retail prices of m ost finished 

goods during the business slowdown 

in late 1966 and the first half of 1967 

reflected the passing through of rising 

labor and other costs. Traditionally, 

p r ic e s o f p r o c e s s e d g o o d s —unlike those 

fo r m a te ria ls —exhibit c o n s id e r a b le 

inflexibility and, in particular, are 

highly resistant to downward price 

pressures. The cost structures of 

fabricating industries are m ore co m ­

plex than those of industries produ cing crude m aterials and involve numerous fa ctors and con d ition s—u n related to the demand and supply of raw 

m a t e r ia ls —w hich a r e difficult to 

change. 3/

As evidence of cost-push pressu res 

accumulated in 1966 and 1967 and 

spending—both m ilitary and c iv ilia n - 

remained strong, the Adm inistration 

p ro p o se d a 6 p e rce n t in c o m e -t a x

su rch a rg e , e ffe ctiv e on July 1, 1967. 

Enactment was still a matter of Congressional debate at the end of the 

year.

A Longer Perspective

In the twenty y e a rs sin ce 1947, 

w holesale prices have increased alm ost one-third and consum er prices 

one-half. All of the wholesale price 

rise and m ost of the retail increase 

occu rred during four periods: the 

years im m ediately after World War 

II, the K orean e m e rg e n cy , the a fte r - 

math of the 1955-57 investment 

boom , and since the step-up of our 

Viet Nam effort in 1965. Aside from 

these periods, consum er prices 

inched upward and w holesale p rices 

remained steady or edged downward.

The current p rice uptrend began, 

as in 1950, when overseas m ilitary

3/ A m ore detailed discussion of price inflexibility is available in "P rice 

Trends and the Business Cycle in Postwar Y ears” by Pearl C. Ravner in 

Monthly Labor Review, March 1962 (Reprint No. 2388).

7

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
involvement was superim posed 

upon an already prospering econom y. 

In 1950, h ow ever, this took p la ce 

le s s than a y ea r after the 1948 — 49 

recession while our heightened 

Viet Nam co m m itm e n t in 1965 — 

and the beginning of the current 

p r ic e upturn—c a m e a fter 3 y e a rs of 

econom ic expansion.

As can be seen from the following 

tabulation, the percent in creases since 

March 196s are considerably sm aller

than during the shorter period of the 

Korean em ergency; and wholesale 

price increases com pare favorably 

with those during the m id -1 9 5 0 fs. 4 / 

Only at the retail level does the 

current p rice rise exceed that of 

the m i d - l ^ O ’ s and, if the d iff e r ­

ence in duration of the two uptrends is c o n s id e re d , the 1956 —

57 rise was larger in term s o fa v e rage m onthly in c r e m e n t—0. 3 p e rce n t 

versus 0. 2- l / 2 percent

Months of price rise Percent Increase

CPI WPI CPI WPI

Current .................................... 17 8. 4 5. 4

M i d - 1 9 5 0 's .............................. ............. 19 33 5. 9 8. 5

Korean C o n flict.................... ............. 21 13 12. 3 19. 2

4 / The duration of the inflationary period was determined by the first and 

lasFm onth of the accelerated price upturn. Since consum er and wholesale 

p rice uptrends generally did not begin or end on the same month, the period 

varies. If the period used for the Korean em ergency is June 1950 to June 

1951, the co n su m e r p r ic e r is e w as 9 p e rce n t and the w h o le sa le r is e 15 p e r ­

cent. For the current period, March 1965 to D ecem ber 1967 is used for 

consum er prices and March 1965 to August 1966 for wholesale prices.

8

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
[Not seasonally adjusted]

Table 1. W h olesale P r ic e Indexes F o r F a rm P rod u cts, P r o c e s s e d F ood s,

And Industrial Com m odities

Quarterly Percent Changes

W holesale 

p rice indexes

1966 1967

D ec. 1965 

to

M arch

March

to

June

June

to

Sept.

Sept.

to

Dec.

Dec. 1966 

to

March

March

to

June

June

to

Sept.

Sept.

to

Dec.

All co m ­

m od ities . . 1. 2 0. 3 1. 0 - 0. 8 - 0. 2 0. 6 - 0. 1 0. 6

F arm products .................... 3. 7 -2. 4 4. 3 - 6. 3 - 2. 2 2. 8 -3. 9 0. 5

Fresh 

fruits and 

vegetables. 10. 3 - 2. 0 10. 7 - 8. 2 - 2. 9 16. 2 -19. 3 13. 9

G rains . . . 0. 8 4. 5 10. 2 -3. 0 - 1. 6 -3. 8 - 10. 9 - 0. 2

Wheat. . . -1. 4 8. 6 11. 2 -5. 4 - 1.0 -7. 2 -9. 3 1. 4

C orn . . . 1. 5 3. 8 11. 5 -1. 3 - 1. 8 - 2. 8 -13. 0 -1. 5

Livestock . 3. 6 -5. 0 - 0. 8 -10. 3 -0. 5 7. 7 -1. 3 -5. 7

Cattle. . . 12. 7 - 6. 8 - 1. 0 - 6. 7 1. 8 3. 0 4. 7 -4. 2

Steers . 4. 5 -7. 8 - 0. 2 -.3. 4 -0. 4 2. 9 6. 9 -3. 6

Hogs . . . 10. 6 -1. 4 - 0. 2 -17. 1 -5. 5 17. 4 - 12. 9 -9. 3

B arrows

and

gilts. . . -11. 5 0. 7 -2. 4 -14. 9 -7. 4 18. 6 -14. 1 -7. 8

Live pou ltry ............. 15. 7 -5. 3 - 8. 5 - 11. 8 17. 6 -5. 6 -14. 9 - 6. 4

B roilers

and

fryers . 22. 4 -7. 3 -5. 7 -23. 2 29. 7 - 6. 9 -12. 9 - 2. 2

Eggs . . , -0. 3 -23. 3 40. 8 -14. 8 -16. 7 -16. 3 22. 5 -2. 4

Fluid milk 4. 4 - 0. 1 11.4 - 1. 1 -4. 0 1. 9 2. 0 0. 5

Oilseeds . 4. 8 9. 5 0. 6 -2. 4 -3. 8 - 0. 2 - 8. 4 1. 4

Raw cotton -0. 3 0. 5 -26. 1 0. 2 0. 8 1. 4 3. 9 16. 4

P rocessed foods 

and feeds . . . 1. 6 - 0. 2 3. 1 - 2. 3 - 2. 0 1. 8 0. 1 - 1. 1

Cereals and 

bakery p ro ­

ducts . . . . 0. 9 1. 6 4. 3 - 0. 8 -0. 4 -0. 3 -0. 5 0. 3

Bread. . . . 1. 1 0. 4 6. 8 0. 2 - 0. 9 - 0. 4 0 0

Meats, 

poultry and 

f i s h ............. 2. 5 -3. 0 2. 1 -7. 0 - 2. 6 . 6. 5 0 3 -5. 0

9

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
[Not seasonally adjusted]

Table 1. W h olesale P r ic e Indexes fo r F a rm Products* P r o c e s s e d F o o d s,co n d .

and Industrial Com m odities

Q u a rte rly P e r c e n t Changes-—Continued

W holesale 

p rice indexes

1966 1967

D ec. 1965 

to

M arch

March

to

June

June 

1 to 

Sept.

Sept.

to

Dec.

Dec. 1966 

to

March

March

to

June

June

to

Sept.

Sept.

to

Dec.

P ro ce sse d 

foods — C on t’ d

M eats, o . . 0. 6 -3. 7 3. 0 - 6. 3 -4. 3 9. 1 1. 2 - 6. 0

Beef and 

v e a l. . . 9. 8 -5. 1 3. 6 -4. 2 - 1. 1 6. 2 4. 4 -4. 7

P o r k . . . -10. 4 -1. 4 4. 3 -9. 9 - 10. 2 -16. 4 -1. 9 -9. 6

P rocessed 

p o u ltry . . . 13. 8 - 1. 1 -4. 9 -13. 1 6. 6 -3. 9 -3. 7 -7. 5

Dairy p ro ­

ducts . . . . 3. 3 1. 3 6. 6 -1. 5 -1. 3 1. 2 0. 5 1. 1

Milk............. 2. 7 0. 6 4. 6 1. 5 -1 .4 2. 9 1. 0 0. 4

C h eese. . . 8. 1 0. 4 9. 0 - 6. 6 -3. 4 -0. 4 - 0. 2 2. 1

P rocessed 

fruits and 

vegetables. -0. 3 0. 1 - 1. 1 2. 0 -1. 5 2. 2 1. 3 4. 8

Canned 

fruits and 

ju ic e s . . . . -1. 3 0 - 6. 4 0. 2 0. 6 4. 7 2. 8 8. 1

Frozen 

fruits and 

ju ic e s . . . . - 2. 9 5. 1 - 2. 8 0. 4 -15. 1 -4. 5 0. 4 10. 7

Canned vegetable and 

ju ic e s . . . . 1. 1 0. 2 1. 7 4. 3 1. 6 2. 6 0. 5 2. 2

Frozen vegetables . . . 0 - 1. 6 1. 5 1. 6 - 6. 0 0. 8 0. 3 0. 8

Alcholic 

beverages . -0. 3 0 0 0. 4 0. 3 0. 3 0. 7 0. 2

Nonalcholic 

b e v e ra g e s. 0 1. 9 0. 9 0 0. 1 1. 4 0. 3 3. 6

Manufactured animal 

fe e d s . • . . 0. 8 3. 8 6. 6 - 0. 2 -5. 5 -1. 9 - 0. 7 - 1. 6

Industrial 

com m odities . 0. 8 0. 9 0. 3 0. 3 0. 5 0. 5 0. 5 0. 8

Crude

m a te ria ls . . 3. 9 - 0. 1 -3. 5 - 1. 2 -1.4 - 0. 8 0. 1 1. 8

10

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Table 1# W h olesale P r ic e Indexes fo r F a rm P ro d u cts, P r o c e s s e d F ood s, cond,

and Industrial Com m odities

Q u a rte rly P e r c e n t Changes —Continued

[Not seasonally adjusted]

W holesale 

price in1966 1967

Dec. 1965 

to

March

March

to

June

June

to

Sept.

Sept.

to

Dec.

Dec. 1 966 

to

March

March

to

June

June

to

Sept.

Sept.

to

Dec.

Industrial co m ­

m odities cont*d 

Interm ediate m a ­

te ria ls . . . 0. 7 1. o 0. 2 0 0.5 - 0.1 0.4 0. 8

Finished 

goods 

Consumer 

nondurables • . . 0. 4 O

00

0. 5 0. 1 0.9 0. 8 0.7 0

Consumer

durables 0. 1 0. 4 -0. 1 1.3 0 -0. 3 0.4 1. 6

P r o d u c e r s 1 

goods . . 0. 8 1. 0 0. 5 1. 7 0.5 0. 5 0.4 1. 6

11

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Table 2. Consumer P rice Indexes For Selected Com m odities

Quarterly Percent Changes

[Not seasonally adjusted]

Consumer 

P rice Indexes

1966 1967

Dec. 1965 

to

March

March

to

June

June

to

Sept.

Sept.

to

Dec.

Dec. 1966 

to

March

March

to

June

June

to

Sept.

Sept.

to

Dec.

A ll Items 0.9 0. 8 1.1 0.5 0. 3 0.9 0.9 0.9

Services . . . . 0.7 1. 6 1.2 1.4 0. 9 0.9 1.0 1.1

All co m ­

m odities . . . . 0.9 0. 6 0.9 0.1 -0. 1 0.9 0.9 0. 8

All co m ­

m odities 

le s s food. . . - 0.1 0. 8 0. 6 0.7 0. 1 1.0 1.0 1. 0

F o o d ............. 3.0 0 1. 5 - 0.7 -0. 5 0. 8 0. .7 0. 3

Food away, 

from home 1.1 1. 3 1. 5 1.4 1. 1 1. 1 1. 3 1. 2

Food at home. . 3.4 -0. 3 1. 5 - 1.2 -1. 0 0. 7 0. 5 0

M eats ................ 5.7 -2. 7 0. 5 - 3.2 -1. 2 2.4 1. 4 -1. 9

B e e f and Veal 4. 6 -1. 0 -0. 1 - 0.7 -0. 4 1. 2 2. 5 0. 2

P o r k ............. 7. 2 -5. 9 2. 0 - 9.1 -2. 4 6. 1 -0. 2 -6. 2

Chicken, 

frying. . . . 13. 6 -4. 1 -0. 2 - 9.2 1. 8 -3. 7 5. 4 -4.5

All dairy 

p r o d u c t s . . . 1. 9' 1. 4 5. 8 0.4 0. 7 0. 5 0. 9 0. 7

Milk,

grocery. . . 1. 7 0. 7 5. 8 0. 6 -1. 1 0. 5 1. 4 1. 1

C h e e s e . . . . 5. 6 3. 5 6. 0 1. 1 -0. 9 -1. 0 -0. 1 0. 4

Fruits and 

vegetables. . . 5. 8 3. 7 -4. 2 -2. 0 0. 8 4. 1 -3. 6 3. 5

Fresh fruits 

and vegetables. . . 9. 4 6. 8 -6. 6 -2. 9 2. 2 6. 8 -7. 2 3. 3

P rocessed 

fruits and 

vegetables. 0. 7 -0. 6 -0. 6 -0. 4 -1. 4 0 2. 3 3. 5

C ereals and 

bakery p roducts ............. 1. 2 1. 0 3. 2' 0. 3 -0. 2 -0. 3 0. 1 0

Breads 

white . . . . 2.4 1. 1 5. 2 -0. 3 -1. 3 -0. 1 -0. 7 0

E g g s ................ - 1. 0 -17. 9 25. 5 0. 1 -17. 2 -15. 3 14. 7 -2. 0

Nonalcholic

beverages -0 .2 1. 5 -0. 2 -0. 9 -0. 7 0 0. 1 -0. 1

12

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Table 2 ,C on su m er P r ic e Indexes F o r S elected C om m o d itie s —Continued

Quarterly Percent Changes

[Not seasonally adjusted]

Consumer 

P rice Indexes

1966 1967

Dec. 1965 

to

March

March

to

June

June

to

Sept.

Sept.

to

Dec.

D ec. 1 966 

to

March

March

to

June

June

to

Sept.

Sept.

to

Dec.

Durable C om ­

m odities |

- 0.4 0. 6 0. 1 0.4 - 0.2 1.2 0.7 1.2

New cars .... -1. 6 -0.3 -2. 5 4.4 - 1.4 - 0.4 - 0.7 5.4

Used c a r s • • • • -2. 4 2. 4 1. 6 - 4.9 1.5 5. 6 3.1 - 1.1

T ir e s , new* • • -0. 3 2. 2 0. 6 0 0.4 1. 2 2.4 3.0

Household

durables • - • • 0. 1 0. 5 0. 6 0.4 0.1 0. 2 0.4 0.7

A p p lia n ces • • -0. 2 -0. 4 0 - 0.1 - 0.5 -0. 2 0.1 0.5

T V s et s • • • • -0. 4 -0. 1 -0. 5 0.2 - 1.0 -1. 4 -0. 8 0. 6

Furniture and

bedding . . . ! 0. 8 1. 3 1. 0 1.4 0. 6 0. 7 0. 8 1. 2

F loor i

co v e r in g . . • 0 0. 1 0. 5 0.1 -0. 2 -0. 5 0. 5 0. 6

Nondurable

Com m odities

L ess F ood . . . 0. 2

00

•

0

0. 9 0. 8 0. 4 0. 8 1. 2 1. 0

Apparel less

footw ea r . . . -0. 3 0. 8 1. 3 1. 3 0. 2 1. 2 1. 3 1. 6

Women*s

and girls* 

M en’ s and

-0. 4 0. 8 1. 5 1. 7 0. 1 1. 4 1. 3 2. 3

boys* .......... -0. 3 1. 0 1. 0 1. 3 0. 1 1. 2 1. 2 1. 1

Footwear .... 1. 1 2. 5 1. 3 1. 3 1. 1 1. 0 0. 8 1. 2

Textile housefurnishings -0. 6 1. 1 1. 3 1. 4 0 0. 5 -0. 1 1. 6

Fuel oil and

coal ............... 0. 3 -1. 7 0. 4 2. 6 0. 8 -0. 5 1. 6 0. 7

Fuel oil #2 • • 0. 3 -1. 5 0. 1 2. 8 0. 8 -0. 4 1. 4 0. 7

Gasoline ..... 0. 4 0. 7 1. 7 0. 5 0. 5 1. 3 0. 9 -1. 4

Drugs and

prescriptions 0. 3 0. 2 -0. 1 -0. 2 -0. 3 -0. 3 0. 2 0. 2

T oilet goods • . 1 0. 6 . 0. 3 0. 3 0. 3 0. 3 0. 7 0. 8 0. 2

Tobacco

p rodu cts . . • 0. 2 1. 9 1. 2 0. 2 0 0 .4 4. 0 1. 8

A lcoholic

b e v e ra g e s • • 0. 4 0. 5 0. 4 0 0. 7 0. 3 1. 5 1. 0

1 3

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
CHAPTER II

Farm Product and Food Prices

Between the spring of 1965 and the 

fall of 1966, prices of farm products 

and food rose substantially. A runup 

in livestock and meat prices sparked 

the 1965 advance. Higher prices for 

meat substitutes soon followed and, 

in 1966, the increases spread throughout the agricultural sector. During 

th ese 18 m onths, the a v e ra g e g r o c e r y 

bill r o s e 8 -1 /2 p ercen t. (See table 1. ) 

Farm product and food prices 

began to decline in the fall of 1966, 

largely because of expanding liv estock production, and continued down 

in early 1967. After rising at m idyear both farm and food prices r e ­

sum ed their downtrend. In D ecem b er, 

they turned up sharply. (See table 2. )

Chart 5. Food Prices: Farm , Wholesale, and Retail

Index (1957-59= 100)

Despite the d ecreases which have 

taken place since the fall of 1966, 

prices averaged substantially higher 

during 1967 than before the 1965-66 

upturn—fa rm p rodu cts 6 p ercen t, 

w h o le sa le p r o c e s s e d food 9 p ercen t, 

and g r o c e r y food 7 p ercen t. It ap ­

pears unlikely that farm product and 

food p rices will soon return to the 

relatively low levels reached prior 

to their 1965-66 jump following a 6- 

year decline.

Supply and Demand

Supply and demand factors co m ­

bined in 1965 and 1966 to create a 

clim ate favorable to higher prices, 

although the largest increases w ere 

chiefly due to limitations of supply. 

Several years of declining livestock 

prices had caused farm ers to cut 

back production. Favorable farm 

alternatives to dairying and shortages 

of farm labor, as well as other developments, reduced 1966 m ilk produ ction to a 13-year low. Bad weather 

—unseasonable freezes and several 

years of sum m er drought—curtailed 

som e fruit and vegetable crops and 

made farm ers use costly feed instead 

of pasture for beef and dairy herds.

At the same time, demand increased substantially. Higher incom e 

levels enabled m ore people to buy 

m ore expensive foods, the Viet Nam 

buildup increased purchases by the 

A rm e d F o r c e s , and fa rm exports — 

pushed by such events as the threat 

of fam ine in India — continued to rise . 

Over the long-run, population growth

14

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
and rising incom es have increased 

consum er spending for food alm ost 

annually since the end of World War 

II. In 1966, spending fo r food (in 

constant dollars) slowed, but retail 

food prices advanced faster for, as 

in m ost years, the price fluctuations 

in 1965 and 1966 reflected changes in

Supply changes w ere also the chief 

determinants of the 1967 price trends. 

Expanding production caused the price 

drop between the autumn of 1966 and 

the spring of 1967; tem porarily cu rtailed supplies of livestock and vegetables triggered the subsequent price 

increases; and expanded hog and poulsupply m ore directly than changes in |try produ ction, record grain crops,

demand. 'and the flooding of the market by dePercent increase from previous year Food and beverage

as a percent

CPI: Food PCE: Food and bev. of total PCE

(1958 dollars)

i 9 6 0 .................................. 1.1 1. 5 25. 6

1961 .............................. 1 .2 1. 6 25. 5

1962 ............... 1. 0 2. 2 24. 8

1963 .................................. 1.4 1. 5 24. 1

1964 ...............____ 1.2 4. 1 23. 7

1965 ................ . . . 2. 3 4. 2 23. 2

1966 ............... 5. 0 2. 9 22. 8

1967 ..............._____ . . . . 0.9 2. 6 22. 7

The National Income and Product Accounts of the United States, 1929-1965 and 

Survey of Current Business, July 1967. Office of Business E conom ics, 

Department of Com m erce.

layed vegetable harvests accounted 

for the slide in farm product prices 

after July 1967. However, supplydemand considerations alone may not 

explain fullv the sharp 1965-66 u d -

rurn and Subsequent downturn. A 

recently published article P j makes 

the point that, in the market environment which exists for m ost farm 

com m odities, prices may overreact:

MIn fact, the upward m ovem en t 

of agricultural prices in much 

of 1966 may have reflected con ­

siderable speculation based

upon anticipated world food 

shortages in addition to the 

price increase resulting from 

a declining-supply, strongdemand interaction. Following 

this deduction a step further, 

to the 10 p e rce n t drop in fa rm 

prices from September 1966 

to April 1967, might lead one 

to conclude that m ost of the 

price softness of the past winter can be attributed to a 

counter-reaction from the 

sharp in creases during 1965 

and early 1966, once the world

5/ "The Impact of Farm P rices on Wholesale and Retail P rice L evels" by 

Gene L. Sw ackhom er. In Monthly R eview of the F e d e ra l R e s e r v e Bank of 

Kansas C ity, S e p te m b e r-O cto b e r 1967, page 9.

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
food demand issue matured in 

perspective. n

As in previous years, Government 

farm program s served as a counterweight to the free play of the forces 

of supply and demand. Although their 

exact impact on 1965-67 farm and 

food prices is difficult to assess, the 

r o le of G overn m en t p r o g r a m s —p r ic e 

supports, acreage controls, im port 

quotas, and purchases for export or 

for civilian and m ilitary u se— was 

co n s id e ra b le . In so m e in stan ces, 

attempts w ere made to curtail G overnment purchases for m ilitary and 

dom estic use when prices rose substantially and to expand them when 

prices fell. After the sharp decline 

in farm product prices in the fall of 

1966, actions w ere taken to raise 

m ilk support prices, to curtail im ­

ports of dairy products, and to r e ­

duce wheat acreage. __

O ther influences diminishing the 

com petitive nature of today*s a g ricultural price structure include the 

growth of the large, corporate farm 

and the vertical integration of som e 

important food-producing sectors. 

Together with the first stirrings of 

labor organization and m inim um - 

wage guarantees, this may make the 

agricultural sector increasingly suscep tib le to " c o s t - p u s h ’1 p r e s s u r e s 

generally associated only with manufacturing industries.

Rising Cost and the Farm-Retail

P rice Spread

When prices of bread and dairy 

products spurted upward in m id-1966, 

following the earlier rise in meat 

p rices, the U.S. Department of A g r iculture requested the Federal Trade

C om m ission to make a special analysis of the reasons for the higher bread 

and milk prices. The report to the 

House of Representatives stated: 6/

"In conclusion, this p relim inary review indicates that 

recent price increases in 

bread and m ilk may be attributed to the follow ing: (1)

Farm prices rose because of 

radically changed supplydem and conditions. In m ilk, 

where the greatest farm price 

increases occurred, farm 

prices had been severely depressed for over a decade.

In bread, the re ce n t r is e in 

wheat p rices reflected a sharp 

reversal in the supply-demand 

situation with respect to the 

1966 wheat crop. (2) Bread 

and m ilk p r o c e s s o r s as a group 

not only passed on the increases in ingredient costs 

but added to their own m argins 

as well. Part of these m argin 

increases reflect other cost 

increases while part may have 

added to profits which had p r e ­

viou sly been d ep ressed . (3) 

Because of the practice of 

taking a fixed percentage m a rgin, retailers tended to p yramid the price increases generated at the farm and p rocessor 

levels. "

The reasons pinpointed in the 

Federal Trade Com m ission statement 

can be applied m o r e gen era lly. In 

addition to supply and demand influences, rising costs have been a m ajor 

factor causing food prices to increase 

and keeping them from decreasing 

substantially when farm prices fell.

4 / E con om ic R eport on Milk and Bread P r ic e s , a rep ort by the F ederal 

Trade Com m ission, N ovem ber 1966, printed for use of the Com m ittee on 

G overn m en t O perations, H ouse of R ep resen ta tives, 89th C o n g re ss , p. 3.

16

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Costs of raw farm products account 

for only about 40 percent of the price 

of delivered foods; the rem ainder r e ­

flects costs of transportation, p r o ­

cessing, distribution, and marketing. 

Even in the years when farm product 

prices have declined, these costs 

have tended to rise and, in recent 

years, the increase has accelerated. 

Labor costs, which account for over 

40 percent of marketing charges, have 

risen substantially; prices of con ­

tainers and m ost other items bought 

by food processing and marketing 

firm s have gone up sharply; and 

freight rates, rents, and many other 

costs have also increased. M oreover, profits after taxes rose until 

1967 7/ and, along with cost increases, have been reflected in 

rising unit marketing charges to the 

consum er.

The phenomenal growth of a g ricultural productivity since the end 

of W orld War II has been a basic fa c ­

tor in maintaining price stability for 

farm products and in causing the 

price slide between 1958 and 1964. 

Productivity gains in the agricultural 

sector have outpaced those in nonfarm industries and have m ade farm 

prices m ore susceptible to downward 

pressu res than p rices in the nonagricultural industries.

Two other fa cto r s —p r o d u ce r c o m ­

petition and product p erish a b ility - 

have an important effect in making 

crude foodstuffs prices m ore subject 

to downward pressu res than p ro ­

cessed foods. Farm ers are m ore 

dispersed and generally do not control 

the m arket for their product. Many 

farm products cannot be stored p ro ­

fitably and must be sold when harvested, even if the price falls d ra stically. In con tra st, p r o c e s s in g

com panies, wholesale distributors, and 

retail food chains are much m ore 

highly organized, and the larger co m ­

panies can resist fluctuations caused by 

the immediate supply- and demandsituation. Furtherm ore, as processing 

is com pleted, many of the foods can be 

stored and this, in turn, perm its 

greater resistance to price reductions.

The impact of these forces is evidenced by the spread between farm 

product and food prices, both before 

and after the 1965-66 upturn. In 1964, 

farm product prices w ere approxim ately 

6 p e rce n t below their 1957-59 avera ge, 

but food p r ic e s w e r e 1 p e rce n t higher 

at w h olesa le and 5 p e rce n t in the g r o ­

cery store. Although rising farm prices 

narrowed the farm -retail spread in 

1965 and 1966, falling farm prices 

again widened the gap in 1967.

Specific P rice Trends

Because of the magnitude and rapidity of the p rice changes since 1965 for 

farm products and food, these com m odities have affected the overall price 

indexes beyond their relative im portance in each index. Farm products 

account fo r only 11 p e rce n t of the 

com m odities in the W holesale P rice 

Index, and p rocessed foods and feeds,

15 p ercen t. In the C on su m er P r ic e 

Index, "food at hom e" represents 

about 18 p e rce n t of the item s and 

"food away from hom e" another 4 1/2 

percent.

The amount of increase varies considerably among the various co m ­

m odities and between the wholesale 

and reta il le v e ls . (See table 3. )

Because of the sharp downturn since 

late 1966, som e 1967 prices are not 

only below 1966 but also low er than in 

1964. For "food away from home, "

]_/ Profits per dollar of sales by food and kindred product manufactures. 

Q u arterly Fin an cial R ep ort fo r M anufacturing C o r p o r a tio n s , F e d e ra l T rade 

Com m ission - Security Exchange Com m ission.

