NEGROES

IN THE UNI TED STATES

THEIR ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL SITUATION

Billetin No. 1511

June 1966

INITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF LABOR W. Willard Wirtz, Secretary

UREAU OF LABOR S T A T I S T I C S Arthur M. Ross, Commissioner

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
NEGROES

IN THE UNI TED STATES

THEIR ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL SITUATION

Bulletin No. 1511

June 1966

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF LABOR W. W illard Wirtz, Secretary

BUREAU OF LABOR S TA T IS T IC S A rthur M. Ross, C om m issioner

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C., 20402 - Price $1.25

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

T h is b u lletin brings up to d ate the stu d y on th e “E con om ic S ta tu s of the

N e g r o /’ w hich w as prepared at the request of the P lann ing Session for the

W h ite H ou se C onference “ T o F ulfill T h ese R ig h ts,” held N o vem b er 17-18,

1965. T h e 1965 stu d y w as used as a reference b y th e T ask F orce on Jobs,

In com e, and E co n om ic S tatu s.

A d d itional data, including findings from new stu d ies, h ave been incorporated in this an alysis. T h e appendix, w hich has been u p d ated , con tains the

sourcebook of tab u lation s used b y w orking staff in ad van ce of the C onference.

T h e bib liograp h y has been expanded.

T h e b u lletin w as planned and prepared b y D o ro th y K . N ew m an of the

B ureau of L abor S ta tistics, w ith th e cooperation of m an y staff m em bers of the

B ureau and persons in other G overnm en t agencies w ho provided su b stan tial

am ou nts of d ata, som e of w hich w ere as y e t unpublished.

A m on g B ureau staff m em bers w ho p articip ated , L aurie D . C um m ings

assisted M rs. N ew m an d irectly in th e in itial d evelop m en t of the basic d ata

and con cep ts; staff m em bers of each of the B u reau ’s operating offices supplied

su b sta n tiv e d ata for analysis; and E llen B u ssey con trib u ted to the an alytic

co n ten t of charts and appendix. T h e R esearch S ta tistics Service of the

V eterans A d m inistration prepared sp ecial tab u lation s from u npublished source

d ata, som e of w hich appear here for the first tim e. I w ish to express m y

appreciation for their in terest and support of this project.

Ar t h u r M . R o ss,

Commissioner of Labor Statistics.

iii

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
Contents

Page

C h apter I. T h e N egro p op u la tio n________________________________________ 1

C hapter II. E m p loym en t, u n em p loym en t, and the labor force__________ 19

C hapter I I I . In com e, earnings, and th e incidence of p o v e r ty_________ 35

C h apter IV . E stim a ted effects of selected F ed eral program s on em p lo ym en t and u n em p loy m en t_________________________________ 43

C on clu sion _________________________________________________________________ 47

B ib liograp h y_______________________________________________________________ 49

A ppendix (B ackground sta tistic s)________________________________________ 55

T ables 1 -1 7 0 ______________________________________________________________ 57

v

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
Chapter I. The Negro Population

T h e k eys to ad van cin g N egro ach ievem en t in

the U jiited S ta tes are w ork at a livin g w age for all

w ho w an t it, equal ad van cem en t op p ortu n ity, and

equal p ay for equal work. W ork provides m ore

than a livelih ood ; on it depends d ig n ity in the

com m u n ity. W ork leads to the econom ic secu rity

th a t supports social goals.

W h eth er or n ot N egroes and other A m ericans

are fu lly em ployed depends on m an y things, n ot

th e lea st of w hich is the sta te of th e econ om y.

As this is being w ritten , th e econom y is boom ing;

y e t th e econom ic situ ation of N egroes con tin u es

to be far less than is considered acceptab le for the

pop u lation as a w hole.

N o A m erican is m erely an econom ic being. A

purely econom ic an alysis of the N egro A m erican

is lik ely to lea ve m an y significant q u estion s u n ­

answ ered. T h is report does n ot presum e to be a

com prehensive socioeconom ic analysis of the opp ortu n ity of th e N egro to work and achieve; b u t,

using social as w ell as econom ic m aterial, it does

attem p t to illu m in ate h ow the N egro A m erican is

faring. I t also a ttem p ts, through p resen tation of

facts ab ou t ed u cation and livin g con d ition s such

as h ealth and housing, to su ggest som e elem en ts

th a t are retarding progress and th a t m ay need

con tin u in g atten tion .

E arlier stu d ies of th e N egro worker h ave m ade

it clear th a t to cope effectively w ith th e econom ic

issues it is necessary to know m ore ab out the

d istrib u tion and ch aracteristics of the N egro

p op u lation in general and the w ays in w hich the

con d ition s of th e N egro correspond to or differ

from those of th e w h ite population.

T h e N egro p op u lation appears p rop ortion ately

greater n ationw id e than it really is, largely because

m assive m igration of N egroes in to th e cen tral cities

of large m etrop olitan areas has b een accen tu ated

b y ou tm igration of w h ites from th e cities to the

suburbs.

A ctu ally, th e percen tage of N egroes in th e total

p op u lation has changed little w ith in this cen tu ry.

T h e grea test change in th e N egro p op u lation has

b een n ot in num bers b u t in location — aw ay from

the South and farms and into the metropolitan

areas (chart 4).

However, in spite of the increasing concentration

of Negroes in central cities, which have served as

magnets to Negro migrants, only Washington,

D.C., among the larger cities, had more Negroes

than whites in 1960. In all other cities of 250,000

population or more, the ratio of Negroes to the

total population was 40 percent or below in 1960;

and, in most instances, it was less than 30 percent

(see table 1).

Except in the South, where they constitute

about one-fifth of the population, Negroes represent only a small fraction (about 11 percent) of

the total population of the United States; 7 percent

each in the Northwest and the North Central

regions; and 4 percent in the West.

Over half (54 percent) of all Negroes still live in

the South, despite the mass exodus of about 3.3

million Negroes from this region since 1940. By

1964, the Northeast and North Central regions

each had almost 20 percent of the Negro population; the West had 8 percent. Most recent statistics indicate that a migration from other regions

to the West has begun and is increasing (chart 1).

In the West, including Alaska and Hawaii,

Negroes accounted for half of the region’s nonwhite residents in 1960; in the conterminous

West (excluding Alaska and Hawaii), Negroes

made up 62 percent of the nonwhite population.

In contrast, virtually all nonwhite residents in

each of the other regions were Negro (95 percent

of all nonwhites in the North Central region; 96

percent in the Northeast; and 98 percent in the

South).

The great majority of Negroes are city dwellers.

Almost all of the Nation’s Negroes who still lived

in rural areas or on farms in 1960 were in the

South. Even there, 3 out of 5 Negroes live in

urban areas. The northern or western Negro has

been a city dweller at least since the turn of the

century. In the North and West combined,

almost all Negroes (as compared with three-fourths

1

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
CHART 1.

THE SOUTH LOST 3.3 M ILLION NONWHITE PER S O N S , 1940-63

(MILLIONS OF NONWHITE MIGRANTS)

- 3 - 2 - 1 0 1 2 3

i -----------------1-----------------1-----------------1-----------------1----------------- 1-----------------r

NORTHEAST

BUT AVERAGE AN N U A L NET OUTMIGRATION OF NONWHITES 

FROM THE SOUTH HAS DRUPPEU S H AR PLY

NORTHEAST NORTH CENTRAL SOUTH WEST

100

50

AVERAGE NET

ANNUAL o

NONWHITE

MIGRANTS

(IN THOUSANDS)

-100

-150

SOURCE: U.S. BUREAU OF THE CENSUS

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
of th e w h ite p op u lation ) liv e in urban areas

(chart 2).

L ike im m igrant groups in general, N egroes

show d istin ct p attern s of concentration. T h ey

are especially num erous in central cities,

CHART 2.

URBANIZATION, 1910-60

NEGROES HAVE BECOME MORE URBAN, 

AND MORE RAPIDLY URBANIZED THAN 

WHITES IN THE

URBANIZATION HAS RISEN SHARPLY 

AND ABOUT THE SAME FOR BOTH 

GROUPS IN THE

NEGROES WERE CHIEFLY URBAN TO 

START WITH IN THE

NEGRO □ WHITE

* EXCLUDING ALASKA AND HAWAII. 

SOURCE: U.S. BUREAU OF THE CENSUS

particularly th e large cities w hich are part of

m etrop olitan areas and w h ich are tech n ically

kn ow n as Standard M etrop olitan S ta tistica l Areas,

or S M S A ’s. For exam ple, in 1960, th e six cities

w ith th e largest N egro p op u lation had alm ost a

fifth of all N egroes in th e U n ited S ta te s, and all

b ut one of th ese cities w ere ou tsid e th e S ou th

(see tab le 1). T h e exception w as W ash in gton ,

D .C ., a border c ity to w hich southern N egroes

are p articu larly attracted (chart 3). T h e in ­

creasing N egro con cen tration w ith in th e cen tral

c ity and th e ou tm igration of w h ites has been far

greater and m ore dram atic in th e largest S M S A ’s

(chart 5). T h e opposing m igratory trends, particu larly th e w h ite ou t-m igration , h ave b een m uch

m ore m od erate in S M S A ’s of 100,000 to 500,000

p op u lation . In th e sm allest S M S A ’s (50,000 to

100,000 p op u lation in 1960) th e proportion of

b oth w h ites and N egroes w ho liv e in cen tral cities

has con tin u ed to increase. M ajor differences

exist am ong regions and cities, and m uch of the

con cen tration in central cities resu lts from in tern al

sh ifts w ith in th e S M S A ’s.

W ith in th e central cities, th e m ain problem

is n ot num ber or p roportion of N egroes, b u t their

sp atial arrangem ent and econom ic statu s. In

m ost large cities in 1960 (charts 6 -9 ), h alf or m ore

of the N egroes liv e d in census tracts in w hich th e

pop u lation w as 90 p ercen t or m ore N egro and

in w hich p op u lation d en sity per square m ile

w as esp ecially high (table 2). B esid es being

confined to a d isp rop ortion ately sm all space

w ith in the city , th e N egro tracts w ere u su ally

con tiguou s or form ed one or m ore p ock ets w ith in

th e city. C olor w as th e on ly com m on characteristic of th ese p ock ets of N egro resid en ce (charts

6 -9 ). O ther socioeconom ic ch aracteristics of th e

p op u lation w ere u n usu ally h eterogeneous, for

exam ple, th e range of incom e and education.

T h e sp atial con fin em en t of urban N egroes to

d en sely p op u lated areas raises serious econom ic

issu es for th e N a tio n . B ecau se of segregation,

the resid en ts of N egro neighborhoods ten d to be

m ore socially and econ om ically h eterogeneous, b u t

th e choices availab le to them as consum ers are

m ore lim ited and m ore hom ogeneous th a n am ong

w h ites. Segregation frequ en tly lim its th e N egro

consum er in his choice of such item s as housing,

pu blic services, tran sp ortation , superm arket facilities, recreation, ban k in g, insurance, m edical and

legal services^ and m an y others. Su ch artificial

narrow ing of consum er ch oice can and often does

3

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
CHART 3

OVER HALF THE NEGROES LIVE IN THE SOUTH

(PERCENT)

8 WEST

19 NORTHEAST

19 NORTH CENTRAL

54 SOUTH

*AS OF 1964

BUT

THE FIRST 6 CITIES IN NEGRO POPULATION ARE NOT

SOUTHERN, EXCEPT FOR WASHINGTON, D.C., A BORDER CITY

NEW YORK

CHICAGO

PHILADELPHIA

DETROIT

WASHINGTON

LOS ANGELES

1,087,931

812,637

529,240

482,223

411,737

334,916

250,000

SOURCE: U.S. BUREAU OF THE CENSUS

500,000 750,000 1,000,000

NEGRO POPULATION, 1960

1,250,000

4

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
CHART 4.

THE NEGRO POPULATION HAS INCREASED LEAST 

(PROPORTIONATELY) OF ALL THE RACES IN THE U.S.* 

AND HAS REMAINED CLOSE TO 10 OR 11 PERCENT OF 

TOTAL POPULATION, 1900-1960

FROM THE SOUTH AND FARMS TO CITIES AND ES P EC IA LLY 

TO CENTRAL CITIES OF SMSA’ S **

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
CHART 5

NEGROES’ INCREASING CONCENTRATION IN CENTRAL CITIES OF 

SMSA’ S HAS ACCOMPANIED DECENTRALIZATION AMONG WHITES

RATIO: 400

CENTRAL CITY TO

OUTSIDE CENTRAL

CITY POPULATION

300

200

100

0

1900 '10 '20 '30 '40 '50 '60

THESE OPPOSING TRENDS HAVE BEEN 

SHARPEST IN THE LARGEST SMSA’ S

RATIO: 700

CENTRAL CITY

TO OUTSIDE 6(X)

CENTRAL CITY

POPULATION

500

400

300

200

100

0

1900 10 '20 '30 '40 '50 '60

MINOR IN SMALLER SM SA’S

IN THE SMALLEST SMSA’S INCREASING

CONCENTRATION IS TAKING PLACE IN

BOTH GROUPS

* IN 1960 SOURCE: U.S. BUREAU OF THE CENSUS

6

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
CHART 6A

CHICAGO 1960

23% O F TH E C I T Y 'S T O T A L P O P U L A T I O N O F 3,5 50 ,0 00 W ERE N E G R O E S 

6 7% O F TH E N E G R O E S L I V E D IN N E G R O T R A C T S .

54 OF THE NEGRO TRACTS (WITH 43% OF THE POPULATION IN 

THESE TRACTS) FELL INTO THE LOWEST QUARTILE FOR INCOME 

AND EDUCATION AND HIGHEST QUARTILE FOR UNEMPLOYMENT.

TRACTS FALLING IN HIGHEST QUARTILE FOR 

MALE UNEMPLOYMENT

TRACTS FALLING IN LOWEST QUARTILE FOR INCOME

AND HIGHEST QUARTILE FOR MALE UNEMPLOYMENT

TRACTS FALLING IN LOWEST QUARTILE FOR INCOME,

ANDEDUCATIONAL ATTAINMENT AND HIGHEST QUARTILE 

FOR MALE UNEMPLOYMENT

TRACT MEDIAN

RANGE OF MEDIAN FAMILY INCOME, LOWEST QUANTILE $2,452 - 5,835

RANGE OF MEDIAN EDUCATIONAL ATTAINMENT, TRACT MEDIAN

LOWEST QUARTILE (years) 5.7-8.8

TRACT RATE

RANGE OF MALE UNEMPLOYMENT RATE. HIGHEST QUARTILE 35.5 - 7.2 

( PERCENT)

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
CHART 6B

CHICAGO 1960

Detail of Negro

Concentration

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
CHART 7A

LOS ANGELES 1960

1 4 % O F T H E C I T Y 'S 2 ,4 7 9 ,0 0 0 P O P U L A T I O N W E R E N E G R O E S 

6 9% O F T H E N E G R O E S L I V E D I N N E G R O T R A C T S .

13 OF THE NEGRO TRACTS (WITH 6 9 % OF THE POPULATION 

IN THESE TRACTS ) FELL INTO THE LOWEST QUART1LE 

FOR IN C O M E A N D EDUCATION A N D HIGHEST QUARTILE 

FOR UNEMPLOYMENT.

NEGRO TRACTS COMPRISED 3 % OF THE CITY'S TOTAL 

POPULATION A N D LESS THAN .05% OF THE CITY'S 

TOTAL AREA.

TRACTS FALLING IN LOWEST QUARTILE FOR INCOME

TRACTS FALLING IN LOWEST QUARTILE FOR 

EDUCATIONAL ATTAINMENT

TRACTS FALLING IN LOWEST QUARTILE FOR BOTH 

INCOME AND EDUCATIONAL ATTAINMENT

TRACTS FALLING IN HIGHEST QUARTIlf FOR 

MALE UNEMPLOYMENT

TRACTS FALLING IN LOWEST QUARTILE FOR INCOME

AND HIGHEST QUARTILE FOR MALE UNEMPLOYMENT

TRACTS FALLING IN LOWEST QUARTILE FOR INCOME.

AND EDUCATIONAL ATTAINMENT AND HIGHEST QUARTILE 

FOR MALE UNEMPLOYMENT

RANGE OF MEDIAN FAMILY INCOME LOWEST QUARTILE

RANGE OF MEDIAN EDUCATIONAL ATTAINMENT 

LOWEST QUARTILE I years I

TRACT MEDIAN

7.3 - 9.7

TRACT RATE

RANGE OF MALE UNEMPLOYMENT RATE. HIGHEST QUARTILE 12.6 - 6.3 

(PERCENT)

9

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
CHART 7B

Mil

10

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
CHART 8A

TRACTS FALLING IN LOWEST QUART!II FOR INCOME

TRACTS FALLING IN LOWEST QUARTILE FOR 

EDUCATIONAL ATTAINMENT

TRACTS FALLING IN LOWEST QUARTILE FOR BOTH 

INCOME AND EDUCATIONAL ATTAINMENT

TRACTS FALLING IN HIGHEST QUARTILE FOR 

MALE UNEMPLOYMENT

TRACTS FALLING IN LOWEST QUART I LI FOR INCOME

AND HIGHEST QUARTILE FOR MALE UNEMPLOYMENT

TRACTS FALLING IN LOWEST QUARTILE FOR INCOME.

AND EDUCATIONAL ATTAINMENT AND HIGHEST QUARTILE 

FOR MALE UNEMPLOYMENT

TF

RANGE OF MEDIAN FAMILY INCOME LOWEST QUARTILE %

RANGE OF MEDIAN EDUCATIONAL ATTAINMENT 

LOWEST QUARTILE (years)

[=□

TRACT MEDIAN 

6.7 -8.7 

TRACT RATE

RANGE OF MALE UNEMPLOYMENT RATE. HIGHEST QUARTILE 25.4 - T 8 

(PERCENT)

MANHATTAN 1960

23% OF THE BOROUGH’S TOTAL POPULATION OF 1,698,000 WERE NEGROES. 

59% OF THE NEGROES LIVED IN NEGRO TRACTS.

10 Of THESE TRACTS (29%) SHOWED LOW INCOME ALTHOUGH 

THEY FELL NEITHER INTO THE LOWEST QUARTILE WITH RESPECT 

TO EDUCATION, NOR THE HIGHEST WITH RESPECT TO 

UNEMPLOYMENT.

ONLY 6 OF THE NEGRO TRACTS (WITH 17% OF THE POPULATION 

IN THESE TRACTS) FELL INTO THE LOWEST QUARTILE FOR 

INCOME AND EDUCATION AND THE HIGHEST QUARTILE FOR 

UNEMPLOYMENT.

MDiOCS ISLAHO

11

217-817 O— 66 2

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
CHART 8B

MANHATTAN 1960

Detail of

Negro Concentration

12

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
CHART 9A

WASHINGTON 1960

54% O F TH E C I T Y 'S T O T A L P O P U L A T I O N O F 75 4,000 W E R E N E G R O E S . 

50% O F T H E S E N E G R O E S L I V E D IN N E G R O T R A C T S .

O N LY 5 OF THE NEGRO TRACTS (WITH 10% OF THE

POPULATION IN THESE TRACTS) FELL INTO THE LOWEST 

QUARTILE FOR INCOME A N D EDUCATION A N D THE HIGHEST 

QUARTILE FOR UNEMPLOYMENT.

NEGRO TRACTS COMPRISED 2 7 % OF THE CITY'S TOTAL

POPULATION BUT O N LY 5% OF THE CITY'S TOTAL AREA.

TRACTS FALLING IN LOWEST QUART Ilf FOR INCOME E=□

TRACTS FALLING IN LOWEST QUARTILE FOR 

EDUCATIONAL ATTAINMENT

TRACTS FALLING IN LOWEST QUARTILE FOR BOTH 

INCOME AND EDUCATIONAL ATTAINMENT

TRACTS FALLING IN HIGHEST QUARTILf FOR 

MALE UNEMPLOYMENT m

TRACTS FALLING IN LOWEST QUARTILE FOR INCOME

AND HIGHEST QUARTILE FOR MALE UNEMPLOYMENT

TRACTS FALLING IN LOWEST QUARTILE FOR INCOME,

AND EDUCATIONAL ATTAINMENT AND HIGHEST QUARTILE 

FOR MALE UNEMPLOYMENT

TRACT MEDIAN

RANGE OF MEDIAN FAMILY INCOME.LOWEST QUARTILE *2.341 - 5,401

RANGE OF MEDIAN EDUCATIONAL ATTAINMENT, RACT MEDIAN

LOWEST QUARTILE (years) 5.6-10.7

RANGE OF MALE UNEMPLOYMENT RATE, HIGHEST QUARTILE

TRACT RATE 

29.8-8.8

(PERCENT)

13

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
CHART 9B

WASHINGTON 1960

Detail of

Negro Concentration

14

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
d rastically reduce real incom e and cu rtail im ­

p ortan t in crem ents to hum an, business, and

com m u n ity resource d evelop m en t.

T h e rising proportion of children in th e d en sely

pop u lated N egro neighborhood^ in th e central

cities and th e crow ding in central c ity schools

present serious problem s. A m ong th ese are p olicy

qu estion s relating to expansion of neighborhoods

and the housing m arket, econom ic op p ortu n ity,

and access to inform ation and resources for fam ily

planning.

CHART 10

THE NEGRO POPULATION ON 

THE AVERAGE IS SLIGHTLY YOUNGER 

THAN THE WHITE

NEGRO CHILDREN OF PRESCHOOL AGE 

ARE INCREASING AS A PROPORTION 

OF THE TOTAL PRESCHOOL POPULATION, 

BUT O N LY IN NONFARM AREAS OR 

IN C IT IE S - DESTINATION OF YOUNG 

MIGRANTS OF CHILDBEARING AGE

W hile there is a rising trend in th e proportion

of N egro children (under 5) in th e to ta l preschool

p op u lation , chiefly in cities (chart 10), it is q u ite

p ossib le th a t N egro fertility rates, esp ecially in

p laces w here N egroes liv e in large num bers, could

fall below th e w h ite average, if econom ic exp an sion

con tin u es and if increased com m itm en ts to

program s for education, em p loym en t, and housing

op p ortu n ity are effective.

Several factors p oin t to this conclusion. A n alyses in d ica te th a t th e n on w h ite to w h ite fertility

ratio falls rap idly as urb an ization and incom es

increase. T h e m ajority of N egroes already are

c ity dw ellers and their earnings are rising. T h e

N egro m igran ts to cities h av e m ore years of

schooling and higher incom es th an th e N egro

p op u lation w h en ce th e y originated. A b ou t half

th e N egroes in th e six cities of largest N egro

pop u lation , w ere born elsew here (chart 11). In

areas of inm igration, n on w h ite m en g e t a larger

proportion of rela tiv ely high sta tu s jobs in w h itecollar occu p ation s and th e crafts, and su b stan tially

b etter p ay, than in th e S ou th, w hich con tains the

areas of ou tm igration (chart 12). N egro w ives at

all fam ily in com e lev els are m ore lik ely than w h ite

w ives to hold a paid job ou tsid e of th e hom e, an

im p ortan t factor in reducing fertility as w ell as

sustain in g or increasing fam ily incom e. F e r tility

rates for n on w h ite w om en age 2 5 -3 4 , w ith fam ily

incom es of $6,000 or m ore, approach th e rates for

w h ite m oth ers of sim ilar age and fam ily incom e

(chart 13).

CHART 11.

ONE OF EVERY

TWO NONWHITES IN NORTHERN AND 

WESTERN CITIES OF GREATEST NEGRO 

PO PULATION WERE IN M IGRANTS, 

CHIEFLY FROM THE SOUTH

15

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
CHART 12.

NONW HITE M IGRANTS A V ER A G E M ORE SCHOOLING 

TH AN OTHER NONW HITES

NONWHITE MALES (25 - 29 YEARS OLD)

S C H O O L IN G OF

PO PU LATIO N,

I960 SOUTH

i— 1 1 + y e a r s o f

1____1 H IG H SC H O O L

f r & iv S S l

------------------------------------------------------------L“ “ " — KvX ] 1 + YEARS OF

CO LLEGE

S C H O O L IN G OF U .S.

INTERREGIO NAL

M IG R A N T S, 1955-60 SOUTH

______________________1______________________1______________________1____________________

25 50

PERCENT OF M IG R AN T S, 1955-60

75 100

IN REG IONS OF G REATEST IN M IG R A TIO N ,

NONWHITES GETHIGHER STATUS JOBS AND BETTER PAY

PERCENT THAN AVAILABLE TO THEM WHERE INMIGRATION IS LOW

EAST CENTRAL EAST CENTRAL

WHITE COLLAR

A N D CRAFTS

PRO DUCTIO N

WORKERS IN

INDUSTRY

SOURCE: U.S.

U.S.

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR,

BUREAU OF THE C EN SUS

BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS;

16

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
CHART 13.

AT MAJOR CHILDBEARING AGES,*

THE NONWHITE TO WHITE FERTILITY RATIO 

DECREASES WITH INCREASING INCOME, 

AND TENDS TO BE LOWEST IN CITIES

TOTAL UNITED STATES URBANIZED AREAS

R A T IO ** R A T IO **

1.40_______K30_______K20_______K10_______K 00 1.00______ KIO_______K20_______K30_______ K40

------------- 1--------------1--------------1-------------- ------------- 1--------------1--------------1--------------

INCOME

UNDER

k \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ $4,000 vWWWWWN

$10,000- 1.... $14,999^ if

EQUAL RATIO

T ............— ’ 1 AGE IN I960 

E 3 20-24 

C D 25-29 

513 30-34

* AGES 20 - 34.

* * NUMBER OF NONWHITE TO NUMBER OF WHITE CHILDREN EVER BORN PER 1,000 MOTHERS. 

SOURCE: 1960 CENSUS OF POPULATION

Although the national economy has shown

healthy growth for 5 years, the large cities to which

Negroes have migrated to find employment have

not shared proportionately in the Nation’s rate of

economic growth; unemployment in these cities

may generate frustration and a host of other

problems.

Six cities among those having 100,000 Negroes

or more in 1960 showed less employment gain

than the national average of 7 percent between

1963 and 1965. These cities included such places

of heavy Negro immigration as New York,

Chicago, Philadelphia, Baltimore, Newark, and

Los Angeles. Most of the cities having an

extensive Negro population gained more than the

national average in the service and trade industries, which include business, household, and

personal services, and both retail and wholesale

trade. Negro men have begun to enter skilled

occupations in manufacturing and are commanding improved earnings and seniority, and most of

the cities having a large Negro population showed

more increase in this area of employment than

the national average. However in the two cities

having the largest Negro population in their

region, as well as substantial Negro immigration—

Los Angeles and New York—there was no increase

in manufacturing employment (see table 1). Six

of the cities showing an employment gain of at

least as much as the national average were in

the South, where Negroes are not yet readily

employed outside of service and laboring jobs

(chart 14).

No unemployment rates for central cities, by

color, are available since the 1960 census of

population, except for those obtained in a recent

survey in south and east Los Angeles by the

Bureau of the Census.1 This survey, and other

clues about employment and unemployment,

suggest that Negroes may benefit less than others

when employment gains take place in SMSA’s.

1 U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census, Current Population Reports, S p e c ia l C en su s S u r v e y o f th e

S o u th a n d E a s t L o s A n g e le s A r e a s : November 1965. 

Series P-23, No. 17, Mar. 23, 1966.

17

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
CHART 14.

OF THE U.S. CITIES' WITH 100,000 NEGROES OR MORE

IN 1960

NEW ORLEANS

ATLANTA

DETROIT___________________

W ASHINGTON, D.C. (SMSA)

DALLAS

CLEVELAND * *

CINCINNATI * *

ST. LOUIS

]

8 SHOWED GREATER

NONAGRICULTURAL

EMPLOYMENT GAIN THAN

THE U.S. AVERAGE,

BETWEEN 1963-65

MEMPHIS

PITTSBURGH

BIRMINGHAM

CHICAGO

NEWARK

LOS ANGELES

BALTIMORE

PHILADELPHIA

NEW YORK (SMSA)

9 SHOWED LESS NONAGRICULTURAL EMPLOYMENT GAIN THAN

THE U.S. AVERAGE

BETWEEN 1963-65

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

PERCENT GAIN IN NONAGRICULTURAL EMPLOYMENT

* CITES WITH 250,000 OR MORE TOTAL POPULATION AND AT LEAST 100,000 NEGRO

POPULATION. 1/3 OF THE TOTAL U.S. NEGRO POPULATION LIVED IN 18 CITIES.

HOUSTON, TEXAS, WHICH MEETS THE CITY CRITERIA,WAS EXCLUDED FROM THE

GRAPH BECAUSE DATA O N NONAGRICULTURAL EMPLOYMENT ARE NOT AVAILABLE

FOR IT.

* * THE G AIN SHOWN MAY BE SOMEWHAT EXAGGERATED DUE TO A CHANGE IN AREA

DEFINITION IN 1964.

SOURCE: U.S. DEPARTMENT OF LABOR, BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS, AND U.S.

BUREAU OF THE CENSUS.

18

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Chapter II. Employment, Unemployment, and the Labor Force

In M arch 1966, n on w h ite workers con stitu ted

ab out 11 p ercen t of th e civilian labor force of the

U n ited S ta tes, b u t accou n ted for over 21 percent

of th e unem ployed and 25 percent of the long-term

un em ployed. T h rou gh ou t the period sin ce W orld

W ar II, n on w h ite u n em p loym en t rates h ave con ­

sisten tly exceeded the rates for w h ite workers,

b u t th e gap varies w ith th e b usiness cycle.

In th e m ost recent full year of the current upswing)

w hen u n em p loym en t rates for w h ite workers

averaged 4.1 percent, th e rate for non w h ites w as

tw ice as high— 8.3 percent. Som e of the reasons

for th e p ersistence of th e relative d isad v an ta ge of

n on w h ite w orkers can be isolated from an exam in ation of each segm en t of th e labor force.

T a b l e 1.— C itie s w ith 1 0 0 ,0 0 0 N eg ro es or M o re in 1 9 6 0 , a n d P e r c e n t C h an g e in T h e ir N o n a g r ic u ltu r a l E m p lo y m e n t, b y

I n d u s tr y G ro u p , 1 9 6 3 - 6 5

1960 population (Number in thousands) Percent change in nonagricultural employment, 1963-65 1

Cities (in order of Negro population)

Total Negro T otal2 Manufac- Services Trade

Number Percent turing

New York, N.Y_____________________ 7, 782 

3, 550 

2, 003 

1, 670 764

1, 088 14 3 — 1 7 5

Chicago, 111_____ _ _______ __ 813 23 6 7 7 6

Philadelphia, Pa_ ____ _ _____ 529 26 5 2 6 7

Detroit, M ic h____ _ __ _ ___ 482 29 12 15 8 14 Washington, D.C__ _ ___ 412 54 10 9 12 11

Los Angeles, Calif______ 2, 479 

939

335 14 5 (3) 1

9 8

Baltimore, Md__ _____ 326 35 5 9 7

Cleveland, Ohio__ 876 251 29 9 8 13 11

New Orleans, La__ __ ._ _ ____ 628 234 37 15 20 (4) 13 11

Houston, Tex _ __ _ ___ 938 215 23 (4) 7

(4) 9

(4) St. Louis, Mo___ _ ____ 750 214 29 5 7

Atlanta, Ga__ _ _ _____ ___ 487 186 38 12 13 14 10 Memphis, Tenn. __ ______ 498 184 37 7 6 5 6

Newark, N.J_ __ 405 138 34 6 3 8 5

Birmingham, Ala__ . . . ___ 341 135 40 7 8 7 3

Dallas, Tex__ 680 129 19 10 12 14 12

Cincinnati, Ohio _ 503 109 22 9 5 10 10

Pittsburgh, Pa_ 604 101 17 7 7 6 6

Total, 18 cities__ 25, 897 

179, 323

14

5, 881 18, 872

31

23 (4) 7

(4) 6

(4) 8

(4) Total, United S ta te s ..__ __ 11 7

Population in the 18 cities, as a percent of total U.S. population

1 For the Standard Metropolitan Statistical Area, or its approximation.

2 Includes industries other than manufacturing, services, and trade not

shown separately, such as finance, transportation, and government.

3 Less than 0.5 percent.

* Not available.

Source C en su s o f P o p u la tio n , 1960, U .S . S u m m a ry , PC(1)-1D, table 304;

U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, In co m e, E d u c a tio n ,

a n d U n e m p lo y m e n t in N eigh borh oods, J a n u a r y 1963, table B-4 for Negro population in individual cities; U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor

Statistics, E m p lo y m e n t a n d E a rn in g s S ta tistic s for S ta tes a n d A re a s 1939-63,

Bulletin No. 1370-1, tables on page 8, 58, 134, 169, 201, 265, 282, 305, 343, 387,

424, 472, 474, 531, 536, 591, 605, and 607 for 1963 figures for individual SMSA’s;

E m p lo y m e n t an d E a rn in g s, \ ol. 11, No. 11, May 1965, table B -l, p. 13 for

total U.S. nonagricultural employment in 1963; and unpublished Bureau of

Labor Statistics data for 1965 nonagricultural employment.

19

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
T able 2.— E x te n t o f N eg ro C o n c en tra tio n in N eg ro C en su s T ra c ts 1 a n d S elected C h a r a c te ris tic s o f T h ese T ra c ts, W a sh in g to n ,

D .C ., C h ica g o, L o s A n g e les, a n d M a n h a tta n , 1 9 6 0

Central city

Total popula­ tion (in thou­ sands)

Negro population

Negro population living in Negro tracts 1 Percent of city’s (borough) total popula­ tion in Negro tracts 1

City (bor­ ough) area in 

square miles

Total area of Negro tracts 1 (sq. mi.)

Percent of city 

area oc­ cupied by Negro tracts 1

Negro tracts 1 in lowest quartile for income and education and highest quartile for unemployment

Num­ ber (in thou­ sands)

Per­ cent

Num­ ber (in thou­ sands)

Per­ cent Num­ ber

Percent of popula­ tion in all Negro tracts 1

Manhattan- 1, 698 397 23 236 59 14 22 2 9 6 17 Los Angeles___ 2, 479 335 14 73 22 3 455 1 (2) 13 69 Chicago__ 3, 550 813 23 541 66 15 224 8 4 54 43 Washington, D.C___ 764 412 54 204 50 27 61 3 5 5 10

1 Tracts in which 90 percent or more of the population was Negro in April

1960.

2 Less than 0.5 percent.

CHART 15.

THE GAP BETWEEN 

NONWHITE AND WHITE 

UNEM PLO YM EN T RATES PERSISTS IN 

BOOM YEARS AS W ELL AS RECESSION , BUT NARROWS SU B STAN TIALLY 

IN AN EXPA N D IN G ECONOMY

SOURCE: U.S. DEPARTMENT OF LABOR, BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS

Source U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, Income,

Education, and Unemployment in Neighborhoods, January 1963; U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census, U.S. Census of Population: I960,

Number of Inhabitants, U.S. Summary, Final Report PC(1)-1A, table 30;

and Bureau of the Census, U.S. Census of Population: 1960, Number of Inhabitants, New York, PC(1)-34A, table 6.

The total nonwhite labor force

E con om ic expansion has created job op p ortu -

nities unevenly. A lth ou gh shortages h ave appeared

in som e occupations and industries, and vacan cies

are opening in greater num bers to non w h ite

workers, the im proved prospects h a v e n ot y e t

rem oved th e handicaps from su b stan tial groups

w ith in th e n on w h ite segm en t of the labor force.

B etw een 1964 and 1965, teenagers, w h o m ake up

10 percent of the n on w h ite labor force, began to

seek jobs in grow ing num bers. W om en over th e

age of 20, already am ou ntin g to 38 p ercen t of the

n on w h ite force, accounted for another m ajor

portion of th e increase b etw een 1964 and 1965.

B o th of these groups h ave been at a rela tive

d isad van tage w hen th ey enter— or reenter— the

job m arket.

T h e adult n on w h ite m an fared b est of th e

groups of non w h ite workers in th e expanding

econ om y (chart 16). M en over th e age of 20

con stitu ted 52 percent of th e tota l non w h ite force.

N ea rly three-fourths of th ese 4.5 m illion m en w ere

m arried and livin g w ith their w ives. T h e u n ­

em p loym en t rate for this group w as 4.3 percent

in 1965. A lth ough tw ice th e rate for w h ite

m arried m en, this w as low er than for other w h ite

m en.

20

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
NONW HITE U N EM PLO YM EN T RATES 

SWING SH A R P LY WITH TH E BUSINESS 

C YC LE, AND W HEN CONDITIONS 

IM PROVE, RATES FOR NONWHITE 

AD ULT MEN DROP MUCH MORE THAN

CHART 16

FOR MOST OTHER NONW HITES

NONWHITE TO WHITE UNEMPLOYMENT RATES HAS REMAINED OVER 2.0 AND HAS BEEN CONSISTENTLY HIGHER FOR NONWHITE ADULT MEN THAN FOR OTHER NONWHITES

D ifferences betw een th e com position of the

n on w h ite segm en t of th e labor force and the

w h ite segm en t help to explain w h y overall un em ­

p loym en t w ith in th e tw o groups responds differen tly to changes in econom ic conditions. T here

is a higher proportion of w om en in th e n on w h ite

force, and a sm aller proportion of adult m en,

but th e sam e proportion of teenagers. Sim ilarly,

their greater need for incom e keeps a higher

proportion of n on w h ite workers engaged in th e

search for work, even w hen conditions are n ot

favorable for finding it. N o n w h ite w om en are

m uch m ore lik ely than are w h ite w om en to be

heads of their fam ilies. A nd in fam ilies w ith

husbands at their head (th e usual situ ation ),

n on w h ite w om en tend to particip ate in th e labor

force at higher rates than w h ite w om en, regardless

of incom e.

Nonwhite teenagers in the labor force

Largely because of sharply increasing school

enrollment, the great increase in the number of

nonwhite youths between 14 and 19 years of age

has not brought about as much growth in the

labor force as had been expected. Yet the

growth of job opportunities has attracted many

youths into seeking jobs, whether or not they are

in school. The nonwhite youths are not as

likely to be seeking work as the white youths.

But when they are, they are more likely to need

and hold full-time jobs or to work long hours.

Well over one-third of the non white teenagers

lived in families with less than $3,000 income in

March 1965. The median income for the families

of unemployed nonwhite teenagers was $3,667.

For the families of the employed youths, the

median rose less than $1,000. Most white teenagers, in contrast, come from families with incomes

above $7,000.

Unemployment rates are especially high for all

youths. When the disadvantages of inexperience

and limited training are compounded by the

results of discrimination and impoverishment, the

barriers to employment become formidable. In

the early months of 1966, for example, 25 to 30

percent of the nonwhite girls who sought work

were unable to find it. This was the highest

unemployment rate of any group in the labor

force but it was scarcely more severe than the rate

for the nonwhite boys, which ranged between 20

and 25 percent. These rates for non white youngsters exceed those for white youths two- to threefold. The difference was especially pronounced

in the 18- and 19-year age groups.

Despite the frustrations of the job search, few

non white teenagers withdraw from the job

market.2 In 1965, only 57,000 were neither in

school nor in the labor force. Of this group,

2 See Research in Labor Force Concepts, by Robert L. Stein and Daniel B. Levine, paper presented at the 1965 Conference of the American Statistical Association in Philadelphia, Pa., September 1965.

21

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
m an y w ere girls w ho w ere married or w orking at

hom e.

Work and school

T h e con n ection b etw een work and school is

esp ecially im p ortan t for y o u th s from low -incom e

fam ilies. P art-tim e work becom es a m ean s to

secure an ed u cation , and education in its turn

p rovid es th e m eans to secure satisfactory fu ll-tim e

w ork. T h ese relationships h av e been stren gth en ­

in g for n on w h ite y o u th s in recent years. M uch

m ore w ill be required a t each stage of this process,

how ever, if th e com ing generation of n on w h ite

y o u th s are to attain ad eq u ate representation in

th e occupations of th e future.

B etw een 1960 and 1964, school enrollm ents of

non w h ite b oy s and girls b etw een 14 and 17

increased m ore th an th e group itself did.

A s chart 17 show s, b etw een 1960 and 1964 th e

p op u lation of n on w h ite y o u th s 18-19 years old

increased m ore than th a t of th e w h ite y o u th s in

th e sam e age range. T h e increase in school

enrollm ent k ep t pace w ith this grow th, and b oth

groups ad van ced a t the sam e rate. T h e w h ite

and non w h ite age groups from 7 through 17 h av e

ab ou t th e sam e school enrollm ent rates, b u t rates

for n on w h ites in th e kindergarten and college ages

(under 7, and from 18 through 24) are n o t n early

as high as the rates for th e com parable w h ite

CHART 17A.

AMONG TEENAGERS 14-17 YEARS OLD

RISING NONWHITE

AND WHITE SCHOOL REVEALING

ENROLLMENT ABSORBED 

MORE THAN THEIR 

POPULATION INCREASE

SHARPER ADVANCES 

IN ENROLLMENT 

THAN POPULATION

22

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
groups, w hich h av e readier access to p u blic schools

at these ages (chart 18).

T h e desire and cap a city to provide m ore sch ooling for n on w h ite y o u th s are reflected in the d ata

show ing th a t n on w h ite h igh school graduates are

m uch m ore lik ely than w h ite graduates to h ave

parents w ho did n o t finish high school, and to

com e from low -in com e h om es (chart 19).

H ow w ell does it p ay off?

N o n w h ite graduates do less w ell than w h ite

graduates in gettin g and keeping a job. T h ey

earn less than w h ite y o u th s w ho h av e left school

before graduation. M ore of them begin in the

low est statu s jobs.

T hus, th e ad van tages of education to n on w h ite

you th s are b arely b eginning to m ak e them selves

AMONG TEENAGERS 

(WORK OR COLLEGE

THE RATIO OF CHANGE IN 

ENROLLMENT TO POPULATION 

WAS SUBSTANTIALLY LOWER 

THAN IN YOUNGER AGES 

AMONG BOTH NONWHITE 

AND WHITE

felt in th e job m arket. U n em p loym en t rates for

m ale graduates dropped sharply betw een O ctober

1964 and 1965, w hile th e rates for m ost dropouts

rose su b stan tially (chart 20). B u t n on w h ite girl

graduates had even higher u n em ploym ent than

th e year before. C learly, n on w h ite y o u th s are

preparing for to d a y ’s jobs faster than existing

p ractices are changing to absorb them (chart 21).

Y et th e ou tlook for future jobs urges th a t the

tem po of increase in n on w h ite schooling be contin u ally increased. Im agin ative govern m en t and

p rivate program s w ill be needed to further

strengthen b oth th e educational and the job m ark et links to job im provem ent. I t is necessary, of

course, to con tin u e to stress and expand training,

17B.