17

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Table 3. Wholesale P rice Indexes for Farm Products and P rocessed 

Foods, and Consumer P rice Indexes for Foods, 1964-67.

W holesale and consum er 

price indexes

Annual averages Percent change

1964 1965 1966 | 1967^ 1964-67

(1957-!!59 = 100)

W holesale price index. . . . . . . . . 100. 5 102. 5 105. 9 106. 1 5. 6

F a rm p rodu cts. . . 7 .................... 94. 3 98. 4 105. 6 99. 7 5. 7

L iv estock .................................... 85. 0 100. 5 110.0 101. 1 18. 9

P ou ltry ........................................ 82. 0 87. 2 91. 4 82. 2 0. 2

E g g s ............................................... 90. 8 93. 5' 107. 9 84. 3 -7. 2

M i l k ............................................... 102. 0 103. 5 117. 6 122. 0 19. 6

G rains ............................................ 94. 1 89. 6 97. 3 92. 2 -2. 0

W h e a t.......................................... 88. 7 75. 0 84. 8 79. 9 -9. 9

Fresh and dried fruits

and v e g e ta b le s ...................... 103. 2 101. 8 102. 5 101. 6 -1.J&

P r o c e s s e d food s ......................... 101. 0 105. 1 111.5 110. 3 9. 2

M e a ts ............................................ 89. 0 100. 8 109. 9 105. 5 18. 5

D airy produ cts ......................... 107. 8 108. 5 118. 5 122. 0 13. 2

Cereal and bakery products 107. 8 109. 0 115. 4 117. 1 8. 6

B read .......................................... 107. 9 108. 4 116. 5 120. 0 11. 2

C on su m er p r ic e i n d e x .................... 108. 1 109. 9 113. 1 116. 3 7. 6

Food away fro m h o m e .................... 115. 2 117. 8 123. 2 j 129. 6 12. 5

Food at h om e ....................................... 104. 7 107. 2 112. 6 112. 3 7. 3

M e a ts ................................................. 99. 4 106. 9 116. 8 113. 8 14. 5

P o u ltr y ............................................ 87. 3 90.3 95.6 ! 88. 4 1. 3

E g g s .................................................... 95. 0 92. 8 105. 7 88. 4 -6. 9

Dairy produ cts ........................ 104. 7 105. 0 111.8 116. 7 11. 5

M i l k ............................................... 103. 3 102. 8 109. 4 113. 8 10. 2

C h eese .......................................... 113. 4 116. 6 130. 6 136. 3 20. 2

Cereal and bakery products . 109. 6 111. 2 115. 8 118. 5 8. 1

Bread ............................................ 113. 3 114. 7 121. 7 123. 8 9. 3

Fresh fruits and vegetables . 119. 2 121. 7 123. 9 124. 3 4. 3

■^Most of the d e c r e a s e in wheat and grain p r ic e s in 1965 resu lted fro m a 

change in the method of com pensating farm ers embodied in legislation 

w hich b e ca m e e ffe ctiv e on July 1, 1964.

18

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
which includes a large s e rv ic e c o m ­

ponent, the p r ic e uptrend —alw ays 

co n s id e r a b le — intensified.

Livestock, Meats, and Poultry. 

Just as falling cattle and hog prices 

w ere m ajor factors in depressing 

agricultural prices prior to 1964, 

rising livestock prices w ere largely 

responsible for the farm product and 

food price increases during the next 

2 y e a rs. The 1965 to ea rly 1966 runup in livestock and meat p rices, as 

w ell as the subsequent decline in late 

1966, cam e largely from changes in 

the supply of hogs and pork. Many 

farm ers, discouraged by the low 

prices they had been receiving for 

several years, had cut back their 

1964-65 pig production. As hog and 

pork prices skyrocketed in 1965, hog 

r a is e r s boosted fa rro w in g s by 10 

percent in the spring of 1966 and, 

when these animals w ere marketed in 

the fall, hog and pork prices dropped 

drastically.

The late 1966 downtrend continued 

into 1967 for hog and pork prices 

which, after rising substantially in 

the second quarter, fell after m idyear with expanding pig production.

In con trast, cattle and b e e f p r ic e s 

advanced substantially despite increased cattle production and turned 

down less than seasonally late in the 

year.

P r ic e s for poultry follow ed a 

somewhat sim ilar pattern, rising and 

falling with those for red meats, p a rticularly pork. Many consum ers, 

discouraged by high meat prices, 

turned to the lower priced poultry as 

a substitute. Although b ro ile r p r o ­

duction increased considerably m ore 

in 1965 and in 1966 than during the 

p re v io u s 3 y e a r s , the shift in demand 

was sufficient to cause poultry prices 

to trend sharply upward through the 

spring of 1966. By the end of 1966, 

however, both wholesale and retail 

prices of poultry had dropped substantially, and, after rising early in

1967, wholesale poultry prices slid 

downward th ereafter. In 1967, p o u ltry prices averaged w ell below their 

1966 le v e l —the highest sin ce I960. 

Throughout the 1960*s, poultry prices 

have been m arkedly low er than in the 

1950*8.

M ilk and D airy P r o d u c t s . A s m ilk 

production in 1966 fell to the lowest 

point in 1 3 y e a r s , the p r ic e s fa r m e r s 

received jumped upward, equaling 

their 1948 record high. The number 

of m ilk cow s fe ll 6 p e rce n t in 1965 

and another 5 p e rce n t in 1966, c o m ­

pared with the a v e ra g e 2 1 /4 p e rce n t 

annual downtrend since 1950, as high 

prices for beef cattle stimulated much 

sharper than usual liquidation of cow 

h erds. In addition, the cum ulative 

effects of the 5-year drought in the 

Northeastern States and favorable 

farm alternatives to dairying helped 

to reduce milk production as well as 

to raise costs of dairy farming. 

Increasing shortages of labor w ere 

reported as opportunities for offfarm employment attracted low-paid 

farm w orkers, and as m ore young 

men w ere inducted into m ilitary 

service. M oreover, the long-term 

trend toward fewer and larger dairy 

farm s intensified. The number of 

d airy fa rm s fe ll about 10 p ercen t in 

1965 and another 10 p e rce n t in 1966.

At the same time, total dom estic 

consumption of fluid milk and dairy 

products continued to rise. M ilitary 

use expanded greatly between 1964 

and 1966, and consum ption for school 

lunch and other special program s also 

increased. As a result of the changed 

supply-demand situation, farm prices 

for m ilk advanced steadily after m id1965. When support p rices w ere 

raised in m id -1966 to encourage dairy 

farming, milk p rices spurted upward.

Wholesale milk prices turned down 

in the fall of 1966, and retail prices 

decreased slightly in early 1967. Since 

the spring, however, both wholesale 

and retail milk p rices have been rising

1 9

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
and, in 1967, averaged considerably 

above th eir a lre a d y high 1966 le v e ls — 

fo r a total r is e of o v e r 10 p e rce n t 

since 1964. Milk prices at the farm 

le v e l jum ped 20 p e rce n t ov e r the 3 

years.

P rices of manufactured dairy p ro ­

ducts, such as cheese and butter, 

rose m ore steeply than milk used for 

drinking. In the expectation of better 

returns, an increasing proportion of 

m ilk was diverted to the manufacture 

of these products. The higher prices, 

however, discouraged consum er demand at the same time that larger 

supplies w e r e being generated. In 

consequence, prices of manufactured 

dairy products began to decline and 

continued down through m ost of 1967; 

w holesale price of butter averaged 

the sam e as in 1966 and cheese lower 

than in 1966. Nonetheless, the la rg ­

est increases in both wholesale and 

retail dairy product prices since 1964 

have been in these two p rodu cts — 

c h e e s e 20 p e rce n t and butter 13 p e r ­

cent.

Wheat, F lou r, and B r e a d . F o r the 

first time since the buildup in grain 

surpluses began a dozen years ago, 

a tight supply situation for wheat 

developed in 1966. Government 

holdings dropped to the lowest level 

in 1 3 y e a rs w hile export dem and, 

both com m ercial and aid shipments, 

skyrocketed. Bad weather, which 

damaged the Midwest crop, caused 

prospects for 1966 wheat production 

to appear poor at the sam e tim e that 

pressu res for foreign aid intensified. 

As a result, speculative buying drove 

wheat p r ice s upward by 20 percen t 

between April and September. However, im proved crop prospects later 

in the year for both the United States 

and other m ajor wheat producing 

countries caused prices to slide 

downward. Nonetheless, wholesale 

p r ic e s fo r wheat ended the yea r 13 

percent higher than a year earlier.

Although the 1966 crop equaled the

above-averaged 1965 wheat p rod u ction, the totail U. S. wheat supply was 

the sm allest since 1952 because of 

the very low level of Government 

stocks. When it becam e evident that 

additional supplies w ere needed to 

m eet dom estic and foreign demand, 

acreage allotments for the 1967 wheat 

crop w ere increased by one-third.

Higher wheat prices w ere transform ed quickly into higher prices for 

flour and bread. W holesale bread 

p r ic e s advanced about 9 p e rce n t in 

1966 after 4 years of relative stability. At retail, the long-term uptrend in bread prices, m oderate 

sin ce I960, a c c e le r a te d to 8 1 / 2 

percent, the largest annual rise since 

the 9 1 /2 p e rce n t jum p during the 

K orean-w ar year of 1951. Although 

higher wheat and flour p rices spurred 

the increase in bread prices, rising 

prices for other ingredients such as 

milk, eggs, and sugar played a part. 

Additional important factors w ere 

higher costs for labor, transportation, 

and marketing as well as attempts to 

p r e s e r v e or t;o im p ro v e p rofit 

margins.

R ecord-breaking crops caused 

grain p rices, including corn and 

w h e a t , to drop in late 1966 

and the steep slide continued throughout m ost of 1967. Bread prices also 

eased somewhat both at wholesale 

and retail, but the drop was too slight 

to bring them below their 1966 levels. 

In 1967, p r ic e s of bread w e re 11 p e r ­

cent higher at w h o le sa le and 9 p e rce n t 

higher at retail than in 1964.

Fruits and V egetables. In recen t 

years, the rise in retail prices of 

fru its and vegeta b les —both at the 

fresh and p rocessed le v e ls—has exceeded to a m arked extent the w h olesale increases. F resh produce prices 

in 1966 w ere 24 percent above their 

1957-59 average at retail but only 

2 1 /2 p e rce n t higher at w h olesa le. 

P rocessed fruit and vegetable prices 

w e r e 10 p e rce n t higher than their

2 0

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
1957-59 average at retail, com pared 

with 5 p e rce n t at w h olesa le.

Fresh produce prices clim bed 

sharply in 1964. During the next 2 

years, retail prices continued m od erately upward, but wholesale prices 

fluctuated slightly below their high 

1964 level. Unfavorable weather in 

the sprin g of 1965 and through m uch o± 

1966 disturbed planting and harvesting 

schedules and kept produce prices 

high during both y e a rs . In addition, 

growing consum er demand for fresh 

fruits and vegetables as well as rising 

costs for equipment, fertilizers, and 

labor helped push prices upward.

In 1967, unfavorable w eather and 

delayed maturing of late spring crops 

disrupted harvesting schedules and 

caused fresh produce prices to rise 

in the second quarter of the year. Although the in crea se was just a little 

m ore than seasonal at the retail level, 

the w h o le sa le r is e was steep. In the 

third quarter, however, the delayed 

harvests of vegetables flooded the 

m arket and caused prices to drop 

somewhat m ore than they had risen 

the previous quarter. Wholesale 

prices during the year averaged close 

to the levels prevailing since 1964 

while retail prices continued their 

m oderate uptrend.

Important production changes r e ­

sulted from the termination at the end 

of 1964 of Public Law 78 which had 

authorized the adm ission of Mexican 

contract w orkers to perform seasonal 

a g ricu ltu ra l w ork. In 1964, the h a r ­

vesting of many crops such as lettuce, 

cantaloupes, tom atoes, cucum bers, 

citrus fruits, and straw berries was

alm ost entirely dependent upon foreign 

w orkers. By 1966, many of these 

crops were harvested with the aid of 

only a sm all number of foreign w ork ­

e r s — 25,000 in 11 States, co m p a re d 

with 200, 000 in 29 States 2 y e a rs 

earlier. About 82 percent of the work 

involved in cultivating and harvesting lem ons and 38 percen t of w ork on 

oranges had been perform ed by fo r ­

eigners in 1964. From A pril 1965 

through early 1967, no foreign la ­

borers w ere used, but in the spring of 

1967 Florida citrus grow ers w ere 

permitted to hire foreign w orkers to 

avoid crop losses. .§/

Intensified re cru itm e n t of U. S. 

w o rk e r s and h igher w ages have helped 

fill the gap left by foreign agricultural 

w o rk e r s . F a rm w ages r o s e 5 p e rce n t 

in 1965 and 8 p e rce n t in 1966, c o m ­

pared with an average annual increase 

of 2 1 /2 p e rce n t betw een I960 and 

1964.1/

In addition, the end of the Mb r a - 

ce ro " program has hastened m echanization. In fact, in c r e a s e d m e ch a n ization and other technological changes 

have caused agricultural productivity 

to rise rapidly, particularly for potatoes and vegetables used for canning 

or freezing. For example, although 

only one-fourth of the tomato crop 

produced for the processin g market 

in 1965 was harvested by m achines, 

about 70 or 80 percen t was harvested 

by machine in 1966. M an-hours per 

ton of tom atoes w e r e cut fro m 7. 2 to 

1. 5, and o v e ra ll c o s t was red u ced 

about 40 p ercen t. -1-27 S cientists and 

engineers are continuing efforts to 

develop m achinery and techniques for

8/ Farm Labor Developm ents. January 1965, July 1966, January 1967, 

and August-Septem ber 19o7 issues. Manpower Administration, Bureau of 

E m ploym en t Security, U„ S. D epartm ent of L a bor, W ashington, D. C.

9/ E con om ic R eport of the President, January 1967. Council of E con om ic 

A dvisers. Table B-27, p. 245.

JLQ/ W eekly D igest, F eb ru a ry 4, 1967. A m e r ic a n Institute of Food 

D istribution. New York, N. Y.

2 1

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
cultivating and harvesting other crops, 

including iruits and vegetables d estined for the fresh market.

From time to time, reports have 

appeared of labor shortage or of 

difficulties encountered in harvesting 

fruits and vegetables. Generally 

these problem s stem m ed from the 

distortions in planting and growing 

seasons caused by adverse weather 

conditions which changed harvesting 

schedules sufficiently to cause unfo r e s e e n overla p p in g. In e m e r g e n c y 

situations-w here labor was needed 

to avert serious crop losses, and 

U. S. w o rk e r s w e r e not a v a ila b le —the 

U. S. D epartm ent of L abor has p e r ­

mitted the use of foreign labor.

Food Away from Home

For m eals and snacKs away from 

hom e, the 4 1 / 2 —p e rce n t p r ic e a d ­

vance in 1966 was m ore than double 

that of other recent years, and the 

largest since 1953 (the year these 

figures w ere first com piled). However, p rice s ro se a m o re substantial 

5 p e rce n t in 1967 even though the co st 

of food did not increase.

In 1965 and 1966, a m a jo r cau se 

of higher restaurant m eal p rices was

rising food costs. About 44 percent 

of restaurant revenue is spent on 

food, and m eats account for about 38 

percent of food costs. )U Other 

costs also m oved up substantially, 

such as wages, equipment, taxes, 

and rent. Shortages of skilled labor 

plus the coverage of restaurant 

w orkers for the first time by the 

minimum wage and overtim e p rov isions of the Fair Labor Standards 

Act, effective February 1967, con ­

tinued to push up labor costs which 

account fo r about 30 p ercen t of all 

restaurant expenses. The impact 

of rising costs for items other than 

food plus the attempt to widen retail 

profit m argins was largely resp on sible for the continuing rapid rise in 

restaurant p rices in 1967.

In addition, higher restau ran t 

prices reflected growing patronage. 

Consumer spending for restaurant 

m eals is closely related to general 

econom ic prosperity and, beginning 

in 1964, rose substantially m ore in 

real term s than at any time since the 

K orean e m e rg e n cy . In fact, the 1964 

and 1966 in c r e a s e s of 5. 7 p e rce n t 

each in spending on purchased food 

and beverages (in constant dollars) 

exceeded the 1951 Korean peak adva n ce of 5. 3 percent.

11/ W ashington R e p o r t , 

A s s o c iation. W a shington,

January 23, 

D. C.

1967. National Restaurant

2 2

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
CHAPTER III

Charges For Consumer Services

A fter in c r e a s in g about 2 p e rce n t 

annually early in this decade, charges 

for consum er services have been 

rising faster each year since 1964, 

and w e r e a lm o s t 11 p e rce n t higher 

in 1967 than they w e re 3 y e a rs 

e a r lie r . (See table 4. ) During the 

same period, retail food prices 

r o s e 8 p e rce n t and reta il p r ic e s fo r 

nonfood co m m od ities in crea sed 4-1/2 

percent.

The upward trend in service 

p rices is a lon g-term phenomenon. 

Service charges have moved up annually since 1935, the first year for 

which these figures are available. 

During the 1950*s, the increase averaged 3-1/2 percent annually as 

consum er demand shifted to se rv ­

ices when the needs for com m od ities w e r e m et after W orld War II. In 

the 1960*s , however, the proportion 

of all consum er spending allocated to 

services has held steady, although 

the amount spent (in constant dollars) 

has risen substantially.

In 1966, p r ic e in c r e a s e s w e re substantial and widespread, accelerating 

as the year advanced. Although consum er service charges increased rapidly in 1967, the rate was m ore m oderate than during the la st half o f 1966. 

(See table 5. ) N o n eth eless, co n s u m e r 

services averaged 4-1/2 percent 

higher in 1967 than a year ea rlier, 

the largest rate of rise since 1953.

M ajor 1965-67 Developments

The service component of the Consum er P rice Index is a heterogeneous

Chart 6. Year-to-Year Changes in Consumer Service Prices

(Percent Changes in Annual Averages)

Percent

10 1—

All Services Household Services Transportation Services Medical Care Services Other Services

K O r

62 63 64 65 66

63 64 65 66 67

62 63 64 65 66

63 64 65 66 67

62 63 64 65 66

63 64 65 66 67

62 63 64 65 66

63 64 65 66 67

62 63 64 65 66

63 64 65 66 67

62 63 64 65 66

63 64 65 66 67

23

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Table 4. Selected C on su m er S e rv ice Prices,, 1964—67

[1957*59=100]

Consumer p rice indexes

Annual averages Percent

change

1964 1965 1966 1967 1964-67

A ll s e r v i c e s .......................... # . 115. 2 117. 8 122. 3 127. 7 10. 9

Rent........................................................... 107. 8 108. 9 110. 4 112. 4 4. 3

Transportation s e r v i c e s ............. 115. 0 119. 3 1 24. 3 128. 4 11. 7

Auto r e p a i r s ................................. 110. 6 112. 6 114. 7 119. 2 7. 8

Auto in s u r a n c e .......................... 119. 2 130. 5 139. 9 143. 8 20. 6

Registration and licen se fees 105. 5 105. 8 115. 7 119. 5 13. 3

P arking and ga ra ge rent . . . 100. 5 102. 2 103. 3 106. 9 6. 4

L o ca l t r a n s it ................................. 122. 8 125. 4 130. 9 140. 2 14. 2

Railroad fare, coach ................ 104. 7 105. 0 104. 9 105. 5 0. 8

A ir lin e f a r e s ................................. 100. 0 100. 5 100. 6 100. 8 0. 8

Bus fares, intercity ............. 101. 2 103. 6 106. 3 110. 6 9. 3

Medical care s e r v i c e s ................ 123. 2 127. 1 133. 9 145. 6 18. 2

P h y s ic ia n s 1 f e e s .......................... 117. 3 121. 5 128. 5 137. 6 17. 3

D en tists1 f e e s ............................. 114. 0 117. 6 121. 4 127. 5 11. 8

E ye exam ination & 

glasses .......................................... 110. 7 113. 0 116. 1 121. 8 10. 0

Hospital daily r a t e s ................ 144. 9 153. 3 168. 0 200. 1 38. 1

O perating ro o m ch a rges . . . 101. 9 106. 4 113. 7 128. 4 26. 0

Household se rv ice s .......................... 114. 8 117. 0 121. 5 127. 0 10. 6

M ortgage in terest rates. . . . 100. 1 100. 5 106. 9 112. 0 11. 9

Property taxes ............................. 101. 4 105. 5 108.9 115. 3 13. 7

P r o p e r ty in s u ra n ce .................... 114. 4 122. 2 128. 8 135. 4 18. 4

H om e m aintenance & r e p a irs 101. 5 104. 3 109. 9 116. 7 15. 0

G a s .................................................... 112. 8 113. 1 113.8 113. 6 0. 7

E le ctricity ..................................... 102. 5 102. 0 102. 0 102. 9 0. 4

Telephone ....................................... 104. 5 103. 0 100. 9 102. 2 -2. 2

Dom estic s e r v ic e ....................... 123. 5 129. 8 136. 6 147. 8 19. 7

Baby s i t t e r s ................................. 100. 1 103. 9 108. 6 115. 6 15. 5

Day ca re .......................................... 101. 0 103. 6 109. 8 116. 7 15. 5

Laundry, f l a t w o r k .................... 101. 4 105. 5 112. 5 121. 7 20. 0

Postal charges ............................. 135. 8 136. 4 137. 6 141. 5 4. 2

Other serv ices .................................... 118. 5 121. 8 126. 5 131. 5 11. 0

Laundry, m e n ’ s shirts .... 100. 6 103. 0 107. 4 113. 0 12. 3

D ry c l e a n i n g ................................. 109. 0 111. 2 115. 6 120. 7 10. 7

Tailoring charges ....................... 100. 0 100. 9 104. 8 110. 4 10. 4

Shoe r e p a i r s ................................. 116. 4 117. 1 117. 8 118. 1 1. 5

Men's haircuts ............................. 117. 7 122. 1 129. 5 136. 1 15. 6

Beauty shop.................................... 113. 0 115. 7 119. 6 124. 3 10. 0

24

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
T able 4. S elected C on su m er S e rv ice P r ic e s , 1964—67 — Continued

[1957-59=100]

Consumer price indexes

Annual averages Percent

change

1964 1965 1966 1967 1964-67

Other s e r v ic e s —Continued

Movie adm issions ....................... 135. 5 146. 4 157. 3 169. 2 24. 9

Bowling f e e s ................................. 99. 1 99. 3 100. 7 103. 9 4. 8

Film developing .......................... 101. 2 103. 1 104. 4 106. 4 5. 1

Funeral s e r v ic e s ....................... 100. 2 101. 4 103. 4 106. 1 5. 9

Bank service c h a r g e s ............. 100. 7 100. 8 101. 5 104. 0 3. 3

Legal s e r v i c e s .............................. 104. 6 110.4 113. 9 119. 5 14. 2

25

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Table 5# S elected C on su m er S e rv ice P r ic e s

Quarterly Percent Changes

[Not seasonally adjusted]

Consum er 

P rice Indexes

1966 1967

Dec. 1965 

to

March

March

to

June

June

to

Sept.

Sept.

to

Dec.

Dec. 1966 

to

March

March

to

June

June

to

Sept.

Sept.

to

Dec.

A ll s e r v ic e s • • • 0. 7 1. 6 1. 2 1. 4 0. 9 0. 9 1. o 1. 1

R e n t .................... 0.4 0. 3 0. 5 0. 5 0. 4 0. 4 0. 5 0. 6

Transportation 

s e r v ic e s .......... 1. 1 0. 5 1. 9 0. 8 0. 7 0. 5 0. 6 1. 2

Auto repairs • 0 0. 5 0. 9 1. 0 1. 5 0. 8 1. 0 0. 9

Auto insurance 1. 3 0. 9 1. 6 0. 6 0‘ 5 0. 2 0. 8 0. 4

Registration 

and license 

f e e s ............... 10. 1 0. 2 0 0 2. ] 0. 7 0 0

Parking and 

garage r e n t • 0. 3 -0. 2 0. 1 0. 9 2. 0 0. 1 1. 4 1. 1

Local transit • 0. 1 0 8. 9 0. 1 0. 7 0. 7 0. 9 2. 1

T a xica b s • • • • — — — - - - ___ - - - — - - -

Railroad fare, 

coach .......... -0. 1 0 0 0 0. 2 0 0. 3 1. 5

A irlin e fares • 0. 1 -0. 2 0 -0. 1 0. 1 0. 3 0 0. 2

Bus fares, 

in te rcity • • • 1. 3 0. 3 0. 4 0. 2 2. 6 1. 5 0. 2 -0. 3

M edical care 

services . . . . 1. 5 1. 7 2. 4 2. 3 2. 5 1. 6 1. 9 1. 6

P h ysicians 1

f e e s ............... 1. 8 2. 0 2. 2 1. 6 2. 0 1. 3 1. 5 1. 1

D en tists1 fees 0. 6 1. 2 1. 6 1. 2 1. 2 0. 9 1. 5 1. 5

Eye exam ination and eyeglasses . . . . 0. 4 1. 0 1. 2 1. 3 1. 7 0. 9 0. 9 0. 7

Hospital daily 

rates .......... 2. 4 2. 1 5. 1 6. 0 6. 1 3. 0 2. 0 3. 6

Operating 

room charges 2. 1 1. 3 2. 5 3. 1 4. 5 3. 5 2. 5 1. 4

Household serv - 

ic e s . ............... 0. 1 2. 7 1. 1 1. 5 0. 6 0. 9 1. 1 0. 8

Mortgage 

interest rates 0. 7 6. 0 2. 1 3. 1 -0. 5 -1. 2 0 .4 0. 5

P rop erty taxes 0. 7 1. 1 1. 2 0. 5 2. 4 2. 0 1. 2 0. 8

26

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Table 5. Selected C onsum er S ervice P r ic e s —Continued

Quarterly Percent Changes

[Not seasonally adjusted]

Consum er 

P rice Indexes

1966 1967

Dec. 1965 

to

March

March

to

June

June

to

Sept.

Sept.

to

Dec.

Dec. 1966 

to

March

March

to

June

June

to

Sept.

Sept.

to

Dec.

Household servic e s —Cont*d

Property insu ran ce • • • • 1. o 1. 7 1. 6 0. 4 0. 7 3. 1 0. 7 0. 4

Home m aintenance and 

re p a ir s . . . 1. 2 2. 0 1. 9 1. 5 1. 1 1. 5 1. 8 1. 2

0. 4 -0. 4 0. 2 -0. 5 0. 4 -0. 3 0. 2 -0. 1

E le c tr ic ity . . . 0 0. 1 -0. 2 0. 2 0. 4 0. 1 1. 1 -0. 3

Telephone . . . -6. 3 6. 6 0. 1 0 -0. 2 0 0. 1 -1. 1

Dom estic 

service . . . . 1. 7 0. 7 1. 9 2. 2 2. 8 1. 5 1. 0 3. 4

Baby sitters • • 1. 2 1. 2 0. 2 1. 9 2. 2 1. 6 1. 7 1. 6

Day care . . . . 0 .4 2. 8 1. 2 2. 3 1. 0 1. 4 1. 1 1. 4

Laundry, flatw o r k ............. 1. 6 1. 8 2. 3 3. 2 1. 9 1. 8 0. 1 1. 6

Postage 

charges . . . . 0 1. 3 0 0 2. 6 0 0 0

Other services . 1. 5 1. 1 0. 9 1. 1 0. 6 1. 2 0. 8 1. 4

Laundry, 

m en's shirts 1. 1 0. 8 0. 8 3. 4 0. 6 0. 8 0. 5 0. 6

Dry cleaning . 1. 0 1. 4 1. 5 2. 1 0. 3 1. 2 0 0. 8

Tailoring 

charges . . . . 1. 0 2. 9 1. 0 0. 9 0. 4 1. 9 2. 0 1. 4

Shoe repairs. . 0. 3 0. 3 0. 2 -0. 8 0 0. 9 0. 3 -0. 1

Men's haircuts 1. 9 2. 7 1. 5 1. 4 0. 9 0. 6 1. 6 1. 0

Beauty shop • • 0. 7 1. 5 1. o 0. 7 1. 1 1. o 0. 8 1. 4

Movie adm is s io n s • • • 3. 7 1. 2 1. 5 1. 4 1. 1 2. 9 2. 8 3. 1

Bow ling f e e s . . 1. 3 -0. 7 -2. 1 4. 0 1. 7 -0. 4 -1. 3 3. 2

Film developing . . . . 0. 9 -0. 1 -0. 4 0. 6 0. 1 •

o

1

1. 7 6. 5

Funeral 

s e r v ic e s • • • 0. 3 0. 7 0. 9 0. 6 0. 5 0 .6 0. 7 1. 6

Bank service 

charges . . . . 0. 3 0. 2 0. 7 0. 6 -0. 2 1. 5 0. 7 2. 0

Legal services 1. 4 0. 2 1. 2 1. o 1. 6 1. 6 0. 4 2. 1

27

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
group com posed of diverse costs such 

as rent, utility rates, property taxes, 

m ovie adm issions, and payments to 

h aird ressers, auto repairm en, and 

babysitters. About half of the se rv ­

ices in the index may be regarded as 

" s e r v i c e in d u stries , n w h ere c o m p e n ­

sation for personal effort represents 

a high proportion of total costs.

Charges for consum er services 

that involve com pensation for p e rsonal effort clim bed steeply in 1966, 

and continued rising rapidly in 1967.

At the sam e tim e, a significant share 

of the 1965-67 p rice rise was due to 

those services where labor does not 

form a large proportion of total costs, 

m ortgage interest,property and auto 

insurance, real estate taxes, and 

rent. Among the publicly-regulated 

s e r v ic e s , rates fo r the utilities —gas, 

e le c tr ic ity , and telep h on e—rem a in ed 

steady until 1967, when electricity 

rates rose sharply after m idyear.

In con tra st, lo c a l tran sit fa r e s have 

increased each year.

Since productivity gains in many 

of the services are lim ited, rising 

costs tend to be reflected quickly in 

higher prices. Beginning in 1965, 

c o sts in cre a s e d m a r k e d ly —la b o r, m a ­

terials, equipment, overhead, con ­

struction, and cost of credit. Some 

of the late 1966 and 1967-price rises 

w ere attributed by em ployers to 

higher labor costs resulting from the 

1966 amendments (effective February 

1, 1967) to the F a ir Labor Standards 

Act which, for the first tim e, extended F ederal minimum wage and 

overtim e provisions to som e service 

industries.

Manpower shortages in certain 

occupations helped bring about som e 

of the increase in consum er service 

prices. Long-standing shortgages 

of certain professional and highlytrained w orkers such as doctors, 

m edical lecnm cians, and auto m echanics grew m o re acute and made it 

easy to in crease charges. Am ong the

less-sk illed and low -paid service 

w orkers, expanding econom y offered 

better employment opportunities in 

other fields and caused em ployers to 

raise wages in order to attract and 

hold their work force.

A unique factor in the 1966 advance 

in service prices was the impact of the 

tightened m oney supply. The m onetary 

m easures, which w ere designed to 

counter inflationary p ressu res, also 

increased the cost of credit. As developments in the m oney m arket in 

late 1965 and early 1966 led to a shortage of m ortgage funds, m ortgage 

interests rates clim bed steeply and 

accounted for a substantial share of 

the 1966 rise in the consum er services 

index. The early 1967 easing of the 

m oney supply caused m ortgage interest rates to decrease slightly from the 

high levels of late 1966 but, as demand 

for available funds once m ore increased, mortgaige interest rates b egan to rise after m id-1967.

The introduction of the M edicare 

program in July of 1966 undoubtedly 

played an im portan t part in the. rapid 

increase in charges for m edical care 

services. During the 12-month period 

ending in June of 1967, m edical care 

ch a rg e s r o s e 9 p e r c e n t—about tw ice as 

much as the average for all consum er 

services. Daily hospital rates shot up 

22 percent during this period, physic ia n s 1 fees in c r e a s e d 7 -1 /4 p erce n t, 

and dentists* ch a rg e s r o s e 5 p ercen t. 

Although hospital rates in 1967 were 

still increasing faster than m ost other 

m edical care cheirges, the pace of advance after early 1967 was substantially 

s lo w e r than during the p reviou s 9 

months. Apparently, the 1966 early 

1967 price upsurge engendered by unexpectedly large wage in creases, initial 

coverage under the minimum wage and 

overtim e provisions of the Fair Labor 

Standards Act, and the introduction of 

M e d ica re has p a sse d its peak. ( See 

table 5 .)

28

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Service Industries: Labor-Intensive

Services

About half of the services rep resented in the Consum er P rice Index 

fall within the Standard Industrial 

Classification category of service 

industries. With som e exceptions, 

labor costs constitute a high p ro p o rtion of the final p rice of these se rv ­

ices. Another com m on ch aracteristic is the lim ited amount of p ro ­

ductivity gains and the consequent 

rapid reflection of higher costs in 

the price structure.

In 1966, o v e r half o f the r is e in 

consum er service charges cam e 

fro m " la b o r -in t e n s iv e 11 s e r v ic e s ; 

m edical care accounted for about 

one-fourth of the rise in the service 

p r ic e le v e l. A n oth er 15 p e rce n t 

resulted from higher costs of se rv ­

ices perform ed by skilled labor 

such as hom e maintenance and r e ­

pairs, haircuts, and auto repair. 

Those services requiring le s s - 

skilled labor—dom estic work, laund ry, dryclea n in g, and b a b ysitters — 

contributed another 10 p ercen t. The 

additional 5 p e rce n t ca m e fr o m other 

"se rv ice industries" such as m ovie 

adm issions, bowling charges, fun e ra ls, and lega l fees. In 1967, 

charges for m ost of these services 

continued their rapid advance, as can 

be seen from the following tabulation:

Demand T ren ds and P r i c e s . In r e ­

cent years the largest rise in service 

prices has been in m edical care which 

also showed the greatest increase in 

demand. Between 1956 and 1966, consum er spending jum ped tw o-thirds (in 

constant dollars) for m edical care and 

lesser amounts for m ost other "s e r v ­

ice industries. " The only significant 

spending decreases w ere for dom estic 

service and m otion picture adm issions 

which, however, also increased 

charges as costs rose.

Between 1964 and 1967, charges 

for all m edical care services clim bed 

18 percent. H ospital daily rates sk y ­

ro ck e te d 36 p e rce n t; a lm o st half o f 

the increase took place in 1967. Despite rising charges, real spending 

for m edical care services has continued to grow. Expenditures for m edical ca re se rv ice s (in constant dollars) 

r o s e 8 1/2 p e rce n t in 1964, 6 1/2 p e r ­

cent in 1965, and 3 1/2 p e rce n t in 1966. 

Consumer spending for hospital care 

during the sam e 3 y e a rs r o s e 24 p e r ­

cent (in constant dollars). Growing 

utilization of hospital facilities which 

was made possible by the wide adoption of health insurance plans and the 

continuing prosperity of the econom y 

played a significant role. At the sam e 

tim e, the use of new and expensive 

equipment and drugs, the im proved 

quality of hospital services and better

Housekeeping and 

hom e maintenance

Medical

care

Personal

care

Other

services

1966:

Dec. -M ar. ..... .................... 1.2 1.5 1.2 1. 1

M ar.—J u n e ............. .................... 1.7 1.7 2.0 1.0

June-Sept. , , . . . .................... 1.6 2.4 1.2 0.9

Sept. - D e c .................. .................... 1.7 2.3 0.9 1.1

1967:

Dec. -M a r ................. 2.5 1.0 0.7

Mar. - J u n e ............. .................... 1.3 1. 6 0. 8 1.2

June-Sept.................. .................... 1.6 1. 9 1. 2 0.9

Sept. - D e c .................. .................... 1.3 1. 6 1. 2 1.3

29

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
paid hospital personnel raised the 

co st of a hospital stay.

In con tra st with the grow th in 

real demand for m edical care, consumer spending on som e services 

such as m ovie adm issions and dom estic services has continued to 

inch downward in recent yea rs, and 

spending for laundry and drycleaning has remained relatively stable. 

P rices for all these services, however, increased markedly.

The slowdown in demand for 

som e services, sparked in som e 

cases by the introduction of substitutes, has been speeded by 

higher prices. The introduction 

of w ash-and-w ear fabrics, as 

well as increased competition 

from wider use of automatic 

washing m achines in the hom e and 

in se lf-se rv ice establishments, 

has been a factor in the decline of 

the proportion of all consum er 

spending allocated to laundries 

and drycleaning establishments. 

Reduced outlays for dom estic 

services also reflect, to som e 

extent, the increased use of home 

appliances for which p r ice s —in 

contrast to service p rice s — declined in the post-K orean years. 

A ccord in g to a recently published study: 12/

"W here the skill r e ­

quired to perform the 

service is relatively 

low and time can be 

saved by the consum er 

if he does the work him ­

self, he is tempted to 

make this transfer.

Improved technology often 

lends impetus. Not only do 

the m ore efficient use of 

time and im proved technology motivate the consum er; as unskilled wages 

rise in relation to other 

wages, people tend to 

substitute their own labor 

for that of the unskilled 

w o r k e r 's . . . . But the 

impact of the transfer of 

service to the home from 

industry is probably not 

limited to the m ore 

menial services. As the 

level of education has 

risen, serv ices at one 

time thought difficult and 

therefore relegated to 

professionals are now attem pted at hom e. ff

Productivity, in recent y e a rs, cne 

largest price increases have been for 

hospital ch a rg e s , p h y s ic ia n s 1 fe e s , 

m ovie adm issions, dom estic service, 

laundry service and haircuts. A basic 

characteristic of these services is the 

lim ited amount o f produ ctivity gains — 

whether perform ed by professional, 

skilled, or unskilled w orkers. P rice 

increases have been somewhat m ore 

m oderate for auto repair, beauty shop, 

and drycleaning services where som e 

productivity gains have been made 

possible by the introduction of tim esaving equipment and training p rogram s.

In their study, Fucns and W ilbu rn iA / 

concluded that between 1948 and 1963 

the largest increase in real output per 

man among the eight services studied 

was achieved by the auto repair industry w here output per man rose an 

a v e ra g e of 1. 85 p ercen t annually. 

Am ong other service industries, 

real output per man over this 15- 

y e a r p eriod in c r e a s e d 1. 65 p ercen t 

for drycleaning establishments,

1. 54 p ercen t fo r beauty shops, and

127 Productivity D ifferences Within the Service Sector by Victor R. Fuchs 

and Jean Alexander Wilburn, O ccasional Paper 102, National Bureau of 

E conom ic R esearch , New York, 1967, p. 105.

Ibid, pp. 17 and 18.

30

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
0. 19 p ercen t for b a rb er shops.

Real output per man declined an 

a v e ra g e o f . 03 p e rce n t annually fo r 

la u n dries, and 3. 4 p e rce n t fo r m o ­

tion picture theaters.

For all eight services combined 

(auto repair, barber shops, beauty 

shops, drycleaners, hotels and 

m otels, laundries, motion picture 

theaters, and shoe repair) the 

average annual increase in real 

output per man was only .21 percent 

co m p a re d with 1. 72 p e rce n t io r 10 

re ta il tra d es, 2. 60 p e rce n t fo r all 

m anufacturing, and 3. 07 p e rce n t 

for the entire goods sector of the 

econom y. For the total econom y, 

the average annual rise in output 

p e r man was 2. 14 p ercen t.

C o s t s . Whether co n s u m e r d e ­

mand clim bs as for m edical care 

or decreases as for m ovies, se rv ­

ice industry charges keep rising, 

as productivity gains continue to 

be outpaced by cost increases.

In addition to risin g w a ges, the 

higher costs of m aterials, equipment, overhead, and—for som e 

o f the s e r v ic e s , con stru ction — 

have exerted considerable upward pressure on prices in r e ­

cent years.

l nuugn the proportion varies, 

labor co sts rep resen t a substantial 

part of total costs. Wages in 1966 

accounted for about two-thirds of 

total hospital c o sts . P a y r o lls equaled 

about 50 percent of total 1963 sales 

receipts in power laundries, over 40 

percent in beauty and barber shops, 

and in cleaning and dyeing plants, and 

fro m 25 to 30 p e rce n t of sales in 

m ost repair shops.JK

Earnings of laundry and drycleaning 

w orkers and of hospital em ployees, in 

particular, increased much m ore in 

1966 than in prior years. A verage 

hourly earnings of production w orkers 

in laundry, cleaning, and dyeing 

plants advanced o v e r 5 p e rce n t annually 

between 1963 and 1966, about twice the 

annual in c r e a s e of the 3 p re ce d in g 

y ea rs. H / Although la rg e in cre a s e s 

for hospital em ployees cam e after 

m id-1966, average straight-tim e 

earnings of general duty nurses in 

short-term hospitals in m etropolitan 

a rea s r o s e 20 p ercen t between m id - 

1963 and m id-1966, m edical technologists 18 p ercen t, and p r a c tic a l n u r s e s, 

m a id s, and h ospital p o r te r s 16 p e r ­

cent. 16/

The M edicare program which went 

into effect in m id-1966 undoubtedly had 

an im pact on h ospital ch a rg e s. In ad ­

dition, som e of the late 1966 and early 

1967—p rice in creases among hospitals, 

laundries, schools, and hotels were attributed by em ployers to higher labor 

costs stemming from the 1966 am endments to the Fair Labor Standards 

A ct effectiv e F e b ru a ry 1, 1967. F o r 

the first time Federal minimum wage 

and overtim e provisions w ere extended 

to cover these service industries.

Interest, Insurance, T axes, and Rent

A tight money supply, rising 

costs, and continued expansion 

of demand w ere m ajor factors leading to higher prices for those s e rv ­

ices where com pensation for personal 

effort does not form a large share of 

total cost. In 1966, o v e r on e-th ird 

of the rise in service prices was

11/ Selected S e r v ic e s , Sum m ary S ta tistics, 1963 Census of B u sin e ss, 

V olum e VI, U. S. D epartm ent o f C o m m e r c e , 1966.

1^/ E m ploym en t and Earnings and Monthly R ep ort on the L abor F o r c e , 

U. S. D epartm ent of L a b or, Bureau o f Labor Statistics.

-1^/ "E a rn in gs of H ospital N u rses, July 1966, " Monthly L a bor R e v ie w , 

June 1967, p. 57; and Industry Wage Survey, H ospitals, M id -1963 and 

July 1966, BLS Bulletins 1409 and 1553.

31

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
caused by financial services and 

taxes, and higher rents accounted 

fo r another 5 p ercen t. Although 

these services continued rising in

1967, the advances —except fo r ren t— 

w ere m ore m oderate, as can be seen 

from the following tabulation:

Quarterly Percent Change In—

Insurance and fin an ce 1/ Rent

1966:

D ec. - M a r .................... .................... 1.2 0 .4

Mar. —J u n e ................ .................... 2.7 0.3

June—Sept..................... ....... 1.1 0.5

Sept. —D e c .................... .................... 2.1 0.5

1967:

D ec. —M a r .................... .................... 0.3 0 . 4

Mar. —J u n e ................ .................... 0.7 0.4

Jun e—Sept..................... .................... 0. 8 0.5

Sept. —D e c .................... .................... 1.3 0. 6

1/ Includes m ortgage interest, property taxes, and auto and 

property insurance.

A substantial share of the 1966 

rise in charges for financial and 

related services was due to the 

steep clim b in m ortgage interest 

rates. As developments in the 

m oney market in late 1965 and 

early 1966 led to shortages of 

m ortgage funds, m ortgage 

in te re st rates r o s e 13 p e rce n t on 

F H A -in su red loans, 14 percen t on 

VA loans, 12 percen t on con ven ­

tional loans fo r new h o m e s, and 9 

percent on conventional loans for 

existing homes. While the easing 

of m onetary restraints caused 

m ortgage interest rates to edge 

down in the first half of 1967, interest charges moved up after m idyear as housing starts recovered 

from their 1966 low and demands for 

available funds increased.

The 1966 increase in rent charges, 

the largest since 1959, also stemmed 

to som e extent from the tight money 

supply, which made home purchase 

less likely and, so, increased the 

demand for rental units. This im ­

portant, but slow -to-change cost,

continued rising in 1967 as vacancy 

rates remained low and higher 

co sts — taxes, maintenance fees, and 

re p a ir ch a rg e s —caused lan d lord s to 

raise rents.

Insurance rates, advancing steadily 

throughout the 1960*8, have increased 

m ore sharply in recent y e a rs—auto 

in su ra n ce sk y rock eted 20 p ercen t and 

p ro p e r ty in su ra n ce 18 p ercen t b e ­

tween 1964 and 1967. Rapidly expanding automobile ownership has led 

to m ore frequent accidents and to 

m ore property damage. A lso, rising 

costs of m edical care and of auto 

and property repairs have resulted 

in larger awards for personal injuries and for damage to property 

or cars. Within the last few years, 

m o st States hatve granted the rate 

increases requested by insurance 

com panies.

Residential property tax rates 

also clim bed steeply as State and 

local governments supplied m ore 

services to com munities and raised 

salaries of government w orkers.

For the m ost part, rising m unici32

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
pal costs have been met by higher 

taxes on real property, although 

som e States also have adopted or 

increased sales and incom e taxes 

to pay som e of these costs.

U tilities and Public Transportation

Am ong the publicly regulated s e rv ­

ices, utility rates have been stable 

since 1964 as have airline and railroad fares. However, bus and taxi 

fa res have risen sharply. (See table 4. )

Throughout the 1960's population growth as well as urban and 

suburban development caused demand for electricity, gas, and telephone service to rise substantially 

each yea r. In addition, p u rch a se 

of home appliances such as air conditioners, dishwashers, washing 

machines, and dryers created new 

demands for electricity and gas. 

Despite the upsurge, gas and e le ctric rates in 1967 w ere about the 

sam e as in 1964 and charges for 

telephone service w ere low er as 

productivity gains kept pace with 

rising costs. Shortly after m id1967, however, charges for electricity ro se m ore than at any tim e in 

recent years as rates w ere increased 

in som e cities and sales taxes w ere 

placed on utilities in others.

In con tra st to the risin g dem and 

but stable price level for utilities,

lo ca l transit fares have evidenced a 

long-run slide in demand a cco m ­

panied by climbing prices. Consumer 

expenditures for local transit declined 

steadily for 20 y e a rs after W orld War 

II and, in 1965, rea l spending was 70 

percent lower than in 1945. Although 

the fall in demand was greatest in 

the 1950's as car ownership m ultiplied and the m igration to the 

suburbs reached a peak, the decline continued in the 1960's. At the 

sam e tim e, la b or c o s t s —w hich 

claim two-thirds of operating revenueclim bed rapidly. To offset the decline in revenue caused by fewer 

passengers and rising costs, transit 

fares w ere raised repeatedly.

As the slide downward in number of passengers diminished after 

1958, the sharp fare increases of 

the im m edia te postw ar p eriod — 

a lm o st 10 p e rce n t annually betw een 

1947 and 1954—slackened to less 

than half that amount. In 1964 

and 1965, both passenger volume 

and fares w ere m ore stable than 

at any other time since World 

War II. In 1966, h ow ever, lo c a l 

transit rates again advanced sharply as 

New Y ork City f a r e s —w hich c a r r y 

a heavy weight in the Consum er 

P r ic e Index—w e re ra ise d after 

a 12-day strike. Since then, fares 

in other cities have risen.

33

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
CHAPTER IV

Prices of Industrial Materials and Products

After holding steady since 

m id -1958, prices of industrial 

com m odities represented in the 

W holesale P rice Index turned up 

in 1964 and, by the first half 

of 1966, w ere rising faster than 

at any tim e sin ce the 1955 — 57 

investment boom . The increases 

slowed after m id -1966 and halted com pletely between February 

and July of 1967. The following 

month, however, wholesale industrial p rices resum ed their 

interrupted uptrend. Retail prices 

of m anufactured g o o d s —which 

had moved up slowly throughout the years of stability at 

the wholesale level—began to 

rise faster in the fall of 1965 

and have speeded their advance steadily since then. (See 

tables 6 and 7. )

During m ost of this period, 

p rice trends for industrial 

m aterials differed m arkedly from 

those for finished goods. For 

exam ple, the 5 months o f 

w holesale p rice stability in the 

first part of 1967 was the r e ­

sult of sharply falling crude 

m aterials prices offsetting 

m oderate price advances among 

the much larger finished goods 

s e c to r . In gen era l, p r ic e s of 

industrial m aterials and finished 

p rodu cers' goods w ere the first 

to respond to the econom ic

expansion. Consum er goods 

prices reacted last, but continued 

to increase between m id -1966 and 

m i d - 1967, when m any m aterials 

prices dropped or leveled off.

Because prices of crude industrial m aterials tend to swing 

widely, their im pact on the industrial price level is d isproportionate to their index weight 

sin ce they accou n t fo r only 3 1 /2 

percent of all industrial com m odities in the Wholesale P rice Index. In con tra st, the in term edia te 

m aterials group which includes 

lum ber, other construction m aterials, and steel and nonferrous 

m ill products constitutes 55 p e r ­

cent. Finished consum er goods 

m ake up another 29 percen t, and 

produ cers' goods the remaining 

13 percen t.

As can be seen from the 

following tabulation, prices of 

crude m aterials retreated substantially from their early 1966 high, 

but those at every other stage 

of processing averaged higher 

in 1967 than in 1966. For 

consum er goods, both wholesale 

and retail prices have risen 

over 4 percent since the cu rrent upturn began and, in 

contrast with every other s e c ­

tor o f the e con om y , advanced at a faster pace in

1967 than in 1966.

34

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Annual averages Percent

change

1964 1965 1966 1967 1964-67

(1957-59=100)

WPI: Industrial Com m odities. . 101. 2 102. 5 104. 8 106. 3 5. 0

Crude m a t e r ia ls ................................. 97. 1 100. 9 104. 5 100. 0 3. 0

In term ediate m a t e r i a l s ................. 100. 2 101. 5 103. 6 104. 8 4. 6

Finished consum er goods ............. 100. 9 101. 6 103. 2 105. 2 4. 3

N ondurables ................................. 101. 6 102. 8 104. 8 107. 2 5. 5

D u ra b le s........................................... 99. 9 99. 6 100. 2 101. 7 1. 8

P r o d u c e r goods ................................. 104. 1 105. 4 108. 0 111. 5 7. 1

C P I: C o m m o d itie s le s s food . . 104. 4 105. 1 106. 5 109. 2 4. 6

N o n d u r a b le s .................................. 105. 7 107. 2 109. 7 113. 1 7. 0

D u ra b le s........................................... 103. 0 102. 6 102. 7 104. 3 1. 3

Underlying Economic Influences

Although the business expansion 

of the early 1960's did not affect industrial prices appreciably until 

late in 1963, it provided the underlying strength for the price a c c e leration w hich follow ed our heightened 

involvement in Viet Nam in 1965. 

Between 1961 and 1964, the average 

operating rate in manufacturing industries rose from 79 to alm ost 86 

percent of capacity utilization, the 

index of industrial production inc r e a s e d fro m 110 (1957 — 59 = 100) to 

132, and the unem ploym ent rate fell 

fro m 6. 7 to 5. 2 p e rce n t o f the la b or 

force.

R e v e r sin g s e v e ra l y e a rs of p r ic e 

declines, industrial m aterials 

prices turned upward in 1964.

Crude m aterials prices clim bed 

rapidly due to a number of special 

situations which created supply 

shortages at a tim e of expanding 

demand, but prices of interm ediate m aterials rose only m od erately. P rod u cers' goods prices 

began to rise substantially as 

growing pressu re on manufacturing 

capacity stimulated additional investm ent in equipment on top of a 

capital goods expansion already 

fueled by the liberalized depreciation

regulations of 1962, the 7-percent investment tax credit passed in 1962 and 

liberalized in 1964, and the 1964 incom e tax reduction.

Although the upturn in the econom y 

had spurred a rise in demand for con ­

sumer goods as early as 1962, w holesale prices for such products held 

relatively stable through 1964. P r o ­

ductivity gains kept pace with cost 

in creases, plant capacity and labor 

resou rces w ere not fully utilized, and

Chart 7 . Finished Consumer Goods

1964 1965 1966 1967

35

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
the m arket remained competitive. 

Retail p rices, however, began to 

advance slightly faster than in p re ­

vious years.

In 1965 and 1966, as m ilita ry 

needs arising from the Viet Nam 

conflict were superim posed upon 

an already prospering economy, pressures on available r e ­

s o u r c e s intensified. In e a rly 

1966^ unit labor costs in the p r ivate economy-12/ advanced significa n tly fo r the fir s t tim e in 6 

years as increased em ployee co m ­

pensation outpaced productivity 

gains. Operating rates in manufacturing industries held close to 

91-percent utilization of capacity 

through m ost of 1966, the index 

of industrial production rose to 

159 (1957-59=100) in the fall of 

the year, unemployment rates 

fell below 4 percent, and aftertax profits of corporations clim bed. 

By early 1966, wholesale industrial prices w ere rising at the 

fastest pace in a decade.

The leveling off of crude 

m aterial prices in the spring of 

1966 and their sharp slide after 

m id-year preceded the general 

slow dow n in b u sin ess activity. In 

som e instances, marked im provements in dom estic or world supplies 

caused prices which had previously 

clim bed steeply to fall alm ost as 

much as their previous rise. M ore 

significantly, the tight 1966 money 

supply situation and high interest 

rates had their earliest and m ost 

drastic effects on industries which 

w e r e la r g e u s e r s o f m a te ria ls — 

housing construction, auto production, and appliance manufacturing.

In addition, slackening e co n o m ic 

activity in several m ajor European

countries further dampened demand 

for both crude and interm ediate m aterials. Between m id -1966 and m id1967, crude m aterials prices plum ­

meted while those for intermediate 

m aterials remained steady.

The econom ic slowdown in this 

country which began in late 1966 and 

continued until m id -1967 also m oderated price advances for producers* 

goods, but the impact on consum er 

goods was negligible. Both wholesale 

and retail prices of consum er products 

continued to rise in the last half of 

1966 and—fo r nondurables —gained 

further momentum in the first half of 

1967. Costs of labor, transportation, 

marketing, and credit increased 

sharply and continued to exceed p ro ­

ductivity gains. In addition, so m e o f 

the earlier price increases for m aterials still w ere working their way 

through to the final levels of produ ction. Although pressures on manufacturing capacity eased and unem ­

ployment rates edged upward, rising 

costs and the effort to retain—or 

im p rov e—profit m argins brought about 

significantly higher prices for finished 

consum er goods.

When the econom y resum ed its interrupted expansion in m id -1967, 

price increases for consum er products 

accelerated, and industrial m aterial 

prices turned upward. With the con ­

tinuance of strong; consum er and 

m ilitary demand as welTas mounting 

cost-push p ressu res, the industrial 

sector becam e the m ajor source of 

inflationary pressure in late 1967.

At the retail level, rising costs of 

retailing plus the tendency to incre a se retail m arkups during a 

period of little consum er re sis tance stimulated additional price 

advances.

— F or a detailed discussion, see "R ecent Developm ents in P rod u ctivity and Unit Labor C osts" by Jerom e A. Mark and Martin Ziegler, 

Monthly Labor Review, May 1967, p. 28.