18-19 YEARS OLD 

ENTRANCE YEARS)

BUT THE NONWHITE YOUTH 

SHOWED PROPORTIONATELY 

AS LARGE AN ADVANCE IN 

ENROLLMENT AS THE WHITE, 

ALTHOUGH A GREATER 

POPULATION INCREASE

RATIO, CHANGE IN SCHOOL ENROLLMENT

TO CHANGE IN POPULATION, 1960-64 PERCENT CHANGE, 1960-64

EE3 NONWHITE

□ WHITE

SOURCE: U.S. BUREAU OF THE CENSUS

E23 POPULATION

j— , SCHOOL

1 ENROLLMENT

23

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
CHART 18. CHART 20.

SCHOOL ENROLLM ENT RATES ARE ABOUT 

AS GREAT AMONG NONWHITE AS WHITE 

YOUTH 7 -1 7 , BUT ARE MUCH LESS FOR 

NONWHITES IN THE KINDERGARTEN AND 

COLLEGE YEARS

CHART 19.

NONWHITE HIGH SCHOOL GRADUATES 

(AGED 16 -2 1) ARE MUCH MORE 

LIK E LY THAN THE WHITE TO HAVE 

PARENTS WHO ARE NOT HIGH SCHOOL 

GRADUATES AND TO COME FROM VERY 

LOW -INCOME FAM ILIES

H

NON WHITE 

WHITE

* * OATA FOR UNMARRIED STUDENTS 16-21 YEARS OLD LIVING WITH AND RELATED TO THE HOUSEHOLD 

HEAD, AND GRADUATED BY OCTOBER 1965.

SOURCE: U.S. DEPARTMENT OF LABOR, BUREAU Of LABOR STATISTICS

UNEM PLOYM ENT RATES WERE HIGHER 

FOR NONW HITE HIGH-SCHOOL 

GR AD UATES* THAN FOR 

WHITE DROPOUTS’ *

OCTOBER 1965

PERCENT OF 

C IVILIAN LABOR

FOR_CE UNEMPLOYMENT RATES OF 16 TO 21 YEAR-OLD MALES

15

10

5

NONWHITE WHITE

* COMPLETED 4 YEARS OF HIGH SHOOL. 

* * COMPLETED LESS THAN 4 YEARS 

O F HIGH SCHOOL.

H D GRADUATES 

1 1 DROPOUTS

W EEKLY EARNINGS ON FU LL TIME IOBS 

WERE LOW ER FOR NONWHITE 

GRADUATES THAN FOR 

WHITE DROPOUTS 

FEBRUARY 1963

MEDIAN WEEKLY EARNINGS ( IN DOLLARS) ON 

FULL-TIME JOB OF 16 TO 21 YEAR-OLD YOUTHS 

(MALE AND FEMALE) NOT IN SCHOOL

SOURCE: U.S. DEPARTMENT OF LABOR, 

BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS

n GRADUATES 

□ DROPOUTS

24

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
CHART 21.

A LARGER PROPORTION OF NONW HITE 

THAN WHITE M ALE HIGH SCHOOL 

GRADUATES* HOLD B LUE-COLLAR JOBS**

BUT A HIGH SCHOOL DIPLOMA 

IMPROVES THE NONWHITE WORKER'S 

CHANCES OF MOVING FROM LABORER 

TO PRODUCTION AND CRAFTS JOBS

IN BLUE COLLAR JOBS

PRODUCTION WORKERS

NONFARM LABORERS

••IN MARCH 1965.

SOURCE: U.S.DEPARTMENT Of LABOR, BUREAU Of LABOR STATISTICS

especially on-the-job training, and to improve the

quality of education in schools and neighborhoods

serving residents who do not have much time or

resources to devote to improving facilities or instruction. As matters stand now, many Negro

youngsters have more education than they need

for the jobs they get, and community recognition

of the costs of wasted talent is required.

Adult workers

Beginning in the middle age groups, nonwhite

men have somewhat lower rates of labor force

participation than do white men in the same age

groups. Rates of participation in the labor

force among those past middle age are partly

a function of educational level and health.

Differences between the groups in educational

level is most pronounced among older men

In addition, of the older nonwhite men who are

not working or looking for work, larger proportions

are unable to work than are any other segments

of the civilian noninstitutional population. About

95 percent of all nonwhite men 25 to 44 years

old were in the labor force in March 1966, compared to not quite 98 percent of the white men.

In the ages 45 to 64, the gap is a little wider

(chart 23).

Long-term unemployment is especially prevalent among older nonwhite men.3 They tend

CHART 22.

LITTLE MORE THAN HALF OF A LL 

NONWHITE MALES WHO WORKED IN 1964 

HAD FULL-TIM E YEAR-ROUND JOBS, 

COMPARED WITH TWO-THIRDS OF A LL 

WHITE MALES

PERCENT

PART-TIME PART-TIME

FULL-TIME

-— 1-26

WEEKS

“

FULL-TIME

1-26 WEEKS /

FULL-TIME

27-49

FULL-TIME

27-49

WEEKS

WEEKS

- /

-

FULL-TIME

50-52

WEEKS

FULL-TIME

50-52

WEEKS

NONWHITE WHITE

MALES MALES

SOURCE: U.S. DEPARTMENT OF LABOR,

BUREAU OF LABOR STASTISTICS

to have relatively little education and training

and they are likely to be employed in heavy

manual labor, and in occupations particularly

subject to seasonality or high turnover.

Because of higher unemployment rates, more

spells of unemployment, and higher disability

rates, only a little more than half of the non white

men with work experience in 1964 worked 50 to

52 weeks, compared with two-thirds of the white

men (chart 22); lower life expectancy and higher

mortality rates also explain differences in labor

force participation (charts 24 and 25).

Occupations of nonwhite workers

Between 1962 and 1965, the largest gains in

employment of nonwhite workers occurred in

3 See “Long-Term Unemployment in the 1960’s,” 

Monthly Labor Review, September 1965, p. 1073.

25

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
CHART 23A

LABOR FORCE PARTICIPATION RATES 

(PERCENT OF POPULATION)

SHARP DECINES ALSO 

OCCURRED AMONG MEN 

65 AND OVER

PERCENT

IN PRIME WORKING YEARS, 

THE RATE HAS REMAINED 

RELATIVELY STABLE FOR 

WHITES, BUT HAS DECLINED 

FOR NONWHITES SINCE THE 

KOREAN WAR

PERCENT

100

98

96

94

92

IN THE 55-64 AGE GROUP, 

RATES HAVE DROPPED MORE 

AMONG THE NONWHITE, BUT 

THE NONWHITE/WHITE GAP 

HAS REMAINED SUBSTANTIAL 

SINCE THE KOREAN WAR

PERCENT

SOURCE: U.S. DEPARTMENT OF LABOR, BUREAU OF UBOR STATISTICS

26

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
CHART 23B

LABOR FORCE PARTICIPATION RATES 

(PERCENT OF POPULATION)

UNTIL RECENTLY, RATES FOR 

TEENAGERS HAVE DROPPED

BETWEEN 1948 AND 1965, DUE TO INCREASING SCHOOL 

THE DECLINE IN RATES WAS ENROLLMENT AND THE 

GREATER FOR NONWHITE DROP HAS BEEN GREATER 

MEN THAN FOR WHITE FOR NONWHITES

PERCENT PERCENT

SOURCE: U.S. DEPARTMENT OF LABOR, BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS

27

217-817 0 — 61 3

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
fields from w h ich th ey h ave tended to be excluded,

su ch as professional and technical jobs, th e

crafts, and sales occupations. N o n w h ite in ­

creases in th ese occupation groups from 1962

throu gh 1965 w ere m u ch greater than in any

3-year in terval since 1954. G ains w ere less than

average, how ever, in m anagerial and proprietors'

jobs, and th e strong retreat from agricultural

w ork has continued.

F aster en try recen tly in to professional, sales,

clerical, and crafts jobs has been accom panied b y

greater differentiation w ith in these broad occupation groups. T hus, th e professional and tech ­

nical group of occupations trad ition ally follow ed

b y ed u cated N egro m en, such as clergym en,

d octors, and teachers, is now expanded b y other

profession als in callings such as d en tists, law yers,

m ed ica l and d en tal techn ician s, professional

nurses, d ietitian s and n u trition ists, and science

techn ician s.

B u t th e occu p ation al d istrib u tion s h ave n o t y e t

b een grea tly affected. W ith in each broad occu p ation al group, non w h ite workers are m ore lik ely

than the w h ite to be em p loyed in th e lea st sk illed

categories, and a t the lo w est levels of th e w ell-paid

jobs. P en etra tion in to desirable occu p ation s has

been m u ch slow er in the S ou th than elsew here.

T o be useful, eva lu atio n of ach ievem en t m u st be

m ad e on a regional b asis.4 For exam ple, in th e

4 See “Recent Trends in the Occupational Mobility of Negroes, 1930-1960: An Intracohort Analysis,” by Nathan Hare, in S o c ia l F orces, December 1965, pp. 166-173.

CHART 24.

IN 1964, LIFE EX P E C T A N C Y * IN PRIME 

WORKING YEA R S WAS C O N SISTEN TLY 

LOWER FOR THE NONWHITE

* AVERAGE NUMBER OF YEARS OF LIFE REMAINING AT GIVEN AGES.

SOURCE: U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, EDUCATION, AND WELFARE, PUBLIC HEALTH SERVICE

NONWHITE DEATHRATES REMAINED 

STRIKINGLY HIGHER IN 1964 

THAN WHITE DEATHRATES

THE NONWHITE/WHITE GAP HAS WIDENED FOR

MATERNAL AND INFANT MORTALITY

DEATHS PER 100,000

LIVE BIRTHS

CHART 25

LIVE BIRTHS 3

— ST! 2

g g . m . . NONWHITE*

~ 0

i

N

.

FANT MORTALITY

11T M T____________

w HITi u

E

uL

1947 49 51 53 55 57 59 61 63

‘ IN F L U E N Z A EPIDEM ICS ARE K N O W N TO AFFECT N O N -

-WHITE INFANTS MORE SERIOUSLY THAN WHITE INFANTS.

THE GAP HAS CHANGED LITTLE FOR EITHER SEX, BUT THE

RATE HAS FALLEN CONSIDERABLY MORE AM O NG WOMEN.

DEATHS PER 1,000

POPULATION

DEATHS PER 1,000

POPULATION

NONWHITE' mui

B MALE H

I n \

— M

WHITE

__1__ __

AGF AC JUSTED DEATH RA1ES

1111-111 Li_

1947 49 51 53 55 57 59 61 63

SOURCE: U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, EDUCATION,

AND WELFARE, PUBLIC HEALTH SERVICE

28

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
CHART 26A

N O N W H ITE W ORKERS IN 1965 

( 1 1 % O F TH E CIVILIAN LA B O R FO R C E) HAD

------------1-------------1-------------1------------1—

LESS THAN THEIR PROPORTIONATE SHARE OF:

6%PRO FESSIO N AL AN D TECHNICAL JOBS

3% M AN AGER, OFFICIAL AN D PROPRIETOR JOBS 

123

6% CLERICAL JOBS

.3 % SALES JOBS {Z3

6% CRAFTSMAN AN D FOREMAN JOBS 

6% FARMER AN D FARM MANAGER JOBS

AND

MORE THAN THEIR PROPORTIONATE SHARE OF:

12% PRODUCTION JOBS

26% NONFARM LABORER JOBS

44% PRIVATE HOUSEHOLD JOBS

21% SERVICE JOBS , EXCEPT FOR PRIVATE HOUSEHOLD

24% FARM LABORER AN D FOREMAN JOBS

w hite-collar group, ad van ces in n on w h ite m ale

em p loym en t from M arch 1960, to M arch 1966,

ranged from 24 p ercen t in sales to over 50 p ercen t

in the professional and technical group ou tsid e of

the S ou th. C hanges in the S ou th were su b ­

sta n tia lly less, ranging dow nw ard from 24 percent

in the m anagerial or proprietor occupations.

O u tsid e of the S ou th, alm ost 4 in 10 of all n on ­

w h ite m ales had either w h ite-collar or craftsm an

jobs in M arch 1966. In the S ou th the proportion

w as less than 2 in 10.

A s already n oted , n on w h ite m en and w om en are

already b etter prepared for m ore responsible jobs

than th ey are gettin g. N everth eless, the trend

tow ard im p rovin g N egro qualifications calls for

encouragem ent. D esp ite a stea d y increase in the

rate of sch ool and college enrollm ent, ed u cation al

a tta in m en t right now , in prim e w orking years

(25 to 44 years of age), is low er in the n on w h ite

than th e w h ite p op u lation . A b out 12 percent of

th e n on w h ites, com pared w ith 24 percent of the

w hites, had 1 year or m ore of college in 1964.

T h e N egro en try in to the fastest grow ing occu p ation s has been rapid since 1961. B u t recent

B L S stu d ies in d icate th a t unless these fast grow ing

occu p ation s are opened still w ider to N egro

en tran ts, relative u n em p loym en t rates m ay n ot

im prove. T h e fields th a t are grow ing faster than

th ey h ave accom m od ated n on w h ite workers over

th e p ast decade in clud e th e professions, the crafts,

and the m anagerial occu p ation s (charts 26 and

27).

Industrial distribution

As of 1964, th e on ly im p ortan t differences in th e

distribution b etw een m ale n on w h ite and w h ite

workers w as a som ew h at larger percentage of n on ­

w h ites in agriculture and th e services, and a

greater proportion of w h ite m en in m anufacturing

(chart 28). B o th groups shared equally in occu ­

p ations in th e p rivate econom y, and had alm ost

an id en tical proportion represented in public

adm inistration. H ow ever, a larger percentage of

n on w h ites than w h ites w orked in Federal service

and a sm aller percentage w ere in S ta te and local

governm ent.

29

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
CHART 26B

YET DIFFERENCES IN NONWHITE-WHITE 

OCCUPATIONAL DISTRIBUTIONS REMAIN GREAT

1965

MALE

(PERCENT

DISTRIBUTION) (SJ0N W H, TE

o l R n S S n I

WHITE

W HITE-COLLAR

WORKERS

BLUE-COLLAR

WORKERS

SERVICE

WORKERS

FARM

WORKERS

FEMALE

NONWHITE WHITE

W HITE-COLLAR

WORKERS

BLUE-COLLAR

WORKERS

SERVICE

WORKERS

FARM

WORKERS

SOURCE: U.S. DEPARTMENT OF LABOR, BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS

30

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Because nonwhite males continued to hold a

greater share than whites of all jobs in agriculture,

they had proportionately fewer private nonagricultural jobs.

In the private nonagricultural sector, nonwhite

workers were less likely than the white to be in

finance, insurance, and real estate, but more likely

to be in the professional services group, and in

personal services. Retail trade (other than eating

and drinking places) had a notably larger proportion of white than nonwhite male or female

workers.

The most important increases in the proportion

of nonwhite males between 1962 and 1964 occurred

in the local gas, electric, and water utilities. The

next most significant rise was in educational

services, reflecting increasing educational attainment and the accessibility and high regard in

which teaching jobs are held by nonwhite men.

Important increases also occurred in Federal

administration and in entertainment and recreation (chart 29).

Three of the four largest decreases in the ratio

of nonwhite males to all males in each industry

took place in relatively low-wage industries—

apparel, lumber and wood products, and agriculture. A decrease in the Federal postal service

probably reflects more choices for white-collar

work among non white men, for whom the postal

service has long served as one of the main sources

of “middle-class” jobs.

CHART 27.

OCCUPATIONS OF NONW HITE LAG 

FAR BEHIND EDUCATION 

(W HITE-COLLAR I0BS COMPARED WITH 

EDUCATIONAL A TTAINM ENT)

PERCENT OF NONW HITES IN THE PERCENT OF ALL EMPLOYED NONWHITES WHO 

C IVILIAN LABOR FO RCE* WITH HIGH WORK IN OCCUPATIONS EM PH ASIZING A

M A L E

F E M A L E

* 18 YEARS O LD A N D OVER.

SOURCE: U.S. DEPARTMENT OF LABOR, BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS.

31

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
CHART 28.

THE INDUSTRIAL DISTRIBUTION OF NONWHITE AND 

WHITE MALES WAS SIMILAR IN 1964

BUT

NONWHITES NUMBERED RELATIVELY FEWER THAN 

WHITES IN MANUFACTURING AND GREATER IN 

AGRICULTURE AND SERVICES

1/ INCLUDES 1 PERCENT FOR FORESTRY, FISHERIES, AND MINING.

2/ INCLUDES 1 PERCENT FOR ENTERTAINMENT AND RECREATIONAL SERVICES.

SOURCE: U.S. DEPARTMENT OF LABOR, BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS

"\

NONAGRI- > PRIVATE

CULTURAL |

" AGRICULTURAL

________ )

PUBLIC

32

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
CHART 29.

EM PLOYM ENT RATIO OF NONWHITE MEN 

INCREASED MOST IN POBLIC UTILITIES 

AND DECREASED MOST IN THE APPAREL 

INDUSTRIES BETWEEN 1962 AND 1964*

33

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
Chapter III. Income, Earnings, and the Incidence of Poverty

G lobal averages of fam ily and in d ivid u al in ­

com e, and sim ple ratios of N egro to w h ite incom e,

reveal a w ide gap b etw een N egro and w h ite

incom e, and a sm all im p rovem en t recen tly. B u t

th ey do n ot tell the w hole story.

N egro fam ily incom es were ab ou t 56 percent

of w h ite incom es in 1964, com pared w ith 53 percen t in 1961-63. T h e ratios h ave been con sisten tly m uch higher in th e N orth and the W est (70

percent or more) and in m etrop olitan areas, and

m uch low er in th e S ou th (less than 50 p ercent).

In rural areas in 1960, th ey were below 40 percent.

T h e ratio tends to be h igh est am ong you n g people

(w h o u su ally h ave m ore form al schooling than their

elders). A m ong the occu p ation s, there is little

or no gap in public em p loym en t (as for m ail carriers, p ostal clerks, firem en, and p olicem en ), or in

jobs such as nonfarm labor and p rivate household

work w here there is n egligible com p etition w ith

w h ites, or am ong you n g professional and clerical

workers in the N o rth and W est.

T h e incom e gap is less b etw een n on w h ite and

w h ite workers w ho w ork full tim e throu gh ou t the

year. Y et, even for year-round, full-tim e work,

the m edian yearly earnings of n on w h ite m en in

1964 w ere only a little over $4,000 and the m edian

for n onw hite w om en w as less than $3,000.

N egro earnings are so low th at, regardless of

w hether N egroes are em ployed, un em ployed, or

ou t of the labor force, their incom es fall w ith in a

narrow range at a low level. On the other hand,

the factor of em p loym en t causes a great w idening

of the range and lev el of w h ite incom es.

In 1964, 37 percent of N egro fam ilies had in ­

com es below $3,000, com pared w ith on ly 15

percent of w h ite fam ilies. In the N orth and the

W est, about one-fourth of the N egro fam ilies had

incom es b elow $3,000 in 1964, com pared w ith

about half of such fam ilies in the S ou th. N o n ­

w h ite farm fam ilies had less than half the incom e

of w h ite farm fam ilies in 1964. N o n w h ite fam ilies

off the farm averaged higher incom es than w h ite

farm fam ilies (chart 30).

W h atever recent year is the base, and w hether

farm residents are included or excluded, m edian

incom es of N egro m en exceed those of w h ite

CHART 30.

MEDIAN INCOME OF NONWHITE FAMILIES 

IN 1964 WAS LESS THAN H ALF THE 

INCOME OF WHITES ON FARMS AND 

AOOUT TH REE-FIFTH S THE WHITE IN 

NONFARM PLACES

MEDIAN INCOME OF FAMILIES

E 3 NONWHITE 

□ WHITE

SOURCE: U.S. BUREAU OF THE CENSUS

w om en and of N egro w om en. T h is is true also of

year-round fu ll-tim e workers (ch art 31).

A m uch larger proportion of n on w h ite than

w h ite fam ilies had incom es under $3,000 in 1964,

even though a m uch larger percentage of nonw h ite fam ilies had m ore than one earner. W hen

the n on w h ite w ife w orks full tim e, th e ratio of

n on w h ite to w h ite m edian fam ily incom e is su b ­

sta n tia lly higher than w hen she does n ot work

or works on ly part tim e. T h e w orking w ife in the

N egro fam ily also u su ally con trib u tes a greater

proportion of fam ily incom e than the w h ite

w orking w ife although adult n on w h ite w om en ’s

earnings average less, and her u n em p loym en t rates

are higher than those of n on w h ite ad u lt m en.

In com e alone is n o t the on ly criterion of econ om ic secu rity. R equired also are stea d y work,

op p ortu n ity for ad van cem en t, and financial in d ep endence in old age.

T h e exten sive effort of the N egro fam ily to

ensure its secu rity m eets n o t on ly discrim inatory

hiring practices, b u t also the situ ation th a t m an y

of the occu p ation s and industries in w hich N egroes

35

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
IN 1964, WOMEN’ S INCOMES WERE 

ABOUT 3/5 THOSE OF M EN, 

AND NONWHITE MEN AVERAGED 

MORE THAN WHITE WOMEN.

CHART 31.

THOUSANDS ( W A G E - A N D - S A L A R Y W O R K E R S , 14 Y E A R S O L D A N D

O F d o l l a r s O V E R , E M P L O Y E D Y E A R - R O U N D A T F U L L - T I M E J O B S )

♦ m e d i a n . 1553 N O N W H I T E

SOURCE: U.S. BUREAU OF THE CENSUS ' * W H I T E

are num erous h av e a large degree of seaso n ality

and high u n em p loym en t, even in good tim es. A

larger proportion of N egroes than w h ite workers

are n o t covered b y co llective bargaining agreem en ts, m in im u m w age law s, and social secu rity;

this is esp ecia lly true am ong the older w orkers.

T h ose N egroes w ho are covered b y union con tracts

are lik e ly to be new er em p loyees than their w h ite

cow orkers and thus h av e less sen iority and other

form s of secu rity.5

Poverty

A b o u t 40 p ercen t of n on w h ite fam ilies, com ­

pared to 12 p ercen t of w h ite fam ilies, w ere judged

poor in 1964.6 A lth ou gh there has been m ore

im p rovem en t am ong them since 1959, the in ciden ce

of n on w h ite p o v erty rem ains very great, p articu ­

la rly in the fam ily typ es esp ecially prone to

p o v erty — those w ith very yo u n g household heads,

those headed b y w om en or b y the eld erly, and

those w ith m an y dep en den ts.

5 See "Intra-Plant Mobility of Negro and White Workers,” by A. P. Garber and John Ballweg, in A m e r ic a n

J o u r n a l o f S o c io lo g y , November 1965, pp. 315-319, which discusses variations in occupational mobility between white and nonwhite workers with equal seniority in a union plant.

6 “Counting the Poor—A Five-Year Review,” by Mollie Orshansky in S o c ia l S e c u r ity B u lle tin , April 1965. (Many more whites than nonwhites are poor because the white population is much greater.)

F am ilies headed b y w om en are p articu larly

vulnerable to p o v erty becau se of w o m en ’s low

earnings and th e num ber of children th ey su p port.

In the 1960’s, w om en h ave h eaded ab o u t 23 p ercen t of all non w h ite fam ilies, com pared to a b o u t

9 p ercen t of th e w h ite fam ilies. A b o u t 8 in 10

of the n on w h ite fam ilies h eaded b y w om en in ­

cluded children. R egardless of m arital sta tu s

(w idow ed, divorced, single, or sep arated ), n on ­

w h ite w om en w ho are heads of h ou seh olds are

m ore prone to p o v erty than w h ite w om en w ho

head h ouseholds— ab ou t 7 in 10 as com pared to

3 in 10.

A sta rtlin g ratio of 6 in 10 of all n on w h ite

children w ere in poor fam ilies in 1963. Y e t

rela tiv ely few poor fam ilies receive assistan ce from

A id to F am ilies w ith D ep en d en t C hildren (A F D C ),

th e largest pu blic assistan ce program . O n ly 30

p ercen t of the n on w h ite fam ilies w ith less than

$3,000 in com e in 1959 received A F D C in 1961

(chart 32).

N egro children receivin g A F D C aid in 1961 w ere

m ore than three tim es as lik e ly as w h ite children

to live in th e central cities of large m etrop olitan

areas. In these cities, three-fourths of the children

aided were n on w h ite, b u t in rural nonfarm areas,

nearly three-fourths receivin g aid w ere w h ite.

In the aggregate, how ever, N egro children con ­

stitu ted less than half of all children receivin g

A F D C in the cou n try in 1961.

M ed ian and per cap ita A F D C p ay m en ts w ere

larger for w h ites than for N egroes, and m ore

CHART 32.

AFDC* FAM ILIES ARE A SMALL 

PROPORTION OF BOTH NONWHITE AND 

WHITE POOR FAMILIES IN CITIES”

36

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
often their sole support. A m uch larger proportion of the N egro than w h ite A F D C hom em akers

are em p loyed ou tsid e the hom e w hile receivin g

aid. A ccording to social welfare experts, N egroes

suffer discrim ination in the distribution of w elfare

funds, and w elfare service, a t the sam e tim e exh ib itin g the general tendency of all groups to

avoid welfare grants or “ the d o le” as a w ay of

life.7

Patterns of Negro consumption

T h e N egro urban consum er has ab ou t the sam e

spending p attern as the w h ite urban consum er

a t the sam e in com e level. A ccording to the

1960-61 consum er expenditures su rvey of the

B ureau of L abor S ta tistics, m ost N egro and

w h ite urban consum ers fell in to a large m iddlein com e group—$3 ,0 0 0 to $7,500. H ow ever, alm o st all of the rem aining N egroes had less than

$3,000 to spend, w hereas the rem ainder of the

w h ites tended to h av e $7,500 or m ore (charts

33 and 34).

7 See M. Elaine Burgess and Daniel O. Price, A n

A m e r ic a n D e p e n d e n c y C h allen g e, Durham, N.C., Seeman Printery, 1963; and A i d to D e p e n d e n t C h ild re n , by Winifred Bell, New York, Columbia University Press, 1965.

CHART 33.

URBAN NEGRO FAMILIES SPENT SOMEWHAT MORE, 

PROPORTIONATELY, THAN WHITE FAMILIES ON BASIC EXPENSES, 

BUT SPENDING PATTERNS OF THE TWO GROUPS WERE SIMILAR

IN BOTH 1950 AND 1900-01*

1950 1960 - 61

70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

FOR 1950,TOTAL AVERAGE EXPENDITURES FOR CURRENT CONSUMPTION WERE $2,614 FOR NEGROES, $3,938 FOR WHITES.

FOR 1960-61, EXPENDITURES WERE $3,707 AND $5,609 RESPECTIVELY.

•INCLUDES FAMILIES AND SINGLE CONSUMERS.

SOURCE: U.S. DEPARTMENT OF LABOR, BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS

37

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
CHART 34.

PROPORTIONATE EXPENDITURES ARE QUITE SIMILAR AMONG 

URBAN NEGROES AND WHITES IN LIKE INCOME GROUPS’

INCOME** UNDER $3,000 INCOME **$3,000 - $7,499

70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

* URBAN FAMILIES A N D SINGLE CONSUMERS 

**1960-61 AN N UAL AVERAGES, AFTER TAXES

SOURCE: U.S. DEPARTMENT OF LABOR, BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS

BUT NEGROES HAD CONSIDERABLY LESS TO SPEND FOR EACH

ITEM*

1950 NEGRO EXPENDITURES AS PERCENT OF WHITE 

20 0 0 20

1960 - 1961

40 60%

NEGROA $2,614

W jd □ E AVERAGE TOTAL ^ * 4 EXPENDITURES Y ^

NEGRO. $ 3,707

WHITE $3,938 £

WHITE $5,609

HOUSEHOLD

OPERATIONS

MEDICAL CARE

TRANSPORTATION

MISCELLANEOUS

L .

i r

c •INCLUDES URBAN FAMILIES AND SINGLE CONSUMERS

SOURCE: U.S. DEPARTMENT OF LABOR, BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS

n e g r o

I I WHITE

38

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
T h e m ost n otab le differences b etw een N egro

and w h ite consum ers w ere the degrees to w hich

th ey w en t in to d eb t, saved , and b ou gh t durable

goods. R ela tiv ely low -incom e N egroes ($3,000 to

$4,999) averaged less d eb t than w h ite consum ers

of the sam e incom e group. M id dle-incom e

N egroes ($5,000-$7,499) averaged larger n et

increases in savin gs than m iddle-incom e w hites.

F or the sam e incom e groups, N egro and w h ite

consum ers averaged ab ou t the sam e am ou nt of

personal insurance, b u t few er N egroes than w h ites,

p rop ortion ately, b ou gh t autom obiles or w ere

hom eow ners (charts 35 and 36). T h ese findings

m a y p ossib ly reflect a differential in the availab ility and cost of credit, regardless of collateral

or other assets. T h ey m ay reflect also fam ily

size and resp on sib ility. N egro fam ilies, in general,

had m ore persons in th e fam ily at each incom e

lev el than w h ite fam ilies. B ecau se th e y m ore

often h ave m ore than one earner, job-related expenses h ave to be budgeted.

H om e ow nership p resents sp ecial problem s for

N egroes. T h ey gen erally b u y in a h igh ly restricted m arket. T h e lim itation s on N egro hom e

ow nership m ake one of th e m ost serious im balances

of su p ply and dem and in th e econom y.

T h e urge tow ard hom e ow nership is am p ly

d em on strated b y n on w h ite fam ilies. A lth ough

ab ou t h alf of all n on w h ite fam ilies w ere poor in

1960 and m an y were in very large cities w here

ap artm en t livin g is usual, 38 percent were hom eowners. T h is is far low er than the 64 percent

for w h ite fam ilies. M oreover, ab out half the

n on w h ite hom eow ners ow ned their houses free

and clear, com pared w ith a little m ore than 40

percent of the w h ite hom eow ners.

Of the hom eow ners w ith m ortgages in 1960, the

n on w h ites w ere m uch less lik ely to h ave received

F H A or V A assistan ce than the w h ites or to h ave

b o u gh t a new house. In addition, n on w h ite

hom eow ners in 1960 w ere m ore than tw ice as

lik e ly as w h ite hom eow ners to be spending 30

p ercen t or m ore of their incom e on housing and

over three tim es as lik ely to be p ayin g over 6

p ercen t in terest on a first m ortgage (charts 37

a and b).

A t every in com e level, rela tively m ore n on w h ite

than w h ite h ouseholds occupied substandard

housing in 1960 (chart 38). D esp ite the greater

housing need am on g N egroes, alm ost 9 in 10 of

th e 16.8 m illion hou sin g u n its added to the

“stan dard h ou sin g” su p p ly betw een 1950 and

1960 w en t to w h ite occupants. In th a t period

CHART 35.

NEGRO URBAN FAMILIES SHOWED A 

SMALLER INCREASE IN DEBT AND A 

GREATER INCREASE IN ASSETS THAN 

WHITE FAMILIES IN SIMILIAR INCOME 

GROUPS IN 1960-1961*

' ' ' 1 ' ' ' ' 1

INCOME** S ,000 - $4,999

NET INCREASE IN DEBT

1

INCOME ** S5,000 - S7,499

NET INCREASE IN SAVINGS

f

__ i__ ,___i___i— i— ■— i— i— ___i___,___i— i— i—

* INCLUDES URBAN FAMILIES AND SINGLE CONSUMERS. NEGRO

* * AFTER TAXES. Q WHITE

SOURCE: U.S. DEPARTMENT OF OF LABOR, BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS

CHART 36

NEGRO URBAN FA M ILIES , IN LOW AS 

W ELL AS M IDDLE INCOM E GROUPS, 

WERE FAR LESS LIK E LY THAN W HITE 

FAM ILIES TO OWN AUTOM OBILES OR 

HOMES IN 1960 - 1961*

39

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
w h ite-occu p ied substandard u n its dropped 50

percent, com pared to less than 20 p ercen t for

n on w h ite-occu p ied substandard u nits. N o n w h ite

households occupied a m u ch larger proportion of

all su b stan d ard h ou sin g in 1960 than th ey did in

1950, alth ou gh their proportion of the p op u lation

increased very little during the decade (chart 39).

A b o u t 40 p ercen t of all n on w h ite children in 1960

lived in seriou sly overcrow ded housing and in

h ou sin g w ith o u t plu m b in g (chart 41).

N o n w h ite h ou sin g is m uch m ore lik ely to be

su b stan d ard in rural than in urban areas and

ou tsid e, rather than inside, m etrop olitan areas

(chart 40). N ev erth eless, ab out 40 p ercen t of

th e h ou sin g of non w h ites in th e central cities of

S M S A ’s in 1960 w as substandard.

CHART 37A.

NONWHITE FAMILIES WERE ABOUT HALF 

AS LIK ELY AS THE WHITE TO 

BE HOMEOWNERS

(1960)

PERCENT HOMEOWNERS IN I960

NONWHITE 38%

WHITE

OF HOMEOWNERS WITH A MORTGAGE, NONWHITES

A LARGER PROPORTION OF NONWHITE THAN WHITE WERE MUCH LESS LIKELY THAN WHITES TO HAVE A

HOMEOWNERS OWNED THEIR HOMES FREE AND CLEAR GOVERNMENT ASSISTED LOAN

PERCENT HOMES NONMORTGAGED PERCENT OF ONE-DWELLING-UNIT PROPERTIES IN 1960

29% 71%

CHART 37B.

NONWHITE HOMEOWNERS WERE MORE 

LIKELY THAN OTHERS T 0 -

AT EV ER Y INCOME L E V E L R E LA T IV E L Y 

MORE NONW HITE TH A N WHITE 

HOUSEHOLDS OCCUPIED SUBSTANDARD 

HOUSING

INCOME IN 1959

ALL INCOMES

UNDER $3,000

$3,000-$4,999

$5,000 -$6,999

$7,000 AND OVER

PERCENT IN SUBSTANDARD HOUSING, 1960

0 20 40 60 80

--------- 1--------- 1--------- 1---------

..• ... 144 %

J 13%

30%

■ ]33 %

115%

Eli NONWHITE

] WHITE

_____ 1__________ 1__________

20%

J 7%

,2%

J 3%

__________ 1_____

SOURCE: U.S. BUREAU OF THE CENSUS

40

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
CHART 39

NONWHITE SUBSTANDARD HOUSING 

UNITS INCREASED G R EA T LY , IN 

PROPORTION TO A LL HOUSING UNITS, 

1950 - 60, WHEREAS THE R ELATIV E 

NUMBER OF NONWHITE HOUSEHOLDS 

SCARCELY CHANGED

PERCENT

1950 1960

SOURCE: U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT, HOUSING AND 

HOME FINANCE AGENCY

CHART 40.

NONWHITE HOUSEHOLDS 

IN RURAL AREAS AND IN THE SOUTH 

ARE MOST LIK ELY TO LIVE 

IN SUBSTANDARD HOUSING

PERC EN T O F NONW HITE H O U S IN G U N ITS S U B S TA N D A R D , 1960

CITIES SOURCE: U.S. BUREAU OF THE CENSUS

CHART 41.

40 PERCENT OF A LL NONWHITE 

CHILDREN IN 1960 LIVED IN 

OVERCROWDED HOUSING OR HOUSING 

LACKING SOME FAC ILITIES*

41

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
Chapter IV. Estimated Effects of Selected Federal Programs on Employment and Unemployment

Antipoverty and training programs

T h e a n tip ov erty program s w hich affect em p loym en t d irectly are concerned chiefly w ith you th ,

16-21 years old. M o st of the yo u th reached are

in their teens and ab ou t one-third are N egro.

Of alm ost 200,000 y o u th s in the N eighborhood

Y o u th Corps and program s, th a t affect persons

n o t in college, ab ou t 65,000 are teenage N egro

y o u th being paid for training and work on prod u ctive jobs.

Perhaps few er than 20,000 of the 100,000 college

people in w ork -stu d y program s during the 1965-66

school year are N egro. Of the ap p roxim ately

80,000 persons in M anpow er D ev elo p m en t and

T raining projects, either in in stitu tio n s or on the

job, ab ou t 23,000 are n on w h ite, and over 3,000

of these are n on w h ite teenagers.

Several thousand ad d itional n on w h ite persons

are trainees enrolled in Area R ed ev elo p m en t

projects.

I t is estim ated th a t close to 100,000 N egro y o u th

are on jobs or in training under go vern m en t

in itia ted or supported program s in the spring of

1966— enough to h ave reduced the u n em p loym en t

rate for all b oys and girls b y w ell over 1 percen tage p oin t and b y even m ore for th e n on w h ite.

T h e effect of the enrollm ent figures for ad u lts

is m ore m od est because of the large ad u lt labor

force. A d u lt en rollm en t in training and em p lo ym en t in an tip o v erty program s is close to 150,000,

and ab ou t one-third are N egroes.

Federal employment

N egroes in Federal em p loym en t increased 9 percen t betw een 1961 and 1965—from 12.9 p ercen t

of all Federal em p loyees to 13.5 p ercen t—a larger

proportion than in the tota l labor force. In 1965,

for the first tim e, N egroes on C lassification A ct

payrolls exceeded those on the p red om in antly bluecollar W age B oard rolls. T h e W age B oard p ay

plans still had the largest proportion of N egro

em p loym en t in 1965— 2 0 percent com pared to 9

percent under th e C lassification A ct and 15 p ercen t

under other plans. T h e G overnm en t P rin tin g

Office and the G eneral Services A d m in istration

had the largest proportion of N egro em p lo ym en t

in 1965 (41 and 34 percent) b u t, as in the case

of th e w h ites, the D efen se and P o st Office D e p a r tm en ts had the largest num ber.

M ore N egroes w ere em p loyed b y th e Federal

G overn m en t in the W ash in gton area in 1965—

63,000—-than in an y other place; N e w Y ork and

C hicago, w ith ab ou t 25,000 each, follow ed n ext.

In all cities and regions excep t W ash in gton D .C .,

p rop ortion ately m ore N egro workers w ere in the

P ostal F ield S ervice or under W age B oard plans

than under th e C lassification A ct (chart 42).

T h e greatest proportionate gains in th e F ederal

em p loym en t of N egroes occurred in the upper

grades of each p ay plan (chart 42). H ow ever,

the num erical increase of N egro F ederal workers

w as greatest in th e low er or m id d le grades, except

for W age B oard work, in w hich N egroes h ave been

em p loyed longer and h ave gained su b stan tial

sen iority. E xp an sion for N egroes in W age B oard

jobs took place alm ost exclu sively in the $6,500 to

$7,999 bracket.

E v en w ith these n otab le im p rovem en ts in

N eg roes’ sta tu s in F ed eral em p loym en t betw een

1961 and 1965, N egroes n everth eless still occu p y a

disproportionate share of low -paid jobs and bluecollar w ork on F ed eral p ayrolls, ju st as th ey do in

p rivate in d u stry. T h e disparities also follow'

regional lines, w ith th e largest proportions on

W age B oard w ork tend ing to be in th e S ou th, and

the largest p ercen tage in the C lassification A ct

p ay plans in th e N o rth and the W est.

Federal contractor employment

N egro em p loym en t in F ed eral con tractor firm s

in general reflect no startlin g breakthroughs so far,

according to the operating sta tistic s recorded in

the p ast fewr years. In firm s w ith F ederal con ­

tracts in 1964, th e N egro proportion of to ta l em -

43

217-817 0 - 6 6 - 4

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
CHART 42.

FEDERAL EMPLOYMENT OF NEGROES

NEGROES HAVE FARED PROPORTIONATELY BETTER THAN OTHERS

IN EACH FEDERAL PAY PLAN, 1962-65

BUT RELATIVELY FEWER

NEGROES ARE EMPLOYED

UNDER THE CLASSIFICATION ACT,

THAN UNDER OTHER PAY PLANS

PERCENT CHANGE IN EMPLOYMENT, 1962-65 PERCENT IN EACH PAY PLAN, 1965

-15 -10 -5 0 5 10 15

CLASSIFICATION

ACT

WAGE BOARD

POSTAL FIELD 

SERVICE AND 

OTHER

NEGROES HAVE GAINED

PROPORTIONATELY MORE

THAN OTHERS IN THE HIGHER

FEDERAL SALARY RANGES, 1962-65

YET IN 1965 NEGROES STILL

REMAINED A RELATIVELY SMALL

PROPORTION OF THOSE IN

HIGHER SALARY GROUPS

PERCENT CHANGE, 1962-65

-20 -10 0 10 20 30 40 50 60

*

LOWER SALARY RANGE

HIGHER 

SALARY .

RANGE

* LESS THAN 0.5%

1/ GS 1-8, PFS 1-8, OR LESS THAN $6,500. 

2/ GS 9- 18, PFS 9-20, OR $6,500 AND OVER

SOURCE: U.S. CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION

PERCENT IN

EACH SALARY RANGE, 1965

44

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
p lo ym en t w as close to 7 percent, com pared w ith

11 percent in th e to ta l labor force.

N egro w orkers in firm s w ith Federal con tracts

w ere rela tiv ely m o st com m on (11 percent of the

w ork force) in services, transportation and p u blic

u tilities (9 p ercen t), and in con stru ction (8 perc en t). N egroes con stitu ted 28 percent of the

em p lo ym en t in personal services and 21 percent

in m edical and h ealth services.

M ore than 9 in 10 of all N egro m en em p loyed

in firm s w ith Federal con tracts in 1964 were in

b lue-collar work, com pared w ith ab ou t 2 in 3 of

all m en in these firms. T h e largest proportion of

b o th m en and w om en N egro workers in w h itecollar em p loym en t, am ong reporting Federal con ­

tractor firm s, were in finance, insurance, and real

estate.

The Negro veteran

A m ong the returns accruing from m ilitary

service and from the sp ecial benefits vo ted for

veteran s are those w hich h ave m ade veteran s m ore

em ployable, p rod u ctive, and affluent than n o n ­

veterans.

A n alysis of the econom ic differences in the

veteran and n on veteran p op u lation s and w h ite

and n on w h ite veteran s a t sim ilar ages illu strates

the effects of a public p olicy to benefit a particular

group. I t also illu strates w ays in w hich public

p olicy m a y h ave been circu m vented to the d isad v an ta ge of the N egroes, even under legislation

ap p lyin g eq u ally to all.

T o som e e x ten t because of selection, b u t also

because of m ilitary service benefits, including

financial secu rity from serving w ith the m ilitary,

all m ale w ar veteran s had higher incom es and

m ore years of school, a t every w orking age and

occu p ation al level, and b etter q u ality housing

than did other m en in 1960. T h e greatest gains

in relation to their nonmilitary counterparts were

made by nonwhite veterans.

On the other hand, a sm aller proportion of

n on w h ite than w h ite w ar veteran s were receiving

V A com pensation, pension, or m ilitary retirem ent

p ay in la te 1962 or early 1963. A lesser proportion of non w h ites had G I life insurance.

T h ese differences m ay, in part, reflect a low er

age distribution am ong n on w h ite veteran s, in

the first in stan ce, and relatively low er fam ily

incom es, in the second.

With respect to major benefits under the GI

Bill of Rights (Servicemen’s Readjustment Act

of 1944), however, the variations between nonwhite and white veterans lead to different conclusions. According to Veterans Administration

data, a somewhat larger proportion of nonwhite

than white war veterans took advantage of the

postservice education, training, and vocational

rehabilitation programs, as of late 1962 and early

1963— 53 percent compared to 48 percent. The

veteran could apply to an accepted school as a

matter of right.