36

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Specific Price Trends

With som e exceptions, substantial p rice advances have taken place 

throughout the industrial sector since 

1964. P r ic e s fo r all o f the 13 m a jo r 

com m odity groups represented in 

the industrial component of the 

W holesale P rice Index averaged 

h igher in 1967 than in 1964. In m o st 

instances, p rice advances w ere 

significant; for som e com m odities, 

the increases w ere substantial. 

W holesale prices of footwear, gasoline, gas fuels, and metalworking 

m a ch in e ry r o s e o v e r 10 p e rce n t 

during this period as did prices for 

the nonferrous metals group. Except for nonferrous m etals and a 

few other products which edged 

down in 1967, prices increased 

steadily year by year. P rice adva n ces o f o v e r 5 p e r c e n t—the 

average for all industrial com m odities—covered such m ajor co m ­

m odities as lum ber, electrical and 

nonelectrical m achinery, leather, 

tires, paper products, metal containers, and furniture. (See table 

6. )

In con tra st, a num ber o f im ­

portant industries have evidenced 

considerable price stability and 

p rices of a few products have decreased, in som e cases substantially. Long-term downtrends in 

wholesale prices for synthetic 

textiles, crude rubber, and floor 

covering continued after 1964. 

Although prices for som e other 

com m odities also averaged low er 

in 1967 than in 1964, the decr e a s e s —as in plywood and w astepaper—took place after m id -1966. 

Considerable stability was evidenced 

during this period by such consum er 

durables as household appliances 

and passenger cars which—although 

risin g in 1967—w e re still below 

their 1964 levels, after adjustments 

had been made for quality im p rovements.

Certain key price developments 

during the 3-year period deserve 

special mention because of their significance to the entire price structure 

and the actions taken to influence them 

under the w age-p rice guidepost policy. 

As early as the spring of 1962, A d ­

ministration pressu re had caused the 

steel industry to roll back attempted 

p r ic e in c r e a s e s. In 1965, risin g 

prices for nonferrous metals and 

leather lik e w ise a rou sed con cern . In 

N ovem ber, previously announced price 

increases for prim ary copper and 

aluminum ingot w ere rescinded in 

response to the Adm inistration's antiinflationary efforts. At the same time, 

pressures on industrial capacity caused 

price advances to intensify for p ro ­

du cers' goods such as metalworking 

and other m ach in ery. In e a rly 1966, 

lum ber prices rose m arkedly because 

of special circum stances which created 

a supply bottleneck. (See table 7„ )

Among consum er goods, sharply 

rising prices for shoes and other 

apparel attracted attention, and autom obile prices began to rise after 

several years of m oderate decline.

In addition, the M ideast c r i s i s and 

closing of the Suez Canal focused attention on oil and petroleum product 

p r ic e s w hich a lre a d y had r is e n substantially before the m ost recent crisis 

d eveloped in m i d - 1967. (See table 80 )

Steel M ill P r o d u c t s . The cu rren t 

advance in prices of steel m ill p ro ­

ducts began in 1963 and, although 

persistent, has been m oderate co m ­

pared with the m o re substantial p rice 

increases during the m id-1950's.

P rices of alm ost all steel products 

w ere raised at som e time during 

the 3-year period ending in D ecem ber 

1966. Rising demand from key users 

such as the autom obile, construction, 

and m achinery industries provided 

support for higher prices despite 

stepped-up im port competition. A lso, 

higher costs of alloying or coating 

m aterials such as nickel, zinc, and

37

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Table 6# W h olesale P r ic e Indexes fo r Selected Industrial C o m m o d itie s, 1964—67

[1 9 5 7 -5 9 = 100]

Wholesale price indexes

Annual averages Percent

change

1964 1965 1966 1967 1964-67

Industrial C o m m o d it ie s ................. 101. 2 102. 5 104. 8 106. 3 5. 0

Textile products and apparel 101. 2 101. 8 102. 1 102. 1 0. 9

Cotton p r o d u cts .................... 99. 6 100. 2 102. 5 100. 7 1. 1

Wool p r o d u cts ....................... 103. 0 104. 3 106. 0 103. 2 0. 2

Manmade fiber products . 95. 8 95. 0 89. 6 86. 8 -9. 4

A p p a r e l .................................... 102. 8 103. 7 105. 0 106. 9 4. 0

H ousefurnishing s .................

Hides, skins, leather &

103. 5 103. 1 104. 4 106. 1 2. 5

p rod u cts .................................... 104. 6 109. 2 119. 7 115. 8 10. 7

Hides and s k in s .................... 87. 5 111. 2 140. 8 94. 0 7. 4

L e a th e r .................................... 102. 9 108. 1 121. 0 110. 5 7. 4

F o o t w e a r ................................. 108. 5 110. 7 118. 2 122. 1 12. 5

Fuels, products, and pow er. 97. 1 98. 9 101. 3 103. 6 6. 7

Crude p e t r o l e u m .................

Refined petroleum

96. 9 96. 8 97. 5 98. 6 1. 8

p rod u cts ................................. 92. 7 95. 9 99. 5 102. 2 10. 2

G a s o lin e .............................. 92.0 94. 7 100. 2 101. 4 10. 2

C h em ica ls and allied p rod . . 96. 7 97. 4 97. 8 98. 4 1. 8

Industrial chem icals . . . . 94. 2 95. 0 95. 7 97. 4 3. 4

Fats and o ils (inedible) . . 

Agricultural chem icals

96. 8 112. 7 102. 8 81. 3 -16. 0

and p r o d u cts .................... 99. 6 101. 8 102. 8 103. 6 4. 0

Rubber and rubber p rod u cts. 92. 5 92. 9 94. 8 97. 0 4. 9

Crude rubber .......................... 90. 6 90. 0 89. 2 85. 5 -5. 6

Tires and tu b e s .................... 89. 0 90. 0 93. 3 96. 2 8. 1

Lumber and wood products . 100. 6 101. 1 105. 6 105. 4 4. 8

L u m b er..................................... 100. 7 101. 9 108. 5 108. 4 7. 6

M illwork.................................... 108. 5 107. 8 110. 0 112. 2 3.4

P ly w o o d .................................... 92. 3 92. 3 92. 8 89. 3 -3. 3

Pulp, p ap er, and p rod u cts . . 99. 0 99. 9 10 2. 6 104. 0 5. 1

W o o d p u lp .................................

Converted paper and

96. 1 98. 1 98. 0 98.0 2. 0

paperboard ....................... 98. 3 99. 3 102. 3 104. 8 6. 6

Metal and m etal produ cts. . . 102. 8 105. 7 108. 3 109. 5 6. 5

Iron and s t e e l ................ •. . 100. 5 101.4 102. 3 103. 6 3. 1

Nonferrous m e t a ls ............. 105. 9 115. 2 121. 0 120. 6 13. 9

Metal c o n t a i n e r s ................. 105. 5 107. 6 110. 0 111. 8 6. 0

Plumbing fixtures ................ 100. 9 103. 1 108. 4 110.4 9. 4

M ach in ery and equipment. . . 103. 8 105. 0 108. 2 111. 8 7. 7

N onelectrical m achinery . 108. 3 110. 1 114. 0 118. 0 9. 0

Metalworking m achinery . 110. 5 113. 6 118. 8 123. 8 12. 0

E le c tr ic a l m a ch in e ry . . . 96. 8 96. 8 99. 0 101. 8 5. 2

38

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Table 6# W h olesale P r ic e Indexes for Selected Industrial 

C om m od ities, 1964- 67—Continued 

1.1957-59=100]

W holesale price indexes

Annual averages P e r c ent 

change

1964 1965 1966 1967 1964-67

Furniture and household

98. 5 98. 0 99. 1 101. 0 2. 5

Household furniture . . . . 105. 3 106. 2 109. 1 112. 8 7. 1

C o m m e r c ia l fu rn itu re. . . 103. 2 103. 7 105. 7 111. 1 7. 7

Floor covering ....................... 99. 4 97. 7 97. 0 93. 7 -5. 7

H ousehold appliances . . . 91. 3 89. 2 89. 1 90. 1 -1. 3

Nonmetallic m ineral products 101. 5 101. 7 102. 6 104. 3 2. 8

C o n cre te ingredients. . . . 102. 8 103. 2 103. 9 106. 0 3. 1

Concrete p r o d u c t s ............. 100. 9 101. 5 103. 0 105. 3 4. 4

T ra n sp orta tion equipm ent . . U /) (1/) (1/) (1/) (1/)

P a ss e n g e r c a r s , new. . . . 98. 8 98. 1 97. 2 98. 1 -0. 7

Railroad equipment............. 100. 5 100. 9 101. 2 103. 3 2; 8

M isce lla n e o u s p r o d u c ts . . . . 104. 1 104. 8 106. 8 109. 2 4. 9

T o b a c c o p r o d u c t s ................. 106. 0 106. 2 109. 6 112. 9 6. 5

1 / Not A vailable.

39

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
T a ble 7- W holesale P r ic e Indexes for S elected Industrial C om m o d itie s

Quarterly Percent Changes

[Not seasonally adjusted]

1966 1967

W holesale 

price indexes

Dec. 1965 

to

March

March

to

June

June

to

Sept.

Sept.

to

Dec.

Dec. 1966 

to

March

March

to

June

June

to

Sept.

Sept.

to

Dec.

Industrial 

com m odities . 0. 8 0. 9 0. 3 0. 3 0. 5 0 0. 5

00

•

°

Textile p roducts and 

a p p a rel.............. 0. 1 0. 1 0 -0. 4 0 -0. 2 0. 4 1. 8

Cotton 

p ro ­

ducts . . , • • 0. 6 1. 0 0. 3 -0. 4 -1. 4 -1. 6 -0. 5 5. 0

Wool

p r o d u c t s . . 0. 6 0. 5 -0. 4 -1. 2 -0. 8

00

•

o

I

-0. 5 -0. 5

Manmade 

fiber p ro ­

ducts i i * « -1. 2 -0. 9 -1. 6 -1. 9 0 -1. 3 0. 6 2. 7

A p p a re l . . . 0. 4 0. 1 0. 3 0. 3 0.. 6 0. 7 0. 7 0. 7

Housefurnishings . . . 0. 1 0. 5 1. 0 0. 2 -0. 2 0. 2 1. 4 2. 8

Hides, skins, 

leather and 

p r o d u c t s . . . 3. 6 3. 5 -2. 4 -2. 2 -0. 3 -1. 1 -1. 0 1. 4

Hides and 

skins . .. . 11. 7 8. 9 -16. 6 -18. 6 -9., 4 -3. 1 -2. 7 -3. 8

Leather . . . 8. 0 2. 7 -3. 8 -4. 6 -1. 4 -3. 8 -4. 4 3. 6

Footwear. . . 1. 4 3. 0 0. 2 1. 0 1. 2 -0. 2 0. 2 2. 1

Fuels, p ro ­

ducts, and 

pow er ............. -0. 7 1. 6 0. 7 0. 2 1. 3 0. 3 0. 5 -1. 8

Crude petroleu m . . . 0. 1 0. 4 0. 3 0. 4 0. 2 0 0. 7 0

Refined.petroleum p ro ­

ducts . . . . -1. 2 3. 1 0. 8 -0. 8 2. 2 0. 7 0. 8 -3. 9

G asoline. . -1. 8 6. 8 0. 6 -2. 5 1. 3 1. 8 0. 6 -7. 0

Chem icals and 

allied p roducts ............. 0 0 0. 4 0. 2 0. 3 0 -0. 6 0. 5

Industrial 

chem icals . -0. 3 0. 6 0 0. 6 0. 6 0. 2 -0. 1 1. 2

Fats and 

oils (inedible) ............. -3. 4 -4. 5 2. 2 -8. 4 -14. 3 -2. 5 -3. 0 0. 1

4 0

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
T able 7. W h olesale P r ic e Indexes fo r S elected Industrial C o m m o d itie s — Continued

Quarterly Percent Changes

[Not seasonally adjusted]

W holesale 

price indexes

1966 1967

D ec, 1965 

to

March

March

to

June

June

to

Sept.

Sept.

to

Dec.

Dec. I 966 

to

March

March

to

June

June

to

Sept.

Sept.

to

Dec.

Chem ical and 

allied p ro ­

ducts (contfd) 

Agricultural 

chem icals 

and p ro ­

ducts . . . . 0. 3 0. 1 -0. 7 0. 9 2. 7 -0. 8 -3. 7 1. o

Rubber and 

rubber p ro ­

ducts ............. 0. 9 1. 2 -0. 7 0. 3 0. 9 -0. 1 2. 5 1. 0

Crude 

rubber . . . 1. 8 -1. 9 -1. 8 -0. 3 -1. 3 -0. 3 -2. 7 *0. 2

T ires and 

tubes . . . . 0 3. 6 -1. 1 0. 5 1. 1 •

o

1

5. 0 0

Lumber and 

w ood products 3. 6 2. 0 -1. 7 -3. 2 1. 1 1.1 3. 8 -1. o

L u m ber . . . 3. 7 4. 5 -2. 2 -4. 6 1. 4 1. 9 3. 7 -0. 2

M illw ork. . . 1. 3 1. 2 0. 3 -0. 5 0. 8 0. 4 1. 3 0. 5

P lyw ood . . . 6. 1 -5. 6 -3. 3 -2. 0 0. 3 -0. 1 9. 2 -5. 7

Pulp, paper 

and products 0. 9 1. 2 0. 1 -0. 1 0. 6 0. 3 0. 2 0. 7

W oodpulp . . -0. 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Converted 

paper and 

paperboard 1. 2 0. 8 0. 6 0. 2 1. 5 0. 2 -0. 1 1. o

Metal and 

metal p ro ­

ducts ............. 1. 3 0. 6 — 0. 3 0. 6 0. 4 -0. 5 0. 6 1. 3

Iron and 

steel . . . . 0. 6 -0. 3 0. 5 0. 4 0. 4 0 0. 7 0. 7

Nonferrous 

m etals . . . 3. 1 2. 0 -2. 7 0. 5 0. 5 -2. 0 0. 6 3. 6

Metal contain ers . . . 0 0. 3 0 0. 1 1. 2 0. 2 0 1. 1

Plumbing 

fixtu res . . 0. 8 2. 6 1. 9 -0. 1 0 0. 3 -0. 5 0. 4

M achinery and 

equipment. . 1. 1 1. 1 0. 7 1. 7 0. 7 0. 1 0. 3 1. 2

N onelectrical

m achinery 1. 0 1. 3 0. 9 1. 3 0. 7 0. 3 0. 6 1. 4

41

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
T able 7. W h olesa le P r ic e Indexes fo r S elected Industrial C o m m o d itie s —Continued

Quarterly Percent Changes

[Not seasonally adjusted]

1966 1967

W holesale 

price indexes* D ec. 1965 

to

March

March

to

June

June

to

Sept.

Sept.

to

Dec.

Dec. 1966 

to

March

March

to

June

June

to

Sept.

Sept.

to

Dec.

Machinery 

and equipment—Con. 

Metalworking 1. 4 2. 0 1. 3 1.1 0. 7

00

•

o

0. 6 1.1

E lectrical

machinery. 1. 7 0. 6 0. 4 2. 3 0. 7 -0. 4 -0. 3 0. 8

Furniture and 

household 

d u ra b le s. . . 0. 2 0. 5 0. 2 1. 2 0. 2 0. 2 0. 4 0. 9

Household 

furniture. . 0. 5 1. 6 0. 8 1. 8 0. 5 0 0. 5 1. 2

C om m ercial 

furniture. . 0. 1 1. 2 0. 7 2. 5 0. 6 2. 4 0. 1 0. 5

Floor c o v e r ­

ing................. 0 -0. 4 -0. 5 1

o

4^

-2. 5 -0. 7 0. 3 1. 9

Household

appliances 0. 3 0. 3 -0. 8 0. 6 0. 7 0. 2 0. 3 0. 7

Nonmetallic 

m ineral 

p rod u cts . . . 0. 5 0. 4 0. 5 0. 3 0. 5 0. 1 0. 8 0. 6

Concrete

ingredients 0. 4 -0. 2 0. 3 0. 4 1. 4 0. 1 0. 2 0. 4

Concrete 

p r o d u c t s . . 0. 4 0. 8 0. 6 0. 3 0. 6 1. 1 0. 2 -0. 1

T r anspor tation 

equipment. . . • • ... • O • ... .... . .

Passenger 

cars, new. -0. 3 -0. 7 -1. 0 2. 4 -0. 5 -0. 4 0. 2 2. 7

Railroad 

equipm ent. 0 0 0 1. 7 0 0. 2 0 1. 8

M iscellaneous 

p r o d u c t s . . . 1. 3 0. 4 0. 2 0. 4 0. 2 1. 8 0. 5 0. 5

Tobacco 

p r o d u c t s . . 3. 6 0. 5 0 0 0 4. 1 0 0

42

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
T able 8. C on su m er P r ic e Indexes F o r S elected 

Industrial Com m odities, 1964-67

[ 1957-59 = 100]

Consumer price indexes Annual averages Percent

change

1964 1965 1966 1967 1964-67

A ll com m odities less food . 104. 4 105. 1 106. 5 109. 2 4. 6

Durable c o m m o d itie s ............. 103. 0 102. 6 102. 7 104. 3 1. 3

New c a r s .................................... 101. 2 99. 0 97. 2 98. 1 -3. 1

Used cars ................................. 121. 6 120. 8 117. 8 121. 5 -0. 1

T ir e s , n e w .............................. 97. 4 99. 8 102. 1 105. 9 8. 7

Household d u ra b les ............. 98. 4 96. 9 96. 8 98. 2 -0. 2

A p p lia n ce s .......................... 90. 0 87. 1 84. 4 83. 8 -6. 9

TV s e t s ................................. 90. 1 86. 3 82. 1 80. 4 -10. 8

Furniture and bedding. . 102. 2 102. 8 105. 4 109. 4 7. 0

Floor c o v e r in g ............. ... 102. 7 101. 6 101. 9 102. 1 -0. 6

N ondurable co m m o d itie s . . . 105. 7 107. 2 109. 7 113. 1 7. 0

Apparel less footwear J/. . 103. 6 104. 4 106. 3 110. 5 6. 7

W om en ’ s and girls* . . . 102. 3 103. 1 105. 1 109. 9 7. 4

M en’ s and b o y s* ................. 106. 1 107. 4 110. 3 114. 3 7. 7

F ootw ear .................................... 111. 0 112. 9 119. 6 125. 5 13. 1

Textile housefurnishings . 102. 0 102. 7 104. 1 107. 0 4. 9

Fuel oil and co a l.................... 103. 5 105. 6 108. 3 111. 6 7. 8

Fuel oil # 2 .......................... 101. 0 103. 1 105. 8 109. 2 8. 1

G a s o lin e .................................... 102. 1 106. 0 108. 3 111. 7 9.4

D rugs & p r e s c r ip tio n s . . . 98. 4 98. 1 98. 4 97. 9 -0. 5

Toilet g o o d s .......................... 102. 9 102. 3 101. 2 102. 9 0

T o b a c co produ cts ................. 114. 8 120. 2 126. 1 130. 9 14. 0

A lcoholic beverages .... 104. 7 105. 8 107. 7 109. 9 5. 0

-i^Total includes unlisted items.

tin as well as the wage settlement of 

1965 contributed to the increases.

F ollow in g their 1966 yea r end advance, p rices for steel m ill products 

remained stable until late in 1967 as 

steel production dropped steadily.

As production picked up in the third 

quarter, another round of increases

began and, by the end of the year, 

prices of over two-thirds of all steel 

products had been raised. Expectation of heavy inventory building in 

the first half of 1968 as a hedge 

against a p ossib le strike on 

August 1, 1968, w as undoubtedly

one reason for the late 1967 in crea ses.

43

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
An increase in the amount of 

steel im ports, which generally are 

1 0 to 20 p e rce n t low er in p r ic e , has 

been responsible partly for the m ore 

m oderate price rise in recent years 

than in the 1950*s. In 1966, im p orts 

r e p re se n te d a lm o st 11 p e rce n t of 

dom estic consum ption and they are 

expected to account fo r a lm o st 12 

percent in 1967.

N o n fe rro u s M e ta ls . P r e s s u r e s 

on prices of nonferrous metals 

started earlier in the recent expansion and w ere greater than for m ost 

industrial m aterials, including other 

metals. Production approached full 

capacity utilization much sooner, 

reaching 90 percen t of nonferrous 

refining capacity by D ecem ber 1963, 

and 98 percent a year later. A lthough prices continued to rise 

substantially until m id -1966, the 

largest increase took place in 1964 

when nonferrous metal prices 

jum ped 12 percen t. P r ic e s for 

virtually all the important metals 

and m ill produ cts in cre a s e d — p r i ­

m ary copper, aluminum ingot, lead 

zinc, m ercu ry and tin. The c o r ­

responding scrap metals rose even 

m ore sharply.

During much of this period, 

special circum stances such as 

strikes in this country and abroad 

and political problem s in several 

m ajor producing countries curtailed 

supplies of nonferrous metals, p articularly copper. Between m id1963 and m id-1966, prices of p rim a r y cop p er in c r e a s e d 16 p ercen t, 

and copper scrap over 130 percent. 

Since many producers of copper 

products frequently w ere forced to 

purchase the metal in the higherp r ice d s cr a p or d e a l e r s 1 m a rkets, 

prices of m ill products increased 

much m ore than prim ary copper. 

During these 3 y e a rs , p r ic e s of c o p ­

per tubing rose one-third, and 

w ire and cable prices one-fourth.

The second half of 1966 and the 

first half of 1967 witnessed a general

softening of nonferrous metals prices as 

difficulties which had previously cu rtailed supplies w ere settled and demand 

from the auto, appliance, and construction industries weakened. After 

m id-1967, however, copper prices 

began to rise as a long strike in the 

U. S. c o p p e r -m in in g industry cut back 

supplies. Once m ore, copper fabricators w ere forced to turn to the 

higher priced dealers* and scrap m a rkets in this country and abroad.

M achinery. Although m achinery and 

equipment price; increases began to 

accelerate in 1964, the largest advance 

cam e in 1966 when both demand and 

cost pressures intensified. Industrial 

output of equipment, including defense 

equipment, r o s e 17 p e rce n t in 1966, 

co m p a re d with an 11 p e rce n t r is e in 

1965 and 6 p e rce n t in 1964. F o r the 

first time in many years, the electrical 

as well as nonelectrical m achinery 

industries were operating at their 

preferred rates, and order backlogs 

grew. Shortages of skilled w orkers 

added to cost pressu res, particularly 

in machine tool production.

Wholesale prices of m achinery and 

equipment, which had risen m oderately 

in 1964 and 1965, jum ped a lm o st 5 

percent in 1966 as electrical m achinery 

prices reversed their long-term downtrend and price increases for nonelectrical m achinery accelerated. 

E lectrical m achinery prices had decreased steadily between 1959 and 

1964, reflecting excess productive 

capacity as well as productivity gains. 

After stabilizing in 1965, .electrical 

m achinery prices rose sharply in 1966. 

The largest increase occurred in the 

fourth quarter following an industrywide wage settlement.

When capital outlays by business 

slowed in the first half of 1967, price 

advances for nonelectrical m achinery 

also slackened and electrical m achinery prices edged down slightly. After 

m id-year, however, electrical m achinery prices held steady; prices for 

m ost nonelectrical m achinery,

44

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
particularly metalworking m achinery 

rose again. Late in the year, all 

m achinery prices rose substantially.

Both demand and cost p ressu res 

are expected to cause prices of m achinery to continue upward in 1968. 

Although still far below 1966*s increa se of 1 6-1/2 percent, new plant 

and equipment expenditures are expected to rise m ore in 1968 than 

they did in 1967. On the cost side, 

both wage increase and those for 

m aterials are expected to be substantial.

Lum ber and Wood P roducts,

P rice trends for lumber and wood 

products in the 1960's closely 

paralleled housing construction 

activity, although the price upsurge 

during the fir s t 5 months of 1966 — 

as well as their precipitous plunge 

by the end of that y e a r —was due 

largely to a com bination of unusual 

circum stances.

Following the I960 decline in 

private housing starts, prices of 

lum ber and wood products fell in 

1961, reaching the lowest level 

since the Korean conflict. As 

housing activity began to expand in 

the e a rly 1960!s with the added incentive of favorable m ortgage 

interest rates, lum ber and wood 

prices rose an average of 1 -1 /2 

p e rce n t annually betw een 1 961 and 

1965. During the fir s t 5 months 

of 1966, how ever, a com bination 

of special circum stances reduced 

lum ber supplies severely and caused 

prices to spurt upward. These 

factors included increased m ilitary 

p rocu rem en t, a te m p o ra ry c u rta ilment of log supplies, hedge-buying 

against a p o ss ib le W est Coast strike 

by lu m b e rm e n at m id -y e a r , and a 

shortage of railway cars to supply 

the needed transportation.

P rices of lum ber and wood p ro ­

ducts declined sharply in the secon d 

half of 1966 as tight money and 

rising m ortgage interest rates depressed housing construction. At

, the sam e tim e, the unusual fa c to r s 

which caused the booming lumber p rices 

earlier in the year w ere eliminated, 

and lum ber buyers showed growing r e ­

sistance to the inflated prices. At the 

end of the year, lum ber and wood 

p r ic e s w e re only 0. 6 p e rce n t higher 

than their Decem ber 1965 levels, and 

3 p ercen t above D e ce m b e r 1964 p r ic e s .

Lumber and wood prices began 

another upward m ovem ent in 1967, r e ­

flecting the revival of housing con ­

struction in the spring and tightening 

lumber supplies in the sum m er due to 

drought conditions and forest fires in 

the Northwest. From D ecem ber 1966 

to September 1967, prices of lumber 

and w ood p rodu cts r o s e 6 p e r c e n t - 

m ore than triple the usual seasonal 

amount. However, the usual seasonal 

decline late in the year caused 1967 

p rices to average close to their 1966 

level.

Hides, Leather^ and Footwear. The 

sharp fluctuations in prices of hides 

and leather since 1964 w ere caused 

prim arily by changes in export demand. When A rgen tin e cattle h erds — 

a m ajor sou rce of leather for the 

European and other w orld m arkets — 

w ere reduced drastically in 1964 b ecause of drought, overseas demand 

shifted to the United States. This 

sharp rise in our exports at a tim e 

of expanding dom estic need caused 

prices to turn upward in the latter 

part of 1964, and to clim b steeply 

when m ilitary needs w ere added in 

1965. At the req u est of U. S. shoe 

and leather m anufacturers, export 

quotas w ere placed on hides in M arch 

of 1966.

From the end of 1964 to m id -1966, 

hides and skin p rice s ro se alm ost 80 

percent and leather 22 percent. However, as the Argentine cattle herds 

w ere rebuilt, Argentine hides reentered world markets and exports from 

this country dwindled. Domestic 

prices of hides and leather fell sharply 

after m id -1966, and export quotas 

w ere rem oved in November.

45

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Although the p r ic e in c r e a s e s which 

began in late 1964 for footwear were 

triggered by soaring leather prices, 

they continued high after leather 

prices began to fall. Higher shoe 

prices at the wholesale level w ere 

attributed to rising labor and other 

production costs as well as to price 

increases for nonleather components 

such as rubber heels. Since m id1966, the advances in retail prices 

have been substantially larger than 

at wholesale due to higher retail 

markups and to rising retailing costs. 

In gen era l, co n s u m e r re sis ta n c e 

has been slight and, in 1967, shoe 

p r ic e s a v era ged about 13 p ercen t 

higher than in 1964. (See table 8.)

Textiles and Apparel. Except 

for synthetics, prices of fabrics 

m oved up alm ost across the board 

in 1965, and continued to rise 

through the first half of 1966. Wool 

p rice s increased as a result of 

w orld-w ide shortages caused by 

droughts in Australia and South 

A fr ic a in 1 965.

A combination of factors caused 

p rices of alm ost all textile m aterials to decrease after m id -1966 

and to continue down until late in 

1967 when the abnorm ally short 1967 

cotton crop caused a sharp p rice 

rise. The econom ic slowdown in 

this country, tight m oney both here 

and abroad, and austerity m easures 

adopted by the United Kingdom 

helped to depress prices in late 

1966 and through m o st of 1967. In 

addition, world supplies of wool 

increased; a change in method of 

paying subsidies under the "one 

p rice cotton” legislation resulted 

in a 25 p ercen t d rop in p r ic e s of 

raw cotton; and continued excess 

production capacity—as well as 

growing com petition due to lower 

prices for other fabrics—caused synthetic fabric prices to fall sharply.

In con trast, p r ic e s of textile 

products, particularly at the retail

level, rose sharply after m id -1966. 

Unlike expenditures for food and 

shelter, spending for clothing and 

household supplies increase as incom e 

rises. This growth in civilian demand, 

on top of rising m ilitary needs, pushed 

prices of apparel and textile housefurnishings upward. In addition, 

many production c o s t s —particularly 

la b o r — in cre a s e d due to higher wage 

rates and the declining supply of 

trained and experienced w orkers.

Retail stores apparently have been 

subject to especially large upward 

labor cost pressu res which have not 

been balanced by productivity gains.

In addition, r e ta ile r s have attem pted 

to widen p ro fit m a rgin s. In c o n s e ­

quence, the rise in retail prices of 

apparel in the year ending in D ecem ­

ber 1967 was over 4 percent, twice 

as much as the wholesale increase.

Autom obiles. New car p rices, as 

m ea su red by the BLS p rice indexes which 

adjust p rices to allow for im provem ents 

on factory-equipped ca rs, declined each 

year between 1959 and 1966. However, 

prices began to rise in m id -1967 and 

increased considerably when 1968 

m odel cars were introduced in the fall.

Between 1961 and 1965, autom obile 

sales rose steadily as incom e in crea sed, financing remained easy, the 

population of driving age grew, and 

the tw o-car fam ily becam e com mon.

In addition, a sharp in c r e a s e in the 

value of used cars raised trade-in 

allow ances and reduced net costs of a 

new ca r to the a v e ra g e buyer. In 

1965, a r e c o r d 9. 3 m illion c a r s w e re 

sold, and spending on automobiles and 

parts reached over 7-1/2 percent of 

p e rso n a l con su m ption expenditures — 

com pared with 5-1/2 percent in 1961.

A combination of factors caused 

sales to fall in 1966 —cre d it was d ifficult to obtain, costs of financing w ere 

higher, trade-in allowances for used 

cars declined, and the problem s of 

auto safety w ere publicized. The decline in sales continued in early 1967,

46

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
but new car sales strengthened in 

the spring and continued upward. 

P rices of 1968 m odel cars introduced in the fa ll of 1967 w e r e 2 

percent higher than com parable 

1967 m odels, even after adjustment 

for quality im provem ent.

Higher 1967 retail prices r e ­

sulted not only from strong consum er demand and somewhat higher 

w h olesale costs but also from a 

combination of special circu m ­

stances. New car inventories w ere 

relatively low because the pickup 

in sales occurred too late to increa se production of 1967 m odels.

In addition, fe a r s of a strik e and the 

s t r ik e fs subsequent developm en t 

created first an anticipated and then 

a real shortage of som e 1968 m odels. 

M oreover, expectations of higher 

prices for 1968 m odels caused 1967 

m odel prices to rem ain strong.

At the manufacturing level, higher 

costs of labor, m aterials, and additional safety equipment w ere among 

the chief reasons for the rise in 

prices of 1968 m odels. The im ­

pact of wage settlements negotiated 

in 1967 is not expected to be c o m ­

pletely offset by productivity gains. 

These factors and rising m aterials 

costs are expected to cause new car 

prices to continue to increase at 

both the w holesale and retail levels.

O il and P e tr o le u m P r o d u c ts , P e t r o ­

leum is still the largest single source 

of en ergy used in this cou n try, despite 

growing com petition from natural gas 

and a tom ic e n e rg y , and dem and has expanded con sid era b ly in recent y ea rs. 

Total dom estic demand for petroleum rose 4 percent in 1965, another

5 p ercen t in 1966, and a substantial 

increase was expected for 1967 even 

before the Mideast crisis developed. 

Defense requirem ents for all oil p ro ­

ducts jumped sharply in 1966 and 

again in 1967, reaching about 350 

m illion barrels annually. However, 

demand has expanded at different rates 

for each of the m ajor petroleum categories. Jet fu el—because of the introduction of com m ercial jets and the 

dem ands of the w ar in Viet Nam — 

has shown the largest advance.

The rise in demand for petroleum 

products has been worldwide, but 

world supplies of crude oil have m ore 

than kept pace with increased requ irements. Potential supplies are large 

and production is controlled in the 

m ajor oil-producing States, thus 

helping to maintain p rice levels. A lso 

im port quotas keep foreign oil from 

floodin g U. S. m a rk ets and driving 

prices down. Just prior to the Mideast crisis in June 1967, crude oil 

inventories in this country and in 

Europe w ere at high levels; they had 

reached a 3-year peak in the United 

States.

Recent price trends should be 

viewed in term s not only of current 

conditions but also in light of the price 

impact which resulted from the Suez 

c r i s i s of 1956. In the 3 months 

follow ing that c r is is , w holesale p rice s 

of crude oil and refined petroleum 

produ cts r o s e 11 p e rce n t and U. S. 

exports clim bed steeply. As an aftermath, the petroleum industry suffered 

from the effects of an oversupply, and 

wholesale prices m oved generally 

downward from m id -1957 through 

1964. In con trast, reta il p r ic e s held 

steady or in cre a se d . In 1964, they

2®/ D etailed accou n ts can be found in "S u m m er 1967 - Oil and the M iddle 

East, ff B u sin ess R e v ie w , O ctob er 1967, F e d e ra l R e s e r v e Bank of Dallas 

and in "O il on T rou b le W aters, " Monthly R e v ie w , O ctob er 1967, F e d e ra l 

R eserve Bank of San F ran cisco.

47

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
a v era ged 1 p e rce n t higher than their 

1957-59 a v e ra g e fo r fuel oil, 2 p e r ­

cent higher fo r gasolin e, and 16 

percent higher for m otor oil.

The booming econom y and increased m ilitary needs as well as 

the continued limitations on oil p ro ­

duction and im ports served to raise 

wholesale prices of petroleum p ro ­

ducts substantially in 1965 and 1966 

and to keep them moving upward in 

1967. Crude oil p rice s turned up 

la ter and r o s e m od era tely . In 1967, 

wholesale prices of refined p etroleum p rodu cts av era ged 10 p ercen t 

higher than in 1964 and crude p etroleu m p r ic e s 2 p ercen t. Retail 

p rice increases for various p ro ­

ducts o v e r the 3 y e a rs ranged 

fr o m a lm o st 8 to o ver 9 p ercen t.

The price impact of the 1967 

Mideast crisis and the closing of 

the Suez Canal was m oderate and, 

in general, tem porary. Oil em ­

bargoes of the Arab countries w ere 

of short duration and, during that 

period, production allowances w ere 

increased in the oil-producing States 

in order to supply dom estic and 

international demand. Sharply 

higher rates for chartering oil

tankers caused transportation costs to 

increase, but this only affected a sm all 

proportion of the oil or the refined 

products used in this country.

Notable p r ic e developm en ts in 1967 — 

the sharp rise in wholesale prices of 

light and middle distillates and the 

late-year drop in wholesale gasoline 

prices resulted from shifts in p ro ­

duction. Oil com panies had limited 

dom estic refinery output of middle 

distillates used for heating fuel and 

substituted production of the m ore 

profitable gasoline. Also, large demands for jet fuel caused m ajor r e ­

fineries to shift production to m eet 

these needs and further curtailed supplies of fuel oil. Some m iddle distillates 

used as heating fuel had to be im ported to 

m eet dom estic requirem ents and higher 

tanker costs w ere one of the causes of 

the p rice in creases which continued 

throughout m o st of 1 967 fo r m iddle d is ­

tillates and heating fuel. In con trast, 

the buildup of gasoline inventories at 

a time of slackening demand brought 

a sharp decline in w holesale p rices 

for gasoline late in the year. Retail 

gasoline prices, which reflect increases in State taxes as well as rising 

retailing costs, continued strong.

48

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
• • • • • • • •

• • • • • • • • • ••• - • • • • • • • • • •••• ' '

MM MM MM ••••

• • • • • • • • • • • • • & • ••••• •••••••f •••••••••••••» •••••••••••» » '

• • • • • • • •

- • • • • • • • •

• • • • • • • • : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : ......................................................................................................

•• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •••• MM •••• ••••

• • • • • • • • • • • • •

:::::::::::::

• • • • • • • •

: : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : 

•••• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •

: : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : .........................................

••••••••••• •••••••••«••••••• • ••• ••••••

::::::::::: ::::::::::::: :::::::::::::

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
(1957-59 = 100)

Table A -l. Consumer Price Indexes, by Major Groups, 1954-66

Year and month A ll

items

All

items

less

food

Food Housing

Apparel

and

upkeep

Transportation

Health and recreation

A ll Medical

care

Personal

care

Reading

and

recreation

Other

Relative importance1 ........... 100.00 77.17 22.83 32.98 10.50 13.80 19.51 5.80 2.70 5.87 5.14

Annual averages

1954............................................. 93.6 92.8 95.4 93.4 96.3 90.8 90.7 86.6 88.5 92.4 94.3

1955............................................. 93.3 93.1 94.0 94.1 95.9 89.7 91.4 88.6 90.0 92.1 94.3

1956............................................. 94.7 94.7 94.7 95.5 97.8 91.3 93.6 91.8 93.7 93.4 95.8

1957............................................. 98.0 97.9 97.8 98.5 99.5 96.5 97.0 95.5 97.1 96.9 98.5

1958......... ................................... 100.7 100.1 101.9 100.2 99.8 99.7 100.3 100.1 100.4 100.8 99.8

1959............................................ 101.5 102.0 100.3 101.3 100.6 103.8 102.8 104.4 102.4 102.4 101.8

I960............................................. 103.1 , 103.7 101.4 103.1 102.2 103.8 105.4 108.1 104.1 104.9 103.8

1961............................................. 104.2 104.8 102.6 103.9 103.0 105.0 107.3 111.3 104.6 107.2 104.6

1962.................................... - 105.4 106.1 103.6 104.8 103.6 107.2 109.4 114.2 106.5 109.6 105.3

1963............................................. 106.7 107.4 105.1 106.0 104.8 107.8 111.4 117.0 107.9 111.5 107.1

1964............................................. 108.1 108.9 106.4 107.2 105.7 109.3 113.6 119.4 109.2. 114.1 108.8

1965............................................. 109.9 110.4 108.8 108.5 106.8 111.1 115.6 122.3 109.9 115.2 111.4

1966............................................. 113.1 113-0 114.2 111. 1 109.6 112.7 119.0 127.7 112.2 117.1 114.9

Percent change in annual averages

1954-55...................................... -0 .3 0.3 -1 .5 0 .7 -0 .4 -1 .2 0.8 2.3 1.7 -0 .3 0

1955-56...................................... 1.5 1.7 .7 1.5 2.0 1.8 2.4 3.6 4.1 1.4 1.6

1956-57...................................... 3.5 3.4 3.3 3.1 1.7 5.7 3.6 4 .0 3.6 3.7 2.8

1957-58...................................... 2.8 2.2 4.2 1.7 .3 3.3 3.4 4.8 3.4 4.0 1.3

1958-59.................... ................. .8 1.9 - 1 . 6 1.1 .8 4.1 2.5 4.3 2.0 1.6 2.0

1959-60...................................... 1.6 1.7 1.1 1.8 1.6 0 2.5 3.5 1.7 2.4 2.0

1960-61 ...................................... 1.1 1.1 1.2 .8 .8 1.2 1.8 3 .0 .5 2.2 .8

1961-62 ...................................... 1.2 1.2 1.0 .9 .6 2.1 2.0 2 .6 1.8 2.2 .7

1962-63 ...................................... 1.2 1.2 1.4 1.1 1.2 .6 1.8 2.5 1.3 1.7 1.7

1963-64...................................... 1.3 1.4 1.2 1.1 .9 1.4 2.0 2.1 1.2 2.3 1.6

1964-65 ...................................... 1.7 1.4 2.3 1.2 1.0 1.6 1.8 2.4 .6 1.0 2.4

1965-66...................................... 2 .9 2.4 5.0 2.4 2.6 1.4 2.9 4 .4 2.1 1.6 3.1

Monthly indexes

1965:

January.................................. 108.9 109.8 106.6 108.1 105.6 111.1 114.5 120.6 110.0 115.0 109.3

February............................... 108.9 109.8 106.6 108.2 105.8 110.6 114.7 121.0 110.1 115.2 109.4

March...................................... 109.0 109.9 106.9 108.2 106.0 110.6 114.9 121.4 110.4 115.4 109.5

A p ril....................................... 109.3 110.1 107.3 108.2 106.3 111.0 115.4 121.6 110.7 115.9 110.3

May........................................... 109.6 110.3 107.9 108.2 106.8 111.4 115.6 121.8 111.0 115.9 110.6

June........................................ 110.1 110.3 110.1 108.2 106.9 111.2 115.7 122.2 111.0 115.7 111.0

J u ly ........................................ 110.2 110.2 110.9 108.3 106.1 111.5 115.3 122.7 108.7 114.6 111.5

August............................. .. 110.0 110.2 110.1 108.2 106.4 111.0 115.6 122.8 109.0 114.3 112.6

September............................. 110- 2 110.6 109.7 108.6 107.2 111.0 115.8 122.8 109.2 114.8 112.7

October.................................. 110.4 110.9 109.7 109.0 107.8 111.2 116.2 123.0 109.2 115.2 113.3

November................................ 110.6 111.2 109.7 109.2 108.1 111.5 116.4 123.4 109.6 115.4 113.3

December................................ 111.0 111.3 110.6 109.4 108.1 111.6 116.6 123.7 110.0 115.4 113-4

1966:

January .................................. 111.0 111.1 111.4 109.2 107.3 111.2 116.9 124.2 110.4 115.7 113.4

February............................... 111.6 111.3 113.1 109.4 107.6 111.1 117.1 124.5 110.8 115.9 113.6

March...................................... 112.0 111.6 113.9 109.6 108.2 111.4 117.6 125.3 111.0 116.6 113.8

April........................................ 112.5 112.2 114.0 110.3 108.7 112.0 118.1 125.8 111.6 116.8 114.3

May.......................................... 112.6 112.5 113.5 110.7 109.3 112.0 118.4 126.3 112.0 116.8 114.7

June........................................ 112.9 112.8 113.9 111.1 109.4 112.2 118.7 127.0 112.2 117.0 114.9

J u ly ........................................ 113.3 113.2 114.3 111.3 109.2 113.5 119.1 127.7 112.5 117.2 115.3

August.................................... 113.8 1,13.4 115.8 111.5 109.2 113.5 119.5 128.4 112.7 117.4 115.5

September............................. 114.1 113.8 115.6 111.8 110.7 113.3 119.9 129.4 113.0 117.5 115.7

October.................................. 114.5 114.4 115.6 112.2 111.5 114.3 120.4 130.4 113.3 118.0 115.9

November............................... 114.6 114.8 114.8 112.6 112.0 114.5 120.8 131.3 113-4 118.3 116.0

December........................... 114.7 114.9 114.8 113.0 112.3 113.8 121.0 131.9 113.7 118.4 115.9

| See footnotes at end of table 6.

51

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Table A-2. Consumer Price Indexes for Food, 1954-66

(1957-59=100)

Year and month

Food

away

from

home

Food ;at home

A ll2

Meats Dairy products

Fruits

and

vegetables

Cereals and bakery

products

Eggs

A ll2

Beef

and

veal

Pork A ll2 Milk,

grocery A ll2 Bread

Relative importance1 ........... 4. 62 18. 21 4. 90 2.25 1.62 2.75 0.83 2.96 2. 45 0. 60 0.68

Annual averages

1954............................................. 90.9 96.3 95.3 85.3 105.7 93-7 92. 1 90.5 91.9 88.4 103.1

1955............................................. 91.8 94.4 87.7 84.4 91.0 93.6 92.3 91.8 93-4 91.0 106.5

1956............................................. 93.6 94.8 84.8 83.1 86.4 96.0 95. 1 96.3 94.7 93.2 105.9

1957............................................. 97.1 97.9 94. 2 89. 2 99.5 98.8 98.4 96.0 98.4 97.5 100.9

1958............................................ 100.0 102.2 104. 9 103. 8 106.1 100.3 100. 3 102.8 100.4 100. 3 106. 1

1959............................................. 102.8 99.7 101.0 106.9 94.4 101.0 101. 3 101.2 101. 2 102. 3 92.9

1960............................................. 105.5 100.6 99.2 104. 2 93.8 103. 2 103.7 103. 8 103. 2 105.5 100. 1

1961............................................. 107.8 101. 5 100. 5 102. 5 98.2 104. 8 104. 0 104. 2 105.4 108. 7 100. 1

1962............................................. 110.7 102.2 102. 5 106. 2 99.1 104. 1 103.5 105.0 107.6 110. 3 94.6

1963............................................. 113.2 103.5 100.9 105.0 96.6 103. 8 103.0 111 .0 109. 1 112. 7 96.0

1964............................................. 115.2 104. 7 99.4 101.9 96.1 104. 7 103.3 115.3 109.6 113.3 95.0

1965............................................. 117.8 107. 2 106.9 106.8 109.4 105.0 102.8 115.2 111.2 114.7 92.8

1966............................................. 123.2 112.6 116.8 112.4 125.1 111.8 109.4 117.6 115.8 121.7 105.7

Percent change in annual averages

1954-55 ...................................... 1.0 -2 .0 -8 .0 -1 . 1 -1 3 .9 -0 . 1 0. 2 1.4 1.6 2.9 3.3

1955-56...................................... 2.0 .4 - 3 .3 -1 .5 -5 .1 2.6 3.0 4.9 1.4 2.4 - . 6

1956-57...................................... 3.7 3.3 11. 1 7.3 15.2 2.9 3.5 - . 3 3.9 4.6 -4 .7

1957-58...................................... 3.0 4.4 11.4 16.4 6 .6 1.5 1.9 7. 1 2. 2.9 5.2

1958-59...................................... 2.8 -2 .5 -3 .7 3.0 -1 1 .0 .7 1.0 - 1 .6 .8 2.0 -1 2 .4

1959-60 ...................................... 2.6 .9 -1 .8 -2 .5 - .6 2.2 2.4 2.6 2.0 3. 1 7.8

1960-61...................................... 2.2 .9 1.3 -1 .6 4.7 1.6 .3 .4 2. 1 3.0 0

1961-62...................................... 2. 7 .7 2.0 3-6 .9 - . 7 - . 5 .8 2. 1 1.5 - 5 .5

1962-63...................................... 2.3 1.3 -1 .6 -1 .1 -2 .5 - . 3 - . 5 5.7 1.4 2.2 1. 5

1963-64 ...................................... 1.8 1. 2 -1 .5 -3 .0 - 5 .9 .3 3.9 .5 .5 - 1 .0

1964-65 ...................................... 2.3 2.4 7.5 4.8 13. 8 .3 - . 5 - . 1 1.5 1. 2 - 2 .3

1965-66...................................... 4 .6 5.0 9.3 5.2 14.4 6.5 6 .4 2.1 4.1 6. 1 13.9

Monthly indexes

1965:

J anuary.................................. 116. 1 104. 8 100.1 103.1 96.2 105.6 103-9 112.4 111. 1 115.2 91.6

February............................... 116. 3 104. 8 100.0 102.4 97.0 105.2 103. 0 113.3 110.7 114. 7 86.1

March...................................... 116. 5 105-0 100. 3 102.6 97.4 105.0 102.7 115.3 110.9 115. 1 83.5

A p ril...................................... 116.8 105-5 100.4 102.6 97.5 104. 5 102. 1 117.6 111.0 115. 3 88.6

M a y ........................................ 116.9 106.2 101. 3 103.9 98.6 104. 2 101. 3 121.4 110.8 114.6 87.5

June........................................ 117.2 108.8 108.0 109.6 108.9 104. 0 100.9 125.9 111.0 114. 3 83-9

July........................................ 117.6 109.7 111.6 110.9 117..2 104.3 101.8 124. 3 111. 1 114.3 87. 2

August.................................... 118. 2 108.6 112. 5 110.1 119.9 105.0 103.1 114.6 111. 1 114.0 90.5

September............................. 118.8 108.0 112.5 109.8 119.9 105.3 103.1 108. 5 111.3 114. 3 98.6

October.................................. 119.2 107.8 111.8 109.1 118.8 105.5 103.7 108.5 111.3 114.8 103. 5

November............................. 119.6 107.8 111.3 108.3 118.3 1Q5.8 104.0 109.9 111.4 114.0 102.6

December............................. 119.9 108.9 113.3 108.9 122.8 106.1 104.3 111.0 112. 2 115. 8 109.6

1966:

J anuary.................................. 120.4 109.8 116.6 109.4 130.9 106.6 104.7 111.3 113-0 117.6 105.0

F ebruary............................... ' 120.8 111.8 118.8 111.4 133. 2 107.0 105.4 116.5 113.2 118. 3 109. 1

March...................................... 121.2 112.6 119.8 113.9 131.7 108. 1 106. 1 117.4 113.6 118.6 108.5

A p ril...................................... 121.6 112.7 118. 1 115.1 124.6 108.9 106.8 119.8 114.1 119.5 105.9

M a y ........................................ 122. 2 112.0 116. 3 113.3 121.6 109.3 107.0 119.2 114. 3 118.9 98.8

June........................................ 122.8 112.3 116.6 112.8 123.9 109.6 106.8 121.7 114.7 119.9 89. 1

July........................................ 123.5 112.7 116.6 112.2 125.0 111.0 108.8 121.5 114.8 119. 7 93.9

August.................................... 124.0 114.4 116.9 112.3 125.9 114.8 112.2 122.3 117.3 125. 2 110. 5

September............................. 124.6 114.0 117.2 112.7 126.4 116.0 113.0 116.6 118.4 126. 1 111.8

October.................................. 125.2 113.8 116.6 112.8 123.8 117. 1 114. 1 115.3 118.3 125. 1 116.1

November............................. 125.7 112.8 114.5 111.4 119.1 116.7 114.0 114.9 118.6 125.6 107.9

December............................. 126.3 112.6 113.4 111.9 114.9 116.5 113.7 114.3 118.8 125.7 111.9

See footnotes at end of table 6.

52

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Table A-3. Consumer Price Indexes for All Commodities and for Key Durables, 1954-66

(1957-59= 1 0 0 )

Year and month

All

commodities

All

commodities

less food

Durable commodities

A ll2

New

cars

Used

cars Tires

Household durables

A ll2

Appliances Furniture Floor

covering

A ll2 T V sets

and bedding

Relative importance1......... 65.51 42.68 18. 10 2.40 2.35 0.72 5.34 1.26 0.54 1.40 0.46

Annual averages

1954........................................ 95.5 95-6 97.3 92.5 92.2 93.1 1 0 1 .0 111.3 99.6 98.9 92.1

1955........................................ 94.6 94.9 95.4 8 9 - 2 87. 2 95.1 98.3 105.9 93.9 97.3 93.5

1956........................................ 95.5 95.9 95-4 91.7 83.9 97.3 97.9 1 0 0 .8 94.3 97.8 9 6 .1

1957 ...................................... 98.5 98.8 98.5 96.5 94.0 98.4 99.6 1 0 1 . 1 98.4 1 0 0 . 3 1 0 0 . 3

1958 ...................................... 1 0 0 .8 99.9 1 0 0 .0 99.6 97.4 101.9 1 0 0 . 3 99.4 1 0 0 .2 99.7 1 0 0 .1

1959 ...................................... 100.9 1 0 1 .2 101. 5 103-9 108.8 99.6 1 0 0 .2 99.5 101.5 99.9 99.5

1 9 6 0 ........................................ 101.7 101.7 100.9 102.5 1 0 1 .6 92.6 1 0 0 .1 9 8 .8 1 0 2 .2 1 0 0 .1 1 0 0 .8

1 9 6 1 ........................................ 1 0 2 . 3 1 0 2 .0 1 0 0 .8 102.5 105.6 8 8 .1 98.9 96.5 99.5 1 0 1 .1 100.5

1 9 6 2 ........................................ 1 0 3 .2 1 0 2 .8 1 0 1 .8 1 0 2 . 1 1 1 5 .2 92.6 98.8 93.5 94.6 1 0 1 .6 100.4

1963........................................ 104.1 103.5 1 0 2 . 1 101.5 116.6 96.9 98.5 91.5 9 2 .2 1 0 2 .1 1 0 1 .1

1964........................................ 105.2 104.4 1 0 3 .0 1 0 1 . 2 1 2 1 .6 97.4 98.4 9 0 . 0 9 0 .1 1 0 2 .2 102.7

1965........................................ 106.4 105.1 1 0 2 .6 99.0 1 2 0 .8 99.8 96.9 87.1 86.3 1 0 2 .8 1 0 1 .6

1 9 6 6 ...................................... 109.2 106.5 102.7 97.2 117.8 1U2 .1 9 6 .8 84.4 82.1 105.4 1 0 1 .9

Percent change in annual averages

1954-55................................. -0 -9 -0 .7 - 2 . 0 -3 .6 -5 .4 2 .1 -2 .7 -4.9 -5 .7 - 1 .6 1.5

1955-56................................. 1 .0 1 . 1 0 2 . 8 -3 -8 2.3 - -4 - 4 .8 .4 .5 2 . 8

1956-57................................. 3.1 3-0 3.2 5.2 1 2 .0 1 .1 1.7 .3 4 .3 2 . 6 4 .4

1957-58.................................. 2.3 1 .1 .1.5 3-2 3.6 3.6 .7 -1 .7 1 .8 - . 6 - . 2

1958-59.................................. . 1 1.3 1.5 4.3 11.7 - 2 .3 -. 1 . 1 1.3 • 2 - . 6

1959-60 ................................. . 8 . 5 - . 6 -1 .3 - 6 . 6 -7 .0 -. 1 - . 7 . 7 . 2 1.3

1 9 6 0 - 6 1 ................................. . 6 .3 -. 1 0 3.9 - 4.9 - 1 . 2 -2 .3 - 2 . 6 1 .0 - .3

1 9 6 1 - 6 2 ................................. .9 . 8 1 .0 —. 4 9.1 5.1 -. 1 -3 -1 - 4.9 .5 - . 1

1962-63................................. .9 . 7 .3 - . 6 1 .2 4. 6 - . 3 - 2 .1 -2. 5 .5 . 7

1963-64 ................................. 1 .1 • 9 • 9 - 3 4.3 .5 - . 1 - 1 .6 -2 .3 . 1 1 .6

1964-65 ................................. 1 .1 .7 - . 4 - 2 . 2 - .7 2.5 -1 .5 -3- 2 —4. 2 . 6 - 1 .1

1 9 6 5 -6 6 ................................. 2 . 6 1.3 .1 - 1 .8 - 2 .5 2.3 - . 1 -3-1 -4 .9 2.5 0.3

Monthly indexes^

1965:

January............................. 105.6 104.9 103-6 101.5 123.7 _ 97.8

F ebruary........................... 105.5 104.7 103-3 1 0 1 .0 121.7 _ 97.8

M a rch ............................... 105.6 104.8 1 0 3 .2 1 0 0 .8 121.7 9 8 . 0