In contrast, a much smaller proportion of nonwhite than white war veterans obtained a home,

farm, or business loan, although a larger proportion

of the nonwhite than white war veterans tried but

failed. In each instance, the ratio of those nonwhite war veterans who did not obtain the loan

was a little higher in the South than in the country

as a whole. For these benefits, application could

be made as a matter of right, but credit institutions

had substantial latitude for refusal.

T h ese d ata su gg est th a t a n ew op p ortu n ity w as

m et b y a high degree of aspiration, and paid large

d ividends. Som e restriction s on fulfillm ent occurred because of lim ited m eans or d enial of

op p ortu n ity.

45

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
Conclusion

The Negroes’ struggle for equality is taking 

many forms, as are the programs supporting this 

struggle. The foregoing pages reveal in part 

to what extent the Negro is gaining.

The Negro household presents a picture of 

substantial effort to insure and sustain security, 

through multiple workers, multiple jobs per 

worker, high labor force participation, plus substantial increases in school enrollment and 

educational attainment.

As Negroes persevere and surmount longstanding hurdles, as the spotlight on discrimination in American society probes wider and 

deeper, and as civil rights and antipoverty

legislation penetrate further and are widely 

implemented, the strides will lengthen.

In the meantime, Negroes still hold a disproportionately large number of manual and lowpaying jobs, their children are more likely to 

attend inferior schools; they have limited choice 

of residence; and they suffer discrimination and 

prejudice.

The changes taking place in American institutions could bring about the most important 

condition of all—that of equality among Americans of varying color, origin, or creed. The 

only conclusion the facts permit is that the 

measures taken and the changes they have made 

so far are not nearly enough.

47

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
Bibliography

Anderson, W. H. Locke. “Trickling Down: The Relation­ ship Between Economic Growth and the Extent of Poverty Among American Families,” Q u a r te rly J o u r n a l

o f E co n o m ics, November 1964, pp. 511-524. Ausubel, D. P. “Ego Development Among Segregated Negro Children,” in a symposium, S o m e C o n s id e r a tio n s

a s to the C o n trib u tio n s o f S o c ia l P e r s o n a lity a n d R a c ia l

F a c to rs to S ch o o l R e ta r d a tio n in M in o r ity G ro u p C h ild re n (Chicago, American Psychological Association. Sept. 1, 1956). Ball, J. C. “Characteristics of Hospitalized Narcotic Addicts,” (I n d ic a to r s, U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, March 1966, pp. 17-26. Batchelder, Alan B. “Decline in the Relative Income of Negro Men,” Q u a r te rly J o u r n a l o f E c o n o m ic s , November 1964, pp. 525-548. Becker, Gary. T h e E c o n o m ic s o f D is c r im in a tio n (Chicago, University of Chicago Press, 1957). 137 pp. Bell, Daniel. “Reflections on the Negro and Labor,” 

T h e N e w L e a d e r, Jan. 21, 1963, pp. 18-20. Bell, Winifred. A id to D e p e n d e n t C h ild re n (New Aork, Columbia University Press, 1966). Bennett, Lerone, Jr. T h e N e g ro M o o d a n d O th er E s s a y s (Chicago, Johnson, 1964). 158 pp. Bernhard, B. I. “Federal Fact-Finding Experience—A Guide to Negro Enfranchisement,” L a w a n d C o n tem ­

p o r a r y P ro b le m s , summer 1962, pp. 468-480. Bickel, Alexander M. “The Decade of School Desegre­ gation Progress and Prospects,” C o lu m b ia L a w R ev ie w , February 1964, pp. 193-223. Billingsby, Arthur and Billingsby, Amy Tate. “Negro Family Life in America,” S o c ia l S e r v ic e R ev ie w , The University of Chicago Press, September 1965, pp. 310- 

319. Brimmer, Andrew F. “The Negro in the National Economy,” T h e N eg ro in A m e r ic a (New Aork, Prentice- Hall, 1965). Broom, Leonard and Glenn, Norval. “When will Amer­ ica’s Negroes Catch Up?” N e w S o c ie ty , Mar 25, 1965, 

pp. 6-7.

-------- . T r a n s fo r m a tio n o f the N eg ro A m e r ic a n (New

Aork, Harper & Row, 1965). 207 pp. Burns, Haywood. T h e V o ices o f N eg ro P r o te s t in A m e r ic a . With a foreword by John Hope Franklin (London, New York, Oxford University Press, 1963). 88 pp. Campbell, Arthur W. “White-Nonwhite Differences in Family Planning in the United States,” I n d ic a to r s , U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, February 1966, pp. 13-21. Campbell, Ernest A. “On Desegregation and Matters 

Sociological,” P h y lo n , summer 1961, pp. 135-145. Cash, Wilbur Joseph. T h e M in d o f th e S o u th . (New York, A. A. Knopf, 1941). 429 pp.

Caudill, Harry M. N ig h t C om es to the C u m b e rla n d s (Boston, Little Brown and Company, 1962). 394 pp.

Clark, Kenneth B., D a r k G h etto with a foreword by Gunnar Myrdal (New York, Harper & Row, 1965). 251 pp.

Clark, Kenneth B., and Clark, Mamie P. “Emotional Factors in Racial Identification and Preference in Negro Children,” J o u r n a l o f N eg ro E d u c a tio n , 1950, pp. 

341-350.

Clark, Kenneth B., and Plotkin, Lawrence. T h e N eg ro a t

I n te g ra te d C olleges (New York, National Scholarship Fund for Negro Students, 1963). 59 pp.

Clift, Virgil A., Anderson, Archibald W., and Hullfish, Gordon G., editors. N eg ro E d u c a tio n i n A m e r ic a , I ts

A d e q u a c y , P ro b le m s a n d N e e d s (New York, Harper and Bros., 1962). 315 pp.

Coles, Robert, M.D. T h e D eseg re g a tio n o f S o u th ern

S ch o o ls: A P s y c h ia tr ic S tu d y (Anti-Defamation League of B’nai B’rith, New York, N.Y., July 1963). 25 pp.

Cummings, Laurie D. “The Employed Poor: Their Characteristics and Occupations,” M o n th ly L a b o r R eview , [U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics.] July 1965, pp. 828-841. Also available as 

Reprint No. 2470.

T h e N eg ro A m e r ic a n , in D a e d a lu s , J o u r n a l o f th e A m e r ic a n

A c a d e m y o f A r ts a n d S cien ce s, Fall 1965, pp. 743-1166 

(whole issue) and winter 1966, pp. 1-445 (whole issue).

Daniel, Walter G., editor, “The Relative Progress of the American Negro Since 1950,” J o u r n a l o f N eg ro E d u c a ­

tio n , Fall 1963, pp. 311-516.

David, Lily Mary. R ecen t C o llective B a r g a in in g a n d

T ech n o lo g ica l C h an g e (Washington, U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, Report 266, March 1964).

David, Martin. “Incomes and Dependency in the Coming 

Decades,” A m e r ic a n J o u r n a l o f E c o n o m ic s a n d S o c io lo g y ,

July 1964, pp. 249-268.

Davis, John P. T h e A m e r ic a n N eg ro R eferen ce B oo k

(New York, Phelps-Stokes, 1966). 960 pp.

Denton, John H. R a ce a n d P o v e r ty (Berkeley, Calif., 

Diablo Press, 1964).

Dernburg, Thomas and Strand, Kenneth. “Hidden Unemployment 1953-62: A Quantitative Analysis by Age 

and Sex,” A m e r ic a n E co n o m ic R ev ie w , March 1966, 

pp. 72-95.

Deutsch, M. M in o r ity G ro u p a n d C la ss S ta tu s a s R e la ted

to S o c ia l a n d P e r s o n a lity F a cto rs in S c h o la stic A ch ie vem en t (Ithaca, N.Y., Society for Applied Anthropology, 

Cornell University, 1960). 32 pp.

Diamond, Daniel E. “Occupational Shifts in Negro 

Employment,” B u s in e s s T o p ic s , summer 1965, pp. 32-44.

49

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Duncan, Otis Dudley and Duncan, Beverly. T h e N eg ro

P o p u la tio n o f C h ica g o : A S tu d y o f R e s id e n tia l S u c c e ssio n (Chicago, University of Chicago Press, 1957). 367 pp. Eckstein, Otto. “ Goals in the War on Poverty,” Paper presented at West Virginia University Conference of 

May 1965, P o v e r ty A m id s t A fflu en ce. Proceedings to be published in 1966, New Haven, Yale University Press.

E c o n o m ic R e p o r t o f the P r e s id e n t, J a n u a r y 1 9 6 4 , see espe­ cially ch. II; and reports submitted in January 1965 and 1966 (Washington: 1964, 1965, and 1966). Edwards, G. Franklin. T h e N e g ro P r o fe s s io n a l C la ss Glencoe, 111., Free Press, 1959). 224 pp. Epps, Edgar C., Katz, Irwin and Axelson, Leland J. “ Relation of Mother’s Employment to Intellectual Per­ formance of Negro College Students,” S o c ia l P ro b lem s,

spring 1964, pp. 414-419. Epstein, Lenore A. “ Unmet Need in a Land of Abun­ dance,” S o c ia l S e c u r ity B u lle tin , May 1963, pp. 3-11. Executive Office of the President, Council of Economic Advisers, E c o n o m ic C osts o f R a c ia l D is c r im in a tio n in

E m p lo y m e n t (Washington, Sept. 25, 1962). 9 pp. Executive Office of the President, Council of Economic Advisers, T h e E c o n o m ic C ost o f D is c r im in a tio n , Staff Memorandum (Washington, Mar. 26, 1965). 2 pp. Fein, Rashi. E d u c a tio n a l P a tte r n s in S o u th e rn M ig r a tio n (Washington, Brookings Institution, 1965). pp. 106- 

124. Fleming, Harold C. “Equal Job Opportunity—Slogan or Reality?”, P e r so n n e l A d m in is tr a tio n , March-April 

1963, pp. 25-28. Frazier, E. Franklin. B la c k B o u rg e o isie (New York, Collier Books, 1962). 222 pp.

-------- . T h e N eg ro in the U n ite d S ta te s (New York, MacMillan Company, 1949). (Revised edition, 1957). 

769 pp. Garbin, A. P. and Ballweg, John. “Intra-plant Mobility 

of Negro and White Workers,” A m e r ic a n J o u r n a l o f

S o c io lo g y , November 1965, pp. 315-319. Ginzberg, Eli. T h e N eg ro C h allen g e to the B u s in e s s

C o m m u n ity (New York, McGraw-Hill, 1964). I ll pp.

-------- . T h e N eg ro P o te n tia l (New York, Columbia

University Press, 1956). 144 pp.

-------- . “Segregation and Manpower Waste,” P h y lo n ,

4th Quarter 1960, pp. 311-316. Ginzberg, Eli and Eichner, Alfred S. T h e T ro u b leso m e

P re se n c e : A m e r ic a n D e m o c r a c y a n d the N eg ro (Glencoe, 111., Free Press of Glencoe, 1964). 339 pp. Gist, Noel P. and Bennett, William S. “Aspirations of Negro and White Students,” S o c ia l F orces, 1963. Glazer, Nathan and McEntire, Davis, editors. H o u s in g

a n d M in o r ity G ro u p s (Berkeley, Calif., University of California Press, 1960). Glazer, Nathan and Moynihan, Daniel P. B e y o n d the

M e ltin g P o t (Cambridge, MIT Press and Harvard University Press, 1963). (Revised edition, 1965). 

360 pp. Gleeson, Geraldine A. “Selected Health Characteristics by Occupation,” V ita l a n d H ea lth S ta tis tic s , Series 10, No. 21, U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, August 1965. 79 pp.

Glenn, Norval D. “Changes in the American Occupa­ tional Structure and Occupational Gains of Negroes During the ‘40’s,” S o c ia l F orces, December 1962, pp. 

188-195.

-------- . “Negro Prestige Criteria: A Case Study in the

Bases of Prestige,” A m e r ic a n J o u r n a l o f S o c io lo g y , May 1963, pp. 645-657.

-------- . “Occupational Benefits to Whites from the Subordination of Negroes,” A m e r ic a n S o c io lo g ic a l R evie w , June 1963, pp. 443-448.

-------- . “Some Changes in the Relative Status of

American Nonwhites, 1940-1960,” P h y lo n , summer 

1963, pp. 109-122.

Gordon, Margaret S. U .S . M a n p o w e r a n d E m p lo y m e n t

P o lic y : A R e v ie w E s s a y (Berkeley, University of Cali­ fornia, Institute of Industrial Relations, Reprint No. 249, 1965).

Gordon, Milton M. “Recent Trends in the Study of Minority and Race Relations,” T h e A n n a ls o f th e

A m e r ic a n A c a d e m y , November 1963, pp. 148-156.

Greenberg, Leon. T ech n o lo g ica l C h an g e, P r o d u c tiv ity , a n d

E m p lo y m e n t in th e U n ite d S ta te s . Paper delivered at Conference on Manpower Implications of Automation of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, Washington, Dec. 8-10, 1964.

Greer, Scott A. “The Place of the Negro in the American Labor Movement,” T h e A m e r ic a n R ev ie w , winter 1961, 

pp. 98-109.

-------- . L a s t M a n I n : R a c ia l A c c e s s to U n io n P o w e r (Glencoe, 111., The Free Press, 1959). 189 pp.

Grier, George and Grier, Eunice. T h e I m p a c t o f R a ce on

N eig h b o rh o o d in the M e tr o p o lita n S e ttin g (Washington Center for Metropolitan Studies, 1961). 13 pp.

-------- . T h e N eg ro M ig r a tio n , reprint from the Housing

Yearbook, 1960 and 1962, Washington Center for Metropolitan Studies, Washington.

-------- . P r iv a te ly D ev elo p ed I n te r r a c ia l H o u s in g (Berke­ ley, University of California Press, 1960). 264 pp.

Grossack, M. M., editor. M e n ta l H ea lth a n d S eg re g a tio n (New York, Springer Publishing Company, 1963). 

247 pp.

H a b b e , S te p h e n . “ T h e N e g r o a s a n E m p lo y e e ,” T h e

C o n feren ce B o a r d R eco rd , September 1965, pp. 42-46.

Handlin, Oscar. F ir e B e ll in the N ig h t (Boston, Atlantic- Little Brown, 1965). 110 pp.

-------- . R a ce a n d N a tio n a lity in A m e r ic a n L ife (Boston, Little Brown and Company, 1957).

Hare, Nathan. “Recent Trends in the Occupational Mobility of Negroes, 1930-1960. An Intracohort Analysis,” S o c ia l F o rces, December 1965, pp. 166-173.

H a rv a r d E d u c a tio n a l R e v ie w . Summer 1960 issue devoted to survey of Negro and Education.

Hayes, Marion. “A Century of Change: Negroes in the 

U.S. Economy, 1860-1960,” M o n th ly L a b o r R ev ie w ,

December 1962, pp. 1359-1365.

Heer, David M. “The Attractiveness of the South to 

Whites and Nonwhites: An Ecological Study,” A m e r ic a n

S o c io lo g ic a l R e v ie w , February 1963, pp. 101-107.

Henderson, Vivian W. T h e E c o n o m ic S ta tu s o f N eg ro es in

the N a tio n a n d in th e S o u th (Atlanta, Ga., Southern 

Regional Council, 1963). 23 pp.

Herzog, Elizabeth. “Is There a ‘Breakdown’ of the Negro 

Family?” S o c ia l W o rk , January 1966, pp. 3-10.

-------- . “Some Assumptions About the Poor,” S o c ia l

Service R ev ie w , December 1963, pp. 389-402.

50

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Hiestand, Dale L. E c o n o m ic G ro w th a n d E m p lo y m e n t

O p p o r tu n itie s f o r M in o r itie s (New York, Columbia Uni­ versity Press, 1964). 127 pp. Holland, Jerome J. R e a liz in g th e M a n p o w e r P o te n tia litie s

o f M in o r ity Y o u th (New York, National Urban League, 1958). Hope, John II. “Equality of Employment Opportunity: A Process Analysis of Union Initiative,” P h y lo n , 1957, pp. 140-154.

*----*—. “The Problem of Unemployment as it Relates to

Negroes,” S tu d ie s in U n e m p lo y m e n t prepared for the Special Committee on Unemployment Problems, U.S. Senate, 86th Cong., 2d sess., pp. 173-223. Hunt, Eleanor P. and Huyck, Earl E. “Mortality of White and Nonwhite Infants in Major U.S. Cities,” 

I n d ic a to r s , January 1966, pp. 23-40.

Johnson, Harry G. “Unemployment and Poverty,” paper presented at West Virginia University Conference, 

P o v e r ty A m id s t A fflu en ce. Proceedings to be published in 1966, New Haven, Yale University Press.

Kahn, Tom. T h e E c o n o m ic s o f E q u a lity (New York, League for Industrial Democracy, 1964). 70 pp.

King, Martin Luther. Acceptance Speech for Nobel Prize, 

N e w Y o r k T im e s , Friday, Dec. 11, 1964.

-------- . S tr id e T o w a rd F reed o m : T h e M o n tg o m e r y S to r y (New York, Harper & Bros., 1958). 230 pp.

■—*——. W h y W e C a n ’t W a it (New York, Harper & Row, 1965). 178 pp.

Kinzer, Robert H. and Sagaien, Edward. T he N eg ro in

A m e r ic a n B u s in e s s (New York, Greenberg, 1950). 220

pp.

Klein, L. R. and Mooney, H. W. “Negro-White Savings Differentials and the Consumption Function Problem, 

E co n o m e trica , July 1953, pp. 425-456.

Ladd, W. M. “The Effect of Integration on Property Values,” T h e A m e r ic a n E co n o m ic R ev ie w , September 

1962, pp. 801-808.

Lampman, Robert J. “Population Change and Poverty Reduction, 1947-1975,” paper presented at West Virginia University Conference, P o v e r ty A m id s t A fflu en ce. Pro­ ceedings to be published in 1966, New Haven, Yale 

University Press.

-------- . “Ends and Means in the War on Poverty,”

paper presented at West Virginia University Conference, 

P o v e r ty A m id s t A fflu en ce. Proceedings to be published in 1966, New Haven, Yale University Press.

Leggett, John C. and Street, David. “Economic Depriva­ tion and Extremism: A Study of Unemployed Negroes,” 

A m e r ic a n J o u r n a l o f S o c io lo g y , July 1961, pp. 53-57.

Lewinson, Paul. R ace, C la ss a n d P a r ty (New York, Grosset and Dunlap, Universal Library, No. 177, revised edition 1965). 302 pp.

Lewis, Hylan. “The Changing Negro Family,” in Eli Ginzberg’s T h e N a tio n ’s C h ild re n , Volume I. Published for Golden Anniversary White House Conference on 

Children and Youth, by Columbia University Press, 

New York, 1960.

-------- . C h ild R e a r in g A m o n g L o w -I n c o m e F a m ilie s (Washington, Washington Center for Metropolitan 

Studies, June 1961). 13 pp.

McEntire, Davis. R esid en ce a n d R a ce (Berkeley, Uni­ versity of California Press, 1960). 409 pp.

McQueen, R. and Churn, B. “Intelligence and Educa­ tional Achievement of a Matched Sample of White and Negro Students,” S ch o ol a n d S o c ie ty , Sept. 24, 1960, pp. 327-329.

Marshall, Ray. T h e N eg ro a n d O rg a n ize d L a b o r (New York, John Wiley and Sons, Inc., 1965). 327 pp.

Mayer, Kurt B. “The Changing Shape of the American Class Structure,” S o c ia l R esea rch , Volume 30, No. 4, 1963, pp. 458-468.

Miller, Arthur S. R a c ia l D is c r im in a tio n a n d P r iv a te

E d u c a tio n (Chapel Hill, University of North Carolina Press, 1957). 136 pp.

Miller, Herman P. “Progress and Prospects for the Negro Worker,” C h allen g e, February 1965, pp. 30-34.

Moore, Elmer J. T h e L o w -I n c o m e P ro b lem in A g r ic u ltu r e (Talk at 42d Annual Agricultural Outlook Conference, Washington, Nov. 17, 1964).

Morrow, J. J. “American Negroes—A Wasted Resource,” 

H a r v a r d B u s in e s s R ev ie w , January-February 1957, pp. 

65-74.

Myrdal, Gunnar. A n A m e r ic a n D ile m m a (New York, Harper and Bros., 1944). 1181 pp.

-------- . C h allen g e to A fflu en ce (New York, Random

House, 1963). 172 pp.

National Association for the Advancement of Colored 

People. T h e N eg ro W a g e -E a rn e r a n d A p p r e n tic e s h ip

T r a in in g P r o g r a m s (New York, 1960).

National Conference on Equal Employment Opportunity, 

Washington, D.C., 1962, A T im e fo r A c tio n : P ro ce ed in g s,

Washington, 1963, 70 pp.

National Education Association, Educational Policies 

Commission. E d u c a tio n a n d th e D is a d v a n ta g e d A m e r ic a n

(Washington, 1962).

National Urban League. A N a tio n a l S k ills B a n k (New 

York, Sept. 1, 1963).

National Urban League. D o u b le J e o p a r d y — T h e O ld er

N eg ro I n A m e r ic a T o d a y (New York, 1964). 28 pp.

National Urban League. E c o n o m ic a n d S o c ia l S ta tu s o f

th e N eg ro in th e U n ite d S ta te s (New York, 1962).

National Urban League. I n d u s tr y ’s M o s t U n d e rd ev elo p ed

R eso u rce (New York, 1964).

Newman, Dorothy K. “The Negro’s Journey to the 

City,” M o n th ly L a b o r R ev ie w , Part I, May 1965, pp. 

502-507; Part II, June 1965, pp. 644-649. Also available as Reprint No. 2466.

New School for Social Research, D is c r im in a tio n a n d L o w

In c o m e s: S o c ia l a n d E c o n o m ic D is c r im in a tio n A g a in s t

M in o r ity G ro u p s in R e la tio n to L o w In c o m e in N e w Y o r k

S ta te (New York State, Interdepartmental Committee 

on Low Incomes, 1959). 381 pp.

New York State Commission Against Discrimination, 

A p p r e n tic e s , S k ille d C ra ftsm e n a n d the N eg ro ; A n A n a ly ­

s is , New York, N.Y., 1960.

Nicholls, William H. S o u th e rn T r a d itio n a n d R e g io n a l

P ro g re ss (Chapel Hill, University of North Carolina 

Press, 1960). 202 pp.

Nixon, J. H. “The Changing Status of the Negro—Some 

Implications for Savings and Life Insurance,” A m e r ic a n

B e h a v io r a l S c ie n tis t, May 1963, pp. 80-82.

51

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Norgren, P. H. E m p lo y in g the N e g ro in A m e r ic a n I n d u s ­

tr y , A S tu d y o f M a n a g e m e n t P ra c tic e s (New York, Industrial Relations Counselors, 1959). 171 pp. Northwood, L. K. and Barth, A. T. U rb a n D eseg re g a tio n (Seattle, University of Washington Press, 1965). 

131 pp. Nye, F. Ivan and Hoffman, Lois Wladis. T h e E m p lo y e d

M o th er in A m e r ic a (Chicago, Rand McNally and Co., 1963) . 406 pp. Orshansky, Mollie. “Children of the Poor,” S o c ia l

S e c u r ity B u lle tin , July 1963, pp. 3-13.

-------- . “The Aged Negro and His Income,” S o c ia l

Se c u r ity B u lle tin , February 1964, pp. 3-13.

-------- . “Counting the Poor, Another Look at the

Poverty Profile,” S o c ia l S e c u r ity B u lle tin , January 

1965, pp. 3-29.

-------- . “ Recounting the Poor—A Five Year Review,”

So c ia l S e c u r ity B u lle tin , April 1966, pp. 20-37.

-------- . “Who’s Who Among the Poor,” S o c ia l S e c u r ity

B u lle tin , July 1965, pp. 3-32.

Patterson, Barbara, et al. T h e P r ic e W e P a y F o r D is ­

c r im in a tio n (Atlanta, Ga., Southern Regional Council and the Anti-Defamation League, June 1964). 44 pp.

Perlman, Helen Harris. “An Approach to Social Work 

Problems: Perspectives on the Unmarried Mother on AFDC,” P ro g r a m D ev elo p m en t fo r S o c ia l S ervices in

P u b lic A s s is ta n c e , 1964, pp. 35-51.

Perry, Jane G. “The Job Outlook for Negro Youth,” 

J o u r n a l o f N e g ro E d u c a tio n , spring 1964, pp. 111-116.

Pettigrew, Thomas F. A P ro file o f the N e g ro A m e r ic a n (Princeton, N.J., D. Van Nostrand Company, Inc., 1964) . 250 pp.

Population Reference Bureau, Inc. T h e A m e r ic a n N eg ro

a t M id - C e n tu r y (Washington, November 1958).

The Potomac Institute, Inc. T h e F ed era l R ole in E q u a l

H o u s in g O p p o r tu n ity : A n A ffirm a tiv e P r o g r a m to I m p le ­

m en t E x e cu tive O rd er 1 1 0 6 3 (Washington, 1964).

Southern Regional Council. “Racial Work and Negro Waste in Southern Employment,” N e w S o u th , May 1962, 15 pp.

Rapkin, Chester and Grigsby, Wm. G. T h e D e m a n d f o r

H o u s in g in R a c ia lly M ix e d A r e a s (Berkeley, University of California Press, 1960). 177 pp.

Reid, Ira De Augustine. T h e N eg ro I m m ig r a n t, H is B a c k ­

g ro u n d C h a ra c te ristic s, a n d S o c ia l A d ju s tm e n t, 1 8 9 9 - 1 9 3 7 (New York, Columbia University Press, 1949). 261 pp.

Rose, Arnold. “Social Change and the Negro Problem,” 

T h e N eg ro in A m e r ic a , 1964, 24 pp.

Rose, Arnold M., editor, A s s u r in g F reed o m to the F ree, A

C e n tu r y o f E m a n c ip a tio n in the U .S .A . (Detroit, Wayne State University Press, 1964). 305 pp.

Rosen, Bernard. “Race, Ethnicity, and the Achievement Syndrome,” A m e r ic a n S o c io lo g ic a l R eview , February 1959, pp. 47-60.

Ross, Arthur M. U n e m p lo y m e n t a n d the A m e r ic a n

E c o n o m y R esea rch P ro g r a m on U n e m p lo y m e n t (New York, John Wiley and Sons, Inc., 1963). 216 pp.

Ross, Arthur M., editor. J o b s a n d R ace (New York, Harcourt, Brace and World, to be published in 1966).

Rustin, Bayard. “From Protest to Politics, The Failure of the Civil Rights Movement,” C o m m e n ta ry , February 1965, pp. 25-31.

-----—. “The Watts 'Manifesto’ and The McCone Re­ port,” C o m m e n ta ry , March 1966, pp. 29-35.

Sawyer, Broadus E. “An Examination of Race as a Factor in Negro-White Consumption Patterns,” R e v ie w o f

E co n o m ics' a n d S ta tis tic s , May 1962, pp. 217-220. Schnore, Leo F. and Sharp, Harry. “The Changing Color of Our Big Cities,” T ra n s-a c tio n , January 1964, pp. 

12-14. Schorr, Alvin L. “Slums and Social Insecurity,” R e ­

sea rch R e p o rt N o . 1, U.S. Department of Health, Educa­ tion, and Welfare, Social Security Administration, Division of Research and Statistics. 168 pp. Sellin, J. Thorstein and Wolfgang, Marvin F. T h e

M e a s u r e m e n t o f D e lin q u e n c y (New York, John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 1964). 423 pp. Sharp, Harry and Schnore, Leo F. “The Changing Color Composition of Metropolitan Areas,” L a n d E c o n o m ic s ,

May 1962, pp. 169-185. Silberman, Charles E. “The Businessman and the Negro,” F o rtu n e, September 1963, pp. 97ff. •——-—. “The City and the Negro,” F o rtu n e, March 1962, 

pp. 88-91, 139-54.

C r is is in B la c k a n d W h ite (Toronto, Random House, 1964). 370 pp.

Southern Regional Council and Greater Atlanta Council on Human Relations. T h e N eg ro a n d E m p lo y m e n t

O p p o r tu n itie s in the S o u th (Atlanta, Ga., 1962). 21 pp. Speck, William H. “Enforcement of Nondiscrimination Requirements for Government Contract Work,” C olu m b ia L a w R ev ie w , February 1963, pp. 243-265. Taeuber, Irene B. “Migration, Mobility, and the Assimi­ lation of the Negro,” P o p u la tio n B u lle tin , November 

1958, pp. 127-150. Taeuber, Karl E. “Residential Segregation,” S c ie n tific

A m e r ic a n , August 1965, pp. 12-19. Thompson, Charles H. “The Southern Association and the Predominantly Negro High School and College,” (Editorial Comment), J o u r n a l o f N eg ro E d u c a tio n ,

spring 1962, pp. 105-107. Thompson, Daniel C. T h e N eg ro L e a d e rs h ip C la ss with a foreword by Martin Luther King, Jr. (Englewood Cliffs, N.J., Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1963). 174 pp.

Titmuss, Richard M. “The Role of Redistribution in Social Policy,” S o c ia l S e c u r ity B u lle tin , June 1965, pp. 14-20.

U.S. Civil Service Commission. S tu d y o f M in o r ity G ro u p

E m p lo y m e n t in the F e d e ra l G o vern m en t, prepared for the President’s Committee on Equal Employment Opportunity, 1963.

U.S. Congress, 88th Cong., 2d sess., House of Representatives. H e a r in g s B efo re the S u b c o m m itte e o n th e W a r on

P o v e r ty P r o g r a m o f th e C o m m itte e on E d u c a tio n a n d

L a b o r, Parts 1 and 2.

U.S. Congress, 88th Cong., 2d sess., House of Representa­ tives, Committee on Education and Labor. P o v e r ty in

the U n ite d S ta te s , 1964.

U.S. Congress, 88th Cong., 2d sess., Senate Select Sub­ committee on Poverty of the Committee on Labor and Public Welfare. T h e W a r o n P o v e r ty , 1964.

—*—•—. Agricultural Research Service. C o n su m e r E x ­

p e n d itu r e s S u r v e y R e p o rts . (Many of the reports on rural consumer expenditures in 1961 include data by race.)

52

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
U.S. Department of Agriculture. Economic Research Service. “Characteristics of the Population of Hired Farmworker Households,” A g r ic u ltu r a l R esea rch R e p o rt

N o . 8 4 , August 1965, 21 pp.

U.S. Department of Commerce. Bureau of the Census Current Population Reports, Consumer Income. In c o m e

in 1 9 6 4 o f F a m ilie s a n d P e r so n s in th e U n ite d S ta te s, Series P-60, No. 47, Sept. 24, 1965.

———, •——•—. Current Population Reports. N eg ro

P o p u la tio n : M a rc h 1 9 6 4 , Series P-20, No. 142. (Other bulletins in the Series P-20 group provide many non­ white-white comparisons, such as those on education, school enrollment, households and families, and popula­ tion mobility.)

*—-—•—, •—•—•—. N eg ro P o p u la tio n : M a rc h 1 9 6 5 (Current Population Reports, Series P-20, No. 145).

■—■—•—, —•——. M o b ility o f th e P o p u la tio n o f th e U n ite d

S ta te s, M a rc h 1 9 6 4 to M a rc h 1 9 6 5 (Current Population Reports, Series P-20, No. 150.)

U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare. 

H e a lth , E d u c a tio n , a n d W e lfa re I n d ic a to r s . (See espe­ cially monthly issues in 1965 and 1966 for a number of salient articles.)

-------- . Welfare Administration. See recent and current

issues of W e lfa re in R ev ie w for selected items on the economic welfare of the Negro.

U.S. Department of Labor. T h e E co n o m ic S itu a tio n o f

N eg ro es in the U n ite d S ta te s, Bulletin S-3, revised 1962. 

32 pp.

----- -—. M a n p o w e r R e p o r t o f the P re s id e n t, Washington,

March 1965. 276 pp.

-------- . Bureau of Labor Statistics. A n tid is c r im in a tio n

P r o v is io n s in M a jo r C o n tra cts, 1 9 6 1 , Bulletin No. 1336, 

July 1962. 17 pp.

--------, . I m p a c t o f O ffice A u to m a tio n in the I n ­

te rn a l R even u e S ervice: a S tu d y o f the M a n p o w e r I m p lic a ­

tio n s D u r in g the F ir s t S ta g e s o f the C h an g eo ver, Bulletin 

No. 1364, July 1963. 74 pp.

--------, . I m p lic a tio n s o f A u to m a tio n a n d O th er

T e c h n o lo g ic a l D ev elo p m en ts; a S elected A n n o ta te d B ib lio g ­

r a p h y . Bulletin No. 1319-1, December 1963. 90 pp.

--------, . In c o m e , E d u c a tio n a n d U n e m p lo y m e n t in

N eig h b o rh o o d s. Washington, January 1963. (Analysis 

by census tracts of the economic characteristics of 36 

United States cities, including information by race.)

--------, . M o n th ly R ep o rt on the L a b o r F orce.

Various issues.

--------, ---------. O c c u p a tio n a l O u tlook Q u a r te rly . Various

issues.

U.S. Department of Labor. Bureau of Labor Statistics. 

S p e c ia l L a b o r F orce R e p o rts . These reports, which usually include substantial amounts of data by color appear, in summary, in the M o n th ly L a b o r R e v ie w . The most recent several reports of particular interest in this connection are: Special Labor Force Report, No. 53 “Educational Attainment of Workers in March 1964,” May 1965, by Dennis F. Johnston; Special Labor Force Report, No. 54, “Employment of High School Graduates and Dropouts in 1964,” June 1965, by Forrest A. Bogan, and Special Labor Force Report, 

No. 58, “Long-Term Unemployment in the 1960’s,” September 1965, by Susan S. Holland.

-------- , . E m p lo y m e n t a n d E a r n in g s . (Monthly

publication with detailed statistics, many by color.)

-------- , . S u r v e y o f C o n su m e r E x p e n d itu r e s 1 9 6 0-

61 . (Many of the reports for urban and nonfarm United States and for selected metropolitan areas and cities show data by race.)

-------- , . E m p lo y m e n t o f S ch o o l A g e Y o u th ,

October 1 9 6 5 . Advance Summary, Special Labor Force Report, April 1966. 6 pp.

-------- . Manpower Administration. E m p lo y m e n t S e r v ic e

R ev ie w .

—------, . M a n p o w e r T r a in in g F a cts. (Monthly

administrative bulletin which provides statistics by training program, and by color of trainees.)

-------- . Women’s Bureau. N eg ro W o m en W o rk e rs in

19 6 0 . Bulletin 287, Washington, 1964. 55 pp. U.S. Housing and Home Finance Agency. Office of the Administrator. S e n io r C itiz e n s a n d H o w T h e y L iv e :

A n A n a ly s is o f 1 9 6 0 C en su s D a ta : P a r t I I : T h e A g in g

N o n w h ite a n d H is H o u s in q , November 1963.

-------- . O u r N o n w h ite P o p u la tio n a n d I ts H o u s in g : T he

C h an g es B e tw e e n 1 9 5 0 a n d 1 9 6 0 . Washington, May 

1963. 60 pp. Vander Zanden, James W. “The Non-Violent Resistance Movement Against Segregation,” A m e r ic a n J o u r n a l o f

S o c io lo g y , 1963, pp. 544-550. Welch, Frank J. “The Evolving Low Income Problems in Agriculture,” A m e r ic a n E c o n o m ic R ev ie w , May 1960, pp. 231-241.

Williams, Robin M. S tr a n g e r s N e x t D o o r (Englewood Cliffs, N.J., Prentice-Hall, 1964). 434 pp. Wilson, James Q. N e g ro P o litic s (Glencoe, 111., The Free Press, 1960). 342 pp. Wolf, Eleanor P. “The Tipping Point in Racially Changing Neighborhoods,” A m e r ic a n I n s titu tio n a l

P la n n e r s J o u r n a l, August 1963, pp. 217-222. Zimmer, Basil G. R e b u ild in g C itie s : T h e E ffects o f

D is p la c e m e n t a n d R e lo c a tio n on S m a ll B u s in e s s (Chicago, Quadrangle Books, 1964). 384 pp.

53

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
APPENDIX

Background Statistics

The reader will find that totals and percentages for the same year or items 

may not always agree exactly between some tables. Rounding of figures 

accounts for most of the variation. Minor differences result also from variations in the sources used; the base on which particular details are available in a 

survey or census; or, in a few instances, because of technicalities, such as the 

need to use data based on less than the most recent revisions, to provide the 

detail necessary.

5 5

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
APPENDIX

Background Statistics

Tables

A. Growth and distribution

T able IA -1 .—-Population b y R ace, C onterm inous

U n ited S ta tes, D ecen n ial Y ears, 1890-1960.

T able I A -2 .— P ercent D istrib u tion of the P op u lation b y R ace, for A ll R egions and th e W est, b y

S elected W estern S ta tes and Standard M etropolitan S ta tistica l Areas, U n ited S tates, 1960.

T ab le IA -3 .— Percent D istrib u tion of the N egro

and W h ite P op u lation , b y Farm and N onfarm

R esidence, and R egion, 1960 and 1964.

T able I A -4 .— P ercen t D istrib u tion of the P op u lation b y R egion, S elected W estern S ta tes, and

Standard M etrop olitan S ta tistica l Areas, b y

R ace, U n ited S ta tes, 1960.

T able I A -5 .— R atio of N egro to T o ta l P op u lation ,

U n ited S ta tes, b y R egion, and U rb an -R u ral

R esidence, C onterm inous U n ited S ta tes, D e c e n ­

nial Y ears, 1900-1960.

T able I A -6 .— Proportion of N egro and W h ite

P op u lation in U rban Areas b y R egion, C on term inous U n ited S ta tes, D ecenn ial Y ears, 1910-

1960.

T able I A -7 .— N egro and W h ite P op u lation in

Standard M etrop olitan S ta tistica l A reas, b y

Insid e and O utside of C entral C ity R esid ence,

C onterm inous U n ited S tates, D ecen n ial Y ears,

1900-1960.

T able I A -8 .— D istrib u tion of N egro and W h ite

P op u lation in Standard M etrop olitan S ta tistica l

A reas, b y R egion, and Inside or O utside C entral

C ity , C onterm inous U n ited S ta tes, 1950 and

1960, and C hange, 1950-60.

T able I A -9 .— N egro and W h ite P op u lation in

Standard M etrop olitan S ta tistica l A reas, b y

In sid e and O utside of C entral C ity R esidence,

and b y Size of S M S A in 1960, C onterm inous

U n ited S ta tes, D ecen n ial Y ears, 1900-1960.

T able IA -1 0 .— N egro and W h ite P op u lation in

F iv e M ajor Standard M etropolitan S ta tistica l

Areas, and in all S M S A ’s, b y Insid e and O utside

of C entral C ity R esidence, and C hange, U n ited

S tates, 1950-60.

T able IA -1 1 .— P ercent D istrib u tion of N egro and

W h ite P op u lation b y A ge, U rban and R ural

L ocation , and b y R egion, C onterm inous U n ited

S ta tes, D ecen n ial Y ears, 1930-60.

T able IA -1 2 .— P ercent D istrib u tion of th e N egro

P op u lation in E ach A ge G roup, U rban and

R ural L ocation , C onterm inous U n ited S tates,

D ecen n ial Y ears, 1930-60.

B. Mobility

T able I B - 1 .— M igra n ts’ R esid ence, Sam e or N ew

R egion, b y R egion and Color, A nnual A verages,

U n ited S ta tes, 1959-64 (3-year m ovin g average,

1958-65).

T able I B -2 .— E stim ated N e t M igration, b y R e ­

gion and Color: 1940-50, 1950-60, 1960-63.

T able I B -3 .— R egion of R esid ence in 1960 b y

R egion of B irth for the N egro and W h ite N a tiv e

P op u lation , U n ited S ta tes, 1960.

T able I B - 4 .— Area of B irth of the N o n w h ite

P op u lation in th e 10 N orthern and W estern

C ities of G reatest N egro C on cen tration , b y

C ity of R esid ence, U n ited S ta tes, 1960.

T able I B - 5 .— Interregional M igrants 1955-60,

b y A ge and Color, and b y R egion of R esid ence

in 1955.

T able I B -6 .— E d u cation al A tta in m en t of M ales,

2 5 -2 9 Y ears Old, b y Color, for th e T otal

P op u lation , and for 1955-60 Interregional

M igrants, U n ited S tates and South.

T able I B -7 .— P rop ortion of 2 5 -2 9 Y ear-O ld M ale

O u t-M igran ts, 1955-60, b y E d u cation al A tta in ­

m en t and Color, and b y R egion and the D iv isions of the South.

T able I B - 8 .— P ercent of th e N a tiv e E xperienced

C ivilian Labor Force Born in A nother R egion,

b y O ccupation G roup, Color, and Sex, U n ited

S tates, 1960.

57

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
The Negro Worker

A. Labor force status

T able I I A -1 .— E m p lo ym en t and U n em p loym en t

S ta tu s of th e C ivilian Labor Force, b y C olor,

1957-65 (annual averages).

T ab le I I A -2 .— U n em p lo ym en t R ates, b y Color,

Sex, and A ge G roup, 1954-65 (annual averages).

T ab le I I A -3 .— E m p loyed and U n em p loyed P erson s, b y Color, Sex, and A ge G roup, 1954-65

(annual averages).

T able I I A -4 .— U n em p lo ym en t R ates, b y Color,

Sex, and A ge D eta il, 1957 and 1965 (annual

averages).

T ab le I I A -5 .— U n em p lo ym en t R ates, b y Color,

Sex, and A ge D eta il, 1948-65 (annual averages).

T ab le I I A -6 .— L ong-T erm U n em p loyed , b y C olor

and Sex, 19 57-65 (annual averages).

T able I I A -7 .— U n em p loyed Persons, b y Color,

Sex, and A ge D eta il, 1957 and 1965 (annual

av era g es).

T able I I A - 8 .— U n em p loyed Persons and U n em ­

p lo ym en t R a tes, b y Sex, Color, A ge, and

M arital S ta tu s, 1965 (annual averages).

T able I I A - 9 .— U n em p loyed R a tes, b y O ccupation

of L a st Job and Color, 1955 and 1965 (annual

av era g es).

T able I I A - 1 0.— U n em p loym en t R ates, b y In d u stry of L ast Job and Color, 1955 and 1965

(annual averages).

T able I I A - 1 1.-— P ercen t D istrib u tion of U n em ­

p loyed Persons, b y In d u stry, O ccupation, and

C olor, 1965 (annual averages).

T able I I A -1 2.— E m p loyed Persons, b y Color, Sex,

and A ge D e ta il, 1947-65 (annual averages).

T able I I A -1 3.— E m p loyed Persons, b y C olor, Sex,

and A ge D eta il, and P ercent C hange, 1957 and

1965 (annual averages).

T able I I A -1 4.-—P erson s E m p loyed in N onagricultural Industries, b y Color and F u ll- or P artT im e S tatu s, 1957 and 1965 (annual averages).