A p r il.................................. 105.9 105.0 1 0 3 .0 100.7 1 2 0 .6 _ 97.9

M a y .................................... 106.2 105.2 102.9 1 0 0 .2 1 2 1 . 1 _ 97.8

J u n e ................................. 106.9 105. 1 1 0 2 .6 97.4 122.7 99.8 97.3 8 8 . 0 8 8 .0 102.9 101.4

J u l y . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 106.9 104.7 1 0 2 . 3 97.2 1 2 3 .0 _ 96.3 _ _ _ _

August............................... 1 0 6 .6 104.7 1 0 1 .8 97.1 120.3 - 95.8 - _ _ _

September......................... 106.6 104.9 101.7 96.5 118.9 _ 96.0 _ _ _ _

October ........................... 106.9 105.3 1 0 2 . 1 97.7 119.4 - 96.0 _ _ _ _

November......................... 107.1 105.6 102.4 98.7 118. 7 _ 9 6 .0 _ _ _ _

December......................... 107.4 105.7 102.4 98.7 118. 2 100.7 9 6 .1 84.8 82.6 103.1 1 0 1 .6

1 9 6 6 :

J anuary............................. 107.4 105.3 101.9 97.4 114.8 _ 96.1 _ _ _

February ......................... 108.0 105.4 1 0 1 .8 97.2 114.0 - 96.1 - - - -

M a rc h ............................... 108.4 105.6 1 0 2 .0 97. 1 115.4 100.4 96.2 84.6 82. 3 103.9 1 0 1 .6

A p r il................................. 108.8 106. 0 102.3 97.4 117.4 _ 96.4 _ _ _ _

M a y ........... , ...................... 108.8 106.3 102.5 97.0 117.5 - 96.7 _ _ _ _

J une ................................. 109.0 106.4 1 0 2 .6 96.8 118.2 1 0 2 .6 96.7 84.3 8 2 .2 1 0 5 .2 101.7

July . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 109-3 106.7 103. 0 96.7 120.3 _ 96.9 _ _ _ _

August............................. 109. 8 106.6 103.0 95.8 1 2 2 . 1 _ 97.0 _ _ _ _

September ...................... 1 1 0 .0 107.0 102.7 94.4 1 2 0 .1 103-2 97.3 84.3 81.8 106.2 1 0 2 .2

October............................. 110.3 107.6 103.5 98.4 1 2 0 .8 _ 97.4 _ _ _ _

November......................... 1 1 0 . 2. 107.8 103.5 99.3 119.3 - 97.6 - - - -

December......................... 1 1 0 .1 107.7 103.1 98.6 114. 2 103-2 97.7 £4.2 .82.0 107.7 102-3

See footnotes at end of table

53

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
( 1957- 59=100)

Table A-4. Consumer Price Indexes for Nondurable Commodities, 1954-66

Year and month

A ll nondurables

less food

Apparel less footwear

Footwear

Textile

housefurnishings

Fuel oil

and coal Gasoline

Drugs

and

prescriptions

Toilet

goods

Tobacco

products A ll2 Women’s Men’s

Relative importance ......... 24.58 7.51 3.99 2.86 1.52 0.60 0.72 3.08 1.10 1.43 1.99

Annual averages

1954........................................... 94.4 99.0 99.6 98.3 88.9 99.9 90.6 92.1 91.7 92.2 91.7

1955........................................... 94.4 98.2 98.7 97.2 89.8 98.3 91.9 93.4 92.7 92.2 92.1

1956........................................... 96.5 99.2 99.4 98.8 94.6 100.0 95.9 96.6 94.7 94.3 94.1

1957........................................... 99.1 100.1 99.9 100.3 97.6 101.0 100.8 100.5 97.2 97.3 96.7

1958........................................... 99.8 99.9 99.8 99.9 99.1 99.4 99.0 99.2 100.6 101.0 99.7

1959........................................... 101.0 100.0 100.2 99.7 103.2 99.7 100.2 100.4 102.2 101.8 103.6

1960........................................... 102.6 101.1 100.7 101.6 106.8 101..1 99.5 103.3 102.3 101.8 107.1

1961........................................... 103.2 101.7 101.0 102.8 107.8 101.7 101.6 102.1 101.1 101.4 108.0

1962........................................... 103.8 101.8 100.9 103.3 109.3 101.5 102.1 102.7 99.6 102.4 108.8

1963........................................... 104.8 102.8 101.7 104.7 110.5 101.6 104.0 102.5 98.7 102.8 112.2

1964........................................... 105.7 103.6 102.3 106.1 111.0 102.0 103.5 102.1 98.4 102.9 114.8

1965........................................... 107.2 104.4 103.1 107.4 112.9 102.7 105.6 106.0 98.1 102.3 120.2

1966........................................... 109.7 106. 3 105.1 110.3 119.6 104.1 108.3 108.3 98.4 101.2 126.1

Percent change in annual averages

1954-55 .................................... 0 -0 .8 - 0 .9 -1 .1 1.0 - 1 . 6 1.4 1.4 1.1 0 0 .4

1955-56............................. 2.2 1.0 .7 1.6 5.3 1.7 4.4 3.4 2.2 2.3 2.2

1956-57 .................................... 2.7 .9 .5 1.5 3.2 1.0 5.1 4 .0 2.6 3.2 2.8

1957-58.................................... .7 - . 2 - . 1 - . 4 1.5 - 1 . 6 - 1 . 8 -1 .3 3.5 3.8 3.1

1958-59.................................... 1.2 .1 .4 - . 2 4.1 .3 1.2 1.2 1. , .8 3 .9

1959-60.................................... 1.6 1.1 .5 1.9 3.5 1.4 - . 7 2.9 . 1 0 3.4

1960-61 .................................... .6 .6 .3 1.2 .9 .6 2.1 -1 .2 -1 .2 - . 4 .8

1961-62.................................... .6 .1 - . 1 .5 1.4 - . 2 .5 .6 -1 .5 1.0 .7

1962-63 .................................... 1.0 1.0 .8 1.4 1.1 .1 1.9 - . 2 - . 9 .4 3.1

1963-64.................................... .9 .8 .6 1.3 .5 .4 - . 5 - . 4 - . 3 .1 2.3

1964-65.................................... 1.4 .8 .8 1.2 1.7 .7 2.0 3.8 - . 3 - . 6 4 .7

1965-66.................................... 2.3 1.8 1.9 2.7 5.9 1.4 2.6 2.2 .3 -1 .1 4.9

Monthly indexes3

1965:

January ................................ 106.1 103.3 101.4 106.2 111.5 _ 106.5 _ _ _ _

February............................. 106.1 103.5 101.9 106.2 111.6 - 106.7 - - - _

March.................................... 106.2 103.7 102.1 106.3 111.7 - 106.5 - - _ _

A p r il.................................... 106.8 104.0 102.5 106.6 112.0 - 105.4 - _ _ _

M a y .................... ................. 107.2 104.6 103.4 107.0 112.2 - 104.6 - - _ _

June...................................... 107.3 104.7 103.5 107.1 112.3 102.6 103.4 106.8 98.1 103.5 119.3

J u ly...................................... 106.9 103.6 102.5 106.8 112.0 - 103.2 - - _ _

A u g u s t............................... 107.1 103.8 102.6 107.2 112.7 - 103.5 - - - _

September........................... 107.7 104.8 1 0 3 .8 107.9 113.4 - 104.3 - - - _

October............................... 108.0 105.4 104.3 108.7 114.4 - 106.9 - _ _ _

November........................... 108.3 105.7 104.6 109.2 115.1 - 107.2 - - - -

December............................ 108.4 105.5 104.3 109.3 115.6 103.1 108.6 106.5 98.1 100.3 123.7

1966:

J anuary................................. 108.0 104.3 102.6 108.6 115.6 _ 108.9 _ _ _ _

February.............................. 108.3 104.6 103.1 108.6 116.2 - 109.0 - - - -

March..................................... 108.6 105.2 103.9 109.0 116.9 102.5 108.9 106.9 98.4 100.9 123.9

A p r il..................................... 109.0 105.6 104.2 109.6 118.1 - 108.5 - - - -

May........................................ 109.3 106.1 105.0 109.9 119.0 - 108.0 - - - -

June...................................... 109.5 106.0 104.7 110.1 119.8 103.6 107.0 107.7 98.6 101.2 126.2

J u ly...................................... 109.7 105.8 104.6 109.6 119.8 - 107.0 - - - -

August ............................... 109.6 105.5 1 0 3 .8 109.9 120.4 - 107.0 - - - -

September........................... 110.5 107.4 106.3 111.2 121.3 104.9 107.4 109.5 98.5 101.5 127.7

October............................... 110.9 108.1 107.5 111.5 122.2 - 108.3 - - - -

November........................... 111.3 108.6 107.8 112.4 122.8 - 108.9 - - - -

December........................... 111.4 108.8 108.1 112.6 122.9 106.4 110.2 110.1 98.3 101.8 128.0

See footnotes at end of table 6.

54

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Table A-5. Consumer Price Indexes for Services, 1954-66

(1957-59=100)

Year and month

A ll

services Rent

Household services

less rent Transportation services Medical care services

Other

services

A ll2

Mortgage

interest

rates

A ll2 Local

transit

Auto

insurance

A ll2 Physicians’

fees

Daily

hospital

charges

Relative importance1 ............ 34.49 5.44 13.57 2.84 5.02 0.78 1.64 4.70 1.50 0.39 5.75

Annual averages

1954 ........................................... 88.7 93.5 ( 4 ) 90.1 88.9 85.4 88.2 85.5 87.0 79.2 ( 4 )

1955 ........................................... 90.5 94.8 ( 4 ) 90.4 89. 1 88.9 84.7 88.0 90.0 83.0 ( 4 )

1956............................................ 92.8 96.5 90.4 93.0 90.5 '9 2 .4 82.4 91.4 92.7 87.5 93.5

1957 ........................................... 96.6 98.3 95.7 99.2 94.8 95.2 89.2 95.3 96.7 94.5 97.2

1958 ........................................... 100.3 100.1 100.8 98.8 100.8 100.9 102.2 100.0 100.0 99.9 100.2

1959 ........................................... 103.2 101.6 103.6 102.0 104.3 104.0 108.7 104.8 103.4 105.5 102.6

1960 ........................................... 106.6 103.1 108.0 106.7 107.0 108.1 111.5 109.1 106.0 112.7 106.2

1961........................................... 108.8 104.4 109.2 103.9 109.5 112.9 112.5 113.1 108.7 121.3 109.7

1962 ........................................... 110.9 105.7 110.6 102.0 111.2 117.3 111.5 116.8 111.9 129.8 112.6

1963 ........................................... 113.0 106.8 113.0 100.8 112.4 120.0 113.3 120.3 114.4 138.0 115.3*

1964 ........................................... 115.2 107.8 114.8 100.1 115.0 122.8 119.2 123.2 117.3 144.9 118.5

1965 ........................................... 117.8 108.9 117.0 100.5 119.3 125.4 130.5 127.1 121.5 153.3 121.8

1966 .................................. 122. 3 110.4 121. 5 106.9 124. 3 130.9 139.9 133.9 128.5 168.0 126. 5

Percent change in annual. averages

1954-55...................................... 2 .0 1.4 ( 4 ) 0.3 0.2 4.1 - 4 .0 2 .9 3.4 4.8 ( 4 )

1955-56...................................... 2.5 1.8 ( 4 ) 2,9 1.6 3.9 2.7 3.9 3.0 5.4 ( 4 )

1956-57............................. ........ 4.1 1.9 5 .9 6 .7 4 .8 3-0 8.3 4.3 4 .3 8.0 4.0

1957-58........................... ........... 3.8 1.8 5.3 - . 4 6.3 6.0 14.6 4 .9 3.4 5.7 3.1

1958-59...................................... 2.9 1.5 2.8 3.2 3.5 3.1 6 .4 4.8 3.4 '5 .6 2.4

1959-60...................................... 3.3 1.5 4 .2 4 .6 2.6 3.9 2.6 4.1 2.5 6.8 3.5

i 960-61...................................... 2.1 1.3 1.1 -2 .6 2.3 4 ,4 .9 3.7 2.5 7.6 3-3

1961-62...................................... 1.9 1.2 1.3 - 1 .8 1.6 3.9 - . 9 3.3 2.9 7.0 2.6

1962-63...................................... 1.9 1.0 2 .2 - 1 .2 1.1 2.3 1.6 3.0 2.2 6.3 2.4

1963-64...................................... 1.9 .9 1.6 - . 7 2.3 2.3 5.2 2.4 2 .5 ‘ 5.0 2.8

1964-65...................................... 2.3 1.0 1.9 .4 3.7 2.1 9.5 3.2 3.6 5.8 2.8

1965-66.........................; .......... 3.8 1.4 3.8 6.4 4. 2 4.4 7.2 5.4 5.8 9.6 3.9

Monthly indexes3

1965:

J anuary.................................. 116.6 108.4 116.0 _ 117.7 - - 125.0 - - 120.1

February................................ 116.9 108.5 116.2 - 118.2 - - 125.5 - - 120.4

M arch.................................... 117.0 108.7 116.2 - 118.4 - - 125.9 - - 120.7

A p ril...................................... 117. 3 108.8 116.3 - 118.5 - - 126.2 - - 121.3

M ay......................................... 117.5 108.8 116.5 - 118.7 - - 126.5 - - 121.6

June...................................... 117.6 108.8 116.8 100.5 118.6 125.3 128.6 127.0 121.1 152.5 121.7

J u ly ...................................... 117.8 108.9 116.9 - 119.1 - - 127.5 - - 121.9

August.................................. 117.9 109.0 116.6 - 119.6 - - 127.7 - - 122.1

September.................. .. 118.5 109.1 117.6 - 120.2 - - 127.8 - - 122.6

O cto b er................................ 118.7 109.2 117.9 - 120.7 - - 128.1 - - 122.8

November............................. 119.0 109.3 118.1 - 121.0 - - 128.5 - - 123.0

December............................. 119.3 109.5 118.4 100.7 121.3 126.1 136.4 128.9 123-3 157.1 123-2

1966:

January.................................. 119.5 109.7 117.9 - 122.5 - - 129.5 - - 123.8

F ebruary................................ 119.7 109.8 118.1 - 122.6 - - 129.9 - - 124.1

March.................................... 120.1 109.9 118.5 101.4 122.6 126.2 138.2 130.8 125.5 160.8 125.0

A p ril...................................... 121.1 110.1 120.2 - 123.0 - - 131.4 - - 125.5

M ay........................................ 121.5 110.2 120.9 - 123.0 - - 132.1 - 125.9

June...................................... 122.0 110. 2 121.7 107.5 123.2 126.2 139.4 133.0 128.0 164.2 126.4

J u ly ....................................... 122.6 110. 3 122. 1 125-0 - - 133-9 - - 126.7

August.................................. 123-0 110.6 122.4 - 125.3 - - 134.7 - - 127.1

September........................... 123-5 110.7 123.0 109.8 125.5 137.4 141.6 • 136.2 130.8 172.6 127.5

October.................................. 124.1 111.0 123.5 - 125.9 - - 137.4 - - 128.2

November....................... 124.7 111.2 124.2 __ _ 126.1 - - 138.6 - - 128. 5

December ................ 125.2 111.3 124. 9 113.2 126. 5 137.6 142 .4 139.4 132.9 183.0. 128.9

See footnotes at end of table 6. 55

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
,o*es for 23 Cities, Annual Averages and Percent Changes, 1954-66

(1957-59-100 unless otherwise indicated5)

Table A-6 AH-item« Consumer Price ■-'*

City 19667 1965 1964 1963 1962 1961 I960 1959 ’ 1958 1957 1956 1955 1954

Annual averages

United States6 ...................................... i 113.1 109.9 108. 1 106. 7 105.4 104.2 103- 1 101. 5 100. 7 98.0 94.7 93.3 93.6

A tla n ta ............................................... 111.5 108. 1 106.7 105. 1 104. 1 103- 2 102.7 101. 3 100.6 98. 1 95.4 93.9 94.3

Baltim ore.......................................... 113.4 109.6 107.9 106.8 105.2 104.4 103.4 102. 2 100. 3 97.5 94. 2 92.8 92.7

B o sto n........................................ . - 113.2 111. 1 109-5 107.4 105. 1 103-6 101. 5 100.7 97.8 94. 5 91.8 91.4

Buffalo5 ............................................. - 103.5 101. 1 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

C h icag o ............................................. 110.J 107.6 106. 1 105.7 104.6 103-6 103.0 101.6 100.7 97.8 94.8 93.5 92.9

Cincin nati......................................... ir ^ 3 107. 2 106. 3 104.7 103-6 102.6 102. 2 101. 2 100.5 98.3 95.3 93.4 93.8

C le ve lan d......................................... - 106.9 105.2 104.7 103-5 103. 2 102. 3 101. 1 100. 5 98.3 95.0 93-1 92.8

Dallas5 .............................................. - 101.4 100. 1 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

Detroit ............................................. n i . i 106.4 104.0 103-2 102. 2 101.9 101. 3 100.4 100. 5 99.1 96.3 94.5 94.6

Honolulu5 <........................................ 105.1 102. 1 100. 3 - - - - - _ _ _ _ _

Houston............................................. - 108.5 107. 2 105.6 104.6 102.6 102. 1 101. 1 100. 3 98.6 95.6 94. 1 94.7

Kansas C ity ...................................... • 116.3 113.3 109. 8 107. 2 106. 1 104. 5 103. 1 101.8 100.3 97.9 95.0 93.5 93-4

Los A n g eles.................................... 114.7 112.5 110. 2 108. 2 106.6 105.4 104. 1 102. 2 100.6 97.2 94. 1 92.7 92.7

M ilw aukee........................................ - 108. 2 106. 1 104.9 103.9 102. 5 101.8 100. 5 100. 5 99-1 95.8 94.4 94.5

Minneapolis...................................... - 109-5 108.0 107.0 105.5 104. 2 103. 1 101.5 100. 5 97.9 94.6 94.4 94.4

New Y o rk .......................................... 116.0 112.2 110.4 108.7 106.4 104.8 103.9 101.9 100. 5 97.6 94. 5 93.1 93-6

Philadelphia...................................... 113.7 110.6 108.8 107. 2 105. 2 104.4 103.2 101.4 100. 2 98.4 95. 3 94. 1 94.2

Pittsburgh. ......................................... - 110. 2 108.5 107. 1 105.9 105.0 104. 1 101.9 100.6 97.6 94.6 92.4 93-0

San Diego5 ........................................ - 100. 1 - - - - - - - - - - -

San Francisco................................. 115.6 112.7 110.6 108.9 107. 4 105.8 104. 5 102.4 100. 5 97.0 93. 3 91. 1 91.7

S e a ttle ............................................... - 111.0 109.7 108.2 106. 5 104.9 103.3 102.0 100. 1 97.9 94.0 92.8 92.4

St. Louis............................................. 113.5 109.9 108.1 106.2 105. 1 103-9 102.4 101.8 100.5 97.7 94.4 93.5 93.9

Washington........................................ - 109.6 108.1 106.4 104. 6 103.7 102.2 101. 1 100.6 98.3 95.4 94.4 94.5

Percent change from previous year

United States........................................ 2.9 1.7 1.3 1. 2 1.2 1. 1 1.6 0.8 2.8 3.5 1. 5 -0 -3 0 .4

A tla n ta ...................................... 3.1 1.3 1.5 1.0 0 .9 0. 5 1.4 0.7 2. 5 2.8 1.6 -0 .4 - . 3

Baltim ore.......................................... 3.5 1.6 1.0 1.5 .8 1.0 1. 2 1.9 2.9 3.5 1-5 . 1 .3

B o sto n ............................................... - 1.9 1.5 2.0 2.2 1.4 2. 1 0.8 3.0 3.5 2.9 .4 .4

B u ffalo ............................................... - 2 .4 - - - - - - - - - _

C h icag o ............................................. 2.9 1.4 .4 1. 1 1.0 .6 1 .4 .9 3.0 3.2 1.4 .6 1.5

Cincinnati ........................................ 2 . 4 .8 1.5 1. 1 1.0 .4 1.0 .7 2. 2 3. 1 2.0 - .4 0

Cleveland.......................................... - 1.6 .5 1. 2 .3 .9 1.2 .6 2. 2 3.5 2. 0 .3 1.0

Dallas ............................................... - 1.3 - - - - - - - - - - -

D e tro it............................................... 4 .4 2.3 .8 1.0 .3 .6 .9 -. 1 1.4 2.9 1.9 -. 1 .4

Honolulu............................................. 2.9 1.8 - - - - - - - - - - -

Houston............................................ - 1.2 1.5 1.0 1.9 . 5 1.0 .8 1.7 3. 1 1.6 - .6 1

Kansas C ity ...................................... 2.6 3.2 2.4 1.0 1.5 1. 4 1.3 1. 5 2.5 3. 1 1.6 . 1 .4

Los A n g e les .................................... 2.0 2.1 1.8 1.5 1. 1 1. 2 1.9 1.6 3. 5 3.3 1.5 0 - . 1

M ilw au kee........................................ - 2.0 1. 1 1.0 1.4 ,7 1.3 0 1.4 3.4 1.5 -. 1 0

Minneapolis...................................... - 1.4 .9 1.4 1. 2 1. 1 1.6 1.0 2.7 3.5 .2 0 1.0

New York .............................!.... 3. 4... 1.6 1.6 2.2 1.5 • 9 2.0 1.4 3.0 3.3 1.5 - .5 .6

Philadelphia................................. .. . 2.8 1.7 1.5 1.9 . 8 1. 2 1.8 1.2 1.8 3.3 1.3 - . 1 1.1

Pittsburgh........................................ - 1.6 1. 3 1. 1 .9 .9 2.2 1.3 3. 1 3-2 2.4 - .6 .9

San Diego ........................................ - - - - - - - - - - - - -

San Francisco .................................. 2.6 1.9 1.6 1.4 1.5 1. 2 2. 1 1.9 3.6 4.0 2.4 - .7 . 1

S e a ttle ............................................... - 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.5 1.5 1.3 1.9 2. 2 4. 1 1.3 .4 . 1

St. Louis............................................. 3.3 1.7 1.8 1.0 1. 2 1.5 .6 1.3 2.9 3.5 1.0 - .4 .4

Washington........................................ “ 1.4 1.6 1. 7 .9 1.5 1. 1 . 5 2.3 3.0 1.1 -. 1 0

1 Relative importance as of December 1965. The relative importance of an item

is its value or weight in the index expressed as a percent of the all-items CPI.

2 Includes groups not shown separately.

3 Some indexes are not computed on a monthly basis. In 1965, numerous indexes for specific items, previously calculated four times a year, were only

computed semi-annually but, in 1966, they were once more placed on a quarterly

basis.

4 Index not available before 1956.

5 Indexes for Buffalo and Dallas based on November 1963=100; Honolulu on

December 1963=100, and San Diego on February 1965=100.

6 The U. S. City average index represents all urban places in the United States

and is based upon data obtained in 56 cities. Separate indexes are published monthly

for 5 cities and four times a year for an additional 18 cities. The individual city

indexes do not show whether prices or living costs are higher or lower in one city

than in another but indicate price change within a city from one period to another.

1 Annual averages for 1966 and percent changes from 1965 to 1966 were not

available at time of publication for those cities for which price data are not

collected in December.

56

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
(1957-59=100)

Table A-7. Wholesale Price Indexes, by Stage of Processing, 1954-66

Year and month

A ll

commod- •

ities

Farm products and foods Commodities other than farm product s and foods (industrial commodities)

All Crude1 Intermediate Consumer

foods2 All Crude Intermediate

Finished goods

Producer

Consumer

Durable Nondurable

Annual averages

1954................................................. 9 2 .9 100.7 106. 2 100.7 9 7.1 9 0 .4 8 8 .0 8 9 .8 8 3 .1 9 1 .8 9 5 .3

1955................................................ 9 3 -2 9 5 .9 9 6 .2 9 7 .5 9 4 .7 9 2 .4 9 6 .6 9 2 .5 8 5 .6 9 2 .8 9 5 .8

1956................................................. 9 6 .2 9 5 .3 9 4 .2 9 7 .9 9 4 .5 9 6 .5 102.3 9 7 .0 9 2 .0 9 5 .9 9 7 .7

1957................................................ 9 9 .0 9 8 .6 9 8 .4 9 9 .7 9 7 .8 9 9 .2 100.9 9 9 .6 9 7 .7 9 8 .7 9 9 .9

1958................................................. 100 .4 103.2 104.2 102 .0 103. 5 9 9 .5 9 6 .9 9 9 .4 100.2 100.1 9 9 .3

1959................................................ 100.6 9 8 .4 9 7 .4 9 8 .3 9 8 .7 101. 3 102.3 101.0 102. 1 101.3 100.8

I960................................................. 100.7 9 8 .6 9 6 .2 9 9 .5 100.8 101. 3 9 8 .3 101.4 102. 3 100. f 101.5

1961................................................ 100.3 9 8 .6 9 4 .9 102 .6 100.4 100.8 9 7 .2 100. 1 102.5 100. 5 101. 5

1962................................................ 100.6 9 9 .6 9 6 .8 100.5 101.3 100.8 9 5 .6 9 9 .9 102.9 100.0 101.6

1963................................................ 100.3 9 8 .7 9 4 .0 105.5 100.1 100.7 9 4 .3 9 9 .6 103. 1 9 9.5 101.9

1964................................................ 100.5 9 8 .0 9 1 .9 104.0 100.6 101.2 9 7 .1 100. 2 104. 1 9 9 .9 101.6

1965................................................ 102.5 102. 1 9 8 .3 106.6 104. 5 102.5 100.9 101. 5 .1 0 5 .4 9 9 .6 102.8

1966................................................ 105.9 108 .9 107.2 111.3 111.2 104.8 104.5 103 .6 108.0 100.2 104.8

Percent change in annual averages

1954-55 ......................................... 0 .3 - 4 . 8 - 9 - 4 - 3 . 2 - 2 . 5 2 .2 9 .8 3 .0 3 .0 1.1 0 .5

1955-56 ......................................... 3 -2 - . 6 - 2 . 0 .4 - . 2 4 .4 5 .9 4 .9 7 .5 3 .3 2 .0

1956-57......................................... 2 .9 3 .5 4 .5 1 .8 3 .5 2 .8 - 1 . 4 2 .7 6 .2 2 .9 2 .3

1957-58......................................... 1 .4 4 .7 5 .9 2 .3 5 .8 .3 - 4 . 0 - . 2 2 .6 1 .4 - . 6

1958-59......................................... .2 - 4 . 7 - 6 . 5 - 3 . 6 —4 .6 1 .8 5 .6 1 .6 1.9 1 .2 1.5

1959-60 ......................................... . 1 .2 - 1 . 2 1. 2 2. 1 0 - 3 . 9 .4 .2 - . 4 .7

1960-61......................................... - . 4 0 - 1 . 4 3 .1 - . 4 - . 5 - 1 . 1 - 1 . 3 .2 - . 4 0

1961-62......................................... .3 1 .0 2 .0 - 2 . 0 .9 0 - 1 . 6 - . 2 .4 - . 5 . 1

1962-63......................................... — 3 - . 9 - 2 . 9 5 .0 - 1 . 2 - . 1 - 1 . 4 - . 3 .2 - . 5 .3

1963-64 ......................................... . 2 - . 7 - 2 . 2 - 1 . 4 .5 .5 3 .0 .6 1.0 .4 - 3

1964-65 ......................................... 2 .0 4 .2 7 .0 2 .5 3 .9 1.3 3 .9 1 .3 1. 2 - . 3 1. 2

1965-66 ......................................... 3 .3 6 .7 9 .1 4 .4 6 .4 2 .2 3 .6 2.1 2 .5 .6 1 .9

Monthly indexes

1965

J anu ary....................................... 101.0 9 8 .1 9 1 .8 106. 3 100.8 101.9 9 9 .0 100.8 104. 9 9 9 .8 102. 3

F ebruary.................................... 101. 2 9 8 .7 9 3-5 106. 3 100.9 101.9 9 9 .4 100.8 105. 0 9 9 .7 102. 2

M arch......................................... 101.3 9 9 .0 9 3 .9 105.6 101. 3 102.0 9 9 .7 100.9 105. 1 9 9 .7 102. 2

A p ril............................................ 101.7 100.2 9 5 .4 105.8 102.6 102. 1 1 0 0 .1 101. 1 105-3 9 9 .7 102. 2

M ay.............................................. ' 102. 1 101. 1 9 7 .3 104. 9 103. 5 102. 3 101.0 101.4 105.3 9 9 .6 102. 5

J u n e............................................ 102.8 103. 5 101.0 105.9 105.6 102.5 100.5 101.5 105.4 9 9 .7 102.6

J u ly.....................................................' 102.9 103. 7 100.9 106.2 106.0 102.5 100.4 101.5 105.4 9 9 .6 102. 7

A u g u st.......................................i 102.9 103.3 1 0 1 .1 106.5 105.3 102.7 101. 7 101.7 105.5 9 9 .5 102.8

September.................................. 103.0 103. 5 100.0 106.9 106.1 102.7 101.3 101.8 105. 5 9 9.5 103.0

October....................................... 103. 1 103. 6 100. 1 107. 5 106.3 102.8 102.0 101.9 105.6 9 9 .5 103-3

November.................................. 103. 5 104.3 100.7 108.1 107. 2 103. 2 102.7 102. 1 105.9 9 9 .6 103.6

December.................................. 104. 1 106. 5 104. 1 108.8 108.9 103- 2 102.6 102. 2 106.0 9 9 .6 103.7

1966-

J anuary.................................. 104. 6 107.7 106.8 109.7 109.5 103. 5 104. 0 102.4 106.2 9 9 .7 103.9

F ebruary.................................. 105 .4 109.8 109.6 111. 1 111.5 103. 8 105.7 102.6 106.6 9 9 .7 104. 0

March....................................... 105.4 109.4 108. 3 110.8 111.5 104. 0 106.6 102.9 106.8 9 9 .7 104. 1

April......................................... 1P5. 5 108.7 107. 5 1 10. 1 110.7 104.3 106. 1 103 .4 107.0 9 9 .8 104. 3

M ay............................................ 105.6 107.9 106.5 109.8 109.6 104. 7 105.9 103. 8 107.6 100.2 104. 5

June......................................... 105.7 107.7 106.0 110.0 109-5 1 0 4 .9 , 106.5 103.9 ' 107.9 1 0 0 .1 104. 9

July.................................................. 106.4 109.9 109. 1 111.9 111.2 105.2 1 0 6 .4 ' 104. 0 108. 1 100.2 105.0

A u gu st..................................... 106.8 111.3 111. 2 114.8 112.8 105.2 103. 3 104. 2 108.3 100. 1 105. 2

September................................ 106.8 111.5 109.9 113 .6 114.5 105.2 102.8 104. 1 108.4 100.0 105.4

October.................................... 106. 2 108.8 106.2 111 .6 112.2 105.3 102.8 104. 1 109.1 100.9 105.5

November................................ *105.9 107.1 102.5 111.2 111.3 105.5 1 0 2 .7 104.1 109. 8 101.2 105.7

December................................ 1 05 .9 106.7 1Q2.3 110.9 110.5 105.5 101.6 104.1 110.2 101.3 105.5

See footnotes at end of Table 10.

57

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
(1957-59=100)

Table A-8. Wholesale Price Indexes for Selected Farm Products, 1954-66

Year and month

All

farm

products3

Fresh

fruits

Fresh

and dried

vegetables

Grains Livestock Live

poultry Eggs

Fluid

milk

A ll3 Wheat A ll3 Steers Hogs

Relative importance4 10.89 0. 47 0.54 1.42 0.64 3-70 0.77 0.68 0.40 0.60 1.47

Annual averages

1954 ............................... 104. 4 99.2 92.1 114.0 108.8 96.4 92.8 128.8 128.5 106.7 95.9

1955 ........................................ 97.9 95.5 102.6 108.4 107.5 82. 8 89.5 89.9 136.7 114.6 96.4

1956 ........................................ 96.6 95.0 103. 1 1 0 8 .4 106.0 79.7 84. 7 84.0 112. 3 109.4 99.5

1957 ........................................ 99.2 102. 3 96. 5 104.7 106.8 91.9 89.8 102.9 104.3 103.2 101.1

1958 ......................................... 103.6 104.4 106.3 99.0 98. 5 108. 5 103-9 115.1 102.4 109.2 99.5

1959 ........................................ 97.2 93-3 97.2 96.3 9 4 .7 99.6 106.4 81.9 93-3 87.6 99.4

1960 ........................................ 96.9 107.8 95.4 94.2 95.8 95.5 99.4 90.8 99.6 103. 2 103.2

1 96 1 ........................................ 9 6.0 103.6 84.6 95.6 97.4 93.8 93.3 96.6 82.8 99.0 103-9

1962......................................... 97.7 107.0 90.5 98.8 103.3 97.6 102.6 95.3 85.3 95.2 101. 2

1963 ........................................ . 95-7 107.5 87.4 101.9 103.6 89.3 90.4 88. 3 84.7 94.0 100.6

1 9 6 4 ........................................ 94.3 109. 7 99.9 94.1 88. 7 85.0 85.9 88.0 82.0 90.8 102.0

1965......................................... 98.4 96.9 109.0 89.6 75.0 100. 5 95.7 120.6 87.2 93.5 103.5

1966......................................... 105.6 104.9 102.8 9 1 3 84.8 110.0 97.8 135.1 91.4 107.9 117.6

Percent change in annual averages

1954-55.................................... -6 .2 -3 .7 11.4 -4 .9 -1 .2 -1 4 . 1 -3 .6 -3 0 .2 6. 4 7.4 0 . 5

1955-56.................................... -1 .3 - 5 .5 0 -1 .4 -3 .7 -5 .4 - 6 . 6 -1 7 .8 -4 -5 3.2

1956-57.................................... 2.7 7.7 -6 .4 - 3 .4 •8 15. 3 6 .0 22.5 -7 . 1 -5 -7 1.6

1957-58.................................... 4.4 2. 1 10.2 -5 .4 -7 .8 18. 1 15.7 11.9 -1 .8 5.8 - 1 . 6

1958- 59.................................... -6 ,2 -1 0 .6 - 8 . 6 -2 .7 -3 .9 -8 . 2 2.4 -2 8 .8 -8 .9 -1 9 .8 -. 1

1959-60 .................................... -.3 15.5 -1 .9 -2 .2 1.2 -4 . 1 -6 .6 10.9 6.8 17.8 3.8

1960-61.................................... - 9 -3 .9 -1 1 .3 1.5 1.7 -1 .8 -6 .1 6. 4 -1 6 .9 - 4 .1 .7

1961-62.................................... 1.8 3.3 7.0 3.3 6.1 4. 1 10.0 - 1 .3 3.0 -3 .8 - 2 . 6

1962-63................ .............. -2 .0 . 5 -3 .4 3.1 .3 -8 .5 -1 1 .9 -7. 3 - . 7 -1 .3 - .6

1963-64.................................... -1 .5 2.0 14.3 -7 .7 -1 4 .4 -4 .8 -5 .0 - .3 -3 . 2 - 3 . 4 1.4

1964-65.................................... 4.3 -1 1 .7 9.1 - 4 . 8 -1 5 .4 18. 2 11.4 37.0 6.3 3.0 1.5

1965-66.................................... 7.3 8. 3 -5 .7 8.6 13.1 9.5 2. 2 12.0 4.8 15. 4 13.6

Monthly indexes

1965

J anuary................................ 93-0 91.6 107.0 90.4 77. 1 85.7 88.9 90.9 83.5 78.9 104.1

February............................. 94.5 94.9 112.2 90.5 76.7 88. 7 89.8 94.8 85.8 76.7 103.5

M a rc h .................................. 95.4 89.5 128. 1 90.6 75.0 89.7 89-3 96.7 89.7 86.9 100.1

A p r il.................................... 97.6 98.6 140.0 91.2 74.6 91.9 92.6 99.1 86.9 91.2 101.2

M a y ...................................... 98.4 91.0 148.6 91.0 73.3 97.7 97. 2 112.4 84.4 79.0 100.2

J u n e .................................... 100. 3 102. 3 119.0 89.6 71.5 106.8 97.7 133-2 88.0 82.0 100.7

July . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100.0 94.8 115. 2 88.4 71.7 107.2 98.6 136.0 88. 5 84.7 102.4

A u g u s t............................... 99.1 97.9 74. 7 88. 3 74.7 109.0 101.0 139-4 86. 5 100.0 103-9

September.......................... 99.5 112.8 82.8 89.3 74.9 104.8 98.6 126. 7 85.3 105.9 104.8

October............................... 99.4 104.0 89.9 88.6 75.0 105.6 98.2 130.5 85.5 105.1 105.9

November........................... 100. 3 95.6 94.8 87.4 77.3 106. 5 97.7 135.3 85.0 114.0 107. 3

December........................... 103.0 90. 2 95.5 90. 1 78.7 111.9 99. 1 152.4 87.2 118.2 108.0

1966

January............................... 104. 5 89. 1 107.6 92.4 78.9 115.3 99.1 157.8 91.9 99.8 108.4

February............................. 107.4 92.2 105.2 92.9 78. 2 119.5 103-3 158.2 95.4 116. 3 111.5

M a rc h ................................. 106.8 96.5 109. 1 90.8 77.6 115.9 106.1 134.9 100.9 118.5 112.7

A p ril.................................... 106.4 101. 7 123.5 91. 2 77.3 114.7 107.5 131-5 95.1 101.8 111.9

M a y ...................................... 104.5 108.4 101.6 93.6 80.4 111.5 98. 2 134.3 101. 3 86.9 111.0

June...................................... 104.2 99.7 102.2 94.9 84.3 110.1 95.9 137.7 95.6 90.9 112.6

Ju l y . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 107. 8 117.2 101.2 103.1 93.5 108. 7 94.0 138.4 94.2 98. 5 119.3

August.................................. 108. 1 107.0 91-5 105.6 92.7 112.0 94.9 145.5 89.8 108.6 124.1

September........................... 108.7 128.9 96.6 104.6 93.7 109.2 95.4 131-9 87.5 128.0 125.4

October ............................. 104.4 109-2 88.8 98.9 85.3 106. 5 95.4 125.0 83. 1 114.7 125.8

November........................... 102.5 104. 3 106.1 98.0 86. 5 98.4 91.7 111.0 85.1 121.8 124.4

December ........................... 101.8 105-0 99.7 101. 5 88.6 97.9 91.7 115. 5 77. 2 109.0 124.0

See footnotes at end of Table 10.

58

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
(1957-59 = 100)

Table A-9. Wholesale Price Indexes for Selected Processed Foods, 1954-66

Year and month

A ll

processed

foods3

Cereal and

bakery products Meats

Dairy

products

Canned

and

frozen

produce

Sugar

and confectionery

Coffee

Animal

fats and

A ll3 oils Bread

(N .Y. City) A l l 3

Choice

beef

Pork

loins

Relative importance4 ............ 14.65 2.31 0.52 3.94 0 .6 1 0.78 2.58 1.09 1.39 0.40 0.13

Annual averages

1954............................................. 97.6 96.5 86.6 92.4 94.3 111.6 94.0 97.2 98.0 132.8 137.9

1955............................................. 94.3 98.5 91.8 83.5 90.6 93.8 94.0 98.1 96.3 110.4 100.4

1956............................................. 94.3 97.6 95.1 79.8 87.3 88.4 96.2 100.4 95.7 119.3 103.5

1957............................................. 97.9 99.1 98.2 91.9 91.3 101.5 98.9 96.6 98.9 112.9 112.1

1958............................................. 102.9 99.9 99.8 108.9 103.5 107.2 99.8 102.0 100.8 100.3 106.9

1959............................................. 99.2 101.1 102.0 99.2 105.3 91.3 101.3 101.4 100.4 86.8 81.1

I960............................................. 100.0 103.2 106.0 96.8 100.9 97.7 105.0 99.5 101.8 85.0 86.6

1961............................................. 100.7 105.1 110.4 95.1 95.1 97.2 107.5 101.7 101.2 83.2 94.4

1962............................................. 101.2 107.6 110.1 97.8 103.3 97.9 106.9 98.0 102.2 80.1 88.4

1963............................................. 101.1 107.3 111.0 91.5 94.0 91.6 107.5 103.9 118.4 79.2 83.9

1964............................................. 101.0 107.8 108.9 89.0 89.9 91.7 107.8 104.8 111.8 97.2 95.4

1965............................................. 105.1 109.0 109.5 100.8 96.8 111.2 108. 5 102.1 109.0 98.4 113.4

1966............................................. 111. 5 115.4 117. 1 109.9 98.7 119. 5 118.5 104.8 110. 5 96.9 113. 1

Percent change in annual averages

1954-55 ...................................... - 3 .4 2.1 6 .0 - 9 . 6 - 3 . 9 -1 5 .9 0 0 .9 - 1 . 7 - 1 6 .9 -2 7 .2

1955-56 ...................................... 0 - . 9 3.6 - 4 .4 -3 .6 - 5 . 8 2.3 2.3 - . 6 8.1 3. 1

1956-57 ...................................... 3.8 1.5 3.3 15.2 4 .6 14.8 2.8 - 3 . 8 3.3 - 5 .4 8 .3

1957-58...................................... 5.1 .8 1.6 18.5 13.4 5.6 .9 5.6 1.9 -1 1 .2 - 4 . 6

1958-59...................................... - 3 .6 1.2 2.2 - 8 . 9 1.7 -1 4 .8 1.5 - . 6 - . 4 -1 3 .5 -2 4 .1

1959-60 ...................................... .8 2.1 3.9 - 2 .4 -4 .2 7.0 3.7 -1 .9 1.4 -2 .1 6 .8

1960-61 ...................................... .7 1.8 4.2 -1 .8 - 5 .7 - . 5 2.4 2.2 - . 6 -2 .1 9 .0

1961-62 ...................................... .5 2.4 - .3 2.8 8 .6 .7 - . 6 -3 .6 1 .0 -3 .7 - 6 .4

1962-63.................... ................. - . 1 — 3 .8 —6.4 - 9 .0 -6 .4 .6 6 .0 15.9 -1 .1 -5 .1

1963-64...................................... - . 1 .5 - 1 .9 -2 .7 - 4 .4 .1 .3 .9 -5 .6 22.7 13.7

1964-65 ...................................... 4.1 1.1 .6 13.3 7.7 21.3 .6 -2 .6 -2 .5 1.2 18.9

1965-66 ...................................... 6.1 5.9 6.9 9.0 2.0 7.5 9-2 2.6 1.4 -1 .5 - 3

Monthly indexes

1965

J anuary.................................... 102.2 108.2 108.9 89.7 90.9 96.5 108.3 101.9 110.0 98.4 106.4

February..................................I 102.1 107.9 108.9 89.9 91. 1 92.3 107.8 100.3 110.0 98.4 107.6

March....................................... 101.8 108.1 108.9 90.1 89.6 92.0 107.5 100.7 108.1 98.4 110.0

A p ril........................................ 102.3 108.3 108.9 91.7 93.7 90.5 107.5 100.9 108.0 98.4 116.7

M a y ........................................... 103.3 108.3 108.9 97.6 98.9 106.2 106.8 100.4 108.7 98.4 107.4

June........................................... 106.1 108.5 108.9 106.6 102.1 127.4 107.1 101.5 109.2 98.4 108.4

J u ly ..................................................... 106.6 109.3 108.9 107.5 100.8 123.3 107.8 101.8 109.1 98.4 115.9

August...................................... 106.7 108.8 107.9 107.1 100.9 117.7 108.5 100.4 108.9 98.4 114.1

September............................... 106.7 109.1 108.9 105.8 100.4 1 1 6 .2 109.1 101.8 108.8 98.4 119.7

October.................................... 106.9 109.4 108.9 105.5 97.5 119.9 109.4 104.7 109.4 98.4 122.1

November................................ 107.6 110.6 112.8 105.8 95.7 121.6 110.4 105.4 109.2 98.4 115.8

December ............................... 109.4 111.2 112.8 112.1 99.6 131.3 111.3 105.1 108.8 98.4 116.4

1966

J anuary.................................... 110.3 111.8 113.4 113.6 99.2 133.2 110.9 104.7 109.4 98.4 125.8

F ebruary.................................. 111.8 112.1 113.4 1 1 6 .0 101.0 135.7 113.0 105.2 110.1 98.4 126.2

March........................................ 111.5 112.2 113.4 112.8 104.4 117.9 115.0 104.8 109.7 98.4 121.8

A p ril........................................ 110.6 112.6 113.4 110.5 104.4 108.7 114.8 104.8 109.3 98.4 115.2

M a y ........................................... 110.5 113.0 113.4 109.8 98.2 121.3 114.9 105.4 109.3 98.4 107.7

June........................................... 110.6 114.0 113.4 108.6 96.0 117.9 116.5 104.9 109.4 98.4 105.8

J u ly .................................................... 111.7 115.5 113.4 108.5 95.8 122.3 119.8 104.5 109.8 98.4 106.3

August...................................... 113.8 118.9 122.0 110.5 97.5 122.6 124.0 102.3 110.9 98.4 120.9

September................................ 113.8 118.9 122.0 111.9 100.2 125.0 124.2 103.7 111.4 94.0 115.9

October.................................... 112.4 118.7 122.6 108.0 96,6 115.8 124.5 105.7 111.6 94.0 108.9

November................................ 110.7 118.7 122.6 103.4 94.4 105.8 122.6 105.9 112. 1 94.0 105.6

December............................... 110.6 118.0 122.6 104.9 96.8 107.6 122.3 105-8 112.6 93.9 97.5

See footnotes at end of Table 10

59

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Table A-10. Wholesale Price Indexes for Selected Industrial Commodities, 1954-66

(1957-59=100)

Textile products and apparel Hide s, skins, and leather products Fuels and power

Year and month Manmade Hides Refined

All 3

products fiber Apparel All 3 and Leather Footwear A ll3 petroleum Gasoline

products skins products

Relative importance4 ......... 7.60 1.93 1.27 3.741 1.53 0.15 0.26 0.79 7.52 3.89 |

1________ ^

Annual averages

1954 ........................................ 100.6 98.8 105. 7 98.9 89-9 81.5 86. 9 90.0 94.6 92. 2 97.3

1955 ........................................ 100.7 101.4 106.8 98.9 89.5 83.5 86. 3 90.3 94.5 94.0 97. 1

1956 ........................................ 100.7 103.0 100.4 100. 0 94.8 87. 2 93. 1 96.1 97.4 99.3 99-9

1957 ........................................ 100.8 100. 5 101. 1 100.0 94.9 81.5 91.9 97.5 102.7 106. 4 104.7

1958 ........................................ 98.9 97.9 99.0 99.7 96.0 84.8 94. 1 98.3 98.7 97.0 97.8

1959 ........................................ 100.4 101.6 100.0 100.4 109-1 133.8 114. 0 104.3 98.7 96.5 97.4

1960 ........................................ 101.5 104.4 97.5 101. 3 105.2 100. 5 103. 5 107.0 99-6 97.6 98.3

1961 ........................................ 99.7 100.4 93.4 101.0 106.2 107.9 106. 0 107.4 100.7 99-3 98.6

1962 ........................................ 100.6 101.7 93.9 101. 5 107.4 106.2 K)8. 5 108.6 100.2 98.2 97.3

1963 ........................................ 100. 5 100.3 93.9 101.9 104.2 84.0 101.9 108. 3 99.8 97. 2 96.2

1964 ........................................ 101. 2 99-6 95.8 102.8 104.6 87.5 102.9 108. 5 97.1 92.7 92.0

1965.......................................... 101.8 100. 2 95.0 103.7 109.2 111.2 108. 1 110.7 98.9 95.9 94.7

1966........................................... ! 102.1 102.5 89.6 105.0 , 119.7 140.8 121.0 118.2 101.3 99.5 100.2

Percent change in annual eiverages

1954-55 .................................... 0. 1 2.6 1.0 0 -0 .4 2.5 -0 .7 0.3 -0 .1 2.0 -0 .2

1955-56 .................................... 0 1.6 -6 .0 1.1 5.9 4 .4 7.9 6 .4 3.1 5.6 2.9

1956-57.................................... . 1 -2 .4 . 7 0 . 1 -6 .5 -1 .3 1.5 5.4 7. 2 4.8

1957-58 .........■......................... -1 .9 -2 .6 -2 .1 -.3 1.2 4.0 2.4 .8 -3 -9 -8 .8 -6 .6

1958-59 .................................... 1.5 3.8 1.0 .7 13.6 57.8 21. 1 6.1 0 - .5 - .4

1959-60 .................................... 1. 1 2.8 -2. 5 .9 -3 .6 -2 4 .9 - 9 . 2 2.6 .9 1. 1 .9

1960-61 .................................... -1 .8 -3 .8 -4 .2 - .3 1.0 7 .4 2.4 .4 1.1 1.7 .3

1961-62.................................... • 9 1.3 .5 . 5 1.1 -1 .6 2.4 1. 1 - . 5 - 1. 1 -1 .3

1962-63................................... -. 1 -1 .4 0 .4 -3 .0 -2 0 .9 -6 .1 - .3 - . 4 - 1. 0 - 1.1

1963-64 .................................... .7 - . 7 2.0 .9 .4 4. 2 1.0 .2 -2 .7 -4 .6 —4. 4

1964-65.................................... .6 .6 - .8 .9 4.4 27. 1 5.1 2.0 1.9 3.5 2.9

1965-66..................................... .3 2.3 -5 .7 1.3 9.6 26.6 11.9 6 .8 2.4 3.8 5.8

Monthly indexes

1965

J anuary............................... ' 101. 5 99.5 96.9 103.1 104.9 86. 5 104. 2 109. 1 98.5 95.2 92.9

February............................. 101. 5 99.6 96. 3 103-1 105.1 90.2 103. 2 109.1 97.9 93.9 90.8

March.................................... 101. 5 99.6 96.4 103.1 105.7 92. 1 105.7 109. 1 97.9 94.0 91.4

April .................................... 101. 5 99.7 96.1 103.1 106.3 96.3 103.6 109.7 97.6 94. 1 92.7

May ...................................... 101.6 99.9 96.0 103. 2 107.4 105.9 104.2 109.7 98.4 95.4 94.8

J une...................................... 101.9 100.2 95.9 103.6 107. 7 103. 1 107.6 109.8 98.7 96.0 95.9

J u l y ...................................... 101.9 100. 3 95.7 103- 8 108. 8 117. 4 105.9 110.0 98.7 96.0 95.9

August................................. 101.9 100.4 94.7 104.1 112. 2 133.4 112.5 110. 2 99.0 96.4 95.9

September........................... 102. 1 100.6 94.2 104. 2 111.3 124.9 110.9 110. 3 99.2 96.4 * 95.4

October............................... 102.0 100.8 93.3 104. 3 113.3 125.6 111.9 113.6 99.4 96.6 95.4

November........................... 101.9 101.0 92.5 104. 2 113.6 126. 5 113.3 113.7 100. 3 98.1 97.6

Decem ber........................... 102.0 101. 2 91.9 104.3 114.6 132.3 114.2 113.8 100.6 98.4 97.6

1966

January............................... 101.9 101.0 91.3 104.6 116.0 140.0 116.6 114.6 100. 5 98.3 97.6

February.............................. 102.0 101.5 91.0 104.7 117.8 152.8 118.0 115.0 100.3 97.8 96. 5

March.................................... 102.1 101.8 90.8 104.7 118.7 147.8 123.3 115.4 99.9 97.2 95.8

A p r il................................... 102.2 102.3 90.5 104. 7 120.6 148.8 122.4 118.2 100.0 97.7 96.9

M a y ...................................... 102.2 102.6 89.9 104.9 122.8 163.0 125. 1 118.9 100.4 98.4 99.2

June...................................... 102.2 102.8 90.0 104.8 122.9 161.0 126.6 118.9 101. 5 100.2 102.3

July ................ 102.4 103.0 90.1 105.0 122.7 156.4 126.0 119.0 101.4 99.9 101.8

August...................... .. 102.4 103.3 89.6 105.2 121.2 141.2. 124.9 119.1 102.0 100.7 102.9

September............. 102.2 103.1 88.6 105.1 119.9, 134.2 121.8 119.1 102.2 101.0 102.9

October............................... 102.2 103.3 88.1 105.3 118.7 120.8 117.5 120.1 102.6 101. 3 102.9

Novem ber........................... 102.1 103.0 87.7 105.5 117.5 114.3 114.1 120.1 102.7 101.3 102.9

Decem ber...................... .. . 101.8 i 102.7 86.9 105.4 117.3 109-2 116.2 120.3 102.4 ; 100.2 100.3

See footnotes at end of Table 10.