T able I I A -1 5.— Persons E m p loyed in N onagricultural Ind ustries on F u ll-T im e Schedules or

V olu n tary P art T im e, b y C olor and Sex, 1957-65

(annual averages).

T able I I A -1 6.-—Persons E m p loyed in N onagricultural Ind ustries on P art-T im e for E conom ic

R eason s, b y U su al F u ll-T im e or P art-T im e

S tatu s, and b y C olor and Sex, 1957-65 (annual

av erag es).

T able IIA -17.-— C ivilian L abor Force, b y Sex,

Color, and Age D etail, 1947-65 (annual

av erag es).

T able I I A - 1 8 .— P ercen t D istrib u tion of the C ivilian L abor Force, b y R ace and Sex, 1950 and 1960.

T able I I A -1 9.— L abor Force P articip ation R a tes

and U n em p lo ym en t R a tes, b y R ace, 1960.

T able II A -2 0 .— C ivilian L abor Force P articip ation R a tes, b y Color, Sex, and A ge D eta il,

1948-65 (annual averages).

T able I I A - 2 1.— C ivilian Labor Force P articip ation R a tes, b y Sex, Color, and A ge D eta il, and

R atio of N o n w h ite to W h ite, 1957 and 1965

(annual averages).

Table I I A -2 2 .—Men 2 5 -6 4 Years Old Not in the 

Labor Force, by Color, 1965 (annual averages).

T able I I A -2 3 .— P ersons 14-24 Y ears Old N o t in

th e L abor F orce and N o t in School, b y Color,

1965 (school year averages).

T able I IA -2 4 .— E x ten t of E m p lo ym en t of Persons

W ith W ork E xperience D u rin g the Y ear, b y

C olor and Sex, 1950, 1957, and 1964.

T able I I A - 2 5.— E x ten t of E m p lo ym en t of Persons

W ith W ork E xperience D u rin g the Y ear, b y

A ge, Color, and Sex, 1959 and 1964.

T able II A -2 6 .— E x te n t of U n em p lo ym en t D u ring the Y ear, b y C olor and Sex, 1959 and 1964.

B. Occupation

T able I I B - 1 .— E m p lo yed Persons, b y O ccupation

G roup, Color, and Sex, 1955, 1961, and 1965

(annual averages).

T able I I B - 2 .— E m p lo ym en t of N o n w h ite

W orkers, b y O ccupation G roup, 1954-65.

T able I I B - 3 .— E m p lo yed M en and W om en , b y

O ccupation G roup, R egion, and Color, 1965

(annual averages).

T able I I B - 4 .— P ercen t D istrib u tion of N egro and

W h ite M ale E m p lo ym en t, b y O ccupation G roup

and R egion, 1950 and 1960.

T able I I B - 5 .— P ercen t D istrib u tion and P ercen t

C hange of E m p lo yed Persons, b y D eta iled O ccupation, Sex, and Color, 1962 and 1965.

Table I I B - 6 .—Negro and White Male Employment in Selected Occupations, 1950 and 1960.

T able I I B - 7 .— E m p lo yed P ersons, b y In d u stry

D eta il, Color, and Sex, 1962 and 1964 (annual

averages).

T able I I B - 8 .— P ercen t D istrib u tion of E m p lo yed

M ales, b y R ace and B road O ccupation G roup,

C onterm inous U n ited S tates, 1950 and 1960.

C. Youth

T able I I C -1 .— P ercen t of P ersons 5 -2 4 Y ears Old

E nrolled in School, b y A ge and Color, O ctober

of S elected Y ears, 1953-65.

58

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
T able I I C -2 .— P ercen t of M ales 14-19 Y ears Old

E nrolled in School, b y Color and A ge G roup,

1948-63 (3-year m ovin g averages, centered,

an n u ally).

T able I I C - 3 .— P ercent of Persons 14-29 Y ears

Old E nrolled in School, b y A ge, R ace, and Sex,

C onterm inous U n ited S tates, 1960.

T able I I C -4 .— E m p loym en t S tatu s of T eenagers,

b y Color, Sex, and A ge, 1954, 1961, and 1965

(annual averages).

T able IIC -5 . —U n em p loym en t R a tes for A ll

W orkers and T eenagers, b y Color and Sex,

1954-65.

T able I I C -6 .— U n em p loym en t R a tes A m ong H igh

School G raduates N o t E nrolled in School and

H igh School D rop ou ts, Persons 16-24 Y ears

O ld, b y Color and Sex, O ctober 1959 and

O ctober 1965.

T able I I C -7 .— P ercent D istrib u tion of E m p loyed

P ersons 16-24 Y ears Old, b y O ccupation

G roup for H igh School G raduates N o t E nrolled

in School and H igh School D rop ou ts, b y Color

and Sex, O ctober 1959 and O ctober 1965.

T able IIC -8.-— W eek ly E arnings on F u ll-T im e

Jobs of 1 6 -2 1 -Y ear-O ld Y ou th s N o t in School,

b y Y ears of School C om pleted and Color,

F ebruary 1963.

T able I I C - 9 .— E m p loym en t S ta tu s and H ours

W orked A m ong Y o u th (aged 16-22) E nrolled

in School, b y Sex, A ge, and Color, U n ited

S ta tes, 1960.

D. Federal employment

T able I I D - 1 .— F ederal E m p loym en t, b y R ace,

1961-65.

T able I I D - 2 .— F ederal E m p loym en t, b y Grade

and Salary G roup, and R ace, 1965; and P ercent

C hange from 1964 and 1962 to 1965.

T ab le I I D - 3 .— T o ta l and N egro F ed eral E m p lo y ­

m en t, b y P a y P lan and A gen cy, June 1965.

T able I I D - 4 .— T o ta l and N egro Federal E m p lo y ­

m en t, b y S elected P a y Plans in the C ivil

Service R egions and Selected Standard M etrop olitan S ta tistica l Areas, June 1965.

The Negro Consumer

A. Income, earnings

T able I I I A - 1 .— M ed ian F am ily Incom e, b y C olor

of F am ily H ead , 1947-64.

T ab le I I I A -2 .— R a tio of N o n w h ite to W h ite

M ed ian In com e of Persons, b y Sex, 1948-64.

T ab le I I I A -3 .— M ed ian W age or Salary In com e

of Persons and of Y ear-R ou n d F u ll-T im e

W orkers, b y C olor and Sex, 1957 and 1963.

T ab le I I I A - 4 .— M ed ian F a m ily Incom e, b y Color

and R egion, 1960-64.

T ab le I I I A -5 .— P ercen t D istrib u tion of F am ilies

b y In com e, C olor, and R egion, 1964.

T ab le I I I A -6 .— P ercen t D istrib u tion of F am ilies

b y In com e, Color, and Farm and N on farm

R esid ence, 1959 and 1964.

T ab le I I I A -7 .— P ercen t D istrib u tion of Persons

14 Y ears Old and O ver, b y In com e, C olor, Sex,

and Farm and N on farm R esid ence, 1959 and

1964.

T ab le I I I A -8 .— P ercen t D istrib u tion of N on farm

H u sb an d-W ife F am ilies, b y In com e, W ork

E xperience of W ives, and Color, 1963.

T ab le I I I A -9 .— L abor F orce P articip ation R a tes

of N on farm M arried W om en W ith H usband

P resen t, b y In com e of H usband, A ge of C hildren

and C olor, M arch 1959 and M arch 1964.

T ab le I I I A -1 0 .— P ercen t D istrib u tion of F am ilies

W ith H ead 65 Y ears O ld and O ver, b y In com e

and Color, U n ited S ta tes, 1960 and 1963.

T ab le I I I A -1 1 .— R a tio of N o n w h ite to W h ite

M ed ian E arnings of M ales, 18-64 Y ears Old, in

th e E xperien ced L abor F orce, b y O ccupation

G roup, A ge, and R egion, 1960.

T ab le I I I A -1 2 .— M ed ian E arnings of M ales in

th e E xperienced C ivilian Labor F orce, b y A ge

and Color, in S elected O ccupations, 1959.

B. Expenditures

T able I I I B - 1 .— S um m ary of In com e and S p end ­

ing of F am ilies, b y R egion and R ace, U rban

U n ited S ta tes, 1960-61 (annual average).

T ab le I I I B - 2 .— A verage E xpend itu res of F am ilies,

b y R ace, U rban U n ited S ta tes, 1950 and 1960-61.

T able I I I B - 3 .— P ercen t D istrib u tion of F am ily

E xpend itu res, b y In com e and R ace, U rban

U n ited S ta tes, 1950 and 1960-61 (annual

average).

T able I I I B - 4 .— P ercen t D istrib u tion of F am ily

E xpend itu res, b y In com e and R ace, in U rban

Places in Southern and N o rth C entral R egions,

1960-61 (annual average).

T able I I I B - 5 .— S avin gs, Insurance, and Selected

C haracteristics of F am ilies in S elected Incom e

C lasses, b y R egion and R ace, U rban U n ited

S ta tes, 1960-61 (annual average).

C. Poverty

T able I I I C -1 .— T o ta l N u m b er of the Poor,

A ccording to Social S ecu rity A dm inistration

59

217-817 O— 6i 5

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
C riteria, b y Color, F a m ily S tatu s, and A ge,

1963-64.

T ab le I I I C -2 .— Poor Persons, b y A ge, L ocation ,

and Color, M arch 1965.

T ab le I I I C -3 .— W ork E xperience of Poor F a m ily

H ead s, b y A ge and Color, 1964.

T ab le I I I C -4 .— T o ta l N u m b er of the Poor in

1963, A ccording to S ocial S ecu rity A d m in istration C riteria, and P ercen t D istrib u tion b y

Color, F a m ily S ta tu s, and A ge D eta il, as of

M arch 1964.

T ab le I I I C -5 .— In cid en ce of P o v erty in 1963,

A ccording to Social S ecu rity A d m inistration

C riteria, b y C olor and Sex of H ou seh old H ead ,

and b y R egion, as of M arch 1964.

T ab le I I I C -6 .— Proportion of F am ilies Poor in

1963, A ccording to S ocial S ecu rity A d m in istration C riteria, and D istrib u tion of th e Poor, b y

C olor and b y Selected F a m ily C haracteristics in

M arch 1964.

T ab le I I I C -7 .— H ou seh olds W ith 1963 Incom e

B elow P o v erty L evel, A ccording to Social Secu rity A d m inistration C riteria, b y C olor and

F a m ily S ta tu s, as of M arch 1964.

T able I I I C -8 .— In cid en ce of P o v erty A m ong

C hildren in 1963, A ccording to Social S ecu rity

A d m inistration C riteria, b y Color, A ge, and Sex

of F a m ily H ead , M arch 1964.

T ab le I I I C -9 .— Proportion of F am ilies Poor in

1963, A ccording to Social S ecu rity A d m inistration C riteria, and D istrib u tion of Poor F am ilies

b y Selected C haracteristics of F a m ily H ead s, as

of M arch 1964.

T ab le I I I C -1 0 .— F am ilies W ith In com e U nder

$3,000 (in 1963 dollars) b y Color, for Selected

Y ears, 1950-64.

T able I I I C -1 1 .— Persons in F am ilies, T o ta l and

N o n w h ite, b y M arch 1965 E m p lo ym en t S tatu s,

A ge, and F a m ily In com e in 1964 (B elow $3,000

and M ed ian ).

T able I I I C -1 2 .— F a m ily H ead s, T otal and N o n ­

w h ite, b y W eeks W orked and F am ily In com e,

1964 (B elow $3,000 and M ed ian ).

T ab le I I I C -1 3 .— E m p lo y m en t S tatu s of F am ily

H ead s in M arch 1965, T y p e of F am ily, and

N u m b er of Own C hildren U n d er 18, b y F a m ily

In com e in 1964, T o ta l and N on w h ite (U nder

$3,000 and M ed ian ).

T ab le I I I C -1 4 .— F a m ily R esp onsibilities of P ersons in th e E xperienced C ivilian L abor Force

and in S elected N on agricu ltural L ow -W age

O ccupations, b y Color, U n ited S ta tes, 1960.

T able I I I C -1 5 .— F a m ily R esp onsibilities of A ll

E m p loyed W om en and W om en E m p loyed in

S elected N on agricu ltural L ow -w age O ccupation s, b y C olor, 1960.

T able I I I C -1 6 .— Farm W age W orkers, b y A verage

N u m b er of D a y s W orked, W ages E arn ed at

Farm and N on farm W ork, and b y Color, Sex,

R egion, and M igratory S tatu s, 1964.

T ab le I I I C -1 7 .— P ercen t D istrib u tion of A F D C

C hildren b y R egion of R esid en ce and R ace,

N o v em b er-D ecem b er 1961.

T ab le I I I C -1 8 .— P ercen t D istrib u tion of Children

R eceivin g A id to F am ilies of D ep en d en t C h ildren (A F D C ), b y U rban-R ural and L arge C entral C ity R esid ence, N o vem b er-D ecem b er 1961.

T ab le I I I C -1 9 .— In com e of A D C F am ilies b y

R ace, early 1961.

T ab le I I I C -2 0 .— M arital S ta tu s of A D C H o m em akers, b y R ace, 1961.

T ab le I I I C - 2 1.— B irth S ta tu s of A D C C hildren,

b y R esid ence, R ace, and S ta tu s of C ase, 1961.

T ab le I I I C -2 2 .— S elected C haracteristics of A D C

H om em akers and A D C F am ilies b y Size of

C om m u n ity and R ace, E a rly 1961.

T able I I I C -2 3 .— P ercen t of A D C F am ilies b y

T enure and H ou seh old C on ven ien ces, b y R ace

and U rban-R ural R esid ence, E a rly 1961.

T ab le I I I C -2 4 .— Proportion of P op u lation R e ­

ceivin g O ld-A ge A ssistan ce (R ecip ien t R a tes)

b y Color, Selected S ta tes, J u ly -S ep tem b e r 1960.

T ab le I I I C -2 5 .— O ld-A ge A ssistan ce R ecip ien ts,

b y R ace, 50 S ta tes, J u ly -S ep tem b e r 1960.

Social Conditions

A. The family

T ab le IV A -1 .— F am ilies b y T y p e and Color,

U n ited S ta tes, M arch of 1960-64 (3-year m o v ­

in g averages, M arch of 1 9 59 -6 5).

T ab le IV A -2 .— F am ilies b y T y p e and Color, b y

R egion and U rb an -R u ral R esid ence, U n ited

S ta tes, 1950 and 1960.

T ab le IV A -3 .— F am ilies b y T y p e and Color, b y

R egion and U rb an -R u ral R esid ence, U n ited

S ta tes, 1950-60 C hange.

T ab le IV A -4 .— F em ale F a m ily H ead s b y A ge,

Color, and R egion, U n ited S ta tes, 1950 and

1960.

T able IV A -5 .— T y p e of F a m ily b y In com e G roup

in 1959, b y Color, Selected R egions, and A reas,

U n ited S ta tes, 1960.

T ab le IV A -6 .— M arital S ta tu s, b y Sex and Color,

1950 and 1960-65.

60

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
T able IV A -7 .— A verage N u m b er of Persons in

F am ily, M em bers of F am ily 18 Y ears Old and

O ver, and F am ilies W ith Own Children U nder

6 Y ears Old, b y T y p e of F a m ily and Color,

U n ited S tates, 1960.

T able IV A -8 .— F ertility R ates, b y Color, U n ited

S tates, 1940-64.

T able IY A -9 .— B irth R ates, b y Order of B irth

and Color, U n ited S ta tes, 1940-64.

T able IV A -1 0 .— B irth R ates, b y A ge of M oth er

and Color, U n ited S ta tes, 1940-64.

T able IV A -1 1 .—C hildren E ver Born Per 1,000

M others 2 0 -3 9 Y ears Old, b y A ge G roup,

Color, and S elected F am ily In com e G roup,

Selected Areas, U n ited S tates, 1960.

T able IV A -1 2 .— N u m b er of B irths Per E verM arried W om an 3 5 -5 9 Years Old, b y L evel of

E d u cational A tta in m en t as of 1960.

T able IV A -1 3 .— A verage T otal N u m b er of B irths

E xp ected and Children W anted, W h ite and

N o n w h ite W ives, b y E d u cation , 1960.

T able IV A -1 4 .— E stim a ted Illegitim a cy R a te, b y

Color, 1947-64.

T ab le IV A -1 5 .— Illegitim a cy R ates as R elated to

Incom e and E d u cation , b y Color, in In tegrated

C ensus T racts (30 to 70 percent non w h ite), in

W ash in gton , D .C .

B. Education

T ab le IV B -1 .— P ercen t Illiterate in th e P op u lation, b y Color, 1870-1959.

T ab le IV B -2 .— E d u cation al A tta in m en t of P ersons 25 Y ears O ld and O ver, b y A ge and Color,

M arch 1959 and M arch 1964.

T ab le IV B -3 .— E d u cation al A tta in m en t of the

P op u lation 14 Y ears and O ver, b y R ace,

U n ited S ta tes, 1950 and 1960.

T ab le IV B - 4.— P ercen t D istrib u tion b y E d u cation al L ev el of M en 20 -6 4 Y ears O ld and of

T heir F ath ers, b y Color, M arch 1962.

T ab le IV B -5 .— E d u cation al A tta in m en t of th e

P op u lation 18 Y ears Old and O ver, b y L abor

Force S ta tu s, Color, Sex, R esid ence, and

R egion, M arch 1959 and M arch 1965.

T ab le IV B -6 .— P ercen t of the C ivilian L abor

F orce 18 Y ears Old and O ver, b y S elected

L evels of E d u cation al A tta in m en t and b y C olor

and Sex, S elected Y ears, 1952-65.

T able IV B -7 .— L abor Force P articipation R a tes

of P ersons 18 Y ears Old and O ver, b y A ge

G roup, Color, Sex, and Y ears of School Corm

pleted, M arch 1965.

T ab le I V B -8 .— L abor F orce P articip ation R a tes

of P ersons 25 Y ears Old and O ver, b y Sex,

Color, and E d u cation al A tta in m en t, U n ited

S ta tes, 1950 and 1960

T ab le IV B -9 .— P ercen t D istrib u tion of E m p loyed

P ersons 18 Y ears O ld and O ver, b y Y ears of

School C om p leted, O ccupation G roup, Color,

and Sex, M arch 1959 and M arch 1965.

T ab le IV B -1 0 .— P ercen t D istrib u tion of E m p loyed

P ersons, b y O ccupation G roup, Y ears of S ch oo l

C om pleted, Color, and Sex, M arch 1959 and

M arch 1965.

T able I V B -1 1.— U n em p lo ym en t R a tes of Persons

18 Y ears O ld and O ver, b y Y ears of School

C om pleted, and b y A ge, Sex, and Color,

M arch 1962 and M arch 1965.

T able IV B -1 2 .— P ercen t D istrib u tion of U n ­

em p loyed Persons 18 Y ears Old and O ver, b y

Y ears of School C om p leted and b y A ge and

Color, M arch 1962 and M arch 1965.

T able IV B -1 3 .— M ed ia n Y early In com e of M ales

14 Y ears Old and O ver W ith Incom e, b y C olor

and Y ears of School C om pleted, 1958 and 1963.

C. Housing

T able IV C -1 .— C ondition of H ou sin g b y In com e

C lass of H ou seh old in 1959 and b y Color,

U n ited S tates, 1960.

T able I V C -2 .— Selected C haracteristics of H ou sing U n its b y Color of H ou seh old H ead , b y

R egion, Insid e and O utside S M S A ’s, U rban

and R ural, 1960.

T able I V C -3 .— S h ifts in H ou sin g C haracteristics,

b y Color of O ccupants, 1950-60.

T able I V C -4 .— H ou sin g C onditions A m ong H ou seholds W ith N o n w h ite H ead s, b y U rban-R ural

L ocation , U n ited S ta tes, 1950 and 1960.

T able IV C -5 .— P ercen t of H ou sin g Seriously

O vercrow ded, In sid e and O utside S M S A ’s,

U rban and R ural, b y T enure and Color of

O ccupants, 1960.

T able I V C -6 .— P ercen t D istrib u tion of O wnerand R enter-O ccupied H ou sin g U n its b y V alue

or G ross M o n th ly R en t, Insid e and O utside

S M S A ’s, U rb an and R ural, b y C olor of O ccup an ts, 1960.

T able I V C -7 .— Substandard H ou sin g U n its b y

In com e C lass of H ou seh old in 1959, b y Color,

R egion, and R esid ence Insid e and O utside

S M S A ’s, 1960.

T able I V C -8 .— M ortgage and G overnm en t In ­

surance S ta tu s of O ne-u n it H om eow ner Properties, b y C olor of H ou seh old H ead , 1960.

61

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
T able IV C -9 .— P ercen t D istrib u tion of H om es b y

A ge of O wner and F in an cial O bligation In ­

curred, T o ta l and N o n w h ite, 1960.

T able IV C -1 0 .— P ercen t D istrib u tion of M ortgaged H om es for S elected P rop erty C haracteristics, T o ta l and N o n w h ite, 1960.

T able IV C -1 1 .— P ercen t D istrib u tion of H om eow ner P roperties, b y M ortgage C haracteristics,

and O wner (T otal and N o n w h ite), 1960.

D. Health

T ab le I V D -1 .— D e a th R ates, b y A ge and Color,

1900 and 1964.

T able I V D -2 .— A g e-A d ju sted D ea th R ates, b y

C olor and Sex, 1947-64.

T able I V D -3 .— M atern al and In fa n t M o rta lity

R a tes, b y C olor, Selected Periods, 1915-64.

T ab le I V D -4 .— A ge-A d ju sted D ea th R a tes for

S elected C om m unicable D iseases, b y Color,

S elected Y ears, 1930-64.

T ab le I V D -5 .— L ife E x p ectan cy in Prim e W orkin g Y ears, b y C olor and Sex, 1964.

T ab le I V D -6 .— L ife E x p ectan cy in Prim e W orking Y ears, b y A ge, Color, and Sex, U n ited S ta tes

and G eographical D ivision s, 1959-61.

T ab le I V D -7 .— S u icid e R a tes, b y Sex and Color,

1947-63.

T ab le I V D -8 .— D istrib u tion of P op u lation , b y

H osp ital and Surgical Insurance C overage,

F a m ily In com e, and Color, Ju ly 1962-Jun e

1963.

T able I V D -9 .— N u m b er and P ercent of Persons

in th e P op u lation W ith O ne or M ore C hronic

C on dition s and A c tiv ity L im itation s, b y C olor

and A ge, J u ly 1957-Ju n e 1961.

T ab le I V D -1 0 .— N u m b er and P ercent of M ales in

th e L abor F orce W ith One or M ore C hronic

C on dition s and A c tiv ity L im itation s, b y Color,

A ge, and E m p lo ym en t S ta tu s, J u ly 1961-Ju n e

1963.

T able I V D - 1 1.— N u m b er of D isa b ility D a y s and

R a tes Per Person Per Y ear b y Sex, A ge, and

Color, J u ly 1961-Ju n e 1963.

T ab le I V D -1 2.— N u m b er of D isa b ility D a y s and

R ates Per Person Per Y ear for N o n w h ite and

W h ite M ales in th e L abor F orce, b y A ge G roup

and E m p lo y m en t S ta tu s, J u ly 1961-Ju n e 1963.

T ab le I V D -1 3 .— N u m b er and P ercen t of Persons

w ith L ast P h ysician V isit W ithin a Y ear, b y

Sex, F a m ily Incom e, C olor, and A ge, J u ly

Color, 1963-Ju n e 1964.

T ab le I V D -1 4 .— Percent D istrib u tion of P h ysician

V isits, b y P lace of V isit, F a m ily In com e, and

and Color, J u ly 1963-Ju n e 1964.

T able I V D - 1 5.— P revalen ce of R eaction to T ests

for S yp h ilis in A d u lts, b y R ace, Sex, and T est

U sed , 1960-62.

E. The veteran

T ab le I V E -1 .— W ork E xperien ce of M ale W ar

V eterans (N on in stitu tio n a l) b y A ge G roup and

Color, 1964.

T ab le IV E -2 .— M ale W ar V eteran s’ P articipation

in L ife Insurance and B en efit Program s, b y

Program and Color, U n ited S ta tes, L a te 1 9 6 2 -

E a rly 1963.

T ab le I V E -3 .— M ale W ar V eteran s’ U se of G I

Loan E n titlem en t, b y Color, U n ited S ta tes and

S ou th, L ate 1 9 6 2 -E a rly 1963.

T ab le I V E -4 .— M ale W ar V eteran s’ R eceip t of

V A M ed ical B enefits Since 1947, b y Color,

L ate 1 9 6 2 -E a rly 1963.

T ab le I V E -5 .— In com e in 1959 of A ll F am ilies

W ith M ale H ead and F am ilies W ith M ale W ar

V eteran H ead , b y A ge and Color, 1960.

T ab le IV E -6 .— E arnings, E d u cation al A tta in ­

m en t, and A ge of A ll M ales and M ale W ar

V eterans, b y O ccupation G roup and Color, 1960.

T able IV E -7 .— E d u cation al A tta in m en t of A ll

M en and of W ar V eteran s, b y A ge and C olor,

1960.

T ab le I V E -8 .— C haracteristics of H ou sin g A m ong

A ll F am ilies w ith M ale H ead and F am ilies

H ead ed b y W ar V eterans, b y T enure and Color,

1960.

T able I V E -9 .— V alue of N on farm O w ner-O ccupied H ou sin g U n its of W ar V eterans and O thers,

b y A ge and Color, 1960.

62

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
N egroes rem ained 10 to 11 p ercen t of the total p op u lation b etw een 1910 and 1960 and w ere ab ou t

12 percent betw een 1890 and 1900.

T a b l e I A - 1 .— P o p u la tio n b y R a c e, C o n te r m in o u s U n ite d S ta te s , D e c e n n ia l Y e a r s , 1 8 9 0 - 1 9 6 0

Decennial years Race

1890 1900 1910 1920 1930 1940 1950 1960

Percent distribution

Total nonwhite- _ 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0

Negro 95 96 96 96 95 96 95 94

Other races 5 4 4 4 5 4 5 6

Other races 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0

Indians _ 69 6 8 64 57 56 57 48 44

Japanese.. 1 7 17 26 23 2 2 2 0 23 Chinese-- - 30 26 17 15 13 13 17 17 All others 1___ 1 2 9 8 15 16

Percent of total population

Total nonwhite_____ _ 12. 5 1 2. 1 1 1. 1 10. 3 1 0. 2 1 0. 2 10. 5 1 1. 2

Negro 11. 9 1 1. 6 10. 7 9. 9 9. 7 9. 8 1 0. 0 1 0. 6

Other races - _ . 6 . 5 . 4 . 4 . 5 . 4 . 5 . 6

Population (in thousands)

Total nonwhite.- __- 7, 846 9, 185 10, 240 10, 890 12, 488 13, 454 15, 755 20, 009

Negro 7, 489 8 , 834 9, 828 10, 463 11, 891 1 2 , 8 6 6 15, 042 18, 860 Other races_____________ 358 351 413 427 597 589 713 1, 149 Indians. __ . . . . 248 237 266 244 332 334 343 509

Japanese.____ _ 2 24 72 111 139 127 142 260 Chinese.. 107 90 72 62 75 78 118 199 All others 1 3 9 51 50 1 1 0 181

White_____________________ 55, 101 6 6 , 809 81, 732 94, 821 110, 287 118, 215 134, 942 158, 455 Total population. __ 62, 948 75, 995 91, 972 105, 711 122, 775 131, 669 150, 697 178, 464

1 All others include Filipinos, Hawaiians, Part-Hawaiians, Aleuts, Eskimos, etc.

Note.—Because of rounding, sums of individual items may not equal totals.

Source: Census of Population: 1960, General Population Characteristics, United States Summary, PC(1)-1B, table 44 (U.S. Bureau ol the Census).

63

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
N egroes w ere ab ou t 20 percent of the total p op u lation in the S ou th b u t less than 10 p ercen t in other

regions in 1960.

T a b l e I A - 2 .— P e r c e n t D is tr ib u tio n o f the P o p u la tio n b y R a c e, f o r A ll R e g io n s a n d th e W e s t,1 b y S e lected W e s te r n S ta te s a n d

S ta n d a r d M e tr o p o lita n S ta tis tic a l A r e a s , U n ite d S ta te s , 1 9 6 0

Region, State, and SMSA Total (in thou- Total White Non white

sands) Total Negro Other Total Negro Other

Percent distribution

United States . 179, 323 1 0 0 89 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 92 8

Northeast. __ 44, 678 1 0 0 93 7 7 (2) 1 0 0 96 4

North Central__ 51, 619 1 0 0 93 7 7 (2) 1 0 0 95 5

South _ _ __ 54, 973 1 0 0 79 2 1 2 1 (2) 1 0 0 98 2

West__ _- _ __ 28, 053 1 0 0 92 8 4 4 1 0 0 49 51

Conterminous W est____ 27, 194 1 0 0 94 6 4 3 1 0 0 62 38

West:California 15, 717 1 0 0 92 8 6 2 1 0 0 70 30 W ashington___ __ - 2, 853 1 0 0 96 4 2 2 1 0 0 48 52

Arizona and Mew Mexico. _ 2, 253 1 0 0 91 9 3 7 1 0 0 29 71

Hawaii_____ _________ 633 1 0 0 32 6 8 1 67 1 0 0 1 99 A laska_______________ 226 1 0 0 77 23 3 2 0 1 0 0 13 87 Other S ta te s____ _ _ 6 , 371 1 0 0 97 3 1 1 1 0 0 48 52

Western SMSA’s .. __ 20, 131 1 0 0 91 9 5 4 1 0 0 58 42

All California SMSA’s___ 13, 591 1 0 0 91 9 6 2 1 0 0 72 28

Los Angeles. 6 , 743 1 0 0 91 9 7 2 1 0 0 78 2 2

San Francisco___ 2, 783 1 0 0 8 8 1 2 9 4 1 0 0 69 31 Others, California___ 4, 065 1 0 0 94 6 4 2 1 0 0 61 39

Others, West____ 6 , 540 1 0 0 92 9 2 6 1 0 0 28 72

1 Total West, including Alaska and Hawaii except where noted.

2 Less than 0.5 percent.

Note.—Because of rounding, sums of individual items may not equal totals.

Source: Census of Population: 1960, General Population Characteristics, United States Summary, PC(1)-1B, table 56; Census of Population: 1960, Selected

Area Reports, Standard Metropolitan Statistical Areas, PC(3)-1D, table 1 (U.S. Bureau of the Census).

64

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
B etw een 1960 and 1964, the d ecline in the

proportion of N egroes in th e S ou th and on farm s

con tin u ed , and there was a further increase in

th e W est and N orth , and in cities, reflecting the

patterns of m igration of th e 1950’s. O ver half

of th e N egroes in th e U n ited S tates lived in th e

S ou th, how ever, in 1964.

T a b l e 1A-3.—P e r c e n t D is tr ib u tio n o f the N eg ro a n d W h ite

P o p u la tio n , b y F a r m a n d N o n f a r m R esid en ce , a n d R eg io n ,

1 9 6 0 a n d 1 9 6 4

Residence and region

1960 1 1964 2

Negro White Negro White

Total population (in thousands) __ 18, 849 158, 838 20, 739 167, 046

Residence:

Percent___ 100. 0 100. 0 100. 0 100. 0

Nonfarm____ 92. 1 92. 5 93. 1 93. 4 Farm 7. 9 7. 9 6 . 9 6 . 6

Regions:

Percent _ _ _ 100. 0 100. 0 100. 0 100. 0

Northeast___ 16. 0 26. 1 18. 1 26. 1

North Central. 18. 3 30. 2 19. 4 29. 4 South 60. 0 27. 4 54. 4 27. 4 West _ _ 5. 7 16. 3 8 . 1 17. 1

* From the 1960 Census.

2 Based on the Current Population Survey of the U.S. Bureau of the

Census.

Note.—Because of rounding, sums of individual items may not equal totals.

Source: Current Population Reports, Population Characteristics, Negro

Population, Series P-20, No. 142, October 11, 1965, table A.

Of th e sm all proportion of N egroes w ho lived in

th e W est in 1960 (less than 10 p ercen t), 8 in 10

w ere in C alifornia, chiefly in th e large cities.

T a b l e I A -4 .'— P e rc e n t D is tr ib u tio n o f th e P o p u la tio n b y

R e g io n , S elected W este rn S ta te s, a n d S ta n d a r d Metrop o lita n S ta tis tic a l A r e a s , b y R a c e, U n ite d S ta te s, 1 9 6 0

Region, State, and SMSA Total

Non white

W hite Total Negro Other

Percent distribution

United States . __ _ 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0

Northeast _ ___ 25 15 16 8 26 North Central___ 29 18 18 1 1 30 South _____ _ 31 56 60 1 1 27 W est.. _ ______ 16 1 1 6 70 16

West, to tal1 - __ 10 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0

California 56 57 81 33 56 Washington__ 10 5 5 5 1 1 Arizona and New

Mexico - _ _ 8 9 6 13 8

Hawaii 2 19 1 37 1

Alaska - 1 2 1 4 1

Other States 23 8 8 8 24

Percent of total W est1

In western SMSA’s-. 72 78 92 64 71

Not in California. _ 23 25 14 35 23 In California. . 48 53 78 29 48

Los Angeles___ 24 27 43 1 1 24

San Francisco__ 10 16 2 2 9 9

Others_____ -_ 15 1 0 13 8 15

Outside western SMSA’s_________ 28 2 2 8 36 29

1 Total West, including Alaska and Hawaii.

Note.—Because of rounding, sums of individual items may not equal

totals.

Source: Census of Population: 1960, General Population Characteristics,

United States Summary, PC(1)-1B, table 56; Census of Population: 1960,

Selected Area Reports, Standard Metropolitan Statistical Areas, PC(3)-1D,

table 1 (U.S. Bureau of the Census).

65

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Since th e turn of th e century, the proportion of N egroes has risen from 2 to 7 percent of th e N orth ern

p op u lation , b u t declined stea d ily from alm ost % to ab out % in th e S ou th, largely through m igration.

W hile th e proportion of N egroes alm ost doubled in th e cities and declined on farm s, it rem ained rela tively

sta b le in rural nonfarm places.

T a b l e IA-5.—R a tio o f N eg ro to T o ta l P o p u la tio n , U n ite d S ta te s, b y R e g io n , a n d U r b a n -R u r a l R e sid en ce , C o n te r m in o u s

U n ite d S ta te s, D e c e n n ia l Y e a r s , 1 9 0 0 - 6 0

Conterminous United States Percent Negro by—

Population (in thousands) Region Residence Decennial

year Rural North- N orth Total Negro White Other Total east Cen- South West Urban tral Total Non- Farm farm

1900_____ 75, 995 8 , 834 66,809 351 1 1 . 6 1 . 8 1. 9 32. 3 0. 7

1910_____ 91, 972 9, 828 81,732 413 1 0 . 7 1.9 1 . 8 29. 8 . 7 6 . 3 14. 5

1920_____ 105, 711 10, 463 94, 821 427 9.9 2.3 2.3 26.9 . 9 6 . 6 13.4 9.0 16.3 1930_____ 122, 775 11,891 110,287 597 9.7 3. 3 3.3 24. 7 1 . 0 7.5 12.4 8 . 5 15.5 1940_____ 131,669 1 2 , 8 6 6 118,215 589 9.8 3.8 3.8 23. 8 1 . 2 8.4 1 1 . 6 7.8 14.9 1950_____ 150, 697 15, 042 134,942 713 1 0 . 0 5. 1 5. 1 21.7 2.9 9.7 10. 5 8 . 0 13.8 1960_____ 178,464 18,860 158,455 1, 149 1 0 . 6 6 . 8 6 . 8 2 0 . 6 3.9 1 1 . 0 9. 4 8.9 1 1 . 0

N otes.—Dashes indicate data not available. Because of rounding, sums

of individual items may not equal totals.

Source: Historical Statistics of the United States: Colonial Times to 1957,

table series 95-122; Sixteenth Census of the United States: 1940, Population,

Vol. II, Characteristics of the Population, Pt. 1, tables 4, 5; Census of Population: I960, Detailed Characteristics, United States Summary, PC(1)-1D, table

158; Census of Population: 1960, General Population Characteristics, United

States Summary, PC(1)-1B, tables 44, 51, 56 (U.S. Bureau of the Census).

66

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
In the N orth and W est, N egroes h ave been

h igh ly urban throu gh ou t this cen tu ry, and continue to be su b stan tially m ore urban than the

w h ite p op u lation . In the S ou th, how ever, urbanization has proceeded at ab out the sam e pace

am ong N egroes and w h ites.

T a b l e IA -6 .—P r o p o r tio n o f N e g ro a n d W h ite P o p u la tio n

in U rb a n A r e a s b y R e g io n , C o n te r m in o u s U n ite d S ta te s,

D e c e n n ia l Y e a rs, 1 9 1 0 - 6 0

Year

Percent urban

United States South North and West

Negro White Negro White Negro White

1910_______ 27 49 2 1 23 77 57

1920_______ 35 53 27 29 84 62

1930_______ 44 58 32 35 8 8 6 6

1940_______ 49 59 37 37 89 67

1950 1______ 62 64 48 49 94 70

1960 2______ 73 70 58 59 95 74

1 Urban definition for 1940 and before not strictly comparable to 1950,1960

definitions.

2 Does not include Alaska and Hawaii.

Source: A b s tra c t o f the T h irteen th C en su s (1910), table 28, p. 103; 1920-40

Sixteen th C en su s o f the U n ite d S ta tes: 1940 P o p u la tio n , Vol. II, C h aracteristics

o f the P o p u la tio n , Pts. 1-7, tables 4, 5, for each State; C en su s o f P o p u la tio n ,

1950, Vol. II, C h aracteristics o f the P o p u la tio n , Pt. 1, U n ited S ta tes S u m m a ry ,

table 145; 1960— C en su s o f P o p u la tio n , D e ta iled C h a racteristics, U n ite d S ta tes

S u m m a ry , Final Keport PC(1)-1D, tables 158, 233 (U.S. Bureau of the

Census).

A b o u t the sam e proportion of N egroes as w h ites lived in S M S A ’s in 1960; how ever, the ratio of

the p op u lation in central cities to the p op u lation ou tsid e tripled am ong N egroes betw een 1900 and 1960,

w hereas it decreased by nearly half am ong w h ites.

T a b l e 1A-7.—N e g ro a n d W h ite P o p u la tio n in S ta n d a r d M e tr o p o lita n S ta tis tic a l A r e a s , b y I n s id e a n d O u tsid e o f C e n tr a l

C ity R esid en ce , C o n te r m in o u s U n ite d S ta te s , D e c e n n ia l Y e a rs , 1 9 0 0 - 6 0

Decennial

years

Total U.S. population (in thousands)

Total SMSA population (in thousands)

Percent of U.S. population in SMSA’s

Population (i 

Central city

n thousands)

Outside central city

Ratio: central city population to outside central city population

Negro White Negro White N egro W hite Negro White Negro White N egro W hite

1900______ 8 , 834 6 6 , 809 2, 352 29, 399 27 44 1, 281 18, 467 1, 071 10, 932 1 2 0 169

1910_____ 9, 828 81, 732 2 , 820 38, 985 29 48 1, 703 25, 286 1, 117 13, 699 153 185

1920______ 10, 463 94, 821 3, 547 48, 779 34 51 2, 382 32, 168 1, 165 16, 611 205 194

1930______ 11, 891 110, 287 4, 991 61, 470 42 56 3, 634 39, 298 1, 357 22, 172 268 177

1940______ 1 2, 8 6 6 118, 215 5, 840 6 6 , 487 45 56 4, 358 40, 971 1, 482 25, 517 294 161

1950_____ 15, 042 134, 942 8 , 360 80, 249 57 60 6, 456 45, 441 1, 904 34, 808 339 131

1960_____ 18, 860 158, 455 12, 194 99, 509 65 63 9, 704 47, 575 2, 490 51, 934 390 92

Note.—Because of rounding, sums of individual items may not equal totals.

Source: C en su s o f P o p u la tio n : 1960, Selected A r e a R e p o r ts, S ta n d a rd M e tro p o lita n S ta tistic a l A re a s , PC(3)-1D, table 1; C en su s o f P o p u la tio n : 1960, G eneral

P o p u la tio n C h a ra cteristics, U n ited S ta tes S u m m a ry , PC(1)-1B, table 44 (U.S. Bureau of the Census).

67

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
W ell over half of the increase in N egro p op u lation b etw een 1950 and 1960 w as in the central cities

of S M S A ’s in th e N o rth — the on ly areas w hich lo st w h ite p op u lation during the decade.

T a b l e IA-8 .—D is tr ib u tio n o f N eg ro a n d W h ite P o p u la tio n in S ta n d a r d M e tr o p o lita n S ta tis tic a l A r e a s , b y R e g io n , a n d I n s id e

o r O u tsid e C en tra l C ity , C o n te r m in o u s U n ite d S ta te s , 1 9 5 0 a n d 1 9 6 0 , a n d C h an g e, 1 9 5 0 - 6 0

Total population

Region and residence

Percent distribution Percent change Number (in thousands)

1950 1960 1950-60 1950 1960

N egro W hite N egro W hite N egro W hite Negro White Negro White

Total U.S. population. _ 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 25 17 15, 042 134, 942 18, 860 158, 455

Total SMSA’s. . . . . . 56 60 65 63 46 24 8,360 80, 249 12, 194 99, 509

Central city__________ _ __ 43 34 52 30 50 5 6 , 456 45, 441 9, 704 47, 575 Outside central city .. __ 13 26 13 33 31 49 1, 904 34, 808 2,490 51, 934

Northeastern SMSA’s. _____ 17 24 2 0 2 2 49 1 2 2, 526 31, 762 3, 757 35, 500

Central city___ _ _ ___ 14 13 16 1 0 50 - 1 0 2, 050 17, 640 3, 082 15, 949 Outside central city .. . 3 1 1 4 1 2 42 38 476 14, 123 674 19, 551

North Central SMSA’s. . 13 17 17 18 58 2 0 2 , 0 0 1 23, 076 3, 165 27, 769

Central city. 1 1 1 1 15 9 62 - 3 1,718 14, 108 2,786 13, 695 Outside central city _ 2 7 2 9 34 57 282 8 , 968 379 14, 074

Southern SMSA’s.. 2 2 1 0 23 1 1 29 39 3, 313 12, 954 4,276 18, 019

Central city____ 15 6 17 6 34 34 2,323 7, 507 3, 113 10, 090 Outside central city. ___ 7 4 6 5 17 46 989 5, 445 1, 161 7, 930

Western SMSA’s__ _ _____ 4 9 5 12 92 46 520 12, 458 997 18, 2 2 0

Central city. 2 5 4 5 99 27 364 6 , 185 723 7, 841 Outside central c i t y .___ 1 5 2 7 75 6 6 157 6,272 274 10, 379

1 Includes Baltimore, Md.; Washington, D.C.-Maryland-Virginia; and Wilmington, Del.-New Jersey whose population in other tables by region is

included largely in the South, and partially in the Northeast.

Note.—Because of rounding, sums of individual items may not equal totals.

s o u r c e : C en su s o f P o p u la tio n : 1960, S elected A r e a R e p o r ts, S ta n d a r d

M e tro p o lita n S ta tistic a l A re a s , PC (3)-lD, table 1 (U.S. Bureau of the Census).

68

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
T h e concentration of N egroes in central cities of S M S A ’s and th e w h ites’ exodus to th e ou tsid e h ave

been greatest since 1900 in the larger S M S A ’s. T h e sh ift am ong N egroes from ou tsid e to inside the

central city has been lea st sharp, how ever, in th e sm allest S M S A ’s (up to 250,000 p op u lation ), w here

w h ites as w ell as N egroes were livin g chiefly in central cities in 1960.

T a b l e IA-9.—N eg ro a n d W h ite P o p u la tio n in S ta n d a r d M e tr o p o lita n S ta tis tic a l A r e a s ,1 b y I n s id e a n d O u tsid e o f C en tra l

C ity R e sid en ce , a n d b y S iz e o f S M S A in 1 9 6 0 , C o n te rm in o u s U n ite d S ta te s, D e c e n n ia l Y e a rs , 1 9 0 0 - 1 9 6 0

Size of SMSA in 1960

3,000,000 and over 1,000,000 to 3,000,000 500,000 to 1,000,000

Decennial years Negro White Negro White Negro White

Cen- Outside Cen- Outside Cen- Outside Cen- Outside Cen- Outside Cen- Outside tral central tral central tral central tral central tral central tral central city city city city city city city city city city city city

Percent SMSA population inside and outside central cities, by race of residents

1900___________ 74 27 81 19 64 36 60 40 63 37 58 42

1910___________ 77 23 82 18 67 33 59 41 69 31 62 38 1920___________ 83 17 80 2 0 71 29 60 41 74 26 63 37

1930___________ 85 15 75 25 72 28 56 44 79 2 1 64 36 1940___________ 86 14 73 27 74 26 53 47 80 2 0 62 38 1950___________ 87 13 67 34 75 25 48 52 80 2 0 56 44

1960___________ 85 15 52 48 80 2 0 38 62 81 19 49 51

250,000 to 500,000 100,000 to 250,000 Less than 100,000

1900___________ 50 50 50 50 41 59 52 48 34 67 67 33

1910___________ 58 42 53 47 45 55 56 44 44 57 6 6 34

1920___________ 63 37 58 42 52 48 60 41 42 58 71 29

1930___________ 68 32 57 43 59 41 60 40 47 53 71 29

1940___________ 69 31 55 45 61 39 58 42 54 46 72 28

1950___________ 72 28 51 49 65 35 57 44 65 35 75 25

1960___________ 73 27 47 53 69 31 55 45 74 27 77 23

1 As defined by the 1960 census. Source: C en su s o f P o p u la tio n : 1960, Selected A r e a R e p o r ts, S ta n d a rd M etroN o t e .—Because of rounding, sums of individual items may not equal p o lita n S ta tistic a l A re a s , PC(3)-1D, table 1 (U.S. Bureau of the Census),

totals.

69

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
A lm ost all of the 19 50-60 N egro increase in the five S M S A ’s of largest N egro pop u lation (all of

w h ich are ou tsid e the S ou th ) w as in th e central city. A ll of the S M S A ’s, excep t L os A ngeles, lo st w h ite

p op u lation in the central city.

T a b l e I A - 1 0 .— N e g ro a n d W h ite P o p u la tio n in F iv e M a jo r S ta n d a r d M e tr o p o lita n S ta tis tic a l A r e a s , a n d in a ll S M S A ’s, b y

I n s id e a n d O u tsid e o f C e n tr a l C ity R esid en ce , a n d C h an ge, U n ite d S ta te s , 1 9 5 0 - 6 0

SMSA population (in thousands)

Standard metropolitan statistical

area

1950 1960

Change, 1950-60

Total Inside central city Outside central city

Negro White Negro White Negro White Negro White Negro White

All metropolitan areas._ 8 , 360 80, 249 12,194 99, 509 3,834 19,260 3,248 2,134 586 17,126

New York- _ 820 8 , 706 1,228 9, 407 408 701 340 -475 67 1,177 Los Angeles 219 4, 092 465 6,148 246 2, 056 169 388 77 1 , 6 6 8 Chicago. 536 4, 623 890 5, 301 354 678 321 -399 34 1, 076 Philadelphia. _ 480 3,187 671 3, 662 191 475 153 -226 38 700

Detroit. . 358 2,654 559 3.195 2 0 1 541 181 -363 2 0 904

Source C en su s o f P o p u la tio n : 1960, Selected A r e a R e p o rts, S ta n d a rd M e tro p o lita n S ta tistic a l A re a s , PC(3)-1D, table 1 (U.S. Bureau of the Census).

70

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
T h e distribution of th e population b y age, 1950-60, and 1930-60, show s m ore of an increase in the

proportion of N egroes under 5 than am ong w h ites of this age. Since 1950, th e increase w as en tirely in

urban and rural nonfarm areas. T h e proportion of N egroes in other age groups declined, excep t am ong

the elderly w hose ratio increased sligh tly, chiefly in rural areas. T h e w h ite pop u lation has show n

sim ilar trends, b u t w ith som ew h at greater increases in th e percent of elderly.

T a b l e I A —11.— P e r c e n t D is tr ib u tio n o f N eg ro a n d W h ite P o p u la tio n b y A g e , U rb a n a n d R u r a l L o c a tio n , a n d b y R e g io n ,

C o n te rm in o u s U n ite d S ta te s, D e c e n n ia l Y e a rs , 1 9 3 0 - 6 0

Age 1930 1940 1950 1960

Negro White Negro White Negro White Negro White

Total United States: All ages____ 1 0 0 . 0 1 0 0 . 0 1 0 0 . 0 1 0 0 . 0 1 0 0 . 0 1 0 0 . 0 1 0 0 . 0 1 0 0 . 0

Under 5 _ 10. 3 9.2 9.7 7.8 1 2 . 6 1 0 . 6 14. 4 10. 9 5-14_________________________ 2 2 . 0 19. 8 20. 4 16.7 19. 2 16. 0 23. 2 19.3 15-19________________________ 10.5 9.3 1 0 . 1 9.3 8 . 2 7.0 7.9 7.3 20-29________________________ 19. 1 16.6 18.2 17. 1 16. 5 15.6 1 2 . 6 1 2 . 0 30-49________________________ 25.9 27.3 27. 1 28. 1 27. 1 27.9 24. 2 26.4 50-64________________________ 8 . 8 1 2 . 0 9. 7 13. 9 10.7 14.6 11.4 14.5 65 and over 3. 1 5.7 4.8 7. 1 5.8 8.5 6 . 2 9.4

Urban: all ages. 1 0 0 . 0 1 0 0 . 0 1 0 0 . 0 1 0 0 . 0 1 0 0 . 0 1 0 0 . 0 1 0 0 . 0 1 0 0 . 0

Under 5__ _ _ _ 8 . 2 8 . 1 7.4 6.7 11.5 1 0 . 1 14.4 10. 7 5-14_________________________ 16. 9 17.7 16.7 14. 5 16. 0 14.0 2 1 . 8 18.5 15-19________________________ 8 . 6 8.7 8.9 8.7 7.0 6.4 7. 1 7.0

20-29________________________ 22.3 17. 9 19. 3 18.0 18.0 16.5 13. 2 12.3

30-49________________________ 32. 4 29.9 33.0 30.4 30.8 29. 2 26.0 27.0

50-64________________________ 8 . 8 12. 3 10.3 14.6 11.3 15.4 11.7 14.8 65 and over.. _ ______ _ 2.7 5.4 4.5 7. 1 5.3 8 . 6 5.8 9.5

Rural nonfarm: All ages_ __ ___ 1 0 0 . 0 1 0 0 . 0 1 0 0 . 0 1 0 0 . 0 1 0 0 . 0 1 0 0 . 0 1 0 0 . 0 1 0 0 . 0

Under 5_ ________ . - 1 0 . 6 10.4 1 0 . 0 9.3 13.6 1 2 . 1 14. 6 1 1 . 8 5-14_________________________ 2 1 . 2 2 0 . 8 2 0 . 1 18. 1 20. 9 18. 1 25.6 2 1 . 2

15-19________________________ 1 0 . 2 8 . 8 1 0 . 0 9. 1 8 . 8 7.4 9.6 7.8 20-29________________________ 2 0 . 0 16.0 19. 1 16.9 16. 2 15.4 1 1 . 8 1 2 . 2

30-49________________________ 25. 0 25.3 25.7 26.6 23. 2 25.8 19. 9 25. 1 50-64________________________ 9. 0 1 1 . 6 9.4 12. 5 9. 9 12. 5 1 0 . 6 12.9 65 and over __ ___ 3.8 6 . 8 5. 6 7.4 7.3 8 . 8 7.7 9. 1

Rural farm: All ages___ _ . . 1 0 0 . 0 1 0 0 . 0 1 0 0 . 0 1 0 0 . 0 1 0 0 . 0 1 0 0 . 0 1 0 0 . 0 1 0 0 . 0

Under 5______ 1 2 . 6 1 0 . 8 1 2 . 8 9.5 15.0 1 0 . 8 14.8 9.2

5-14_________________________ 28. 1 24. 4 25.7 20.9 27. 1 2 1 . 1 29.7 21. 7

15-19________________________ 1 2 . 8 1 1 . 1 1 2 . 0 10.9 1 1 . 0 8.9 1 1 . 8 9. 1

20-29________________________ 15.3 13.9 16.3 15.0 12.3 1 2 . 0 9.2 8.3

30-49________________________ 19.0 2 2 . 8 19. 5 23. 2 19. 5 25.0 17.4 24.8

50-64________________________ 8.9 11.7 8 . 8 13.6 9.3 14.4 1 1 . 0 17.2

65 and over ______ 3.4 5.5 5.0 6.9 5.9 7.8 6.3 9.8

Note.—Because of rounding, sums of individual items may not equal totals.

Source: 1960 C en su s o f P o p u la tio n , U n ited S ta tes S u m m a ry , PC(1)-1D, table 158; 1940 C en su s o f P o p u la tio n , C h aracteristics o f the P o p u la tio n , vol. II, pt. 1,

U n ited S ta tes S u m m a ry , table 7 (U.S. Bureau of the Census).

71

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
T h e proportion of N egro children under 5

in th e tota l pop u lation of th a t age increased m ost

in th e cities from 1930-60; th e d estin ation of

N egro m igrants w ho tend to be yo u n g and of

childbearing age.

T a b l e IA-12.—P e r c e n t D is tr ib u tio n o f the N e g ro P o p u la ­

tio n in E a c h A g e G ro u p , U rb a n a n d R u r a l L o c a tio n ,

C o n te rm in o u s U n ite d S ta te s , D e c e n n ia l Y e a rs , 1 0 3 0 - 6 0

Age 1930 1940 1950 1960

TOTAL UNITED STATES

Under 5__- -------- ---------- 10.7 1 1 . 8 1 1 . 6 13. 5

5-9_____________________ 10.9 1 2 .1 1 1 . 6 12. 9

10-14___________________ 10.4 11.3 1 2 . 1 1 1 . 8

15-19___________________ 1 0 . 8 1 0 . 6 11. 5 11.3

20-24___________________ 1 1 . 1 10.3 1 0 . 8 11.3

25-29___________________ 10.9 10.3 10.3 10.9

30-34___________________ 9.5 9.7 9.6 10. 3

35-39___________________ 9.7 10.3 1 0 . 2 9.8

40-44___________________ 8 . 6 9.3 9.6 9.4

45-49__________________ 9.0 8.4 9.6 9.3

50-54___________________ 8.4 7.6 8 . 6 8 . 8

55-59___________________ 6.7 6 . 8 7.2 8.9

60-64___________________ 6.5 6 . 2 6.4 7.7

65-69___________________ 5.6 7.8 8 . 1 7.9

70-74___________________ 5. 1 6.3 6.5 7.0 75 years and over___ 6 . 2 5.9 6 . 0 6.7

URBAN

Under 5 _ _ _ _ — 7.6 9.3 1 1 . 0 14.2

5-9_____________________ 7.5 9.8 1 0 . 8 13.4

10-14___________________ 6.9 9.2 11.4 1 2 . 0

15-19___________________ 7.4 8.5 1 0 . 6 1 1 . 2

20-24___________________ 8.7 8.5 10.4 11. 7

25-29___________________ 9.7 9.4 1 0 . 6 11.9

30-34___________________ 8 . 6 9.3 1 0 . 2 11.4

35-39___________________ 8 . 6 1 0 .1 1 0 . 8 1 0 . 8

40-44 __________________ 7.5 8.9 1 0 . 0 10.3

45-49___________________ 7.5 7.8 9.9 1 0 . 0

50-54___________________ 6.5 6.7 8 . 6 9.3

55-59___________________ 5.0 5.9 7.0 9.3

60-64___________________ 4.5 5.3 6 . 1 8 . 0

65-69___________________ 4.0 6.3 7.4 7.8

A ge 1930 1940 1950 1960

7 0 - 7 4________________________ 3.6 5 .0 5 .8 6 .8

75 years and o v e r . ________ 4.3 4 .5 5 .4 6 .4

RURAL NONFARM

U nder 5_ . 8 .6 8 .4 8 .9 1 0 .7

5 - 9___________________________ 8.8 8 .7 8 .8 10. 7

1 0 -1 4________________________ 8.5 8 .5 9 .3 1 0 .4

1 5 -1 9________________________ 9.7 8 .5 9 .4 1 0 .7

2 0 - 2 4________________________ 10 .9 8 .9 9 .1 9 .4

2 5 - 2 9________________________ 10 .0 8 .5 7 .7 7 .9

3 0 - 3 4________________________ 8.5 7 .6 7 .0 7 .2

3 5 - 3 9________________________ 8.8 8 .0 7 .4 7 .0

4 0 - 4 4________________________ 8.0 7 .5 7 .3 7 .1

4 5 - 4 9________________________ 8.2 7 .0 7 .5 7 .5

5 0 - 5 4________________________ 7.8 6 .6 7 .2 7 .5

5 5 - 5 9________________________ 6.0 5 .8 6 .2 7 .8

6 0 - 6 4________________________ 5.9 5 .4 5 .8 7 .2

6 5 - 6 9________________________ 5.0 6 .9 7 .8 8 .1

7 0 - 7 4________________________ 5.6 5 .7 6 .2 7 .4

75 years and o v e r___________ 5.4 5 .2 6 .2 7 .3

RURAL FARM

U nder 5_._ ________ 17 .6 19. 1 18. 1 1 6 .4

5 - 9___________________________ 17.7 18.5 17.2 14.9 10-14___________________ 17.2 17. 1 16.8 14.1 15-19___________________ 17.5 16.3 16.4 13.9 20-24___________________ 17.4 16.5 15.5 13.8 25-29___________________ 16.0 15.4 1 2 . 6 1 0 . 1 30-34___________________ 13. 5 13.7 1 1 . 0 8.7 35-39___________________ 13.9 13.7 11.5 7.9 40-44___________________ 12.5 10.3 1 1 . 1 7.8 45-49___________________ 13.4 11.4 1 0 . 8 7.9 50-54___________________ 13.7 10.9 1 0 . 1 7.6 55-59. _________________ 1 1 . 1 9.9 9.1 7.5 60-64___________________ 11.5 9.6 8.5 6 . 8 65-69___________________ 1 0 . 0 1 2 . 2 1 1 . 8 7.6 70-74___________________ 9.0 1 0 . 6 1 0 . 1 6.9 75 years and over________ 1 1 . 1 1 0 . 2 9.9 7.2 Not reported. _ _ _ _ _ 19. 2

Source: I960 C en su s o f P o p u la tio n , U n ited S ta tes S u m m a ry , PC(1)-1D, table 158,1940 C en su s o f P o p u la tio n , C h aracteristics o f the P o p u la tio n , Vol. II,

Pt. 1, U n ited S ta tes S u m m a ry , table 7 (U.S. Bureau of the Census).

72

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
T h e num ber of n on w h ite m igrants lea vin g th e S ou th has accelerated in recen t years, esp ecially to

the W est and N o rth C entral regions. S u b stan tial num bers are m igratin g to the W est from N orthern

S tates.

T a b l e IB -1 .—M ig r a n ts ' R esid en ce , S a m e or N e w R eg io n , b y R e g io n a n d C olor, A n n u a l A ve ra g e s, U n ite d S ta te s , 1 9 5 9 - 6 4 (3 -y e a r m o vin g a ve ra g e ,1 1 9 5 8 - 6 5 )

Migrants

Color and 

year

Total2

Remain­ ing in 

same region

Moved to dif­ ferent region

Total Remain­ ing in 

same region

Moved to dif­ ferent region

Moved to different region

To North­ east: from To North Central from To West from To South from North3 and South West

N orth Cen­ tral and West

South

North­ east and West South North 3

In thousands Percent distribution In thousands

Non white;

1959-60-_- 820 621 198 1 0 0 76 24 45 8 43 6 39 4 54

1960-61-.- 829 608 2 2 1 1 0 0 73 27 54 17 45 6 38 8 53

1961-62.-- 8 6 8 625 243 1 0 0 72 28 58 18 47 8 31 2 1 59

1962-63-__ 915 640 276 1 0 0 70 30 61 2 0 56 1 1 43 26 60

1963-64.-- 972 681 291 1 0 0 70 30 6 8 1 1 56 1 2 48 26 70 White; 1959-60..- 10,174 7, 495 2 , 680 1 0 0 74 26 198 189 337 309 369 453 824

1960-61.-- 10, 343 7,582 2,761 1 0 0 73 27 180 209 350 287 399 497 841

1961-62--- 10, 673 7,698 2, 975 1 0 0 72 28 177 2 0 2 411 321 386 598 879

1962-63.-- 10, 956 7, 939 3,017 1 0 0 72 28 188 214 410 308 391 618 8 8 8

1963-64.-- 11,473 8 , 336 3, 137 1 0 0 73 27 183 255 389 317 403 610 981

1 Figures given are averages of annual reports for three consecutive years; average represents middle year.

Note:—Because of rounding, sums of individual items may not equal

Source: C u rren t P o p u la tio n R e p o rts, P o p u la tio n C haracteristics, “Mobility

of the Population of the United States, April 1958 to 1959,” Series P-20, No.

104, table 10; “. . . March 1959 to 1960,” Series P-20, No. 113, table 13;

“. . . March 1960 to March 1961,” Series P-20, No. 118, table 13; “. . . April

2 April to April, 1958-59 and 1961-62; other years, March to March. 3 Includes Northeast and North Central.

1961 to April 1962,” Series P-20, No. 127, table 9; “. . . March 1962 to March

1963,” Series P-20, No. 134, table 14, “. . . March 1963 to March 1964,”

Series P-20, No. 141, table 14, “. . . March 1964 to March 1965,” Series P-20,

No. 150, table 14 (U.S. Bureau of the Census).

73

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
N o n w h ite n e t ou tm igration from the S ou th totaled 3 m illion 1940-60, and another 235,000 in

1960-63. Since 1960, n on w h ite ou t-m igran ts from the N o rth C entral exceeded in -m igran ts, w hereas

m igration to the N o rth ea st and W est has accelerated.

T a b l e IB-2.— E s tim a te d N e t M ig r a tio n,* b y R e g io n a n d C olor: 1 9 4 0 - 5 0 , 1 9 5 0 - 6 0 , 1 9 6 0 - 6 3 2

[In thousands]

Region

Net migrants Average net migrants per year

1940-50 1950-60 1960-63 1940-50 1950-60 1960-63

Non­ white White Non­ white White Non­ white White Non­ white White Non­ white White Non­ white White

United States___ -160 1,522 -2 5 2,685 138 1,162 -1 6 152 - 3 269 46 387

Northeast _ . 483 -173 542 -206 237 138 48 -1 7 54 - 2 1 79 46 North Central. _ 632 -948 558 -679 -2 3 -957 63 -9 5 56 - 6 8 - 8 -319 S o u th .__ -1,5 97 -538 -1,4 57 52 -235 843 -160 -5 4 -146 5 -7 8 281

W est.. . . 323 3,181 332 3,519 159 1,138 32 318 33 352 53 379

> Includes net migration from abroad.

2 Hawaii and Alaska excluded 1940-50, but included for all other comparisons.

Source: C u rren t P o p u la tio n R e p o rts, P o p u la tio n E stim a te s “Estimates of the Components of Population Change by Color, for States: 1950 to 1960,” Series

P-25, No. 247, tables 2, 3, and 4 (U.S. Bureau of the Census); and “Recent Patterns of Internal Migration,” S ta tistic a l B u lle tin , page 2, Vol. 46, April 1965 (Metropolitan Life Insurance Company).

N egroes born in the W est or the N o rth e a st and N o rth C entral regions are far m ore lik e ly to rem ain

there than those born in the South.

T a b l e IB-3.—R e g io n o f R e s id e n c e in 1 9 6 0 b y R e g io n o f B ir th f o r th e N e g ro a n d W h ite N a tiv e P o p u la tio n , U n ite d S ta te s , 1 9 6 0

Region of birth

Region of residence Northeast North Central South West

Negro White Negro White Negro White Negro White

United States (number in thousands) _ 1, 607 38,172 1 , 806 48, 430 14, 056 43, 240 381 15, 059

Percent. _ 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0

Northeast___ . . . . 92 8 8 2 2 8 2 2 1

North Central 2 4 91 82 1 1 7 3 3

South 5 5 3 5 77 85 4 4

West. 1 4 4 1 1 4 7 92 92

Note.—Because of rounding, sums of individual items may not equal totals.

Source: C en su s o f P o p u la tio n : 1960, S u b ject R e p o rts, S tate o f B irth , PC(2)-2A, tables 19, 20, 23, 24 {U.S. Bureau of the Census).

Digitized for 

74

FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
A b ou t one-half of the N egro resid en ts in th e 10 cities of th e N o rth and W est th a t led in N egro p op ­

u lation in 1960 w ere n o t born there. Of this group, m ost w ere born in th e South.

T a b l e IB-4.— A r e a o f B ir th o f th e N o n w h ite P o p u la tio n in th e 1 0 N o r th e r n 1 a n d W e ste rn C itie s o f G rea test N eg ro C o n c en tra ­

tio n , b y C ity o f R esid en ce , U n ite d S ta te s, 1 9 6 0

City of residence

1960 population (in thousands) Percent distribution

Negro 2

Native 

non­ white 3

Total native 

non­ white 3

Born in State or region of 1960 residence

Born in South

Born in remaining regions or other 

areas 4

New York. . _________ _______________ 1,085 1,047 1 0 0 49 39 1 2 Chicago__________________________________ 813 828 1 0 0 42 44 14 Philadelphia 5___ _ _ . _ ________________ 529 531 1 0 0 53 40 8

Detroit____ ________ _________ ___ 482 483 1 0 0 45 48 8

Washington____ _ _ _ . - ______________ 412 413 1 0 0 e 4 4 43 13 Los Angeles_________ __________ - - 335 393 1 0 0 39 46 16 Cleveland. 251 252 1 0 0 45 48 8

St. Louis__ ____ __ 214 216 1 0 0 52 40 9

Newark__ - . _ . - 137 138 1 0 0 46 42 1 1

Cincinnati- _____ 109 109 1 0 0 52 41 7

1 Washington, D.C. included.

1 Includes small proportion of Negro immigrants from other countries.

This column is shown to illustrate the close conformance In these cities

between Negro and nonwhite population.

3 Includes native born Negroes, Indians, Japanese, Chinese, and Filipinos.

* Includes regions other than present region of residence and South, U.S.

outlying areas, born abroad or at sea, and not reported.

{ County.

6 Proportion born in Washington, D.C.

Source: C en su s o f P o p u la tio n : 1960, D eta ile d C h aracteristics, PC(1) Series, for each State represented tables 96, 98 (U.S. Bureau of the Census).

75

217-817 0 - 6 6 - 43

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
T h e m odal age group am ong w h ite and n on w h ite m igrants b etw een 1955-60 w as 2 0 -2 9 years in

every region.

T a b l e IB-5.— In te r re g io n a l M ig r a n ts 1 9 5 5 - 6 0 , b y A g e a n d C olor, a n d b y R e g io n o f R e s id e n c e in 1 9 5 5

Percent of 1955 residents who moved to another region between 1955-60

Age Northeast North Central South West

Nonwhite White Nonwhite White Nonwhite White Nonwhite White

Total, 5 years and over___ 3. 1 4.3 3.8 5.7 4. 1 5.4 2 . 8 4. 9

5-9 years.. . 3.0 4.5 3.4 6 . 2 3.5 6.3 2.4 5.9 10-19 years . . . 2 . 8 4.4 3.4 5. 6 3.4 4. 9 2 . 0 4.3 20-24 years 7.6 10.9 9.4 1 2 . 7 11.7 1 1 . 8 6.7 9.8 25-29 years. . . . . . . 5.4 8 . 2 7.0 10.4 9. 1 1 2 . 8 7.2 1 2 . 8

30-34 years . _ 4. 1 5.6 5. 1 7.6 5.4 7.4 4.0 7.2

35-44 years.. _ . . . . 2 . 6 3.9 3.3 5.5 3.2 5.0 2 . 1 4.7 45-54 years. . _ . . . 1. 7 2.4 2 . 2 3.4 2 . 0 2.7 1.3 2.4

55-64 years . . . 1.4 2.4 1 . 8 3.0 1 . 6 1.9 1 . 0 1 . 8 65 and o v e r ..____ . 1 . 6 2 . 8 1. 7 3. 2 1 . 1 1 . 6 .9 1.7

Median age in 1960: Population living in specified

area in 1955 . . . . _ 32.3 36.6 31. 1 34.6 27.2 32.7 30.0 34.2 Interregional migrants leaving specified areas,

1955-60________________ 26. 6 27.8 26.3 27. 0 23.7 25.8 26.3 26.9

Source: C en su s o f P o p u la tio n : 1960, D e ta iled C h a racteristics, U n ited S ta tes S u m m a ry , PC(1)-1D, table 238 (U.S. Bureau of the Census).

76

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
A b ou t y2 of the 1955-60 non w h ite m ale m igrants 25 to 29 years old had som e high sch ool ed u cation

and % had som e college training.

Table IB-6 .—E d u c a tio n a l A tta in m e n t o f M a le s , 2 5 - 2 9 y e a r s o ld , b y C olor, f o r the T o ta l P o p u la tio n , a n d f o r 1 9 5 5 - 6 0

I n te r r e g io n a l M ig r a n ts , U n ite d S ta te s a n d S o u th

Educational attainment

Total, males 25-29 years__

No school___________

8 th grade or less______ High school, 1-4 years. College, 1 year or more.

Nonwhite White

Population Interregional migrants Population Interregional migrants

United States South United States From the South United States South United States From the South

Percent distribution

100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100

2

35

2

47 J 23 28 f ‘

1

23 } 11 13

1 17 50 42 55 53 53 49 45 45 14 10 2 2 19 29 27 44 42

Number (in thousands)

Total, males 25-29 years__

No school___________

8 th grade or less______ High school, 1-4 years. College, 1 year or more.

606 297 48 30 4, 733 1, 345 536 197

9 6 1 / 31 1 2 1

2 1 0 138 )

8

{ 801 314 I 57 26

305 124 26 16 2, 519 658 241 8 8 82 28 1 0 6 1, 382 361 238 83

N ote.—Because of rounding, sums of individual items may not equal totals.

Source: C en su s o f P o p u la tio n : 1960, S u b ject R e p o rts, E d u c a tio n a l A tta in m e n t, PC(2)-5B, table 2; C en su s o f P o p u la tio n : 1960, S u bject R e p o r ts, L ife tim e a n d

R ecen t M ig ra tio n , PC(2)-2D, table 8 (U.S. Bureau of the Census).

77

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
A m on g n on w h ite as w ell as w h ite, a larger proportion of th e ed u cated m igrate th an th ose w ith

lim ited schooling, so th a t betw een 1955-60, th e S ou th lo st % of all n on w h ite m en 2 5 -2 9 years old w ho

had som e college training, b u t only 6 p ercen t w ith elem en tary schooling.

T a b l e IB-7.—P r o p o r tio n 1 o f 2 5 - to 2 9 - Y e a r O ld M a le O u t-M ig r a n ts , 1 9 5 5 - 6 0 , b y E d u c a tio n a l A tta in m e n t a n d C o lo r

a n d b y R e g io n a n d the D iv is io n s o f the S o u th

Educational attainment

North­ east North Central

South

West Total South Atlantic East south central West south central

Non­ white W hite Non­ white W hite Non­ white W hite Non­ white W hite Non­ white W hite Non­ white W hite Non­ white W hite

Total _ . ___ . - 6 9 8 11 1 0 15 1 0 2 0 17 2 2 13 2 1 9 15 Elementary, 8 years or

less_____ 4 4 6 8 6 8 5 9 12 14 6 1 2 5 1 2 High school, 1-4 years __ 5 7 7 8 13 14 13 19 2 1 2 1 16 2 0 1 0 15 College, 1 year or more__ 14 16 18 19 2 0 23 2 1 33 33 35 25 29 1 0 17

1 Of 1955 population.

Source: C en su s o f P o p u la tio n , 1960, S u bject R e p o rts, L ife tim e a n d R e ce n t M ig ra tio n , PC(2)-2D, table 8 (U.S. Bureau of the Census).

C lerical and production jobs in in d u stry— occu p ation s w hich N egroes h ave sou gh t— claim ed th e

largest proportion of n on w h ite workers born ou tsid e of their region of residence in 1960.

T a b l e IB -8 .—P e r c e n t o f the N a tiv e E x p e rie n c e d C iv ilia n L a b o r F o rce 1 B o r n in A n o th e r R e g io n , b y O c c u p a tio n G ro u p ,C o lo r ,

a n d S ex , U n ite d S ta te s , 1 9 6 0

Occupation group Male Female

Nonwhite White Nonwhite White

Professional, technical, and kindred workers 27 24 24 2 0 Farmers and farm managers ____ 2 6 2 11

Managers, officials, and proprietors, except farm 31 2 1 28 23 Clerical and kindred workers _ .......................... 36 16 32 17 Sales workers . _____ 25 18 30 17 Craftsmen, foremen, and kindred workers __ __ 33 18 41 17 Operatives and kindred workers _ _ 34 15 43 13 Private household workers. 27 2 0 2 2 19 Service workers, except private household 33 17 30 19 Farm laborers and foremen _ _ _ _ __ 5 13 4 1 1

Laborers, except farm and mine 26 15 30 14

114 years old and over.

Source: C en su s o f P o p u la tio n , 1960, O ccu p a tio n a l C h a racteristics, P C ( i ) 7A , table 8 (U.S. Bureau of the Census).

78

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
N o n w h ites con stitu ted 11 percent of th e labor force from 1957-65, b u t accou n ted for ab ou t 20

p ercen t of the u n em ployed and ab ou t 25 p ercen t of those u n em ployed 6 m on th s or m ore.

T a b l e IIA -1 .— E m p lo y m e n t a n d U n e m p lo y m e n t S ta tu s o f the C iv ilia n L a b o r F orce, b y C olor, 1 9 5 7 - 6 5 (a n n u a l a vera ges)

Employment status 1957 1958 1959 1960 1961 1962 1963 1964 1965

Civilian labor force (thousands): Nonwhite _ _ . _ 7, 306 7, 455 7, 539 7, 844 7, 924 7, 976 8 , 119 8, 292 8 , 448 White___________________ 60, 640 61, 194 61, 855 62, 767 63, 679 63, 878 64, 855 65, 940 67, 187 Nonwhite as a percent of total. _ 1 0. 8 10. 9 10. 9 1 1. 1 1 1. 1 1 1. 1 1 1. 1 1 1. 2 1 1. 2

Employed (thousands): Nonwhite____ 6, 721 6, 517 6 , 730 7, 040 6 , 936 7, 097 7, 234 7, 480 7, 747 White _ _ 58, 290 57, 450 58, 851 59, 640 59, 860 60, 749 61, 574 62, 877 64, 432

Index of employment (1957=100): Nonwhite __ 100. 0 97. 0 100. 1 104. 7 103. 2 105. 6 107. 6 111. 3 115. 3

White______ 100. 0 98. 6 101. 0 102. 3 102. 7 104. 2 105. 6 107. 9 110. 5 Unemployed (thousands): Nonwhite___ 585 938 809 804 988 879 885 812 702

White____ ___ 2, 351 3, 744 3, 004 3, 127 3, 819 3, 129 3, 281 3, 064 2, 754 Nonwhite as a percent of total 19. 9 2 0 . 0 2 1 . 2 20. 5 2 0 . 6 21. 9 2 1 . 2 20. 9 20. 3

Unemployment rate: Nonwhite__ 8. 0 1 2. 6 10. 7 1 0. 2 12. 5 1 1. 0 10. 9 9. 8 8. 3

White___________________ 3. 9 6. 1 4. 9 5. 0 6. 0 4. 9 5. 1 4. 6 4. 1

Ratio of nonwhite to white. _ 2. 05 2. 07 2 . 18 2. 04 2. 08 2. 24 2. 14 2. 13 2. 0 2

Long-term unemployed—Non­ white as a percent of total: Unemployed 15 weeks and 

over 2 2 . 6 2 2 . 0 24. 3 24. 9 22. 5 25. 9 26. 0 22. 9 22. 9

Unemployed 27 weeks and 

over. . _________ _ 24. 1 23. 0 26. 2 26. 0 23. 6 28. 4 28. 2 25. 3 25. 4

Source: U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics,

of 12 monthly surveys.

Data are from regular monthly Current Population Survey. Annual figures are averages

79

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
In 1965 the tota l non w h ite u n em p loym en t rate w as the lo w est sin ce 1957, b u t rem ained ab out

tw ice the w h ite rate, as it has for over a decade. U n em p lo ym en t has dropped m o st sh arp ly for n on w h ite

m en 20 years and over, am ong w hom the rate has been low er than for non w h ite w om en sin ce 1963.

T a b l e IIA-2.— U n e m p lo y m e n t R a te s , b y C olor, S ex , a n d A g e G ro u p , 1 9 5 4 - 6 5 (a n n u a l a vera g es)

Year

Total Males, 20 years and over Females, 20 years and 

over

Both sexes, 14 to 19 years of age

Non- Ratio Non- Ratio Non- Ratio Non- Ratio white W hite nonwhite to white white W hite nonwhite to white white W hite nonwhite to white white W hite nonwhite to white

1954_______ 8 . 8 4. 5 2. 0 9. 0 3. 9 2. 3 7. 4 4. 4 1. 7 13. 8 10. 3 1. 3

1955_______ 8 . 0 3. 6 2. 2 7. 7 3. 0 2 . 6 6 . 8 3. 4 2 . 0 14. 2 9. 2 1. 5

1956_______ 7. 5 3. 3 2. 3 6 . 7 2. 7 2. 5 6 . 8 3. 3 2 . 1 15. 9 8 . 8 1. 8

1957________ 8 . 0 3. 9 2. 1 7. 6 3. 2 2. 4 6 . 4 3. 8 1. 7 17. 8 9. 9 1. 8

1958_______ 12 . 6 6. 1 2 . 1 1 2. 7 5. 5 2. 3 9. 5 5. 6 1. 7 25. 0 13. 0 1. 9

1959_______ 10. 7 4. 9 2 . 2 10. 5 4. 1 2 . 6 8 . 3 4. 7 1. 8 23. 5 11. 9 2 . 0

1960_______ 10. 2 5. 0 2 . 0 9. 6 4. 2 2. 3 8 . 3 4. 6 1. 8 2 2 . 1 12. 4 1. 8

1961_______ 12. 5 6. 0 2 . 1 11. 7 5. 1 2. 3 1 0. 6 5. 7 1. 9 25. 4 13. 8 1. 8

1962_______ 11. 0 4. 9 2 . 2 1 0. 0 4. 0 2. 5 9. 6 4. 7 2 . 0 23. 7 1 2. 0 2 . 0

1963_______ 10. 9 5. 1 2 . 1 9. 2 3. 9 2. 4 9. 4 4. 8 2 . 0 28. 4 14. 0 2 . 0

1964________ 9. 8 4. 6 2 . 1 7. 7 3. 4 2. 3 9. 0 4. 6 2 . 0 26. 2 13. 3 2 . 0

1965_______ 8 . 3 4. 1 2 . 0 6 . 0 2. 9 2 . 1 7. 4 4. 0 1. 9 25. 3 1 2 . 2 2 . 1

Source: U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics.

80

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
T h e increase in total em p loym en t from 1954-65 w as even ly sp lit b etw een m en and w om en, in b oth

w h ite and n on w h ite groups. A m ong teenagers, the increase in em p lo ym en t w en t alm ost en tirely to

w hites. W h ite and n on w h ite ad u lt m ales w ere the on ly groups w hich decreased in the num ber of

unem ployed.

T a b l e IIA-3.—E m p lo y e d a n d U n e m p lo y e d P e r so n s, b y C olor, S ex , a n d A g e G ro u p , 1 9 5 4 - 6 5 (a n n u a l a verages)

[In thousands]

Total Males, 20 years and over

Year Employed Unemployed Employed Unemployed

Non white White Non white White Nonwhite White Nonwhite White

1954_________________ 6 , 335 54, 903 615 2, 615 3, 548 36, 279 350 1, 491

1955_________________ 6 , 495 56, 698 561 2 , 101 3, 657 36, 990 306 1, 154

1956_________________ 6 , 706 58, 274 547 2, 003 3, 775 37, 573 269 1, 042

1957_________________ 6 , 711 58, 298 585 2, 350 3, 753 37, 484 307 1,234

1958_________________ 6 , 517 57, 450 938 3, 744 3, 604 36, 808 526 2, 156

1959_________________ 6 , 730 58, 851 809 3, 004 3, 734 37, 533 437 1, 585

1960_________________ 7, 040 59, 640 804 3, 127 3, 880 37, 663 413 1, 647

1961_________________ 6 , 936 59, 860 988 3, 819 3, 809 37, 533 504 2, 014

1962_________________ 7, 097 60, 749 879 3, 129 3, 897 37, 918 435 1, 581

1963_________________ 7, 234 61, 574 885 3, 281 3, 979 38, 272 402 1, 569

1964_________________ 7, 480 62, 877 812 3, 064 4, 088 38, 798 339 1,379

1965_________________ 7, 747 64, 432 702 2, 754 4, 190 39, 232 267 1, 169

Females, 20 years and over Both sexes, 14 to 19 years of age

1954_________________ 2, 270 14, 855 182 691 517 3, 769 83 433

1955_________________ 2, 313 15, 787 168 559 524 3, 921 87 388

1956_________________ 2 , 387 16, 481 175 554 544 4, 221 103 407

1957_________________ 2, 444 16, 607 167 654 514 4, 207 111 463

1958_________________ 2, 454 16, 589 259 983 459 4, 052 153 605

1959_________________ 2, 527 16, 998 228 836 469 4, 321 144 584

1960_________________ 2 , 618 17, 487 237 843 543 4, 491 154 638

1961_________________ 2 , 610 17, 687 308 1, 060 517 4, 641 176 745

1962_________________ 2 , 6 8 6 18, 006 284 891 514 4, 824 180 657

1963._ ______________ 2, 757 18, 499 285 931 498 4, 803 198 781

1964_________________ 2, 855 19, 048 283 912 537 5, 030 191 773

1965_________________ 2, 979 19, 652 239 817 578 5, 549 196 769

Source: U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics.

81

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
T h e grea test drop in u n em p loym en t rates (1957-65) w as for n on w h ite m en in th e prim e w orking

years (2 0 -4 4 ), b u t th e grea test increase w as for n on w h ite w om en in th e sam e age group. Y e t th e

n on w h ite/w h ite gap in u n em p loym en t rates w as over 2 for m atu re m en in 1965 and under 2 for m atu re

w om en.

T a b l e I I A - 4 .— U n e m p lo y m e n t R a te s , b y C olor, S ex , a n d A g e D e ta il, 1 9 5 7 a n d 1 9 6 5 (a n n u a l a ve ra g e s)

Age and sex

Non white White Ratio of nonwhite to white

1957 1965 1957 1965 1957 1965

Total, 14 years and over___ __ _______ 8 . 0 8 . 3 3. 9 4. 1 2. 05 2 . 0 2 14 to 19 years, both sexes___________ _ _

2 0 years and over:

17. 8 25. 3 9. 9 1 2. 2 1. 82 2. 07

Men__ _ _ _ ____ ----- 7. 5 6 . 0 3. 2 2. 9 2. 34 2. 14 Women _ __ — _ ------- 6 . 3 7. 4 3. 8 4. 0 1. 6 6 1. 85 Men, 14 years and over____ _ __ --------- 8 . 4 7. 6 3. 7 3. 6 2. 27 2 . 1 1 14 to 19 years. ------------------ 17. 5 2 2 . 6 10. 5 1 1. 8 1. 67 1. 92 20 to 24 years. _ _ _ _ _ _ 12. 7 9. 3 7. 1 5. 9 1. 79 1. 58 25 to 34 years.. .............................. 8 . 5 6. 2 2. 7 2 . 6 3. 15 2. 38 35 to 44 y e a rs ._______ _ ------ 6 . 4 5. 1 2. 5 2. 3 2. 56 2 . 2 2 45 to 54 years. 6. 2 5. 1 3. 0 2. 3 2. 07 2 . 2 2 55 to 64 years. _ _ _ ______ ----- 5. 5 5. 4 3. 4 3. 1 1. 62 1. 74 65 years and o v e r_____ ____ — 5. 9 5. 2 3. 2 3. 4 1. 84 1. 53 Women, 14 years and over._ _ _ __ _ __ 7. 4 9. 3 4. 3 5. 0 1. 72 1. 8 6 14 to 19 years. _ __ ___ 18. 9 29. 8 9. 1 1 2. 6 2 . 08 2. 37 20 to 24 years.. _ . . _ _ 1 2. 2 13. 7 5. 1 6 . 3 2. 39 2. 17 25 to 34 years. 8 . 1 8 . 4 4. 7 4. 8 1. 72 1. 75 35 to 44 years.. _ _ _. 4. 7 7. 6 3. 7 4. 1 1. 27 1. 85 45 to 54 years.. _ _ 4. 2 4. 4 3. 0 3. 0 1. 40 1. 47 55 to 64 years. 4. 0 3. 9 3. 0 2. 7 1. 33 1. 44 65 years and over. __ __ __ 4. 3 3. 1 3. 5 2. 7 1. 23 1. 15

Source: U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics. Data are from the regular monthly Current Population Survey.

82

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
E x cep t for teenagers, u n em ploym ent rates for non w h ite m en and w om en w ere low er in 1965 than

at an y tim e in the 1960’s. T h e jobless rate am ong n on w h ite teenagers, 16 -19, how ever, has n o t been

below 20 for boys, nor below 25 for girls since 1958.

T a b l e IIA-5.— U n e m p lo y m e n t R a te s , b y C olor, S ex , a n d A g e D e ta il, 1 9 ^ 8 -6 5 (a n n u a l a vera g es)

Color and Total, 14 14 to 19 years 20 to 24 25 to 34 35 to 44 45 to 54 55 to 64 65

years

sex years and

over

Total 14 and 15 16 and 17 18 and 19

years years years years years and

over

NONWHITE

MALE

1948________ 5. 1 7.6 3.2 8 . 6 9.9 1 0 . 6 4.2 4.5 3.1 3.3 4.0

1949________ 8 . 8 13.9 6 . 1 15. 1 16. 6 14.9 7.8 7.4 7. 1 6.5 6 . 2

1950________ 8.9 13.2 9.7 12.9 16.3 12.4 9.4 7.3 7.0 7.4 7.0

1951________ 4.4 7.9 6 . 1 7.9 9.0 6 . 0 4.8 3.2 3.4 3.9 4.7

1952________ 4.5 7.7 5.5 7.2 9.3 6.7 4.6 3.8 3.6 3.2 4. 1

1953 1_______ 4.4 7.1 5.1 7.6 7.5 7.1 3.7 3. 1 4.3 3.2 2 . 6 1954________ 9.2 11.7 5. 1 13.4 13.5 14.9 9.2 7. 1 8 . 2 6.9 6.9

1955________ 8 . 2 13.2 12.7 14. 1 1 1 . 8 1 1 . 2 8 . 0 7.4 5.8 8.3 6 . 6 1956 2_______ 7.3 13.6 11.7 15.0 13.8 10.9 6.9 6 . 0 5.0 7.4 4.3

1957________ 8.4 17.5 14. 1 16.3 2 0 . 0 12.7 8.5 6.4 6 . 2 5.5 5.9

1958________ 13.7 24.3 13.0 27. 1 26.7 19.5 14.7 11.4 10.3 1 0 . 1 9.0

1959________ 11.5 2 2 . 8 12.7 22.3 27. 2 16.3 12.3 8.9 7.9 8.7 8.4

1960 1_______ 10.7 2 2 . 0 13.3 22.7 25. 1 13. 1 10.7 8 . 2 8.5 9.5 6.3

1961________ 12.9 24.7 14.3 31.0 23.9 15.3 12.9 10.7 1 0 . 2 10.5 9.4

1962 i_______ 1 1 . 0 20.7 15. 2 21.9 2 1 . 8 14.6 10.5 8 . 6 8.3 9.6 11.9

1963________ 1 0 . 6 25.4 16.9 27. 0 27.4 15.5 9.5 8 . 0 7. 1 7.4 1 0 . 1

1964________ 9.1 23.3 19. 1 25.9 23. 1 1 2 . 6 7.7 6 . 2 5.9 8 . 1 8.3

1965________ 7.6 2 2 . 6 20.3 27. 1 2 0 . 2 9.3 6 . 2 5.1 5. 1 5.4 5.2

NONWHITE

FEMALE

1948________ 5.2 10.4 5.9 10.5 1 2 . 6 8.9 6 . 1 3.3 2.4 2.4 1 . 6

1949________ 7.2 14.3 7.3 18.8 15.0 11. 5 7.6 5. 5 3.4 4.8 1 . 6

1950________ 7.8 14.0 13. 0 16.2 13. 1 1 2 . 0 8.4 6 . 1 5.4 4.3 4.3 1951________ 5.4 1 0 . 2 4.4 11.7 14. 1 8 . 0 6 . 5 4.7 2.4 2 . 8 1 . 6 1952________ 4. 8 10.4 4.3 7.9 14. 9 9. 2 5.4 3.3 2 . 8 1. 9 1.5 1953 1_______ 3.7 7. 5 2.4 7.0 8.9 4. 9 4. 2 2 . 8 1.7 1. 5 1 . 6 1954________ 8 . 2 17. 1 1 0 . 6 17.6 2 0 . 8 11.7 9. 6 6.3 5.0 4.0 5. 1 1955________ 7.5 16. 2 5. 9 15. 4 19.7 11.4 9. 1 4. 9 4. 6 4.7 3.4 1956 2_______ 8 . 0 19.6 13. 6 20.7 2 1 . 0 13. 2 7. 9 5.9 4.8 4.5 2.7 1957________ 7.4 18.9 12. 5 18.3 21.3 1 2 . 2 8 . 1 4.7 4. 2 4. 0 4.3 1958________ 1 0 . 8 26. 2 13. 2 25. 4 30.0 18. 9 1 1 . 1 9.2 4. 9 6 . 2 5. 6

1959________ 9. 5 24. 9 11. 9 25.8 29.9 14. 9 9. 7 7.6 6 . 1 5. 0 2.3

1960 1_______ 9. 5 22. 7 1 0 . 6 25.7 24. 5 15.3 9. 1 8 . 6 5.7 4. 3 4. 1

1961________ 11.9 26.6 13.6 31. 1 28. 2 19. 5 1 1 . 1 10. 7 7.4 6.3 6 . 5

1962 i_______ 1 1 . 1 28. 2 17. 9 27.8 31.2 18. 2 11.5 8.9 7. 1 3.6 3.7

1963________ 11.3 33. 1 23.4 40. 1 31.9 18.7 11.7 8 . 2 6 . 1 4.8 3.6

1964________ 1 0 . 8 30.6 23.6 36.5 29. 2 18.3 1 1 . 2 7.8 6 . 1 3.8 2 . 2

1965________

See footnotes a

9.3

t end of tal

29.8

)le.

19.0 37.8 27.8 13.7 8.4 7.6 4.4 3.9 3. 1

83

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
T a b l e 11A-5.— U n e m p lo y m e n t R a tes, b y C olor, S ex , a n d A g e D e ta il, 1 9 4 8 - 6 5 ( a n n u a l a ve ra g e s)—Continued

Color and Total, 14 14 to 19 years 20 to 24 25 to 34 35 to 44 45 to 54 55 to 64 65

years

sex years and

over

Total 14 and 15 16 and 17 18 and 19

years years years years years and

over

WHITE

MALE

1948________ 3. 1 8 . 3 5. 4 9. 4 8 . 5 5. 8 2. 4 1. 9 2 . 2 2 . 7 2. 9

1949________ 5. 2 11. 7 4. 6 12. 9 13. 6 9. 3 4. 5 3. 6 3. 7 4. 8 4. 7

1950________ 4. 5 10. 5 5. 5 1 2. 8 1 1 . 0 7. 3 3. 7 3. 0 3. 5 4. 5 4. 4

1951________ 2. 4 6. 8 4. 2 8 . 9 6. 2 3. 2 1. 8 1. 6 2 . 0 2. 4 3. 2

1952________ 2 . 2 7. 6 5. 1 10. 3 6 . 5 3. 7 1. 6 1. 5 1. 7 2 . 1 2. 5

1953 1_______ 2 . 2 6 . 3 4. 0 7. 9 5. 8 3. 7 1. 6 1. 5 1. 7 2 . 2 2 . 1

1954________ 4. 4 1 1. 0 4, 4 13. 5 11. 9 9. 0 3. 8 3. 2 3. 4 3. 8 3. 8

1955________ 3. 4 9. 6 4. 9 1 1. 8 9. 7 6 . 3 2. 5 2. 4 2 . 8 3. 7 3. 5

1956 2_______ 3. 1 8 . 9 5. 8 10. 5 9. 2 5. 6 2. 5 2 . 0 2. 5 2. 9 3. 1

1957________ 3. 7 10. 5 6 . 8 11. 9 1 1. 2 7. 1 2. 7 2. 5 3. 0 3. 4 3. 2

1958________ 6 . 1 14. 0 7. 9 14. 9 16. 5 11. 7 5. 6 4. 4 4. 8 5. 2 5. 0

1959________ 4. 6 12. 5 7. 2 15. 0 13. 0 7. 5 3. 8 3. 2 3. 7 4. 2 4. 5

1960 1_______ 4. 8 12. 9 8 . 1 14. 6 13. 5 8 . 3 4. 1 3. 3 3. 6 4. 1 4. 0

1961________ 5. 7 14. 1 8 . 0 16. 5 15. 1 1 0. 0 4. 9 4. 0 4. 4 5. 3 5. 2

1962 1_______ 4. 6 12. 3 7. 6 15. 1 12. 7 8 . 0 3. 8 3. 1 3. 5 4. 1 4. 1

1963________ 4. 7 14. 2 7. 9 17. 8 14. 2 7. 8 3. 9 2. 9 3. 3 4. 0 4. 1

1964________ 4. 2 13. 4 7. 7 16. 1 13. 4 7. 4 3. 0 2. 5 2. 9 3. 5 3. 6

1965________ 3. 6 1 1. 8 7. 1 14. 7 11. 4 5. 9 2 . 6 2. 3 2. 3 3. 1 3. 4

WHITE

FEMALE

1948________ 3. 4 6 . 9 7. 1 8. 7 5. 8 3. 6 3. 2 2. 3 2. 5 2 . 8 2 . 0

1949________ 5. 2 10. 7 7. 4 13. 0 1 0. 1 6. 0 4. 9 4. 0 3. 5 3. 8 3. 9

1950________ 4. 9 9. 8 7. 5 12. 9 8 . 7 5. 6 4. 7 3. 7 4. 1 3. 9 2. 9

1951________ 3. 7 7. 1 6 . 6 9. 1 6 . 0 3. 4 3. 7 3. 0 3. 2 3. 5 2. 7

1952________ 2. 9 6 . 6 6 . 1 8. 4 5. 4 3. 2 2 . 8 2. 4 2 . 0 2 . 1 1. 9

1953 1_______ 2 . 6 5. 4 3. 1 7. 1 4. 7 3. 3 2. 3 1. 8 1. 7 1. 8 1. 2

1954________ 4. 9 9. 3 6 . 3 1 1. 1 9. 0 5. 9 5. 0 4. 3 3. 9 3. 9 2. 3

1955________ 3. 9 8 . 2 6 . 7 1 0. 6 7. 0 4. 5 3. 8 3. 4 2. 9 3. 2 1. 8

1956 2_______ 3. 8 8 . 6 7. 1 1 1. 0 7. 5 4. 5 3. 5 3. 0 2. 9 3. 1 1. 9

1957________ 4. 3 9. 1 6 . 8 11. 9 7. 9 5. 1 4. 7 3. 7 3. 0 3. 0 3. 5

1958________ 6 . 2 1 1 . 6 5. 8 15. 6 1 1 . 0 7. 4 6 . 6 5. 6 4. 9 4. 3 3. 5

1959________ 5. 3 1 0 . 6 5. 2 13. 3 1 1 . 1 6. 7 5. 0 4. 7 4. 0 4. 0 3. 4

1960 1_______ 5. 3 11. 9 6 . 3 14. 5 11. 5 7. 2 5. 7 4. 2 4. 0 3. 3 2. 8

1961________ 6 . 5 13. 5 6 . 6 17. 0 13. 6 8 . 4 6. 6 5. 6 4. 8 4. 3 3. 7

1962 2_______ 5. 5 11. 5 5. 6 15. 6 11. 3 7. 7 5. 4 4. 5 3. 7 3. 4 4. 0

1963________ 5. 8 13. 6 5. 9 18. 1 13. 2 7. 4 5. 8 4. 6 3. 9 3. 5 3. 0

1964________ 5. 5 13. 2 4. 1 17. 1 13. 2 7. 1 5. 2 4. 5 3. 6 3. 5 3. 4

1965________ 5. 0 1 2. 6 4. 4 15. 0 13. 4 6 . 3 4. 8 4. 1 3. 0 2 . 7 2. 7

1 Not strictly comparable with prior years due to introduction of data from decennial censuses and the inclusion of Alaska and Hawaii.

2 Data through 1956 have not been adjusted to reflect changes in the definitions of employment and unemployment adopted in January 1957.

Source: U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics. Data are from the regular monthly Current Population Survey.

84

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
T h e proportion o f n on w h ite workers am ong the long-term unem ployed (nearly one in four) has

changed little since 1957, after a sligh t decline in 1964.

T a b l e IIA -6 .—L o n g -te rm U n e m p lo y e d , b y C olor a n d S ex , 1 9 5 7 - 6 5 (a n n u a l avera ges)

Color and sex 1957 1958 1959 1 1960 1961 1 1962 1963 1964 1965

Total: Number (In thousands)____ Percent

Unemployed 15 weeks and over

560 

1 0 0 . 0

1, 452 

1 0 0 . 0

1, 040 

1 0 0 . 0

956 

1 0 0 . 0

1, 532 

1 0 0 . 0

1, 119 

1 0 0 . 0

1, 088 

1 0 0 . 0

973 

1 0 0 . 0

755 

1 0 0 . 0

Nonwhite __ 2 2 . 6 2 2 . 0 24. 3 24. 9 22. 5 25. 9 26. 0 22. 9 22. 9

Male _ _ _ 15. 8 

6. 8

16. 0 

6 . 0

17. 9 

6 . 4

17. 1

7. 8

15. 3 7. 2

16. 7 

9. 2

16. 4 

9. 7

13. 3 

9. 7

13. 0 Female _ _ ________ 9. 9

White _ _ _ _ _ _ 77. 4 78. 0 75. 7 75. 1 77. 5 74. 1 74. 0 77. 1 77. 0

Male _ _ 53. 0 

24. 4

56. 7 

21. 3

53. 4 

22. 4

52. 4 

22. 7 53. 9 

23. 6

50. 7 

23. 4

49. 4 

24. 6

49. 2 

27. 9

47. 9 Female 29. 2

Total:Number (In thousands)

Unemployed 27 weeks and over

239 

1 0 0. 0

667 

1 0 0 . 0

571 

1 0 0 . 0

454 

1 0 0 . 0

804 

1 0 0 . 0

585 

1 0 0 . 0

553 

1 0 0. 0

482 

1 0 0. 0

351 Percent 1 0 0. 0

Nonwhite 24. 1 23. 0 26. 2 26. 0 23. 6 28. 4 28. 2 25. 3 25. 4

Male _. - _ 16. 6 

7. 5

17. 3 

5. 7 20. 3 

5. 9

18. 9 

7. 2

17. 1

6 . 5 19. 3 

9. 1

18. 4 

9. 8

14. 7 

1 0. 6

15. 4 Female __ 1 0. 0

White 75. 9 77. 0 73. 8 74. 0 76. 4 71. 6 71. 8 74. 7 74. 6

Male 53. 9 

2 2 . 0

56. 3 

20. 7

52. 6 

2 1 . 2

53. 1 

20. 9

53. 7 22. 7 50. 4 

2 1 . 2

50. 8 

2 1 . 0

50. 2 24. 5

49. 6 Female _ _ _ ___ 25. 1

1 Not strictly comparable with prior years due to introduction of data from the 1960 decennial census and the inclusion of Alaska and Hawaii.

Note.—Because of rounding, sums of individual items may not equal totals.

Source: U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics. Data are from the regular monthly Current Population Survey.

85

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
T h e percent of non w h ite m en am ong all un em ployed m en declined sligh tly, 1957-65, reflecting a

sharp drop in the u n em p loym en t rate for th e age groups 2 0 -4 4 ; n on w h ite w om en as a percent of all

u n em ployed w om en increased for virtu a lly all age groups.

T a b l e I I A - 7 .— U n e m p lo y e d P e r so n s, b y C olor, S ex , a n d A g e D e ta il, 1 9 5 7 a n d 1 9 6 5 (a n n u a l a vera g es)

[In thousands]

Age and sex

Non white White Nonwhite as a percent of total

1957 1965 1957 1965 1957 1965

Total, 14 years and over--- -------- 585 702 2, 350 2, 754 19. 9 20. 3

14 to 19 years, both sexes___ 11 2 196 462 769 19. 5 20. 3

2 0 years and over:

Men_ _ ------- --------- - 306 267 1, 236 1, 169 19. 8 18. 6

Women____ __ _ _ _ _ 165 239 657 817 2 0 . 1 2 2 . 6

Men, 14 years and o v e r---- -------- _ __ 374 377 1, 519 1, 603 19. 8 19. 0

14 to 19 years. _ . . . . . . . . 67 111 284 434 19. 1 20. 4

20 to 24 years. . . 60 57 223 254 2 1 . 2 18. 3 25 to 34 years. _ ------ -------- . _ 92 67 257 226 26. 4 22. 9

35 to 44 years. _ _ — __ 65 56 239 228 21. 4 19. 7 45 to 54 years. _ _ . . ___ . . . . 52 47 250 206 17. 2 18. 6

55 to 64 years__ 27 31 193 190 12. 3 14. 0 65 years and over__ 10 9 74 67 11. 9 1 1. 8

Women, 14 years and over.. 2 1 1 324 832 1, 152 2 0 . 2 2 2 . 0

14 to 19 years._____ . . ___ 44 85 178 335 19. 8 2 0 . 2

20 to 24 years__ 38 62 109 183 25. 9 25. 3 25 to 34 years. _ _ __ 56 64 168 173 25. 0 27. 0 35 to 44 years. _ 34 64 161 199 17. 4 24. 3 45 to 54 years 23 30 123 152 15. 8 16. 5 55 to 64 years. _ _ 1 1 15 70 8 6 13. 6 14. 9 65 years and over_______ ______ ______ 3 3 26 24 0 ) 0 )

1 Percent not shown where base is less than 50,000.

N ote.—Because of rounding, sums of individual items may not equal totals.

Source: U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics. Data are from the regular monthly Current Population Survey.

86

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
A t 4.3 percent, th e average u n em p loym en t rate in 1965 for ad u lt n on w h ite m arried m en w as th e

low est for an y group am ong n on w h ite m en or w om en. A lth ough it w as tw ice the rate for w h ite m arried

m en, it w as m uch low er than th e rate for other groups of w h ite m ales— the single or the w idow ed,

separated, or divorced.

T a b l e IIA -8 .— U n e m p lo y e d P e r so n s a n d U n e m p lo y m e n t R a te s , b y S e x , C olor, A g e ,a n d M a r ita l S ta tu s , 1 9 6 5 {a n n u a l avera ges)

Sex, age, and marital status

Unemployed persons Unemployment rates

(In tho 

Nonwhite

usands)

White

Nonwhite 

as a percent of totalNonwhite White Ratio of nonwhite to white

Men, 14 years and over __ _______ 377 1,603 19.0 7. 6 3.6 2 . 1 1

Single.. _ . --------- 185 724 20.4 16. 5 9.2 1.79 Married, wife present_____ __ 141 742 16. 0 4.4 2 . 2 2 . 0 0 Other marital status 1 . 51 137 27. 1 8.7 6.7 1.30

Men, 20 years and over. _ 267 1, 168 18.6 6 . 0 2.9 2.07

Single _________ 78 303 20. 5 11.9 6.9 1.72 Married, wife present. _ _ _ _ _ 138 729 15.9 4.3 2 . 1 2. 05 Other marital status 1 _. _ ______ 51 136 27.3 8.7 6.7 1.30

Women, 14 years and over _ _ 323 1,152 21. 9 9.2 5.0 1.84

Single ----------- — ----- 113 409 2 1 . 6 16.0 7.2 2 . 2 2 Married, husband present _ 123 541 18. 5 7.3 4. 1 1.78 Other marital status 1 _________________ 87 2 0 2 30. 1 7.9 4.7 1 . 6 8

Women, 20 years and over.. ___ 240 815 22.7 7.5 4.0 1 . 8 8

Single.. — - _ __ 41 1 21 25.3 8.9 3.6 2. 47 Married, husband present______ _ _ 113 501 18.4 6 . 8 3.9 1.74 Other marital status 1 _ _ 8 6 193 30.8 7.9 4.5 1.76

1 Includes widowed, divorced, or separated.

Source: U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics. Data are from the regular monthly Current Population Survey.

87

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
B y occu p ation , th e ratio of n on w h ite to w h ite u n em p loym en t narrow ed appreciably over the

1955-65 period am ong all w h ite-collar groups excep t sales workers, and for m ost oth er groups also,

excep t those in d om estic, laborer, and farm jobs.

T a b l e IIA-9.— U n e m p lo y m e n t R a tes, b y O c c u p a tio n o f L a s t J o b a n d C olor, 1 9 5 5 a n d 1 9 6 5 (a n n u a l a vera g es)

Occupation

Non white White Ratio of nonwhite to white

1955 1 1965 1955 1 1965 1955 1965

T otal2 _ — _ 7. 9 8.3 3. 6 4. 1 2 . 2 2 . 0

White-collar workers 5. 1 4. 1 1.7 2 . 2 3.0 1. 9 Professional and technical. 2 . 6 2 . 6 1 . 0 1.4 2 . 6 1.9 Managers, officials, and proprietors _ _ 3.3 1. 9 .9 1 . 1 3.7 1.7 Clerical workers. . 8 . 1 5.4 2.4 3. 1 3.4 1.7 Sales workers . . . . . . . 3. 6 7. 0 2. 5 3.2 1.4 2 . 2

Blue-collar workers. _ . . — . . 9.7 7. 9 5. 5 4. 9 1 . 8 1 . 6

Craftsmen and foremen . . . 8 . 8 6 . 0 3. 9 3.4 2.3 1 . 8

Operatives. _____ 8 . 2 7.4 5. 5 5.2 1. 5 1.4 Nonfarm laborers._ _____ _ _ ____ 1 2 . 0 9.7 9.8 7.9 1 . 2 1 . 2

Service workers _ . . . . . _ 7.2 7. 1 4.8 4. 5 1. 5 1 . 6 Private household workers 5. 6 5.9 3.0 2 . 8 1. 9 2 . 1

Other service workers. _ 8.7 7.8 5. 2 4. 8 1.7 1 . 6 Farm workers 4. 4 6 . 5 1. 4 1. 9 3. 1 3. 4 Farmers and farm managers. __ . 6 .7 .4 . 4 1. 5 1 . 8 Farm laborers and foremen__ 6.3 7.5 3.0 4. 0 2 . 1 1. 9

> Except for total, figures are based on an average of January, April, July, 2 Includes persons with no previous work experience, not shown separately,

and October; data have not been adjusted to 1957 definitions of employment Source: U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics. Data are

and unemployment. from the regular monthly Current Population Survey.

E xperien ced non w h ite w orkers had low er u n em p loym en t rates in 1965 than in 1955 in every in d u stry

group excep t agriculture, w hereas the trend varied b y in d u stry am ong w h ite workers. T h e ratio of

non w h ite to w h ite u n em p loym en t declined in every in d u stry group over this period.

T a b l e IIA-10.— U nem ploym ent Rates, by In d u stry of L ast Job an d Color, 1955 and 1965 (ann ual averages)

Industry group

Nonwhite White Ratio of nonwhite to white

1955 1 1965 1955 1 1965 1955 1965

Total2__ 7.9 8.3 3.6 4. 1 2 . 2 2 . 0

Experienced unemployed__ 7.5 6 . 8 3.2 3.4 2.3 2 . 0 Agriculture_____ . 4.8 6.3 1.4 2 . 1 3.4 3.0 Nonagricultural industries. _ . . . . 8 . 0 6 . 8 3.5 3.5 2.3 1.9 Mining, forestry, fisheries__ _ _ 7.7 2.5 7.7 5.3 1 . 0 0.5

Construction. _ _ 16.0 14. 6 7.4 7.3 2 . 2 2 . 0 Manufacturing 7.8 6 . 6 3.8 3.6 2 . 1 1 . 8

Durable goods___ 7.2 5.9 3.6 3.2 2 . 0 1 . 8

Nondurable goods__ 8 . 6 8 . 0 4.0 4.2 2 . 2 1.9

Transportation and public utilities 8 . 2 4.4 3. 1 2.5 2 . 6 1 . 8

Wholesale and retail trade . 9. 1 8.7 3. 1 3.8 2.9 2.3

Service and finance__ 6 . 6 5.7 2.3 2.7 2.9 2 . 1

Public administration. _ 5.5 3.8 1.4 1 . 6 3.9 2. 4

1 Data have not been adjusted to 1957 definitions of employment and Source: U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics. Data

unemployment. are from the regular monthly Current Population Survey.

2 Includes those with no previous work experience, not shown separately.

88

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
T he occupational and industrial pattern of u n ­

em p loym en t w as sim ilar am ong w h ite and n on ­

w h ite experienced workers in 1965. W ith in in ­

dustries, the largest percentage of the un em ployed

were in the services. A m ong occu p ation s, jobless

p roduction workers were the largest group.

T a b l e IIA-11.—P e r c e n t D is tr ib u tio n o f U n e m p lo y e d P e r ­

so n s, b y I n d u s tr y , O c c u p a tio n , a n d C olor, 1 9 6 5 (a n n u a l

a vera ges)

Industry Nonwhite White

Total (in thousands)__ _ _ . 702 2, 754

Percent _ 1 0 0. 0 1 0 0. 0

Experienced wage and salary workers . _ 78. 5 79. 8

Agriculture 6. 0 2. 7

Nonagricultural industries 72. 5 77. 1

Mining, forestry, fisheries ___ . 1 1. 2

Construction 1 0. 1 1 1. 2

Manufacturing 16. 4 24. 2

Durable goods . . 8 . 0 1 2. 0

Nondurable goods 8 . 4 1 2. 2

Transportation and public 

utilities 2 . 8 3. 8

Wholesale and retail trade, . 15. 1 17. 6

Finance, insurance, and real 

estate 1. 1 2. 3

Industry Nonwhite White

Total—Continued Experienced etc.—Continued Nonagricultural industries—Con. Service industries _ _ 25. 1 14. 6

Public administration 2 . 1 2 . 1

Self-employed and unpaid family workers _ _ __________ 1. 9 2. 9 No previous work experience__ 19. 7 17. 2 White-collar workers _____ _ _ 9. 3 25. 0 Professional and technical _ 2 . 0 4. 3 Managers, officials, and proprietors . . . ____ . 6 2. 9 Clerical workers __ 5. 1 12. 3

Sales workers 1. 6 5. 5 Blue-collar workers_____________ 38. 5 43. 5 Craftsmen and foremen 4. 7 11. 3

Operatives _ _ _ 18. 7 23. 3 Nonfarm laborers _ _ _ 15. 1 8 . 9

Service workers____ _ _ _ __ 26. 6 11. 7 Private household workers 8 . 8 1. 3

Other service workers. _ _ 17. 8 10. 4 Farm w orkers.__ ________ _ 5. 8 2 . 6

Farmers and farm managers. . 1 . 3

Farm laborers and foremen . _ 5. 7 2. 3

No previous work experience 19. 8 17. 1

Source: U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics. Data are

from the regular monthly Current Population Survey.

89

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
In 1954-65, em p loym en t of w h ite m en in prim e w orking years (20-54 ) dropped in the 25 -3 4 -y ea rold group (by 727,000), w hereas em p loym en t am ong n on w h ite m ales in all prim e age groups increased.

Sh arp est em p loym en t increases in the period w ere am ong w h ite teenagers and m atu re w om en (w h ite

and n on w h ite) 45 to 54 years old.

T a ble IIA-12.— E m p lo y e d P er so n s, by C olor, S ex , a n d A g e D e ta il, 1 9 4 7 - 6 51 ( a n n u a l a vera ges)

lln thousands]

Color and Total, 14 years and over

14 to 19 years 20 to 24 25 to 34 35 to 44 45 to 54 55 to 64 65 years 

sex and over Total 14 and 15 16 and 17 18 and 19

years years years years years

MALE

1947________ 41, 677 2, 795 559 999 1,237 4, 262 9,881 9, 266 7, 659 5, 499 2, 316

1948________ 42, 428 2,911 543 1 , 006 1, 362 4, 380 1 0 , 068 9, 393 7,761 5, 604 2, 312

1949________ 41,660 2 , 687 549 916 1, 2 2 2 4, 222 9, 918 9, 343 7,691 5,465 2, 335

1950________ 42, 287 2, 787 585 914 1,288 4, 274 10, 092 9,467 7, 804 5, 521 2, 341

1951________ 42, 490 2, 753 584 985 1, 184 3, 797 1 0 , 166 9, 631 8 , 033 5,724 2, 387

1952________ 42, 391 2, 674 555 991 1, 128 3,204 10, 390 9,778 8 , 172 5, 822 2, 351

1953 2_______ 43, 125 2 , 6 8 6 537 981 1, 168 2,922 10, 535 10, 258 8,403 5, 830 2, 492

1954________ 42, 377 2, 550 547 885 1 , 118 2, 752 10, 303 10,123 8 , 366 5, 861 2, 422

1955 43,290 2, 642 532 941 1, 169 2,997 10,476 10, 295 8 , 576 5, 872 2,430

19563_______ 44,148 2 , 802 621 1 , 016 1, 165 3, 266 10, 371 10, 414 8,755 6 , 0 2 0 2, 519

1957________ 43, 990 2, 750 633 987 1, 130 3, 343 1 0 , 2 2 2 10,427 8 , 851 6 , 0 0 2 2, 394

1958________ 43, 042 2, 631 619 948 1, 064 3,293 9, 790 10,291 8,828 5, 954 2, 254

1959________ 44, 089 2 , 821 623 1, 015 1, 183 3, 597 9, 863 10,492 9, 048 6 , 058 2 , 2 1 0

I9602_______ 44, 485 2, 941 581 1, 089 1, 271 3, 754 9, 759 10, 551 9, 182 6 , 106 2, 191

1961________ 44, 318 2, 976 662 989 1, 325 3, 798 9, 591 10,505 9, 194 6 , 156 2, 098

1962 2_______ 44, 892 3, 077 715 990 1,372 3, 898 9, 475 10, 711 9, 333 6 , 260 2, 137

1963________ 45, 330 3, 079 673 1, 073 1, 333 4, 118 9, 431 1 0 , 801 9, 479 6 , 385 2, 039

1964________ 46, 139 3, 253 665 1, 242 1, 345 4,370 9, 531 10, 832 9, 637 6,477 2, 039

1965________ 47, 034 3, 612 694 1, 284 1,634 4, 583 9, 611 10, 837 9, 792 6 , 542 2, 057

FEMALE

1947________ 16, 349 1,921 215 587 1, 119 2 , 606 3, 628 3, 594 2 , 673 1, 490 438

1948________ 16, 950 1, 930 231 611 1, 088 2, 604 3,787 3, 706 2,898 1, 522 503

1949________ 17, 049 1,826 225 560 1, 041 2,481 3, 785 3, 821 2,990 1 , 612 536

1950________ 17,670 1,777 245 531 1 , 0 01 2, 507 3, 876 3, 993 3, 185 1, 766 566

1951________ 18, 515 1, 863 240 601 1, 0 2 2 2, 557 4, 117 4, 159 3, 426 1, 856 537

1952________ 18, 902 1,857 230 647 980 2,405 4, 185 4, 327 3, 561 1, 990 579

1953 2_______ 19, 088 1, 829 230 607 992 2, 340 4, 043 4, 570 3,613 2, 009 684

1954________ 18, 861 1,736 234 548 954 2 , 266 3,970 4, 494 3, 667 2, 079 649

1955________ 19, 904 1,803 241 570 992 2, 314 4, 053 4, 633 4, 024 2, 312 765

1956 3_______ 20, 831 1, 962 288 647 1, 027 2, 318 4, 095 4, 858 4, 266 2, 527 805

1957________ 2 1 , 0 2 1 1,970 307 626 1, 037 2, 295 4, 031 4, 921 4,469 2, 550 784

1958________ 20, 924 1, 881 311 571 999 2, 277 3,885 4,866 4, 620 2, 604 791

1959________ 21, 492 1,968 328 655 985 2, 273 3, 846 4, 961 4, 867 2,764 812

1960 2_______ 22, 196 2 , 091 322 680 1,089 2, 366 3, 871 5, 046 5, 055 2,884 882

1961________ 22, 478 2 , 181 388 632 1, 161 2, 433 3,838 5, 047 5, 124 2,964 889

1962 2_______ 22,954 2 , 262 429 617 1, 216 2, 548 3,836 5, 190 5, 158 3,086 875

1963________ 23,479 2,223 374 678 1, 171 2,697 3, 8 8 8 5,313 5, 272 3,211 877

1964________ 24,218 2, 316 387 771 1, 158 2,934 3,918 5, 335 5,457 3, 326 934

1965________ 25, 145 2, 515 397 790 1, 328 3, 119 4, 093 5,457 5, 528 3, 486 948

NONWHITE

MALE

1954________ 3, 8 8 6 338 75 1 1 0 153 336 977 916 723 421 174

1955________ 4,001 342 69 116 157 372 998 923 765 429 171

1956 3_______ 4, 112 343 6 8 119 156 401 1, 015 942 786 448 177

1957________ 4, 080 321 67 113 140 413 996 947 784 460 160

1958________ 3,891 289 60 97 132 397 929 905 767 454 151

1959________ See footnotes 4, 041 it end of ta 307 ble. 69 101 137 445 951 932 787 470 150

90

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Table IIA-12.—Employed Persons, by Color, Sex, and Age Detail, 1947-651 (annual averages)— Continued

[In thousands]

Color and Total, 14 to 19 years 20 to 24 25 to 34 35 to 44 45 to 54 55 to 64 65 years

sex 14 years and over Total 14 and 15 16 and 17 18 and 19

years years years years years and over

NONWHITE

MALE--Con.

1960 2_______ 4, 220 340 72 116 152 490 982 963 809 487 148

1961________ 4, 133 324 6 6 98 160 487 961 938 800 485 137

1962 2_______ 4, 220 323 60 106 157 472 961 993 821 510 140

1963________ 4, 293 314 64 101 149 471 968 1, 019 828 541 151

1964________ 4, 429 341 70 114 158 514 993 1, 032 850 533 167

1965________ 4, 568 378 72 126 181 558 1,013 1, 043 869 543 165

NONWHITE

FEMALE

1954________ 2, 448 179 42 56 81 288 616 641 452 217 56

1955________ 2, 495 181 32 55 94 272 642 640 477 224 58

1956 3_______ 2,588 2 0 1 38 65 98 258 660 651 494 254 70

1957________ 2, 641 189 35 58 96 273 638 685 527 263 67

1958________ 2, 624 170 33 53 84 265 618 681 568 257 67

1959________ 2, 689 162 37 50 75 288 614 691 577 289 67

1960 2_______ 2 , 821 2 0 2 42 55 105 298 627 705 608 310 70

1961________ 2, 803 194 38 51 105 284 633 708 613 300 72

1962 2_______ 2, 878 191 34 53 104 298 647 736 604 324 78

1963________ 2, 941 183 30 49 104 307 661 754 617 337 81

1964________ 3, 052 196 28 53 116 346 662 754 649 355 90

1965________ 3, 179 2 0 0 32 57 111 392 698 779 649 369 93

WHITE MALE

1954________ 38, 491 2 , 2 1 1 473 774 964 2 , 417 9, 325 9, 207 7, 643 5, 441 2, 248

1955________ 39,289 2, 299 463 824 1 , 0 1 2 2, 625 9, 478 9,372 7, 812 5, 443 2 , 260

1956 3_______ 40, 036 2, 459 552 898 1, 009 2, 865 9,355 9, 472 7, 970 5, 572 2, 342

1957________ 39, 909 2, 430 566 874 990 2,930 9, 226 9,480 8 , 067 5, 542 2, 234

1958________ 39,150 2,342 558 852 932 2,896 8 , 861 9, 386 8 , 061 5, 501 2 , 103

1959________ 40,047 2, 515 554 915 1, 046 3, 153 8 , 911 9, 560 8 , 261 5, 588 2 , 060

1960 2_______ 40, 265 2 , 602 510 973 1, 119 3, 264 8,777 9, 589 8 , 372 5, 618 2, 043

1961________ 40, 185 2, 652 597 891 1, 164 3, 311 8 , 630 9, 566 8 , 394 5, 670 1, 961

1962 2_______ 40, 672 2, 754 656 883 1, 215 3,426 8 , 514 9, 718 8 , 512 5, 749 1, 998

1963________ 41, 037 2, 765 609 972 1, 184 3, 646 8,463 9, 782 8 , 650 5, 844 1, 887

1964________ 41, 710 2, 911 596 1, 128 1 , 188 3, 856 8 , 538 9, 800 8 , 787 5, 945 1, 872

1965________ 42, 466 3, 234 622 1, 159 1, 453 4, 025 8 , 598 9, 795 8 , 924 5, 998 1, 892

WHITE FEMALE

1954________ 16,412 1, 558 192 492 874 1,977 3, 354 3,853 3, 215 1,862 593

1955________ 17,409 1, 622 209 515 898 2, 042 3, 411 3, 992 3, 547 2, 089 707

1956 3_______ 18,243 1, 760 250 582 928 2 , 060 3, 435 4, 208 3, 772 2, 272 734

1957________ 18,381 1,781 272 568 941 2 , 0 2 2 3, 393 4, 236 3, 942 2, 287 717

1958________ 18, 300 1,711 278 518 915 2 , 0 1 2 3, 267 4, 185 4, 052 2, 348 725

1959________ 18, 804 1,806 292 605 909 1,985 3, 233 4, 270 4, 291 2, 475 745

1960 2_______ 19,376 1, 890 281 625 984 2, 067 3, 244 4, 341 4,448 2, 574 812

1961________ 19,675 1,988 351 581 1, 056 2, 149 3, 205 4, 339 4, 512 2, 665 817

1962 2_______ 20, 077 2, 071 395 564 1, 1 1 2 2, 250 3, 189 4, 455 4, 554 2, 762 797

1963________ 20, 538 2, 038 344 628 1, 066 2,390 3, 226 4, 559 4, 654 2,874 796

1964________ 21, 167 2, 119 359 718 1, 042 2, 588 3, 256 4, 580 4, 809 2,971 845

1965________ 21, 966 2, 315 365 733 1, 217 2, 727 3, 394 4, 678 4, 880 3, 118 856

1 Absolute numbers by color are not available prior to 1954. * Data through 1956 have not been adjusted to reflect changes in the defini2 Not strictly comparable with prior years, due to the introduction of data tions of employment and unemployment adopted in January 1957.

from decennial censuses and the inclusion of Alaska and Hawaii. Source: U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics. Data

are from the regular monthly Current Population Survey.

217-817 0 — 66------- 7 91

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
N o n w h ite em p loym en t increased rela tiv ely m ore than w h ite em p loym en t betw een 1957 and 1965,

reflecting m ain ly em p loym en t grow th am ong n on w h ite adults. E m p lo ym en t am ong w h ite teenagers

increased rela tively m uch m ore than non w h ite teenage em p loym en t in th a t period.

T a b l e IIA-13.—E m p lo y e d P e r so n s, b y C olor, S ex , a n d A g e D e ta il, a n d P e r c e n t C h an ge, 1 9 5 7 a n d 1 9 6 5 (a n n u a l a vera ges)

[In thousands]

Age and sex

Nonwhite White

1957 1965 Percent change 1957 1965 Percent change

Total, 14 vears and over 6 , 721 7,747 15. 3 58, 290 64, 432 10. 5

14 to 19 years, both sexes__ 509 578 13. 6 4, 211 5, 549 31. 8

2 0 years and over:

Men 3, 760 4,190 11. 4 37, 479 39, 232 4. 8

Women 2,452 2, 979 21. 5 16, 600 19, 652 18. 4

Men, 14 years and over__ 4, 080 4, 568 1 2 . 0 39, 909 42,466 6 . 4

14 to 19 years. 321 378 17. 8 2, 430 3,234 33. 1 20 to 24 years 413 558 35. 1 2, 930 4, 025 37. 4 25 to 34 years. 996 1,013 1. 7 9, 226 8 , 598 - 6 . 8

35 to 44 vears 947 1, 043 1 0 . 1 9,480 9, 795 3. 3 45 to 54 years 784 869 1 0 . 8 8 , 067 8 , 924 1 0 . 6

55 to 64 vears 460 543 18. 0 5, 542 5, 998 8 . 2

65 vears and over 160 165 3. 1 2,234 1, 892 -15. 3

Women, 14 vears and over 2, 641 3,179 20. 4 18, 381 21, 966 19. 5

14 to 19 years 189 2 0 0 5. 8 1, 781 2, 315 30. 0

20 to 24 vears 273 392 43. 6 2 , 0 2 2 2 , 727 34. 9 25 to 34 years 638 698 9. 4 3, 393 3,394 0 . 0

35 to 44 vears 685 779 13. 7 4, 236 4, 678 10. 4 45 to 54 vears 527 649 23. 1 3, 942 4, 880 23. 8

55 to 64 vears 263 369 40. 3 2,287 3, 118 36. 3 65 years and over 67 93 38. 8 717 856 19. 4

Note.—Because of rounding, sums of individual items may not equal totals.

Source: U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics. Data are from the regular monthly Current Population Survey.

92

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
T h e n on w h ite are m u ch m ore lik ely to be w orking p art tim e in v olu n ta rily than w h ite workers, and

the proportion of n on w h ites on in v olu n ta ry p art-tim e work increased as a proportion of all w orkers so

em p loyed b etw een 1957 and 1965. H ow ever, the likelih ood of being em p loyed part tim e for econom ic

reason s declined m ore for n on w h ite than w h ite w orkers.

T a b l e IIA-14.—P e r so n s E m p lo y e d in N o n a g r {c u ltu r a l I n d u s tr ie s , b y C olor a n d F u ll- or P a r t- T im e S ta tu s , 1 9 5 7 a n d 1 9 6 5

( a n n u a l a verages)

Full- or part-time status

Percent d 

Nonwhite

istribution

White

Nonwhite as a percent of total in each group

1957 1965 1957 1965 1957 1965

Total employed: Number (in thousands) _ _______ 5, 755 6 , 735 53,034 57, 492

Percent 1 0 0 . 0 1 0 0 . 0 1 0 0 . 0 1 0 0 . 0 9. 8 10. 5

Full-time schedules. _ _ _ _ 79. 4 80. 9 87.7 85.7 8.9 1 0 . 0 Voluntary part time 10. 9 11.4 9. 1 11.9 11.5 1 0 . 1

Part time for economic reasons 1____ 9.7 7.7 3. 2 2. 5 24. 5 27.0

Usually work full time 3.7 2.4 1. 9 1.3 17. 3 18.3 Usually work part time ._ 6 . 0 5. 3 1.3 1 . 2 33. 1 34. 5

1 Mainly slack work, job turnover, and inability to find full-time work. Source: U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics. Data are

. T _ , . ... .... . . , . . ., from the regular monthly Current Population Survey. Note.—Employed persons with a job but not at work during the survey

week have been distributed proportionately.

Note.—Because of rounding, sums of individual items may not equal

totals.

93

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
V olu n tary p art-tim e em p loym en t rose rela tively m ore than full-tim e em p loym en t betw een 1957

and 1965, b u t the color-sex distribution in b oth series changed little during the period.

T a b l e I I A - 1 5 .— P e r s o n s E m p lo y e d in N o n a g r ic u ltu r a l I n d u s tr ie s on F u ll- T im e S c h e d u le s or V o lu n ta r y P a r t T im e , b y

C o lo r a n d S ex , 1 9 5 7 - 6 5 (a n n u a l a ve ra g e s)

[Percent distribution]

Color and sex On full-time schedules 1

1957 1958 1959 I9602 1961 1962 3 1963 1964 1965

Total:Number (in thousands) 48, 617 47, 077 48, 865 49, 542 49, 427 50, 619 51, 439 52, 872 54, 692

Percent - - - - 100. 0 100. 0 100. 0 100. 0 100. 0 100. 0 100. 0 100. 0 100. 0

Nonwhite - — — 9. 0 8. 8 8 . 8 9. 2 ,9. 1 9. 2 9. 4 9. 7 9. 9

Male_ 5. 9 5. 6 5. 7 5. 9 5. 8 5. 9 6 . 0 6 . 2 6 . 3

Female __ 3. 1 3. 2 3. 1 3. 3 3. 3 3. 3 3. 4 3. 5 3. 6

White_______________________ 91. 0 91. 2 91. 2 90. 8 90. 9 90. 8 90. 6 90. 3 90. 1

Male 64. 4 64. 2 64. 3 63. 8 63. 8 63. 7 63. 6 63. 2 62. 6

Female___ _ _ _ 26. 7 27. 0 26. 8 27. 0 27. 1 27. 1 27. 0 27. 2 27. 4

On voluntary part-time schedules 4

Total:Number (in thousands). 5, 181 5, 215 5, 569 5, 815 6 , 148 6 , 597 6 , 808 7, 263 7, 607

Percent 100. 0 100. 0 100. 0 100. 0 100. 0 100. 0 100. 0 100. 0 100. 0

Nonwhite 11. 5 10. 7 10. 5 10. 5 9. 4 9. 9 10. 5 10. 5 1 0 . 1

Male 2. 7 2 . 6 2. 7 2. 7 2 . 2 2. 3 2 . 8 2. 9 2. 9

Female. 8. 8 8. 1 7. 9 7. 7 7. 2 7. 6 7. 7 7. 6 7. 2

White_______________________ 8 8 . 5 89. 3 89. 5 89. 5 90. 6 90. 1 89. 5 89. 5 89. 9

M ale.. _ . . 31. 8 32. 1 32. 3 31. 2 31. 2 31. 8 31. 5 31. 8 32. 1

Female___ . . ._ ___ 56. 7 57. 2 57. 2 58. 3 59. 3 58. 3 58. 0 57. 6 57. 8

1 Includes those who worked 35 hours or more during the survey week and

those who usually work full time but worked part time because of illness,

bad weather, holidays, personal business, or other temporary noneconomic

reasons.

2 Not strictly comparable with prior years due to the inclusion of Alaska

and Hawaii.

3 Not strictly comparable with prior years due to the introduction of data

from the 1960 decennial census.

4 Those who wanted part-time work only.

Note.—Because of rounding, sums of individual items may not equal

totals.

Source: U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics. Data

are from the regular monthly Current Population Survey.

94

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
T h e d istrib u tion of n on w h ite and w h ite nonfarm w orkers em p loyed for econom ic reasons on p arttim e work changed little b etw een 1957 and 1965. In 1965, n on w h ite p art-tim e workers were alm ost onefifth of those (w hite and nonw hite) w ho u su ally hold fu ll-tim e jobs, and th ey were ab ou t one-third of all

p art-tim e workers w ho w an ted fu ll-tim e work.

T a b l e I I A - 1 6 .— P e r so n s E m p lo y e d in N o n a g r {c u ltu r a l I n d u s tr ie s on P a r t T im e fo r E c o n o m ic R e a so n s, b y U s u a l F u ll- T im e

or P a r t- T im e S ta tu s , a n d b y C olor a n d S ex , 1 9 5 7 - 6 5 (a n n u a l a verages)

[Percent distribution]

Color and sex Usually work full time 1

1957 1958 1959 I9602 1961 1962 3 1963 1964 1965

Total:Number (in thousands) 

Percent.

Nonwhite

Male _ - _ Female---------------- --------

White_______________________

Male _ - Female

Total:Number (in thousands).

Percent

Nonwhite

Male Female

White_______________________

Male. Female.

1, 183 1, 638 1, 032 1, 243 1,297 1, 049 1, 069 986 897

100. 0 100. 0 100. 0 100. 0 100. 0 100. 0 100. 0 100. 0 100. 0

17. 3 15. 6 17. 7 16. 8 15. 2 15. 9 16. 4 17. 8 18. 3

1 1. 2 

6 . 1

1 0. 6 

5. 0

1 1. 6 

6. 0

11. 7

5. 2

1 0. 2 

5. 0

10. 7 

5. 2

1 1. 0

5. 3

1 1. 2 

6. 6

11. 5 

6. 8

82. 7 84. 4 82. 3 83. 2 84. 8 84. 1 83. 6 82. 2 81. 7

53. 9 

28. 8

58. 1 

26. 3

54. 1 

28. 2

56. 3 

26. 9

56. 0 

28. 8

54. 1 

30. 0

52. 0 

31. 7 49. 8 32. 4 48. 7 33. 0

Usually work part time 4

986 1, 315 1, 304 1, 317 1, 516 1, 287 1, 219 1, 151 1, 031

100. 0 100. 0 100. 0 100. 0 100. 0 100. 0 100. 0 100. 0 100. 0

33. 2 31. 6 33. 6 32. 5 31. 7 34. 8 33. 8 34. 7 34. 4

13. 1 

2 0 . 1

13. 0 

18. 6

13. 7 

19. 9

12. 5 

2 0 . 0

13. 3 

18. 5

14. 5 

20. 3

14. 0 

19. 9

15. 0 

19. 7

1 2. 8 

2 1 . 6

6 6 . 8 6 8 . 4 6 6 . 4 67. 5 6 8 . 3 65. 2 6 6 . 2 65. 3 65. 6

37. 0 

29. 8

37. 7 

30. 7

35. 4 

31. 0

35. 4 

32. 1

37. 4 

30. 9

34. 3 

30. 9

34. 4 

31. 8

33. 0 

32. 3

32. 3

33. 3

1 Includes those who worked 35 hours or more during the survey week and

those who usually work full time but worked part time because of illness,

bad weather, holidays, personal business, or other temporary noneconomic

reasons.

2 Not strictly comparable with prior years due to the inclusion of Alaska

and Hawaii.

3 Not strictly comparable with prior years due to the introduction of data

from the 1960 decennial census.

4 Those who wanted part-time work only.

Note.—Because of rounding, sums of individual items may not equal totals.

Source: U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics. Data are

from the regular monthly Current Population Survey.

95

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
T h e largest gains in b oth th e w h ite and n on w liite labor force betw een 1947 and 1965 occurred am ong

w om en aged 3 5 -6 4 .

T a bl e IIA-17.— C iv ilia n L a b o r F orce, b y S ex , C olor, a n d A g e D e ta il, 1 9 4 7 - 6 5 1 ( a n n u a l a verages)

[In thousands]

Sex and color

Total, 14

years and

over

14 to 19 years 20 to 24 

years

25 to 34 

years

35 to 44 

years

45 to 54 

years

55 to 64 

years

65

years and Total 14 and over 15 16 and 17 18 and 19

MALE

1947________ 43, 272 3, 074 586 1, 106 1,382 4, 629 10, 207 9, 492 7, 847 5, 647 2, 376

1948________ 43, 858 3, 173 573 1, 109 1, 491 4, 674 10, 327 9, 596 7, 942 5, 764 2, 384 1949________ 44,075 3, 054 577 1, 056 1,421 4, 681 10, 410 9, 722 8 , 008 5, 748 2, 454

1950________ 44, 442 3, 127 623 1, 047 1,457 4, 632 10, 527 9, 793 8 , 117 5, 794 2, 454 1951________ 43, 612 2, 957 611 1, 080 1, 266 3, 935 10, 375 9, 798 8 , 204 5, 874 2, 469 1952________ 43, 454 2, 896 585 1, 101 1, 2 1 0 3, 338 10, 585 9, 945 8 , 326 5, 950 2,415 1953 2_______ 44,194 2 , 880 561 1, 070 1, 249 3, 054 10, 737 10,436 8 , 570 5, 974 2, 544 1954________ 44, 537 2 , 8 6 8 572 1, 024 1, 273 3, 052 10, 772 10, 513 8 , 703 6 , 105 2, 525

1955________ 45, 041 2, 935 566 1, 070 1, 299 3, 221 10, 805 10, 595 8 , 839 6 , 1 2 2 2, 526 1956________ 45, 756 3, 098 665 1, 142 1, 292 3,485 10, 685 10, 663 9, 002 6 , 2 2 0 2, 603 1957________ 45, 882 3, 102 685 1, 127 1, 290 3, 626 10, 571 10, 731 9, 153 6 , 2 2 2 2, 478 1958________ 46, 197 3, 104 676 1, 133 1, 295 3,771 10, 475 10, 843 9, 320 6 , 304 2, 379

1959________ 46,561 3, 273 676 1, 207 1,391 3, 940 10, 346 10, 899 9, 437 6 , 345 2, 322

1960 2_______ 47, 025 3, 423 637 1, 290 1, 496 4, 123 10, 252 10,967 9, 574 6 , 400 2,287

1961________ 47, 378 3, 518 725 1, 2 1 0 1, 583 4, 255 10, 176 1 1 , 0 1 2 9, 667 5, 530 2 , 2 2 0

1962 2_______ 47, 380 3, 549 780 1, 177 1, 592 4, 279 9, 921 11, 115 9, 715 6 , 560 2, 241

1963________ 47, 867 3, 645 738 1, 321 1, 586 4, 514 9, 875 11, 187 9, 836 6 , 674 2, 135

1964________ 48,410 3, 806 731 1, 498 1, 576 4, 754 9, 875 11, 155 9, 956 6 , 740 2, 123

1965________ 49, 014 4, 157 759 1, 531 1, 8 6 6 4, 894 9, 902 1 1 , 121 10, 045 6,763 2, 131

FEMALE

1947________ 16, 896 2 , 067 232 643 1, 192 2, 716 3, 740 3, 676 2, 731 1, 522 445

1948________ 17, 583 2, 083 248 671 1, 164 2, 719 3, 932 3, 800 2, 972 1, 565 514

1949________ 18, 030 2, 053 242 648 1, 163 2, 659 3, 997 3, 989 3, 099 1,678 556

1950________ 18, 657 1, 980 268 611 1, 101 2 , 675 4, 092 4, 161 3, 327 1, 839 584

1951________ 19,272 2, 013 256 662 1, 095 2, 659 4, 292 4, 301 3, 534 1, 923 551 1952________ 19, 513 1, 996 244 706 1, 046 2, 502 4, 320 4, 438 3, 636 2, 032 590

1953 2_______ 19, 621 1, 945 239 656 1, 050 2, 428 4, 162 4, 662 3, 680 2, 048 693 1954________ 19, 931 1, 933 253 620 1, 062 2, 424 4, 212 4, 709 3, 822 2, 164 6 6 6

1955________ 2 0 , 806 1, 982 258 641 1, 083 2, 445 4, 251 4, 805 4, 154 2, 391 780 1956________ 21, 774 2, 176 313 736 1, 127 2, 455 4, 276 5, 031 4, 405 2 , 610 821

1957________ 22,064 2, 192 332 716 1, 144 2, 442 4, 255 5, 116 4, 615 2,631 813

1958________ 22, 451 2, 165 333 685 1, 147 2, 500 4, 193 5, 185 4, 859 2, 727 822

1959________ 22,833 2, 244 349 765 1, 131 2,473 4, 089 5, 227 5, 081 2, 883 836

1960 2_______ 23,587 2, 402 347 805 1, 250 2, 580 4, 131 5, 303 5, 278 2,986 907

1961________ 24,225 2, 560 419 774 1, 368 2, 697 4, 143 5, 389 5, 403 3, 105 926

1962 2_______ 24, 474 2, 607 460 742 1, 405 2 , 802 4, 103 5, 474 5, 381 3, 198 911

1963________ 25, 109 2, 636 405 850 1, 381 2, 959 4, 174 5, 600 5, 503 3, 332 905

1964________ 25, 823 2, 725 411 950 1, 364 3, 210 4, 180 5, 614 5, 680 3, 447 966

1965________ 26, 621 2, 934 421 954 1, 559 3,364 4, 329 5, 720 5, 712 3, 587 976

NONWHITE

MALE

1954________ 4, 282 384 79 127 178 396 1, 075 997 790 451 187

1955________ 4, 358 392 79 135 178 419 1, 085 998 813 468 183

1956________ 4, 436 398 77 140 181 450 1, 090 1, 0 0 2 827 484 185

1957________ 4,454 388 78 135 175 473 1, 088 1, 0 1 2 836 487 170

1958________ 4, 511 382 69 133 180 493 1, 089 1, 0 21 855 505 166

1959________ 4, 569 397 79 130 188 532 1, 085 1, 023 849 512 163

See footnotes at end of table.

96

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Table IIA -17.— Civilian Labor Force, by Sex, Color, and Age Detail, 1947-651 (annual averages)— Continued

Sex and T otal,14

14 to 19 years

20 to 24 25 to 34 35 to 44 45 to 54 55 to 64 65

years color years and

over

T o ta l 14 and

15

16 and

17

18 and

19

years years years years years and

over

NONWHITE

MALE

1960 2_________ 4, 728 436 83 150 203 564 1, 099 1, 049 884 538 158

1961__________ 4, 743 429 77 142 210 575 1, 103 1, 050 891 542 151

1962 2_________ 4, 739 408 71 136 201 553 1, 074 1, 087 895 564 159

1963__________ 4, 802 421 77 138 206 558 1, 070 1, 109 891 584 168

1964__________ 4, 871 445 86 154 205 588 1, 074 1, 101 903 580 181

1965__________ 4, 945 489 90 172 226 614 1, 079 1, 098 916 575 173

NONWHITE

FEMALE

1954__________ 2, 668 216 47 68 101 326 680 684 476 226 59

1955__________ 2, 697 216 34 65 117 307 706 673 499 235 60

1956__________ 2,8 1 2 250 44 82 124 297 717 692 519 266 72

1957__________ 2, 852 233 40 71 122 311 694 719 550 274 70

1958__________ 2,9 4 3 229 38 71 120 328 695 750 597 274 72

1959__________ 2, 970 215 42 66 107 338 680 748 614 304 69

1960 2_________ 3, 116 260 47 74 139 352 690 771 645 324 73

1961__________ 3, 180 264 44 74 146 353 712 793 662 320 77

1962 2_________ 3, 237 266 42 73 151 364 730 809 650 336 82

1963__________ 3,3 1 8 274 39 82 153 377 749 821 656 354 84

1964__________ 3,4 2 1 283 37 83 164 424 744 818 690 370 92

1965__________ 3, 503 285 39 92 154 454 761 844 680 383 96

WHITE MALE

1954__________ 40, 255 2, 484 495 895 1, 094 2, 656 9, 695 9, 516 7, 914 5, 654 2 ,3 3 8

1955__________ 40, 683 2, 542 487 934 1, 121 2, 802 9, 720 9, 598 8, 027 5, 653 2, 342

1956__________ 41 ,3 2 0 2, 700 586 1, 003 1, 111 3, 034 9, 594 9, 662 8, 175 5, 736 2, 417

1957__________ 41, 428 2 ,7 1 4 607 992 1, 115 3, 153 9, 483 9, 719 8 ,3 1 7 5, 735 2 ,3 0 8

1958__________ 41, 686 2, 723 606 1, 001 1, 116 3 ,2 7 8 9, 386 9, 822 8, 465 5, 800 2 ,2 1 3

1959__________ 41, 993 2, 875 596 1, 077 1, 202 3, 408 9, 261 9, 876 8, 581 5, 833 2, 158

1960 2_________ 42, 297 2, 988 555 1, 140 1, 293 3, 559 9, 153 9, 919 8, 689 5, 861 2, 129

1961__________ 42, 635 3, 088 649 1, 067 1, 372 3, 681 9, 072 9, 961 8, 776 5, 988 2, 068

1962 2_________ 42, 641 3, 142 710 1, 041 1 ,3 9 1 3, 726 8, 846 10, 029 8, 820 5, 995 2, 082

1963__________ 43, 065 3, 224 661 1, 183 1 ,3 8 0 3, 955 8, 805 10, 079 8, 944 6, 090 1, 967

1964__________ 43, 539 3, 361 646 1, 345 1, 371 4, 166 8, 800 10, 055 9, 053 6, 160 1, 943

1965__________ 44, 069 3, 668 669 1, 359 1, 639 4, 279 8, 823 10, 023 9, 129 6, 188 1, 958

WHITE

FEMALE

1954__________ 17, 262 1, 717 205 552 960 2, 098 3, 532 4, 025 3, 346 1, 937 607

1955__________ 18, 110 1, 766 224 576 966 2, 137 3, 546 4, 131 3, 654 2, 156 720

1956__________ 18, 962 1, 926 269 654 1, 003 2, 158 3, 559 4, 340 3, 886 2, 344 748

1957__________ 19 ,2 1 2 1, 959 292 645 1, 022 2, 131 3, 561 4, 397 4, 065 2, 357 743

1958__________ 19, 508 1, 937 295 614 1, 028 2, 172 3 ,4 9 8 4, 435 4 ,2 6 2 2, 454 751

1959__________ 19, 863 2, 028 307 698 1, 023 2, 135 3, 409 4, 479 4, 467 2, 577 767

1960 2_________ 20, 471 2, 143 300 731 1, 112 2, 228 3 ,4 4 1 4, 531 4, 633 2, 661 835

1961__________ 21, 044 2 ,2 9 8 376 700 1 ,2 2 2 2, 345 3, 431 4, 596 4, 741 2, 785 849

1962 2_________ 21 ,2 3 7 2 ,3 4 0 418 668 1 ,2 5 4 2 ,4 3 8 3 ,3 7 2 4, 666 4, 731 2, 861 830

1963__________ 21, 791 2 ,3 6 0 365 767 1, 228 2, 582 3, 424 4, 780 4, 845 2, 977 823

1964__________ 22, 402 2, 442 374 867 1, 201 2, 786 3, 435 4, 797 4, 989 3, 077 874

1965__________ 23 ,1 1 8 2, 649 382 862 1, 405 2, 910 3, 568 4, 876 5, 032 3 ,2 0 3 879

1 Absolute numbers by color are not available prior to 1954. Source U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics. Data are

s Not strictly comparable with prior years, due to the introduction of data from the regular monthly Current Population Survey,

from decennial censuses and the inclusion of Alaska and Hawaii.

97

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
In b o th 1950 and 1960, N egroes com prised nearly all n on w h ite workers (over 90 p e r c e n t); all n on ­

w h ite w orkers accou n ted for ab out 10.5 p ercen t of the tota l civilian labor force.

T a b l e IIA-18.—P e r c e n t D is tr ib u tio n o f the C iv ilia n L a b o r F orce, b y R a c e a n d S ex , 1 9 5 0 a n d 1 9 6 0

Race 1950 1960

Total Male Female Total Male Female

Total, all races: Number (in thousands) _ - Percent distribution. __

Nonwhite__- - -- - Negro_____

Other nonwhite. _ _

White________________________________

58, 646 

1 0 0. 0 

10. 4 

1 0. 0 . 4 

89. 6

42, 126 

1 0 0 . 0 

9. 5 

9. 0 

. 5 

90. 5

16, 520 

1 0 0 . 0 

1 2. 8 

12. 4 

. 3 

87. 2

6 8 , 144 

1 0 0. 0 

10. 7 

9. 8 

. 8 

89. 3

45, 763 

1 0 0. 0 

9. 6 

8 . 7 

. 9 

90. 4

22, 381 

1 0 0 . 0 

1 2. 8 

1 2 . 0 

. 8 

87. 2

Note.—Because of rounding, sums of individual items may not equal

totals.

Source: 1950 Census of Population, U n ited S ta les S u m m a r y , D eta iled

C h aracteristics, P-Cl table 118, and N o n w h ite P o p u la tio n by R a ce, P-E No.

3B, table 9; 1960 Census of Population, N o n w h ite P o p u la tio n by R ace, PC (2)-

1C, table 32 and U n ite d S ta tes S u m m a ry , D eta ile d C h aracteristics, PC(1)-1D,

table 194.

In 1960, Jap an ese and C hinese labor force

p articip ation rates w ere sign ifican tly higher and

their u n em p loym en t rates low er th an for b o th

w h ites and N egroes.

T a b l e IIA-19.'—L a b o r F orce P a r tic ip a tio n R a te s a n d

U n e m p lo y m e n t R a te s , b y R a ce, 1 9 6 0

Participation rate Unemployment rate

Total labor force as percent of population

Unemployed as percent of civil­ ian labor force

Negro _ _ _ 57. 6 8. 8

Japanese__ 61. 3 2 . 8

Chinese _ _ 65. 8 3. 9 White. _______ __ 56. 0 4. 7

Source: 1960 C en su s o f P o p u la tio n , N o n w h ite P o p u la tio n by R a ce, PC(2)-1C,

tables 32, 34, 35; U .S . S u m m a ry , D eta iled C h aracteristics, PC(1)-1D, tables

182,194. (U.S. Bureau of the Census.)

98

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Labor force participation rates betw een 1947 and 1965 fell for teenagers, esp ecially non w h ite teen ­

agers w hose school enrollm ent rates have risen sh arp ly in this period; th ey dropped also for all older

workers except w h ite w om en 65 and over. T h e decline am ong m ature m en appears at earlier ages for

the n on w h ite than the w h ite.

T a bl e IIA-20.—C iv ilia n L a b o r F orce P a r tic ip a tio n R a te s ,1 b y C olor, S ex , a n d A g e D e ta il, 1 9 4 8 - 6 5 (a n n u a l a vera ges)

Color and Total, 14 14 to 19 years 20 to 24 25 to 34 35 to 44 45 to 54 55 to 64 65

years and

over

sex years and

over

Total 14 and 15 16 and 17 18 and 19

years years years years years

NONWHITE,

MALE

1948________ 84. 8 58. 3 39. 3 59. 8 77. 8 85. 6 95. 3 97. 2 94. 7 8 8 . 6 50. 3 1949________ 84. 5 59. 2 36. 6 60. 4 80. 8 89. 7 94. 1 97. 3 95. 6 8 6 . 0 51. 4 1950________ 83. 3 56. 1 37. 7 57. 4 78. 2 91. 4 92. 6 96. 2 95. 1 81. 9 45. 5 1951________ 83. 6 55. 3 34. 6 54. 7 80. 8 8 8 . 7 95. 7 96. 4 95. 1 84. 6 49. 5 1952________ 83. 8 49. 5 30. 5 52. 3 79. 1 92. 8 96. 2 97. 2 95. 0 85. 7 43. 3 1953________ 83. 0 50. 3 27. 8 53. 0 76. 7 92. 3 96. 7 97. 3 93. 9 8 6 . 7 41. 1 1954________ 82. 0 48. 7 27. 2 46. 7 78. 4 91. 1 96. 2 96. 6 93. 2 83. 0 41. 2

1955________ 81. 8 48. 8 27. 1 48. 2 75. 7 89. 7 95. 8 96. 2 94. 2 83. 1 40. 0 1956________ 81. 8 48. 3 25. 5 49. 6 76. 4 8 8 . 9 96. 2 96. 2 94. 4 83. 9 39. 8

1957________ 80. 8 46. 0 24. 7 47. 5 72. 0 89. 6 96. 1 96. 5 93. 5 82. 4 35. 9 1958________ 80. 4 44. 0 2 1 . 3 45. 1 71. 7 8 8 . 7 96. 3 96. 4 93. 9 83. 3 34. 5 1959________ 79. 1 44. 0 23. 9 41. 7 72. 0 90. 8 96. 3 95. 8 92. 8 82. 5 33. 5 1960________ 79. 4 45. 0 23. 3 45. 6 71. 2 90. 4 96. 2 95. 5 92. 3 82. 5 31. 2

1961________ 78. 0 41. 5 19. 2 42. 5 70. 5 89. 7 95. 9 94. 8 92. 3 81. 6 29. 4

1962________ 76. 4 38. 4 16. 5 40. 2 6 8 . 8 89. 3 95. 3 94. 5 92. 2 81. 5 27. 2

1963________ 75. 8 37. 8 17. 2 37. 2 69. 1 8 8 . 6 94. 9 94. 9 91. 1 82. 5 27. 6

1964________ 75. 6 37. 7 18. 7 37. 3 67. 2 89. 4 95. 9 94. 4 91. 6 80. 6 29. 6

1965________ 75. 2 39. 1 18. 9 39. 3 6 6 . 7 89. 8 95. 7 94. 2 92. 0 78. 8 27. 9

NONWHITE,

FEMA LE

1948________ 44. 4 30. 5 2 1 . 0 29. 1 41. 2 47. 1 50. 6 53. 3 51. 1 37. 6 17. 5

1949________ 45. 8 32. 8 23. 5 30. 1 44. 8 49. 8 50. 9 56. 1 52. 7 39. 6 15. 6

1950________ 45. 7 31. 0 2 2 . 0 30. 2 40. 6 46. 9 51. 6 55. 7 54. 3 40. 9 16. 5

1951________ 44. 9 28. 9 17. 3 30. 4 40. 2 45. 4 51. 1 55. 8 55. 5 39. 8 14. 0 1952________ 44. 2 28. 3 18. 5 27. 4 44. 7 43. 9 50. 1 54. 0 52. 7 42. 3 14. 3 1953________ 42. 3 25. 4 14. 9 24. 2 37. 8 45. 1 48. 1 54. 9 51. 0 35. 9 11. 4 1954________ 44. 7 25. 7 16. 2 24. 5 37. 7 49. 6 49. 7 57. 5 53. 4 41. 2 1 2. 2

1955________ 44. 4 25. 3 1 1. 4 22. 7 43. 2 46. 7 51. 3 56. 0 54. 8 40. 7 1 2. 1

1956________ 45. 6 28. 6 14. 4 28. 3 44. 6 44. 9 52. 1 57. 0 55. 3 44. 5 14. 5

1957________ 45. 5 25. 9 1 2. 6 24. 1 42. 8 46. 6 50. 4 58. 7 56. 8 44. 3 13. 6

1958________ 46. 2 24. 8 1 1. 6 23. 2 41. 2 48. 3 50. 8 60. 8 59. 8 42. 8 13. 3 1959________ 45. 8 2 2 . 7 1 2. 6 20. 7 36. 1 48. 8 50. 0 60. 0 60. 0 46. 4 1 2. 6

1960________ 46. 3 25. 8 13. 2 2 2 . 1 44. 3 48. 8 49. 7 59. 8 60. 5 47. 3 1 2. 8

1961________ 46. 2 24. 6 1 1. 0 2 1 . 6 44. 6 47. 7 51. 2 60. 5 61. 1 45. 2 13. 1

1962________ 45. 6 24. 0 9. 7 2 1 . 0 45. 5 48. 6 52. 0 59. 7 60. 5 46. 1 1 2. 2

1963________ 45. 6 23. 4 8 . 7 21. 5 44. 9 49. 2 53. 3 59. 4 60. 6 47. 3 1 1. 8

1964________ 46. 0 2 2 . 8 8 . 0 19. 5 46. 5 53. 6 52. 8 58. 4 62. 3 48. 4 12. 7

1965________

See footnotes

46. 0

it end of ta

2 1 .

ble.

7 8 . 1 20. 5 40. 0 55. 2 54. 0 59. 9 60. 2 48. 9 12. 9

Digitized for FRASER 

99

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Table IIA -20.—Civilian Labor Force Participation Rates,1 by Color, Sex, and Age Detail, 1948-65 (annual averages)—Con.

Sex and color

Total, 14

years and

over

14 to 19 years 20 to 24 

years

25 to 34 

years

35 to 44 

years

45 to 54 

years

55 to 64 

years

65

years and Total 14 and over 15 16 and 17 18 and 19

WHITE, MALE

1948________ 84.2 50.7 26.1 51. 2 76.2 84.4 96.0 98. 0 95.9 89.6 46.5

1949________ 84.0 49.4 26.3 50. 1 74.8 8 6 . 5 95.9 98. 0 95.6 87.6 46.6

1950________ 84. 1 50.3 27.6 50.5 75.6 87.5 96.4 97.7 95.9 87.3 45. 8

1951________ 84.0 49.2 26.9 52.7 74. 2 88.4 97.0 97.6 96.0 87.4 44.5

1952________ 83.6 47. 6 25.3 51.9 72.7 87.6 97.6 97.9 96.3 87.7 42.5

1953________ 83. 1 46.4 23.6 49.8 72.8 87.4 97.5 97.9 96.4 87.7 41.3

1954________ 83.0 45.4 24.5 47. 1 70.4 86.4 97.5 98.2 96.8 89.2 40.4

1955________ 82.8 45.6 23.5 48.0 71.7 85.6 97.8 98.3 96.7 88.4 39.5

1956________ 83.0 47.4 26.7 51. 3 71.9 87.6 97.4 98. 1 96. 8 88.9 40. 0

1957________ 82. 0 45.4 25.1 49. 6 71.6 86.7 97.2 98.0 96.6 8 8 . 0 37.7

1958________ 81.3 43.5 24.1 46.8 69.4 86.7 97. 2 98.0 96.6 8 8 . 2 35.7

1959________ 81. 0 44. 0 24.2 45.4 70.3 87.3 97.5 98.0 96.3 87.9 34.3

1960________ 80. 5 43.6 2 2 . 2 46. 0 69. 0 87.8 97.7 97.9 96. 1 87.2 33.3

1961________ 79.7 41. 7 2 2 . 2 44. 3 6 6 . 2 87.6 97.7 97.9 95.9 87.8 31.9

1962________ 78.6 40.8 22.3 42.9 66.4 86.5 97.4 97.9 96.0 86.7 30.6

1963________ 78. 1 40.7 21.4 42.4 67.8 85.8 97.4 97.8 96.2 8 6 . 6 28. 4

1964________ 77.9 41. 0 2 1 . 2 43. 5 6 6 . 6 85.7 97. 5 97.6 96. 1 8 6 . 1 27.9

1965________ 77.6 42.6 21.7 44. 6 65.8 85.3 97. 4 97.7 95.9 85.2 27.9

WHITE,

FEMALE

1948________ 30.6 32.8 1 1 .1 31.7 53.5 45. 1 31.3 35. 1 33.3 23.3 8 . 6

1949________ 31.0 32.4 10.3 31.4 54. 0 44.4 31.7 36. 1 34.3 24.2 9.1

1950________ 31.8 31.6 11.5 30. 1 52.6 45.9 32. 1 37.2 36.3 26.0 9.2

1951________ 32.6 32. 5 1 1 .2 32.4 54. 1 46.7 33.6 38.0 38.0 26.5 8.5

1952________ 32.7 31.7 1 0 . 2 34. 1 52.0 44.8 33.8 38.9 38.8 27.6 8.7

1953________ 32.0 30.5 9.9 31.2 51.9 44. 1 31.7 38.8 38.7 28.5 9.4

1954________ 32. 5 30.3 10.5 29.3 52. 1 44.4 32. 5 39.4 39.8 29. 1 9. 1

1955_______ 33.7 30.5 1 1 . 2 29.9 52.0 45.8 32. 8 39.9 42.7 31.8 10.5

1956________ 34. 8 32. 3 12.7 33. 5 53.0 46. 5 33.2 41. 5 44. 4 34. 0 1 0 . 6

1957_______ 34. 7 31.2 12.5 32. 1 52.6 45.8 33.6 41. 5 45.4 33.7 1 0 . 2

1958________ 34. 8 29.7 1 2 . 2 28.8 52. 3 46. 1 33.6 41.4 46. 5 34.5 1 0 . 1

1959________ 35. 0 30.2 13.0 29.9 50. 8 44. 5 33. 4 41.4 47.8 35.7 1 0 . 2

1960________ 35. 5 30.7 12.5 30. 0 51. 0 45.7 34. 1 41. 5 48.6 36.2 1 0 . 6

1961________ 35. 8 30.6 13.5 29.4 51.9 46.9 34.3 41. 8 48.9 37. 2 10. 5

1962______ 35.6 29.7 13.7 27. 9 51.6 47. 1 34. 1 42.2 48.9 38.0 9.8

1963________ 35. 9 29. 0 1 2 . 2 27.9 51. 3 47. 3 34. 8 43. 1 49. 5 38. 9 9. 4

1964________ 36. 4 29. 0 12.7 28. 5 49. 6 48.8 35.0 43.3 50.2 39.4 9.9

1965________ 36.9 30.3 12.9 28.7 50. 6 49. 2 36.3 44.3 49.9 40.3 9.7

1 Percent of civilian noninstitutional population in the civilian labor force. Source: U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics. Data are

from the regular monthly Current Population Survey.

100

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
T he ratio of n on w h ite to w h ite labor force p articip ation rates declined slightly from 1957 to 1964,

w ith the reduction chiefly am ong teenagers and w om en 35 to 64. T he ratios increased am ong elderly

m en, and am ong w om en 20 to 24 years old.

T a b l e IIA-21.—C iv ilia n L a b o r F orce P a r tic ip a tio n R a te s ,1 b y S ex , C olor, a n d A g e D e ta il, a n d R a tio N o n w h ite to W h ite ,

1 9 5 7 a n d 1 9 6 5 (a n n u a l a vera g es)

Age and sex

Nonwhite White Ratio of nonwhite to white

1957 1965 1957 1965 1957 1965

Men, 14 years and over _ 80. 8 75. 2 82. 0 77. 6 . 99 . 97

14 to 19 years. 46. 0 39. 1 45. 4 42. 6 1. 0 1 . 92 14 and 15 years 24. 7 18. 9 25. 1 21. 7 . 98 . 87

16 and 17 years. . 47. 5 39. 3 49. 6 44. 6 . 96 . 8 8 18 and 19 years 72. 0 6 6 . 7 71. 6 65. 8 1. 0 1 1. 0 1

20 to 24 years. _. _ . 89. 6 89. 8 8 6 . 7 85. 3 1. 03 1. 05

25 to 34 years. 96. 1 95. 7 97. 2 97. 4 . 99 . 98

35 to 44 years . . 96. 5 94. 2 98. 0 97. 7 . 98 . 96

45 to 54 years.. . . . . . . . . 93. 5 92. 0 96. 6 95. 9 . 97 . 96

55 to 64 years. 82. 4 78. 8 8 8 . 0 85. 2 . 94 . 92

65 years and over _ — . 35. 9 27. 9 37. 7 27. 9 . 95 1. 0 0 Women, 14 years and over _______ — 45. 5 46. 0 34. 7 36. 9 1. 31 1. 25

14 to 19 years. 25. 9 21. 7 31. 2 30. 3 . 83 . 72

14 and 15 years _ _ 1 2. 6 8 . 1 12. 5 12. 9 1. 0 1 . 63

16 and 17 years 24. 1 20. 5 32. 1 28. 7 . 75 . 71

18 and 19 years _ _ __ 42. 8 40. 0 52. 6 50. 6 . 81 . 79

20 to 24 years. 46. 6 55. 2 45. 8 49. 2 1. 0 2 1. 1 2

25 to 34 years 50. 4 54. 0 33. 6 36. 3 1. 50 1. 49

35 to 44 years _ _ 58. 7 59. 9 41. 5 44. 3 1. 41 1. 35

45 to 54 years. __ 56. 8 60. 2 45. 4 49. 9 1. 25 1. 2 1

55 to 64 years 44. 3 48. 9 33. 7 40. 3 1. 31 1. 2 1

65 years and over____ _ _____ _. 13. 6 12. 9 1 0. 2 9. 7 1. 33 1. 33

1 Percent of the civilian noninstitutional population in the civilian labor force.

Source: U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics. Data are from the regular monthly Current Population Survey.

101

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
L ow er rates of labor force p articip ation am ong n on w h ite than w h ite m en in 1965 w ere p artly th e

resu lt of a higher in ciden ce of illness and d isab ility.

T a b l e IIA-22.—M e n 2 5 - 6 4 Y e a r s O ld N o t in th e L a b o r F orce, b y C olor, 1 9 6 5 (a n n u a l a vera g es)

Color and age

Thousands of persons Percent of civilian noninstitutional population

Total Unable to work All other Total Unable to work All other

Nonwhite men: Total, 25 to 64 years. __ --------- --- - - - - 350 104 246 8 . 7 2 . 6 6 . 1

25 to 34 years. . . . — . . . 47 9 38 4. 2 . 8 3.4 35 to 44 years . . — 6 8 19 49 5.8 1 . 6 4. 2 45 to 54 years. 80 26 54 8 . 0 2 . 6 5.4 55 to 64 years . . . . . 155 50 105 2 1 . 2 6 . 8 14.4

55 to 59 years. 64 2 2 42 16. 2 5.6 10. 7

60 to 64 years 91 28 63 27. 1 8.3 18.8

White men: Total, 25 to 64 years . . 1,934 501 1,433 5.4 1.4 4.0

25 to 34 years . . . - - - 234 39 195 2 . 6 .4 2 . 2

35 to 44 years 240 8 6 154 2.3 . 8 1.5

45 to 54 years - - 387 124 263 4. 1 1.3 2 . 8

55 to 64 years 1,073 252 821 14. 8 3.5 11.3

55 to 59 years _ 364 116 248 9. 2 2.9 6.3

60 to 64 years__ . . 709 136 573 21. 5 4. 1 17.4

Source: U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics. Data are from the regular monthly Current Population Survey.

T h e percen tage of y o u th 18-24 ou t of sch ool

and n ot in th e labor force w as ab ou t th e sam e in

1965 for n on w h ite and w h ite teen age girls b u t

higher am ong th e other n on w h ite you n g w om en

and m en.

T a b l e IIA-23.—P e r s o n s 1 4 ~ 2 4 Y e a rs O ld N o t in th e L a b o r

F orce a n d N o t in S ch o o l, b y C olor, 1 9 6 5 (sch ool y e a r

a vera ges *)

Sex and age

Thousands of

persons

Percent of civilian noninstitu­ tional population

Non­ white W hite Non­ white W hite

Male :2 Total, 14 to 24 years - 61 281 3. 2 2 . 1

14 to 19 years 37 193 3. 0 2 . 2

14 to 17 years.. 2 1 1 2 0 2. 3 2. 0

18 and 19 years____ 17 73 5. 0 2. 9

20 to 24 years____ _ _ 24 8 8 3. 5 1. 8

Female :3 Total, 14 to 24 years 33 192 1. 5 1. 3

14 to 19 years ___ 20 144 1. 5 1. 6

14 to 17 years______ 14 90 1. 5 1. 5 18 and 19 years___ 8 54 2 . 1 1. 9

20 to 24 years _ - 13 48 1. 6 . 8

1 Excludes June, July, and August.

2 Excludes unable to work.

3 Excludes unable to work and keeping house.

Source: U.S. Department of Labor Statistics. Data are from the regular

monthly Current Population Survey.

102

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
T he proportion of b oth w h ite and n on w h ite m en w ith som e w ork experience during the year d eclined betw een 1950-64. H ow ever, the proportion of non w h ite m en and wom en w ith work experience

em ployed the entire year at a fu ll-tim e job increased sharply, esp ecia lly since 1957, in con trast w ith

little change am ong w h ite workers.

T a b l e IIA-24.—E x te n t o f E m p lo y m e n t o f P e r so n s w ith W o rk E x p e rie n c e D u r in g th e Y ea r, b y C olor a n d S ex , 1 9 5 0 , 1 9 5 7 , a n d 1 9 6 4

1950 1957 1964

Nonwhite White Nonwhite White Non white White

MALE

Percent of population with work experience 87. 3 8 6 . 8 85. 2 8 6 . 1 79. 9 82. 8

Percent distribution of those with work exper­ ience, total. _ 100. 0 100. 0 100. 0 100. 0 100. 0 100. 0

Worked at full-time jobs___ _ _ 8 6 . 0 90. 4 81. 7 8 8 . 8 83. 1 87. 7

50-52 weeks__ - _ _ 50. 2 6 6 . 8 52. 7 67. 3 55. 0 67. 5 27-49 weeks 24. 8 16. 0 19. 9 14. 6 17. 9 12. 4

1-26 weeks__ 1 1 . 0 7. 6 9. 1 6 . 9 1 0 . 2 7. 8

Worked at parttime jobs_ 14. 1 9. 4 18. 3 11. 3 17. 0 12. 4

FEMALE

Percent of population with work experience . 58. 4 39. 4 59. 9 45. 1 56. 5 46. 4

Percent distribution of those with work experience, total 100. 0 100. 0 100. 0 100. 0 100. 0 100. 0

Worked at full-time jobs 6 8 . 9 74. 1 61. 1 70. 3 65. 1 6 8 . 3

50-52 weeks __ _ - ___ 25. 2 38. 6 27. 6 38. 5 32. 2 38. 2 27-49 weeks. _ _ _ 19. 7 17. 5 17. 4 15. 8 16. 1 14. 8

1-26 weeks _ _ _ _ 24. 0 18. 0 16. 1 16. 0 16. 8 15. 3

Worked at part-time jobs.. 31. 2 25. 9 38. 8 29. 8 35. 0 31. 7

Source: U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics. Data are from the February supplement to the Current Population Survey. They pertain to persons’ employment and unemployment experience during the entire calendar year.

103

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
In every age-sex group (except teenage b oys) a larger proportion of w h ite than n on w h ite workers

had fu ll-tim e yearround jobs in 1964, b u t this gap in the exten t of fu ll-tim e em p loym en t experience

tend ed to narrow from 1959 to 1964, esp ecially am ong m en and w om en 25 -6 4 .

T a b l e IIA-25.—E x te n t o f E m p lo y m e n t o f P e r s o n s W ith W o rk E x p e rie n c e D u r in g th e Y e a r, b y A g e , C olor, a n d S e x , 1 9 5 9

a n d 1 9 6 J+

Age and color

Population Percent distribution of those with work experience

Number (thou­ sands)

Percent with work experience

Total

Worked at full-time jobs Worked at part- time 50 to 52 jobs weeks 27 to 49 weeks 1 to 26 weeks

MALE, 1959

Total, 14 years and over, , 58, 222 84. 1 100. 0 64. 3 16. 0 7. 5 1 2 . 2

Nonwhite. ------ ------------ 5, 913 82. 5 1 0 0 . 0 51. 1 20. 3 11. 3 17. 3 White____ — — 52, 309 84. 3 100. 0 65. 8 15. 5 7. 1 1 1 . 6

14 to 19 years_____________ _____ 7, 667 58. 0 100. 0 8 . 9 6 . 9 22. 7 61. 4

Nonwhite__ . . --------------- 950 58. 3 100. 0 1 2. 8 8 . 7 27. 8 50. 7 White________ _ — 6 , 716 58. 0 100. 0 8 . 4 6. 7 2 2 . 0 62. 9

20 to 24 years. . . . — ------ 4, 628 92. 0 100. 0 48. 8 2 0 . 6 18. 4 1 2 . 2

Nonwhite . . . . — 616 91. 7 100. 0 47. 9 19. 5 18. 8 13. 8

White______ . . — 4, 012 92. 0 100. 0 49. 0 2 0 . 8 18. 3 11. 9

25 to 64 years. . . . 39, 056 95. 6 100. 0 74. 4 16. 9 4. 1 4. 6

Nonwhite___ __ _ 3, 843 92. 4 100. 0 58. 7 22. 9 7. 6 10. 9 White__ ____ 35, 213 96. 0 100. 0 76. 0 16. 3 3. 8 3. 9

65 years and over 6 , 871 42. 4 100. 0 42. 5 11. 7 1 1. 2 34. 6

Nonwhite. _ _ _______ 504 41. 6 100. 0 33. 2 9. 6 1 1. 1 46. 2 White______________________ 6 , 367 42. 5 100. 0 43. 2 1 1 . 8 1 1. 2 33. 7

FEMALE, 1959

Total, 14 years and over. 63, 973 45. 6 100. 0 36. 1 16. 0 16. 4 31. 5

Nonwhite_______ — . . . 6 , 678 56. 6 100. 0 26. 9 16. 3 18. 6 38. 2 White----- ------------------ 57, 296 44. 3 100. 0 37. 4 16. 0 16. 1 30. 5

14 to 19 years___ . . __ 7, 840 45. 6 100. 0 8 . 2 7. 9 29. 0 54. 9

Nonwhite. . 990 43. 4 100. 0 4. 4 7. 2 37. 6 50. 7 White________________ ____ 6, 851 45. 9 100. 0 8 . 7 8. 0 27. 8 55. 4

20 to 24 years. _ _ ____________ 5, 560 61. 3 100. 0 35. 8 20. 3 26. 9 17. 0

Nonwhite___________________ 716 55. 4 100. 0 25. 2 20. 7 29. 2 24. 9 White__ ___ ________ 4, 844 62. 2 100. 0 37. 3 20. 3 26. 6 15. 9

25 to 64 years ._ . _ 42, 218 49. 8 100. 0 41. 4 17. 0 13. 0 28. 6

Nonwhite. _ . . ____ 4, 407 64. 6 100. 0 31. 2 17. 3 14. 5 37. 0 White__ _______ _ _ _ 37, 812 48. 1 100. 0 43. 0 17. 0 1 2 . 7 27. 2

65 years and over _ 8 , 353 13. 9 100. 0 25. 2 1 0. 8 9. 6 54. 4

N onw hite__ . 565 18. 8 100. 0 8. 6 9. 5 11. 4 70. 5

White__. . . _ ____ 7, 789 13. 5 100. 0 26. 8 10. 9 9. 4 52. 8

See source at end of table.

104

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Table IIA-25.—Extent of Employment of Persons With Work Experience During the Year, by Age, Color, and Sex, 1959

and 1964—Continued

Population Percent distribution of those with work experience

Age and color Number Percent with Worked at full-time jobs Worked at part- time jobs (thou­ sands) work experience

Total 50 to 52 weeks 27 to 49 weeks 1 to 26 weeks

MALE, 1964

Total, 14 years and over____ 62, 991 82.5 1 0 0 . 0 6 6 . 2 12.9 8 . 0 1 2 . 8

Nonwhite__ _ _ 6 , 522 79.9 1 0 0 . 0 55.0 17.9 1 0 . 2 17.0

White____ _ - ----------- _ 56, 469 82.8 1 0 0 . 0 67. 5 12.4 7.8 12.4

14 to 19 years___ 9, 632 57.4 1 0 0 . 0 6 . 6 5.6 25. 1 62.7

Non w hite.. _ _ ------------ 1, 2 2 0 50.4 1 0 0 . 0 8 . 8 7.5 28.3 55.4

W hite.. __ - ______________ 8,412 58.4 1 0 0 . 0 6.3 5.4 24.7 63.6

20 to 24 years.- _ 5, 696 92.5 1 0 0 . 0 47.8 20.3 19.8 1 2 . 2

Nonwhite_________________ _ 679 90.3 1 0 0 . 0 46.3 25.9 13.5 14.2

White. __ 5,017 92. 8 1 0 0 . 0 47.9 19.6 2 0 . 6 11.9

25 to 64 years. _ _ _ . 40, 044 95. 7 1 0 0 . 0 79.2 13.3 3.8 3.7

Nonwhite.. 4, 006 93.2 1 0 0 . 0 65.7 18.9 6.9 8.5

W hite.. _ _ . 36,038 96.0 100. 0 80.7 1 2 . 6 3.5 3.2

65 years and over. _ _ __ 7,619 37.3 1 0 0 . 0 41. 1 9.2 9.2 40.4

Nonwhite__ __ ____ 617 39.4 1 0 0 . 0 28.4 8 . 2 6 . 2 57.2

White. _ _ ______ 7, 0 0 2 37. 1 100. 0 42.3 9.3 9. 5 38.8

FEMALE, 1964

Total, 14 years and over. _ __ _ 69, 773 47.5 1 0 0 . 0 37.5 15.0 15.5 32. 1

Non white 7, 546 56. 5 1 0 0 . 0 32.2 16. 1 16.8 35.0 White___ ____ . _ _ . 62, 227 46.4 100. 0 38.2 14.8 15.3 31.7

14 to 19 years____ _ _____ 9, 896 42. 9 100. 0 5.7 6 . 8 24. 7 62.8

Nonwhite. _ ___ 1,287 36.5 100. 0 3.0 7.4 33.6 56.0 White___- . . _ _ 8 , 609 43.9 100. 0 6 . 1 6.7 23.6 63.7

20 to 24 years___ 6 , 653 65.6 1 0 0 . 0 34. 9 20.5 26. 1 18.5

Nonwhite. _ 809 65.8 100. 0 21.4 17.7 33.6 27.3 W h ite__ _ ___ 5, 844 65.6 1 0 0 . 0 36.8 20.9 25.0 17.4

25 to 64 years _ _ _ ____ 43, 514 53.2 1 0 0 . 0 44. 5 15.8 1 2 . 0 27.7

Nonwhite. _ . . _ 4,716 6 6 . 0 1 0 0 . 0 39.5 17.3 11.7 31.5 White. __ 38, 798 51.6 1 0 0 . 0 45.3 15.6 1 2 . 1 27. 1

65 years and over _ 9,710 14. 4 1 0 0 . 0 25.6 9.3 1 1 . 2 53.9

Nonwhite. _ 734 20.4 1 0 0 . 0 10.7 11.3 8.7 69.3 White___ _ __ 8 , 776 13.9 1 0 0 . 0 27.3 9.2 11.4 52.0

Source: U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics. Data are from the February Supplement to the Current Population Survey. They pertain

to persons’ employment and unemployment experience during the entire calendar year.

105

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
B o th m en and w om en nonw hite w orkers are m uch m ore lik ely than w h ite workers to h ave three

or m ore spells of joblessness during the year. T h e ratios were little changed from 1959 to 1964.

T a b l e IIA-26.'— E x te n t o f U n e m p lo y m e n t D u r in g th e Y e a r, h y C olor a n d S ex , 1 9 5 9 a n d 1 9 6 4

Year, color, and sex

Total working or looking for work (in

Unemployed as percent of total working

Percent of unemployed who worked during the year having unemploy­ ment of—

thousands) or looking for work 15 weeks 

or more

2 spells 3 spells or 

more

1959 Both sexes: Nonwhite _____ 8 , 958 24. 0 0 ) 14. 5 31. 3 White____ _ _________ 70, 535 14. 2 0 ) 17. 1 20. 4 Male:Nonwhite- 5, 001 27. 8 0 ) 14. 0 33. 4 White_________ __ _ _ _ __ 44, 524 15. 2 0 ) 17. 6 23. 0 Female: Nonwhite _____ _ . _ _ 3, 957 19. 2 0 ) 14. 8 27. 0 White____ _ __ 26, Oil 12. 5 0 ) 16. 0 14. 1

1964

Both sexes: Nonwhite _ 9, 865 25. 5 40. 8 18. 8 27. 9 White_____________________________ 76, 972 15. 0 31. 6 19. 0 17. 8

Male:Nonwhite 5, 354 27. 7 40. 7 18. 1 31. 4 White_____________________________ 47, 291 15. 0 32. 3 20. 3 2 0 . 1

Female: Nonwhite.- - _ ________ 4, 511 23. 0 40. 9 2P. 1 2 2 . 1

White__ . _ 29, 681 15. 0 30. 1 16. 6 13. 7

1 Not available.

Source: U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics. Data are from the February supplement to the Current Population Survey. They pertain

to persons’ employment and unemployment experience during the entire calendar year.

106

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
O ver the p ast decade, a n otab le sh ift in the occu p ation al p attern of n on w h ite workers has taken

place tow ard w h ite-collar jobs, especially am ong w om en.

T a b l e IIB-1.—E m p lo y e d P er so n s, b y O c c u p a tio n G ro u p , C olor, a n d S ex , 1 9 5 5 , 1 9 6 1 , a n d 1 9 6 5 (a n n u a l a vera ges)

Occupation group

Percent distribution Non white as a percent of total Nonwhite White

1955 1 1961 1965 1955 1 1961 1965 1955 1 1961 1965

Total employed: Number (thousands) __ 6 , 438 6,936 7, 747 56, 561 59, 860 64, 432

Percent _ 1 0 0 . 0 1 0 0 . 0 1 0 0 . 0 1 0 0 . 0 1 0 0 . 0 1 0 0 . 0 1 0 . 2 10.4 10.7 White-collar workers .. — ._ 1 2 . 0 16.4 19. 5 42. 1 46.7 47.5 3. 1 3.9 4. 7 Professional and technical--- 3. 5 4. 6 6 . 8 9. 8 12.3 13. 0 3.9 4. 1 5.9 Managers, officials, and

proprietors. 2.3 2. 5 2 . 6 1 1 . 1 1 1 . 6 1 1 . 1 2.3 2.4 2 . 8 Clerical workers.- 4. 9 7.7 8 . 2 14. 2 15.6 16. 3 3.8 5.4 5.7 Sales workers 1.3 1 . 6 1.9 6.9 7.2 7. 1 2 . 0 2.5 3. 1 Blue-collar workers 41.8 39. 1 40.7 39. 0 35.3 36. 2 10.9 11.4 11.9 Craftsmen and foremen------- 5.2 6 . 1 6 . 7 14. 1 13.7 13. 5 4.0 4.9 5.6 Operatives _ 20. 9 2 0 . 1 21. 3 2 0 . 2 17.3 18.2 1 0 . 6 11.9 12.3 Nonfarm laborers 15.8 12. 9 12.7 4.7 4. 3 4. 5 27.6 25.7 25. 6

Service workers 31.6 32.8 31. 7 9.0 1 0 . 6 10.7 28. 6 26.3 26. 3 Private household workers__ 14.8 14. 5 12. 7 1 . 8 2 . 2 2 . 0 48. 8 43.4 43. 6

Other service workers 16. 8 18.3 19. 0 7. 2 8.4 8.7 2 1 . 0 2 0 . 1 2 0 . 8

Farm workers__ 14. 5 11.7 8 . 1 9.9 7. 3 5.6 14. 3 15.7 14.7 Farmers and managers 5. 0 2.9 1 . 8 6 . 0 4.2 3.3 8 . 6 7.4 6 . 1

Farm laborers and foremen. _ 9. 5 8 . 8 6.3 3.9 3. 1 2.4 2 1 . 8 24.8 24. 3 Male employed: Total (thousands) 3, 978 4, 133 4, 568 39,196 40, 185 42, 466

Percent 1 0 0 . 0 1 0 0 . 0 1 0 0 . 0 1 0 0 . 0 1 0 0 . 0 1 0 0 . 0 9.2 9.3 9.7 White-collar workers _ 1 0 . 8 15. 0 16. 5 35.4 40. 2 40. 5 3. 0 3.7 4.2 Professional and technical — 2. 5 4. 0 5.6 8.9 11.9 1 2 . 6 2.7 3. 3 4. 6

Managers, officials, and

proprietors. _ 2.7 3. 1 3.4 13. 6 14. 6 14. 3 2 . 0 2 . 1 2. 5

Clerical workers _ 4.4 6 . 3 5.7 6 . 7 7. 1 7. 1 6.3 8 . 3 7.9

Sales workers. 1 . 2 1 . 6 1 . 8 6 . 1 6 . 6 6.5 1. 9 2.4 2.9 Blue-collar workers 57. 7 55. 0 58.0 47. 5 44. 7 46.3 1 1 . 0 1 1 . 2 11.9 Craftsmen and foremen------ 8 . 0 9.9 10. 9 19.9 19. 9 19.9 3.9 4.9 5.6

Operatives 24. 8 24. 0 26. 1 2 1 . 0 18. 5 19. 8 10. 7 11.7 12. 4

Nonfarm laborers 24.9 2 1 . 1 2 1 . 1 6 . 6 6.3 6 . 6 27.8 25.7 25.7 Service workers 14. 9 15.7 15. 5 5. 3 5.8 6 . 1 22.3 21.7 2 1 . 6

Private household workers__ . 5 . 4 . 4 . 1 . 1 . 1 47.6 29.0 29.8 Other service workers 14. 4 15. 3 15. 2 5.2 5.7 6 . 0 21.9 2 1 . 6 21. 5

Farm workers 16.6 14. 3 9.9 11.9 9. 2 7. 1 12. 4 13.8 13. 1 Farmers and farm managers. 7.6 4.4 2.7 8.4 6 . 0 4. 7 8.4 7. 1 5.8 Farm laborers and foremen.. 9. 0 9.9 7. 2 3. 5 3.2 2. 4 20.9 24. 2 24. 4

See footnote at end of table.

217-817 0 — 66— 8 107

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
T able IIB -1.—Employed Persons, by Occupation Group, Color, and Sex, 1955, 1961, and 1965 (annual averages)— Con.

Percent distribution Nonwhite as a percent

Occupation group Nonwhite White of total

1955 1 1961 1965 1955 1 1961 1965 1955 1 1961 1965

Female employed: Total (thousands) _ _ __ 2, 460 

1 0 0 . 0

2,803 3, 179 

1 0 0 . 0

17,366 19,675 21,967 Percent _ _ 1 0 0 . 0 1 0 0 . 0 1 0 0 . 0 1 0 0 . 0 12.4 12. 5 1 2 . 6

White-collar workers _ _ 14. 1 18.2 23. 7 57. 2 59.9 60.9 3. 4 4. 2 5. 3 Professional and technical---

Managers, officials, and 5. 2 5.4 8.4 1 1 . 8 13. 2 13.7 5.9 5.6 8 . 1

proprietors______ 1 . 6 1 . 6 1.5 5. 5 5.4 4.8 3.9 4. 1 4.4 Clerical workers - 5.8 9.7 1 1 . 8 31. 2 32.9 34. 1 2 . 6 4. 0 4.8 Sales workers _ - 1. 4 1.5 2 . 0 8 . 6 8.4 8 . 2 2 . 2 2.5 3.4 Blue-collar workers 16. 2 15. 8 15. 9 19. 9 16. 1 16.6 10. 3 1 2 . 2 1 2 . 2 Craftsmen and foremen. . . 6 . 6 .7 1 . 2 1 . 0 1 . 1 7.0 7.9 8.5 Operatives _ ------- 14.6 14. 5 14. 5 18. 2 14. 8 15. 1 1 0 . 2 1 2 . 2 1 2 . 2 Nonfarm laborers .9 .7 .7 . 5 . 3 .4 21.7 23. 8 20.7 Service workers. 58.7 58. 1 54. 8 17.4 20. 4 19.6 32.4 28.8 28.8 Private household workers__ 37.9 35.4 30.3 5.6 6.4 5.6 48.8 43.9 43.9 Other service workers 2 0 . 8 22.7 24. 5 11. 7 14. 0 14. 0 2 0 . 0 18.7 2 0 . 2 Farm workers___ 1 1 . 1 7.9 5. 5 5. 5 3.5 2 . 8 2 2 . 2 24. 7 2 2 . 0

Farmers and farm managers. .9 .7 . 5 .7 . 6 . 5 14. 2 15.4 11.4 Farm laborers and foremen.. 10. 3 7. 2 5. 1 4.8 2.9 2.3 23. 2 26. 2 24. 0

1 Based on an average of January, April, July, and October; data have not been adjusted to 1957 definitions of employment and unemployment.

Note.—Because of rounding, sums of individual items may not equal totals.

Source: U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics. Data are from the regular monthly Current Population Survey.

108

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Principal gains since 1954 in the occu p ation al d istrib u tion of non w h ite em p loym en t w ere m ade in

the 1960’s and have com e in rela tively w ell-paying occupations, such as professional and technical,

clerical, and the skilled blue-collar jobs.

T a b l e IIB-2.— E m p lo y m e n t o f N o n w h ite W o rk e rs, b y O c c u p a tio n G ro u p , 1 9 5 4 - 6 5

Occupation group Number of nonwhite workers (in thousands)

1954 1955 1 1956 1 1957 1 1958 1959

Total, all occupations _ ______ 6,312 6 , 438 6 , 692 6 , 751 6 , 723 6 , 730

Professional, technical, and kindred workers. 217 228 224 246 272 303 Managers, officials and proprietors (ex- eluding farm). _ _ __ __ 130 147 141 139 159 162 Clerical and kindred workers 308 318 334 400 404 404

Sales workers 89 81 76 79 89 94 Craftsmen, foremen, and kindred workers __ 316 332 366 381 391 390 Operatives and kindred workers. 1, 313 1,346 1, 441 1,411 1,345 1, 326 Private household workers __ 897 952 990 1, 007 1, 044 996 Service workers, excluding private house- hold 1, 057 1,084 1, 166 1, 152 1, 183 1, 151 Farmers and farm managers __ 389 322 311 276 246 236 Farm laborers and foremen. 589 612 663 652 603 632

Laborers, excluding farm and mine 1, 009 1, 016 982 1, 008 986 1, 036

Percent

1960 1961 1962 1963 1964 1965 change,

1954-65

Total, all occupations. 7, 041 6 , 936 7, 097 7, 234 7, 480 7, 747 22. 7

Professional, technical, and kindred workers. 331 319 373 435 499 525 141. 9

Managers, officials, and proprietors (ex- eluding farm) _ 176 173 188 192 192 204 56. 9 Clerical and kindred workers 507 534 512 523 572 633 105. 5

Sales workers _ __ 113 111 115 132 136 146 64. 0

Craftsmen, foremen, and kindred workers. _ 415 423 427 468 525 520 64. 6

Operatives and kindred workers _ 1, 415 1,394 1, 412 1,475 1, 520 1, 651 25. 7 Private household workers _ 1, 007 1, 006 1, 040 1, 035 1, 013 981 9. 4 Service workers, excluding private house- hold 1,232 1,269 1, 286 1,340 1,398 1, 472 39. 3 Farmers and farm managers 218 2 0 1 195 168 145 138 64. 5

Farm laborers and foremen 655 610 587 536 506 491 16. 6

Laborers, excluding farm and mine. 972 895 962 932 974 985 2. 4

See footnote at end of table.

109

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Table IIB -2 .— Employment of Nonwhite Workers, by Occupation Group, 1934-65—Continued

Percent of all workers

1954 1955 1 1956 1 1957 1 1958 1959

Total, all occupations._ _ _ _ . __ 10. 3 1 0. 2 10. 3 10. 4 10. 5 10. 3

Professional, technical, and kindred workers. 3. 9 3. 9 3. 7 3. 8 3. 9 4. 2 Managers, officials, and proprietors (ex­ cluding farm). ___ _ __ . . . 2 . 1 2. 3 2 . 2 2 . 1 2. 3 2. 3 Clerical and kindred workers___________ 3. 7 3. 8 3. 8 4. 4 4. 4 4. 3 Sales workers____ — . ._ __ 2. 3 2 . 0 1. 8 1. 9 2 . 1 2 . 1

Craftsmen, foremen, and kindred workers. _ 3. 8 4. 0 4. 2 4. 4 4. 6 4. 6

Operatives and kindred workers. _ 10. 7 1 0. 6 1 1. 2 11. 3 1 1. 8 1 1. 2

Private household workers_______ 51. 4 48. 8 46. 3 48. 0 47. 4 45. 3 Service workers, excluding private house­ hold_______________________________ 2 1 . 2 2 1 . 0 2 1 . 2 2 0 . 8 2 1 . 1 19. 7 Farmers and farm managers___ 10. 0 8 . 6 8 . 5 8 . 3 8 . 0 7. 8

Farm laborers and foremen______ __ 23. 6 2 1 . 8 2 2 . 8 23. 9 24. 0 24. 7 Laborers, excluding farm and mine_______ 27. 6 27. 6 26. 7 27. 4 27. 4 27. 7

1960 1961 1962 1963 1964 1965

Total, all occupations. ------ ----------- ------------ 10. 6 10. 4 10. 5 10. 5 1 0 . 6 10. 7

Professional, technical, and kindred workers. 4. 4 4. 1 4. 6 5. 3 5. 8 5. 9 Managers, officials, and proprietors (ex­ cluding farm). _ ___________________ 2. 5 2. 4 2. 5 2 . 6 2 . 6 2 . 8

Clerical and kindred workers____ 5. 2 5. 4 5. 1 5. 1 5. 4 5. 7 Sales workers__ _______ — _____ 2 . 6 2. 5 2 . 6 3. 0 3. 1 3. 1 Craftsmen, foremen, and kindred workers. _ 4. 8 4. 9 4. 9 5. 2 5. 8 5. 6

Operatives and kindred workers._ 1 1. 8 11. 9 11. 7 1 1. 8 1 1. 8 12. 3 Private household workers___ _______ 45. 4 43. 4 44. 4 44. 9 43. 6 43. 6

Service workers, excluding private household____________________:__________ 2 0 . 1 2 0 . 1 19. 9 19. 9 2 0 . 2 2 0 . 8

Farmers and farm managers__ . . 7. 8 7. 4 7. 5 7. 0 6. 3 6. 1

Farm laborers and foremen___ 25. 0 24. 8 25. 8 24. 2 23. 8 24. 3 Laborers, excluding farm and mine_______ 26. 5 25. 7 27. 0 26. 2 26. 9 25. 6

1 Averages based on data for January, April, July, and October.

N ote—Because of rounding, sums of individual items may not equal totals.

Source: U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics. Data are from the regular monthly Current Population Survey.

110

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
In the S ou th, n on w h ite em p loym en t is con cen trated m uch m ore h eav ily in low -paid, u n skilled

occupations than in other regions, whereas w h ite em p loym en t is d istrib u ted ab out the sam e in the

S ou th as elsew here.

T a b l e IIB-3.—E m p lo y e d M e n a n d W o m e n , b y O c c u p a tio n G ro u p , R e g io n , a n d C olor, 1 9 6 5 (a n n u a l a vera g es)

[Percent distribution]

United States South All other regions

Occupation group Non­ white White Non­ white White Non­ white White

Men, total__________ __________ ___________ 10 0. 0 1 0 0 . 0 1 0 0 . 0 1 0 0 . 0 1 0 0 . 0 1 0 0 . 0

White-collar workers ______ ______ 16. 5 40. 5 10. 7 40. 2 2 2 . 6 40. 6

Professional and technical _____ 5. 6 1 2. 6 3. 9 1 1. 1 7. 5 13. 1 Managers, officials, and proprietors__ 3. 4 14. 3 2 . 2 15. 5 4. 6 13. 9 Clerical w o rk ers._________ ___ __ _ _ 5. 7 7. 1 3. 6 6. 9 7. 8 7. 2 Sales workers _____________ _ __ _ __ 1. 8 6. 5 1. 0 6. 7 2 . 6 6. 4 Blue-collar workers. _ _________ 58. 0 46. 3 57. 8 46. 4 58. 2 46. 3 Craftsmen and foremen_____ __ __ 10. 9 19. 9 9. 3 20. 9 1 2. 6 19. 7

Operatives _ __ ____________ ____ 26. 1 19. 8 23. 5 19. 5 28. 7 2 0 . 0

Nonfarm laborers. ___ 2 1 . 1 6. 6 25. 0 6. 4 17. 0 6. 6

Service workers._____ _ ______ _______ 15. 5 6. 1 14. 4 5. 0 16. 7 6. 5 Private household. _ ____ __ __ . 4 . 1 . 5 . 1 . 2 . 1

Other service workers___ 15. 2 6. 0 13. 9 5. 0 16. 4 6. 3 Farm workers. __ ________ _ 9. 9 7. 1 17. 1 8. 4 2. 5 6. 6

Farmers and farm managers______ 2. 7 4. 7 4. 6 5. 6 . 8 4. 3 Farm laborers and forem en____ 7. 2 2. 4 12. 5 2. 8 1, 8 2. 3

Women, total _________________ ___________ 1 0 0 . 0 1 0 0. 0 1 0 0. 0 1 0 0 . 0 , 1 0 0. 0 1 0 0 . 0

White-collar workers ____ _ ______ _ __ 23. 7 60. 9 16. 1 61. 2 31. 8 60. 8

Professional and technical__ ___ _____ 8. 4 13. 7 8. 3 13. 3 8. 5 13. 8

Managers, officials, and p ro p rie to rs..__ 1. 5 4. 8 1. 6 5. 6 1. 5 4. 5 Clerical workers___ . __ _ ____ 11. 8 34. 1 5. 0 33. 3 18. 9 34. 5 Sales workers. __ ._ ___ __ __________ 2 . 0 8. 2 1. 2 8. 9 2 . 8 8. 0

Blue-collar workers____ . . _____ . . _ 15. 9 16. 6 9. 9 18. 7 22. 4 15. 8

Craftsmen and foremen_____ _______ . 7 1. 1 . 4 1. 1 1. 2 1. 1

Operatives _ _______ _ _________ _ 14. 5 15. 1 9. 0 17. 3 2 0 . 2 14. 3 Nonfarm laborers_______ _ . 7 . 4 . 5 . 4 1. 0 . 4

Service workers__ ____ 54. 8 19. 6 63. 9 16. 9 45. 5 2 0 . 6

Private household_______ _ ______ _ 30. 3 5. 6 40. 5 4. 2 19. 7 6. 1

Other service workers._ _ ______ ___ 24. 5 14. 0 23. 4 12. 7 25. 8 14. 5 Farm workers ___ _ _____ ________ 5. 5 2 . 8 1 0. 2 3. 2 . 6 2. 7 Farmers and farm managers _ _ _ . 5 . 5 . 7 . 9 . 2 . 4

Farm laborers and foremen ______ 5. 1 2. 3 9. 5 2. 3 . 4 2. 3

Source: U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics. Data are from the regular monthly Current Population Survey.

Ill

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
N egro p articip ation in professional, clerical, skilled, and sem i-skilled jobs increased in all regions of

th e cou n try b etw een 1950 and 1960, b u t all regions excep t th e S ou th shared in th e declining proportion

of N egroes w orking as nonfarm laborers.

T a b l e IIB-4.— P e r c e n t D is tr ib u tio n o f N eg ro a n d W h ite M a le

United States Northeast

Occupation group 1950 1960 1950 1960

Negro White Negro White Negro White Negro White

Total, experienced civilian labor force_____ _ _ . ______ _ _ . 100. 0 100. 0 1 0 0 . 0 1 0 0 . 0 100. 0 100. 0 1 0 0 . 0 100. 0

Professional, technical and kindred workers. 2 . 2 7.8 3. 1 1 1 . 0 2 . 8 9. 0 3.6 1 2 . 0 Farmers and farm managers___

Managers, officials, and proprietors, ex- 13. 3 1 0 . 0 4.3 5. 6 . 2 2 . 6 . 2 1.5

eluding farm _____ ___________ 1. 9 1 1 . 6 1.7 11. 5 3.5 12. 5 2.7 11.3 Clerical and kindred workers _ __ _ 3. 1 6 . 8 4. 9 7. 1 7.2 8 . 1 8.9 8 . 5 Sales workers_______ _ _________ . . 1. 1 6.9 1.3 7.4 2 . 0 7.3 1. 9 7.6 Craftsmen, foremen, and kindred workers.. 7.7 19.7 9.8 20.5 10. 5 2 1 . 1 11.4 20. 9 Operatives and kindred workers. 2 1 . 1 2 0 . 0 24.4 19. 5 26.4 2 2 . 8 27.2 20. 4 Private household workers____________ 1.0 . 1 .7 . 1 1. 5 . 1 . 8 . 1

Service workers__ _ _________ . 13. 3 5. 1 13. 9 5.2 2 0 . 1 6.7 15.6 6.5 Farm laborers . . . ____ 10.3 4. 2 7. 1 2. 3 1.3 1.7 . 8 . 9 Laborers, excluding farm and mine ___ 23.7 6 . 6 20. 4 5.6 22. 7 7. 1 15. 2 5. 6

Occupations not reported______________ 1.5 1. 1 8.4 4.2 1.7 1. 0 11.4 4.7

N ote.—Because of rounding, sums of individual items may not total 100.0.

Source: 1960 C en su s o f P o p u la tio n , D e ta iled C h aracteristics, U n ited S ta tes S u m m a ry , PC(1)-1D, table 257. I960 C en su s o f P o p u la tio n , Vol. II, C h a ra cteristics

o f the P o p u la tio n , Part 1, U n ited S ta tes S u m m a ry , table 159.

112

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
E m p lo y m e n t, b y O c c u p a tio n G ro u p a n d R eg io n , 1 9 5 0 a n d 1 9 6 0

North Central South West

1950 1960 1950 1960 1950 1960

Negro White Negro White Negro White Negro White Negro White Negro White

1 0 0 . 0 1 0 0 . 0 1 0 0 . 0 1 0 0 . 0 100. 0 1 0 0 . 0 1 0 0 . 0 1 0 0 . 0 100. 0 1 0 0 . 0 1 0 0 . 0 1 0 0 . 0

2.4 7.1 3. 1 9. 9 2 . 0 6.9 2 . 8 1 0 . 0 2.3 9. 1 4.3 12.9

. 9 13.3 .3 8.9 19.3 15.5 7. 1 7.2 . 1 7.0 .5 3.6

2.4 10.3 1 . 8 1 0 . 2 1. 4 11.4 1.4 1 2 . 6 3. 1 13.0 2.4 12.5

5. 1 6 . 6 6 . 8 6.7 1 . 6 5.8 2.9 6 . 6 5.5 6 . 1 7.2 6.5

1.5 6.4 1 . 6 6.9 . 8 6.9 .9 7.7 1 . 6 7.6 1.4 7.4

10.5 19.4 1 1 . 1 2 0 . 1 6.3 18.3 8 . 6 20. 5 10. 9 20.4 12.9 20. 5

29.0 20.3 29.1 2 0 . 6 18.4 18.4 22.3 19.2 18.8 16.4 2 1 . 1 16.5

.9 . 1 . 6 . 1 .9 . 1 . 8 . 1 1 . 6 . 1 .5 . 1

18.6 4.7 15.0 4.8 1 0 . 2 3.6 12.7 4.0 23.4 5.8 17.7 5.7

1. 1 4.5 .7 2.4 14. 5 6 . 1 11.4 3.0 4.7 5.4 2.4 3.5

25.4 6.3 17.7 5 .5 23.2 5.7 23. 1 5.2 27.3 8 . 1 18.2 6.5

2 . 0 1 .1 12.7 3.9 1. 3 1.3 5.9 4.0 1 . 6 1 .0 1 1 . 0 4.2

113

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
W ithin each m ajor occupation group, and b oth for m en and w om en, jobs of lea st skill and lo w est

w ages tended to be m ore im p ortan t sources of em p loym en t for n on w h ites than for w h ites b oth in 1962

and 1965. H ow ever, significan t gains occurred during this period in the proportion of n on w h ite w orkers

in w hite-collar jobs and in the crafts.

T a b l e IIB-5.—P e r c e n t D is tr ib u tio n a n d P e r c e n t C h an g e o f E m p lo y e d P e r s o n s , b y D e ta ile d O c c u p a tio n ,1 S e x , a n d C o lo r,

1 9 6 2 a n d 1 9 6 5

Percent Percent change, 1962-65 Sex and occupation 1 1962 1965

Nonwhite White Non white White Nonwhite White

MALES

Total employed__________ 1 0 0 . 0 1 0 0 . 0 1 0 0 . 0 1 0 0 . 0 8. 2 4. 5 White-collar workers __ ----------------- ----- 14. 6 40. 8 16. 7 40. 6 23. 1 4. 0 Professional and technical________ ______ 4. 4 1 2 . 2 5. 5 12. 5 35. 3 7. 1 Engineers ----------- -------------- ----- . 3 2. 4 . 6 2. 4 115. 4 3. 6

Teachers, elementary and secondary__ . 8 1. 0 1. 0 1. 1 33. 3 5. 4 Social and welfare workers (except group), religious workers, and clergymen __ _______________________ . 5 . 6 . 7 . 6 6 8 . 4 - 7 . 7 Managers, officials and proprietors_______ 3. 3 15. 1 3. 5 14. 4 15. 7 - . 2

Clerical workers________________________ 5. 4 7. 1 5. 8 7. 1 16. 4 4. 2 Postal clerks--------- ------------------------- . 9 . 4 . 7 . 4 -18. 4 - 2 . 9 Shipping and receiving clerks --------- . 7 . 7 . 8 . 6 2 2 . 6 - 6 . 9 Stock clerks and storekeepers______ _ . 8 . 7 1. 1 . 7 48. 5 1 1 . 0

Sales workers__ ----- ------------------------- 1. 5 6. 4 1. 8 6 . 5 27. 7 7. 4 Blue-collar workers _ _ ------------- 56. 2 44. 8 57. 8 46. 2 11. 3 7. 7 Craftsmen and foremen _ — . -------- 10 . 1 19. 8 10. 9 19. 9 17. 6 5. 2 Brickmasons, stonemasons, and tile 

setters. _______________________ . 6 . 4 . 6 . 4 16. 7 7. 9 Excavating, grading and road machinery operators _______________ _ . 4 . 6 . 3 . 6 10. 3 Carpenters 1. 0 1. 9 1. 0 1. 9 2. 3 4. 1

Foremen, n.e.c_ __________________ . 6 2. 7 . 7 2. 7 32. 0 4. 1 Automobile mechanics___________ __ 1. 4 1. 5 1. 3 1. 7 - 1. 6 18. 9 Other mechanics_______________ — 1. 8 3. 4 1. 9 3. 4 14. 7 3. 4 Painters, construction, and maintenance _ _____________________ . 8 . 9 . 8 1. 0 12. 5 15. 6

O peratives.--- ----------- . . . 24. 3 18. 9 26. 1 19. 7 16. 5 9. 5 Assemblers.. __ ______ _ _ _ . 5 . 7 . 8 . 8 63. 6 17. 1

Attendants, auto service and parking__ 1. 1 . 8 1. 0 . 8 - . 9 Deliverymen and routemen_________ 1. 2 1. 1 1. 2 1. 2 8. 2 18. 2

Filers, grinders, and polishers, metal__ . 4 . 4 . 4 . 4 26. 7 1 2. 2

Laundry and dry cleaning operatives__ 1. 2 . 1 . 8 . 1 -24. 0 Packers and wrappers, n.e.c _____ __ . 8 . 4 1. 0 . 5 40. 6 18. 2

Taxicab drivers and chauffeurs _____ . 8 . 3 . 7 . 3 -3 . 3 Truck and tractor drivers 4. 9 3. 3 4. 9 3. 2 8 . 7 1. 4 Welders and flame-cutters._ . . _____ . 7 . 8 . 7 1. 0 3. 4 31. 6

See footnote at end of table.

114

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Table IIB -5 .— Percent Distribution and Percent Change of Employed Persons, by Detailed O ccupationSex, and Color,

1962 and 1965—Continued

Sex and occupation 1

Percent Percent change, 1962-65 1962 1965

Non white White Nonwhite White Nonwhite White

males—continued

Nonfarm laborers. _______ _ ___ ___ 21. 9 6 . 2 2 0 . 8 6 . 6 2 . 6 1 0. 8

Carpenters’ helpers, except logging and

mining______ _ --------------- . 5 . 1 . 5 . 2 19. 0 1 2 . 1

Garage laborers, and car washers and

greasers_____________________________ 1. 2 . 2 1. 1 . 2 - 2 . 0 10. 4 Gardeners, except farm, and groundskeepers. _________________________ . 1. 3 . 7 1. 4 . 8 16. 1 18. 5 Longshoremen and stevedores. _ _ . 7 . 1 . 6 . 1 -3 . 3 3. 2 Lumbermen, raftsmen, and woodchoppers. _ . 5 . 2 . 7 . 2 30. 4 5. 3 Warehousemen, n.e.c.. _ ------------— . 5 . 2 . 4 . 2 -4 . 8 7. 1 Service workers. ______________ __________ 15. 9 5. 9 15. 6 6. 1 5. 9 7. 7 Private household workers____________ __ . 6 . 1 . 4 . 1 25. 0 4. 9 Other service workers___________________ 15. 4 5. 8 15. 2 6. 0 7. 1 7. 8

Attendants. ___________________ _ 1. 2 . 5 1. 2 . 4 1 0. 2 - 8. 1

Barbers__________________________ . 5 . 4 . 5 . 4 9. 1 - 1. 1

Cleaners _ _ _____________________ . 5 . 1 . 5 . 2 20 4 Cooks, except private household 1. 4 . 4 1. 4 . 4 3. 3 18. 2

Janitors and sextons _ ____ 4. 3 1. 0 4. 6 1. 2 15. 9 16. 9 Kitchen workers, n.e.c., except private household___________ — _____ 1. 3 . 3 1. 3 . 3 5. 4 11. 3 Porters ________________ ____ 2. 7 . 1 2. 2 . 1 -10. 5 5. 4 Protective service workers___________ . 8 1. 8 . 8 1. 9 9. 1 8. 6

Waiters_______ ___________________ . 8 . 2 . 9 . 2 2 1 . 2 -7 . 3 Farm workers____________________ -------- 13. 2 8. 5 9. 9 7. 1 -19. 0 -12. 3 Farmers and farm managers____ 4. 2 5. 6 2 . 6 4. 7 -31. 3 - 1 2 . 2

Farmers__________________________ 4. 1 5. 5 2 . 6 4. 6 -30. 1 - 1 2 . 1

Farm laborers, and foremen______________ 9. 0 2. 9 7. 2 2. 4 -13. 4 -12. 4 Farm laborers, wage workers _______ 7. 6 2 . 0 6 . 5 1. 7 - 7 . 2 -14. 2 Farm laborers, unpaid family workers. _ 1. 4 . 8 . 7 . 7 -48. 3 -10. 7

FEMALES

Total employed_____________________ 1 0 0 . n 1 0 0 . 0 1 0 0 . 0 1 0 0 . 0 10. 5 9. 7 White-collar workers_______________________ 19. 7 60. 1 23. 3 60. 8 31. 1 1 1. 0

Professional and technical. ____ _ _ __ 6 . 7 13. 4 8 . 2 13. 7 35. 4 1 2. 6

Nurses, student and professional 1. 1 2. 9 1. 1 2 . 8 12. 9 6 . 4 Teachers, elementary and secondary__ 3. 6 5. 0 4. 2 5. 0 28. 8 9. 3 Technicians_______________________ . 3 . 6 . 6 . 8 1 1 1 . 1 39. 1 Managers, officials and proprietors _____ _ 1. 5 5. 4 1. 6 4. 9 18. 2 - 1. 6

Clerical workers_______________ _____ 9. 7 33. 0 11. 5 33. 9 30. 4 1 2 . 8

Bookkeepers __________ _ . _ . 5 4. 6 . 6 4. 5 35. 7 6 . 8

Cashiers___________________ _ _ . 5 2 . 2 1. 1 2. 4 126. 7 2 0 . 6

Office machine operators.__ . 7 1. 4 . 9 1. 3 52. 6 9. 6

Secretaries, stenographers, and typists. _ 3. 1 1 1. 6 3. 3 12. 3 15. 4 16. 3 Telephone operators. _____________ . 4 1. 5 . 7 1. 4 61. 5 4. 0

Sales workers_______ _______________ 1. 7 8. 3 2. 0 8 . 2 30. 0 9. 4

See footnote at end of table.

115

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
T able IIB -5.—Percent Distribution and Percent Change of Employed Persons, by Detailed Occupation,x Sex, and Color, 1962 and 1965— Continued

Sex and occupation 1

Per

1962

cent

1965

Percent change, 1962-65

Nonwhite White Nonwhite White Nonwhite White

females—continued

Blue-collar workers __ ----- — --------------- 15. 4 16. 2 15. 8 16. 6 13. 1 11. 9 Craftsmen and foremen — . 6 1. 1 . 7 1. 1 2 2 . 2 17. 3 Operatives____ - --------------- 14. 0 14. 8 14. 4 15. 0 14. 0 1 1. 2

Assemblers __ ----- ------ . 7 1. 3 . 9 1. 4 45. 0 16. 3 Dressmakers and seamstresses, except factory_________ ___ ____ . 4 . 7 . 5 . 6 15. 4 Laundry and dry cleaning operatives__ 4. 4 . 9 4. 1 . 9 3. 9 14. 9 Packers and wrappers, n.e.c ------------ 1. 3 1. 4 1. 3 1. 3 1 0 . 8 3. 5 Sewers and stitchers, manufacturing---- 1. 6 3. 1 1. 9 3. 2 32. 6 14. 8

Nonfarm laborers ----- ----------- . 9 . 3 . 7 . 4 - 8 . 0 24. 6

Service workers---- ----------------- — -- 57. 5 20. 4 55. 2 19. 9 5. 9 6 . 6

Private household workers----------------- 35. 7 6. 4 30. 9 5. 8 -4 . 2 - 0 . 2

Babysitters _ _ _ 2 . 2 3. 5 2 . 2 3. 5 10. 9 1 0. 8

Housekeepers. _ — . ____ 1. 8 . 7 1. 4 . 5 -11. 5 -14. 5 Laundresses____________ ____ 1. 2 . 3 . 8 . 3 -25. 0 - 8 . 8

Other private household workers,

n.e.c ------ . — 30. 4 1. 9 26. 5 1. 5 -3 . 8 -13. 9 Other service workers. _ ------------------------ 2 1 . 8 14. 0 24. 2 14. 0 22. 5 9. 6

Attendants._ _. ------ --------------- 4. 0 1. 7 4. 6 1. 8 28. 4 20. 5 Boarding and lodging housekeepers----- . 7 1. 0 . 8 . 9 28. 6 - 3 . 5 Chambermaids and maids, except pri- vate household-------- -------------- 3. 3 . 4 3. 8 . 4 26. 0 8 . 3 Charwomen and cleaners. 1. 0 . 5 1. 3 . 6 40. 0 18. 3 Cooks, except private household _ 2. 9 1. 4 3. 5 1. 4 34. 9 1 0 . 0

Counter and fountain workers ______ . 4 . 5 . 6 . 6 38. 5 28. 9 Hairdressers and cosmetologists. ------- 1. 7 1. 5 1. 4 1. 6 - 8. 2 21. 9 Housekeepers, except private household. . 5 . 7 . 7 . 6 53. 3 3. 8

Janitors and sextons_____ — . 6 . 3 . 7 . 3 35. 3 16. 9 Kitchen workers, n.e.c. except private household _ --------------- — 2. 2 . 8 1. 8 . 8 - 7 . 8 1. 2

Practical nurses______ ____ 1. 7 1. 0 2. 4 . 9 55. 1 3. 1

Waitresses. ------ ---------- 1. 8 3. 7 1. 7 3. 5 7. 8 2. 9 Farmworkers — ----------- 7. 4 3. 2 5. 7 2 . 8 -15. 3 -4 . 3 Farmers and farm managers ------ . 6 . 6 . 5 . 5 - 1 1 . 8 -1 . 7

Farmers--- -------- . . 6 . 6 . 5 . 