60

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
(1957-59 = 100)

Table A-10. Wholesale Price Indexes for Selected Industrial Commodities, 1954-66—Continued

Year and month

Chemicals and allied products Rubber and rubber products Lumber and wood products

Manufactured

animal

feeds

A ll3

Industrial chemicals A ll3 Crude

rubber

Tires A113 Lumber Plywood Millwork

Inorganic Organic

Relative importance4. ......... 6.25 0.87 1.30 1.33 0.21 0.50 2.66 1.58 0.37 0. 70 1.90

Annual averages

1954........................................... 97.3 93.3 96.0 87.6 86.4 87.9 97.6 96.4 105.0 99.8 132.8

1955........................................... 96.9 94.5 96.0 99.2 110.1 97.6 102.3 102.4 107.4 98.4 104.8

1956........................................... 97.5 97.2 98.6 100.6 1 0 3 .0 102.4 103.8 104.6 103.5 98.7 99.7

1957........................................... 99.6 98.9 100.5 100.2 99.2 101.4 98.5 98. 5 98.1 98.1 93.2

1958........................................... 100.4 100.2 99.8 100.1 94.1 102.5 97.4 97.0 98.9 98.0 102.9

1959............................................. 100.0 100.9 99.8 99.7 106.7 96.1 104.1 104.5 103.0 103.9 104.0

I960........................................... 100.2 101.8 99.6 99.9 109.3 92.3 100.4 99.8 97.8 104.5 96.4

1961.......................................... 99.1 102.4 96.0 96.1 96.3 91.6 95.9 94.7 95.7 101.9 104.6

1962.......................................... 97.5 102.4 92.6 93.3 93.6 86.1 96.5 96.5 92.4 101.8 110.6

1963........................................... 96.3 102.2 90.1 93.8' 91.9 89.1 98.6 98.9 93.5 104.0 116.4

1964.......................................... 96.7 103.0 88.7 92.5 90.6 87.9 100.6 100.7 92.3 108.5 113.9

1965.......................................... 97.4 1 0 4 .6 88.9 92.9 90.0 89.2 101.1 101.9 92.3 107.8 116.3

1966.......................................... 97.8 106.0 89.1 94.8 89. 2 92.6 105.6 108. 5 92.8 110.0 126.6

Percent change in annual averages

1954-55 .................................... -0 .4 1.3 0 13.2 27.4 11.0 4 .8 6.2 2.3 - 1 .4 -2 1 .1

1955-56.................................... .6 2.9 2.7 1.4 -6 .4 4.9 1.5 2.1 -3 .6 .3 - 4 .9

1956-57.................................... 2.2 1.7 1.9 - . 4 - 3 .7 - 1 . 0 -5 .1 -5 .8 -5 .2 - . 6 - 6 .5

1957-58.................................... .8 1.3 - . 7 - . 1 -5 .1 1.1 -1 .1 -1 .5 .8 - . 1 10.4

1958-59.................................... - . 4 .7 0 - . 4 13.4 - 6 . 2 6.9 7.7 4.1 6.0 1.1

1959-60.................................... .2 .9 - . 2 .2 2.4 -4 .0 - 3 .6 -4 .5 - 5 . 0 .6 -7 .3

1960-61 .................................... -1 .1 .6 -3 .6 -3 .8 -1 1 .9 - . 8 -4 .5 -5 .1 -2 .1 -2 .5 8.5

1961-62.................................... - 1 .6 0 -3 .5 3.3 -2 .8 - 6 . 0 .6 1.9 -3 .4 - . 1 5.7

1962-63 .................................... -1 .2 - . 2 - 2 .7 -5 .5 -1 .8 3.5 2.2 2.5 1.2 2.2 5.2

1963-64.................................... .4 .8 - 1 .6 -1 .4 -1 .4 - 1 .3 2.0 1.8 -1 .3 4.3 -2 .1

1964-65 .................................... .7 1.6 .2 .4 - . 7 1.5 .5 1.2 0 - . 6 2.1

1965-66.................................... .4 1.3 . 2 2.0 - . 9 3.8 4. 5 6. 5 .5 2.0 8.9

Monthly indexes

1965

January................................ 97.3 104.4 88.6 92.3 90.7 87.7 100.8 100.8 94.5 107.7 115.1

F ebruary............................. 97.5 104.6 88.6 92.2 90.7 87.7 100.8 101.4 93.0 107.5 114.3

March...................................... 97.5 104.6 88.4 92.2 90.6 87.7 100.7 101.3 92.2 107.6 114.2

A p ril.................................... 97.6 104.7 88.8 92.3 91.6 87.7 100.5 101.0 91.9 107.6 115.5

M a y ...................................... 97.6 ' 104.7 88.8 92.9 91.8 88.9 100.4 101.0 91.3 107.9 112.9

June..................................... 97.4 104.5 88.8 93.1 90.1 89.4 100.3 101.1 90.5 107.8 116.6

July.................: ........................... 97.4 104.5 89.2 93.0 89.1 89.4 100.5 101.2 91.0 107.8 118.8

August.................................. 97.1 104.1 89.2 93.3 88.6 90.3 101.8 102.5 94.6 107.8 116.9

September........................... 97.2 104.1 89.2 93.3 88.7 90.3 102.0 103.1 93.3 107.8 116.8

October............................... 97.6 105.1 89.3 93.4 89.0 90.3 101.6 103.0 91.6 107.8 116.2

November........................... 97.5 105.2 89.2 93.5 89.3 90.3 101.6 103.0 91.7 107.8 119.9

December........................... 97.6 105.1 89.2 93.5 89.6 90.3 101.9 103.4 92.1 107.9 118.6

1966

January ............................... 97.6 105.1 88.5 93.7 90.0 90.4 102.8 104.3 93.9 107.9 121.8

February............................. 97.6 105.1 88.6 94.1 91.0 90.4 103.7 105.6 94.0 108.4 124.8

March.................................... 97.6 105.3 88.6 94.3 91.2 90.4 105.6 107.2 97.7 109.3 119.6

A p ril.................................... 97.6 105.3 89.1 95.4 90.0 93.7 108.4 110.8 102.4 109.6 119.2

M a y ...................................... 97.7 106.3 89.2 95.4 90.0 93.8 109.6 113.2 100.3 110.4 123.1

June........... - ........................ 97.6 106.2 89.1 95.4 89.5 93.8 107.7 112.0 92.2 110.6 124.1

J u ly ............................................... 97.9 106.6 89.2 95.1 89.0 93.2 106.6 110.5 91.5 110.7 132.6

August.................................. 97.9 106.2 89.2 95.1 88.8 93.2 106.2 110.2 90.0 110.9 133.6

September........................... 98.0 106.3 89.2 94.7 87.9 92.7 105.9 109.5 89.2 110.9 132.3

October............................... 97.9 106.3 89.3 94.6 87.4 92.7 104.8 108.0 88.1 110.8 128.1

Noyember........................... 98.0 106.4 89.4 95.0 87.9 93.2 103.0 105.6 86.9 110. 3 128.4

December........................... 98.2 107.0 89.6 95.0 87.6 93.2 102.5 104.5 87.4 110.3 132.0

See footnotes at end of Table 10.

61

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
(1957-59=100) '

Table A-10. Wholesale Price Indexes for Selected Industrial Commodities, 1954-66--Contimued

Machinery and motive products

Year and month

A ll3

Machinery and equipment

Motor

vehicles

Passenger

cars

Construction

materials

A ll3 Electrical Nonelectrical

Metalworking

General

purpose

Construction

Agriculture

Relative importance4............. 17. 30 ( 5) 4.35 ( 5) 1. 27 1.98 0.86 0.88 4.85 3.02 (5)

Annual averages

1954............................................. 83.2 82. 1 83.1 81.4 78. 1 79.6 79.3 88. 1 85.6 86.4 91.1

1955............................................. 85.8 84.6 84.4 84.8 83.6 83. 2 82.6 88.9 88.2 89. 1 95.1

1956............................................. 92. 1 91.5 91.1 91.8 91.7 91.7 89.5 92.0 93.2 93.6 99.0

1957............................................. 97.7 97,9 98.1 97.7 97.9 97.9 96.3 96.3 97.2 97.4 99.0

1958............................................. 100. 1 100.0 100.2 99.9 99.8 99.4 100.1 100. 3 100. 3 100. 2 98.9

1959............................................. 102. 2 102. 1 101.7 102. 5 102.3 102.7 103.6 103.4 102. 5 102.4 102.1

1960............................................. 102.4 102. 9 101.3 104. 2 105.5 103.6 105.8 105.4 101.0 101. 2 100.5

1961............................................. 102.3 102. 8 100.0 104. 9 107.0 102.8 107.5 107.4 100.8 . 100.7 98.6

1962............................................. 102.3 102.9 98.4 105.7 109.3 103. 3 107.J8 109.5 100.8 99.8 98.3

1963............................................. 102.2 103. 1 97.4 106.7 109.8 103.8 109.6 111. 1 100.0 99.0 98.5

1964............................................. 102.9 103. 8 96.8 108.3 112.6 104.4 112.4 112.9 100.5 98.8 99.6

1965............................................. 103. 7 105.0 96.8 110. 1 116.9 105.1 115.3 115.1 100. 7 98. 1 100.8

1966............................................. 106.0 108.2 99.0 114.0 123.2 109.7 118.9 118.5 100.8 97.2 104.0

Percent change in annual averages

1954-55 ...................................... 3.1 3.0 1.6 4.2 7.0 4 .5 4 .2 0.9 3.0 3-1 4 .4

1955-56...................................... 7.3 8.2 7 .9 8.3 9.7 10.2 8 .4 3.5 5.7 5.1 4.1

1956-57 ...................................... 6.1 7.0 7.7 6 .4 6.8 6 .8 7.6 4.7 4 .3 4 .1 0

1957-58...................................... 2.5 2. 1 2. 1 2.3 1.9 1.5 3.9 4 .2 3.2 2.9 - . 1

1958-59................'..................... 2. 1 2. 1 1.5 2.6 2.5 3.3 3.5 3.1 2. 2 2.2 3.2

1959-60 ...................................... . 2 .8 - . 4 1.7 3. 1 .9 2.1 1.9 -1 .5 -1 . 2 - 1 .6

1960-61...................................... - . 1 - . 1 -1 .3 .7 1.4 - . 8 1.6 1.9 - . 2 - . 5 -1 .9

1961-62...................................... 0 . 1 -1 .6 .8 2.1 .5 .3 2.0 0 - . 9 - 3

1962-63...............•...................... - . 1 . 2 -1 .0 .9 .5 .5 1.7 1.5 - . 8 - . 8 .2

1963-64...................................... .7 .7 - . 6 1.5 2.6 .6 2.6 1.6 .5 - . 2 1.1

1964-65...................................... .8 1. 2 0 1.7 3.8 . 7 2.6 1.9 . 2 - . 7 1.2

1965-66...................................... 2.2 3.0 2.3 3.5 5.4 4 .4 • 3-1 3-0 . 1 - . 9 3.2

Monthly indexes

1965

J anuary.................................. 103.3 104.4 96.7 109.3 115.3 104. 1 113.8 114.3 100.8 98.5 100. 2

F ebruary............................... 103. 5 104.5 96.8 109.5 115.6 104.4 114.3 114.4 100.9 98.5 100. 3

March...................................... 103. 5 104. 5 96.8 109.6 115.6 104.4 114.5 114.6 100.8 98.3 100.2

A p r il...................................... 103. 7 104. 8 97.0 109.7 115.7 104. 2 115.0 114.6 100.8 98.3 100.3

M ay........................................ 103.7 104. 9 97.1 109.9 116.2 104. 7 115.1 114.7 ; 100.8 98.2 100.7

June.................................... • 103. 8 105.0 96.9 109.9 116.4 104. 7 115.2 114.7 100.7 98. 1 100.7

July........................................ 103. 7 104.9 97.0 109.9 116.5 104.7 115.3 114.9 100.7 98.1 100.8

August.................................. 103.8 105.0 96. 7 110. 3 117.4 105.3 115.6 114.8 100. 7 98.1 101.2

September............................. 103. 8 105. 1 96.6 110. 5 117.9 105.7 115-6 115.0 100. 5 97.9 101.2

October.................................. 103.9 105.2 96.6 110.7 118.3 106.3 115.8 114.9 100.5 97.8 101.2

November............................. 104.1 105.5 96.5 111. 3 118.6 106.5 116.4 116.8 100. 5 97.8 101.3

December............................. , 104. 2 105.7 96.6 111.3 118.9 106. 5 116.5 117.0 100. 5 97.7 101.4

1966

J anuary.................................. 104.4 106.0 97.0 111.6 119.6 106.8 116.9 117.3 100. 5 97.7 101.9

February............................... 104. 7 106. 5 97.8 112.0 120.8 106.8 117.5 117.8 100.4 97.5 102.4

March...................................... 105.0 106.9 98.2 112.4 121.0 107. 3 117.9 118.0 100.3 97.4 103. 2

A p ril................................... 105.2 107. 2 98.4 112.8 121.0 108. 5 118.5 118.1 100.2 97.2 104.3

May......................................... 105.8 107.8 - 98. 9 113.5 122.5 109.3 118.9 118. 2 100.9 97.0 105.1

June........................................ 105.9 108. 1 98.8 113.9 123.5 109.8 118.9 118.4 100.7 96.7 104. 8

July........................................ 106.0 108.3 99.0 114. 1 123.5 110.0 118.9 118.5 100.7 96.8 104.6

August.................................... 106. 2 108.5 99.1 114.5 124. 0 110.6 118.9 118.3 100.5 96.3 104.5

September............................. 106. 3 108.9 99.2 114.9 125.0 111. 1 119.4 118.2 100. 1 95.7 104. 3

October................................. 107.1 109.4 ! 99.5 115.5 125.6 111.8 119.8 i 118.5 101.7 98.0 104.3

November............................. 107.7 110.2 100.7 116.1 126.0 112.2 120.6 120.4 101.7 98.0 104.0

December............................. 108.0 110.7 1 101.5 116.4 126.3 112.4 121.0 120.8 101.7 98.0 104.0

See footnotes at end of Table 10.

62

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Table A-10. Wholesale Price Indexes for Selected Industrial Commodities, 1954-66--Continued

(1957-59=100)

Year and month

Metals and metal products Furniture and other household durables

A ll3

Iron

and

steel

Steel

mill

products

Foundry

and forge

products

Nonferrous

metals

Fabricated

A ll3 Household

furniture Appliances

TV, radios,

and phonographs Structural

products

Nonstructural

products

Relative importance4 ........... 13. 18 4.66 ( 5) 0.79 3.16 1.90 1.80 3.81 0.95 0.88 0.41

Annual averages

1954............................................. 84.3 78. 7 78. 2 80.0 92.9 87.6 86. 5 93.9 92.0 104.4 ( 6)

1955............................................. 90.0 83.2 81.8 82.0 106.7 91.6 88. 1 94.3 92.5 101.8 99. 1

1956............................................. 97.8 91.6 88. 7 90.4 116.7 99.1 92.9 96.9 96.6 100. 5 99.2

1957............................................. 99.7 98.4 97.2 97.4 102.8 100.1 99.5 99.4 99.4 100.5 100.6

1958............................................. 99.1 99.9 100.6 100. 3 95.5 100. 1 100.2 100.2 99.8 99.8 100.5

1959............................................. 101.2 101.8 102. 2 102. 3 101.8 99.8 100.4 100.4 100.7 99.7 98.9

I960............................................. 101. 3 100.6 102. 1 103.1 103.9 100.8 100.6 100. 1 101.6 97.0 97.3

1961............................................. 100.7 100. 7 101. 7 103.4 100.4 99.0 103. 1 99.5 102.8 95.2 95.3

1962............................................. 100.0 99.3 101.4 103.6 99.2 98. 2 103. 9 98.8 103. 8 94.0 91. 1

1963............................................. 100.1 99.1 102.0 103.6 99.1 98.2 105.1 98.1 104.6 91.8 88.6

1964............................................. 102.8 100.5 102.8 104. 7 105.9 99.3 108. 5 98.5 105.3 91.3 87. 2

1965 ........................................... 105.7 101.4 103.3 106. 1 115. 2 101. 2 109.4 98.0 106.2 89.2 85.2

1966............................................. 108. 3 102. 3 104.7 108.0 121. 0 103.9 111.6 99. 1 109. 1 89.1 83.6

Percent change in annual averages

1954-55 ...................................... 6.8 5.7 4.6 2.5 14.9 4.6 1.8 0.4 .5 -2 .5 ( 6)

1955-56...................................... 8.7 10. 1 8.4 10.2 9 .4 8 .2 5.4 2.8 4.4 -1 .3 0.1

1956-57...................................... 1.9 7 .4 9 .6 7.7 -1 1 .9 1.0 7. 1 2.6 2.9 0 1.4

1957-58...................................... - . 6 1.5 3.5 3.0 -7 . 1 0 .7 .8 .4 - . 7 - . 1

1958-59...................................... 2.1 1.9 1.6 2.0 • 6.6 - 3 . 2 . 2 .9 - . 1 -1 .6

1959-60 ...................................... . 1 -1 . 2 - . 1 .8 2.1 1.0 . 2 - . 3 .9 -2 .7 -1 .6

1960-61...................................... - . 6 . 1 - . 4 • 3 -3 .4 - 1 .8 2.5 - . 6 1. 2 -1 .9 -2 . 1

1961-62...................................... - . 7 -1 .4 - . 3 .2 -1 . 2 - . 8 .8 - . 7 1.0 -1 .3 -4 .4

1962-63...................................... . 1 - . 2 .6 0 - . 1 0 1. 2 - . 7 .8 -2 .3 -2 .7

1963-64 ...................................... 2.7 1.4 .8 1. 1 6.9 1.1 3.2 .4 .7 - . 5 - 1 .6

1964-65...................................... 2.8 .9 • 5 1.3 8.8 1.9 .8 - . 5 .9 -2 .3 -2 .3

1965-66 ...................................... 2.5 .9 1.4 1.8 5.0 2.7 2.0 1 . 1 2.7 - . 1 -1 .9

Monthly indexes

1965

J anuary.................................. 104. 5 101.4 102.9 105.6 111.5 100.3 108. 3 98.3 106. 1 90.2 86.4

February. . ........................... 104. 6 101.2 102.9 105.4 111.8 100. 2 109.0 98.2 106.0 90.0 85.9

M a rch.................................... 104. 8 101.3 103.0 105.6 112.3 100.3 109. 1 98.3 106.0 90.0 85.9

A p ril...................................... 105.2 101.4 103. 0 105.9 113.4 100.8 109. 2 98.0 106.0 89.4 85.9

M a y ......................................... 105.7 101. 5 103. 2 105.8 115.2 101.2 109. 2 98.0 106.0 89.2 85.9

June......................................... 105.9 101. 3 103. 2 106.1 116.2 101.2 109. 2 98.0 105.9 89.4 85.9

July......................................... 105.8 101. 5 103.4 106. 3 115.5 101.4 109. 1 97.8 105.9 89.2 84.6

August.................................... 106. 2 101.4 103. 5 106.3 116. 5 101.7 109.9 97.7 106.1 88.6 84.4

September............................. 106.2 101.2 103.5 106.5 117.0 101.8 109. 9 97.7 106. 2 88.6 84.4

October.................................. 106.3 101. 2 103. 7 106.6 117.4" 101.8 109.8 97.8 106.4 88.6 84.5

November............................. 106.7 101. 3 103.6 106.6 118.1 102.0 109.8 98.0 106.6 88.6 84. 5

December.............................. 106.6 101.7 103.9 106.7 111 . 2 102.0 109.7 98.2 106.7 88.8 84.5

1966

J anuary.................................. 107.0 102.0 104. 1 107. 1 118.3 102.3 110.0 98.3 107. 0 89.0 83.9

February................................ 107.5 102. 2 104. 2 107. 2 119.5 102.6 110. 5 98.4 107. 2 89-0 83-8

March...................................... 108.0 102. 3 104. 3 107. 2 120.8 103.1 110.9 98.4 107.2 89.1 83.5

A p ril...................................... 108.2 102.0 104. 3 107. 2 122.1 103. 7 110.9 98.6 108. 3 89.3 83.5

M a y ........................................ 108.4 101.8 104.3 107.4 122.5 103. 8 110.9 98.9 108.9 89.4 83.5

June........................................ 108.7 102. 0 104. 5 107.4 123.2 104. 1 111.2 98.9 108.9 89.4 83.5

July........................................ 108.8 102. 2 104. 5 107.5 122.9 104.2 111.2 99.0 109. 1 89. 1 83.5

August.................................... 108.5 102.7 105.0 107.8 120.4 104. 2 112.3 99.1 109.4 8 8 .8 83.1

September............................. 108.4 102. 5 105. 1 108. 1 119.9 104.4 112.4 99.2 109.8 88.7 6 3 - 3

October.................................. 108.6 102.5 105.1 108.2 120.3 104.6 112.7 99.7 1 1 0 . 3 88.9 83.8

November............................. 109.0 102. 8 105. 2 1 1 0 . 1 121.0 1 0 4 .8 113.1 100. 3 111.5 89. 2 83.8

December............................. 109.0 102.9 105.3 110.3 120.5 104.9 113.2 100.4 111.8 89.2 83.8

See footnotes at end of Table 10.

63

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Table A-10. Wholesale Price Indexes for Selected Industrial Commodities, 1954-66—Continued

(1957-59=100)

Year and month

Pulp, paper, and allied ]>roducts Nonmetallic mineral products

Tobacco products and

bottled beverages

A ll 3 Woodpulp Wastepaper Paper

Paper boxes

and

containers

Concrete

A ll3

Tobacco

products

Nonalcoholic

beverages

A ll3

Ingredients; Products

Relative importance4 ......... 4. 69 0. 23 0. 12 1. 27 1. 32 2.78 0.70 0.87 2.51 0.96 0.54

Annual averages

1954.......................................... 88.8 91. 1 86.8 88.9 87.4 88.8 87.4 91.8 93.8 93.3 91-7

1955.......................................... 91. 1 93.8 119.5 91. 1 89.2 91.3 90. 2 92.7 94.6 93-4 95.4

1956........................................... 97. 2 97.8 121.2 96.4 96.8 95.2 94. 3 96.0 95.1 93.5 95.6

1957........................................... 99-0 98. 7 83.3 99.6 99.1 98.9 98. 2 98.7 98.0 97.4 96.0

1958........................................... 100. 1 100.7 95.3 99.8 100.2 99.9 100.4 100.0 99.7 101.0 96. 1

1959.......................................... 101.0 100.7 121.4 100.6 100.6 101. 2 101. 3 101. 3 102.2 101.7 107.8

1960........................................... 101.8 100. 2 90.3 102.0 103.9 101.4 102.7 102.4 102.5 101.9 110. 3

1961........................................... 98.8 95.0 80. 5 102. 2 98.4 101.8 102.8 102. 5 103.2 102.0 112.8

1962........................................... 100.0 93.2 97.5 102.6 101.8 101.8 103.2 102. 6 104.1 102. 1 116.9

1963........................................... 99.2 91.7 92. 2 102.4 101.8 101. 3 103.0 101.7 106. 1 104.5 122.6

1964........................................... 99.0 96.1 92.4 103.6 99. 1 101. 5 102.8 100.9 107.4 106.0 127.0

1965........................................... 99.9 98. 1 99.4 104. 1 98.7 101. 7 103. 2 101. 5 107.7 106. 2 128. 3

1966........................................... 102.6 98.0 105.0 107.3 101. 1 102.6 103.9 103.0 109-6 109- 6 130. 5

Percent change in annual averages

1954-55.................................... 2.6 3.0 37.7 2.5 2. 1 2.8 3.2 1.0 0.9 0. 1 4.0

1955-56.................................... 6. 7 4. 3 1.4 5.8 8.5 4.3 4.5 3.6 • 5 . 1 . 2

1956-57.................................... 1.9 • 9 -31. 3 3.3 2.4 3.9 4.1 2.8 3.0 4. 2 .4

1957-58.................................... 1. 1 2.0 14.4 . 2 1. 1 1.0 2.2 1.3 1.7 3.7 . 1

1958-59.................................... -9 0 27.4 .8 .4 1-3 .9 1. 3 2.5 . 7 12.2

1959-60.................................... .8 -. 5 -2 5 .6 1.4 3. 3 . 2 1.4 1. 1 • 3 . 2 2.3

1960-61.................................... -2 .9 -5 .2 -1 0 .9 . 2 -5 .3 .4 . 1 . 1 . 7 . 1 2.3

1961-62 .................................. 1. 2 -1 .9 21. 1 .4 3.5 0 . 4 . 1 .9 . 1 3-6

1962-63.................................... -.8 -1 .6 -5 .4 -. 2 0 -. 5 -. 2 - .9 1.9 2.4 4.9

1963- 64 .................................. - .2 4.8 .2 1. 2 -2 .7 . 2 -. 2 - .8 1. 2 1.4 3.6

1964-65.................................... .9 2. 1 7.6 ■ 5 - . 4 . 2 .4 .6 • 3 . 2 1.0

1965-66.................................... 2.7 - . 1 5.6 3. 1 2. 4 .9 .7 1. 5 1.8 3.2 1.7

Monthly indexes

1965

January............................... 99.0 98. 1 96. 1 103.7 97.9 101.7 103. 2 101. 3 107.5 106. 1 128. 1

F ebruary ........................... 99.0 98. 1 96.0 103-8 97.9 101.8 103- 2 101. 2 107. 6 106. 1 128. 1

M a rch................................. 99-5 98. 1 96.2 103.8 98.9 101.9 103. 2 101. 2 107. 5 106. 1 128.1

A p ril.................................... 99.8 98. 1 97.3 103.9 99-0 101.9 103.2 101.3 107.8 106.7 128. 1

May ......................................• 100.0 98. 1 100. 3 104. 0 99.0 101.9 103- 2 101. 3 108. 1 107.4 128. 1

J u n e .................................... 100. 0 98. 1 98.0 104. 1 99.0 102.0 103- 1 101.6 107. 6 106. 1 128. 1

July .................. 99.9 98. 1 98.3 104. 1 98. 4 101. 7 103. 1 101.7 107.6 106. 1 128. 1

August................................... 99-9 98. 1 97.5 104. 1 98.4 101.6 103- 2 101. 5 107.6 106. 1 128. 5

September............................. 100. 0 98. 1 97.3 104. 1 98.6 101.6 103. 2 101.6 107. 7 106. 1 128. 5

October............................... 100.5 98. 1 104. 5 104. 5 98. 7 101.6 103. 4 101.6 107.7 106. 1 128.5

November........................... 100.8 98.1 107.0 104.8 99.2 101.6 103.4 101.8 107. 7 106. 1 128. 5

December........................... 100.9 98. 1 104.6 104.9 99.4 101.6 103.4 101.8 107.9 106.0 128. 5

1966

J anuary ............... 101. 2 98.0 105.8 105. 2 100.0 102.0 103.6 102.0 108. 1 106.6 128.5

F ebruary............................. 101. 3 98.0 105.5 105.4 100. 1 102. 1 103.7 102. 1 108.0 106.6 128. 5

M arch................................. 101.8 98.0 108. 7 105.4 101. 2 102. 1 103. 8 102.2 109.2 109.8 128. 5

April ................. 102. 3 98.0 110.3 106.0 101. 2 102. 3 103.8 102.7 109.4 110. 2 128. 5

May ............................. 102. 7 98.0 112.0 107. 1 101.0 102.4 103. 7 102.7 109.4 110.3 128. 5

J u n e ............................... .... 103.0 98.0 112.7 108.0 101.0 102.5 103.6 103.0 109.8 110.3 131.0

J u ly..................••••••••• 103.2 98.0 113.2 108.2 101.2 102.7 103.7 103. 1 110.0 110.3 131-8

August.................... 103. 2 98.0 106.7 108.4 101. 2 102.7 103.8 103-3 110.1 110.3 132.2

September........................... 103.1 98.0 102.9 108.4 101. 3 103.0 103.9 103.6 110.1 110. 3 132.2

October ............................. 103.1 98.0 98.8 108.4 101.4 103.2 104. 3 103. 5 110. 1 110. 3 132.2

November ............. 103.0 98.0 92.7 108. 5 101. 5 103. 3 104.2 103. 5 110.1 110.2 132.2

December........................ . 103.0 98.0 90.5 108. 5 101. 5 103.3 104.3 103-9 110.3 110. 3 132. 2

^ru d e foods for further processing.

Includes all foods used directly by consumers; for example, eggs, fresh produce,

and milk.

^Includes groups not shown separately.

4Relative importance as of December 1965. The relative importance of an item is

its value or weight in the index expressed as a percent of the all-commodities WPI.

5This is a special index for which relative importance is not computed. Special

indexes combine appropriate segments of pertinent commodity groups.

^Indexes not available for 1954.

64

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
REGION AL O F F IC E S AND D IRECTO RS

NEW EN GLAN D REGION 

W endell D. M acD onald 

1 6 0 3 -A F e d e r a l B uilding 

G overn m en t C en ter 

B oston , M ass. 02203 

P h one: 2 23 -6 727 (A rea C ode 617)

MIDDLE A T L A N T IC REGION 

H erb ert B ien stock 

341 Ninth Avenue 

N ew Y ork , N .Y . 10001 

P h on e: 971-5401 (A rea C ode 212)

SOUTHERN REGION 

B ru n sw ick A . Bagdon 

1371 P e a ch tre e St., N .E .

A tlanta, Ga. 30309

P h on e: 526-5416 (A rea C ode 404)

NORTH C E N T R A L REGION 

T h om as J. M cA rd le 

219 S. D ea rb orn S treet 

C h ica go, 111. 60604 

P h on e: 353-7226 (A rea C ode 312)

M OUNTAIN PLAIN S REGION 

E llio tt B row ar 

911 W alnut S treet 

K ansas C ity, M o. 64106 

P h on e: 374-2378 (A rea C ode 816)

W E STER N REGION 

C h a rles A . R o u m a sset 

450 G olden Gate A v e. B ox 36017 

San F r a n c is c o , C a lif. 94102 

P h on e: 556-3178 (A rea C ode 415)

* U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE : 1968 0 -2 9 9 -6 8 8

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis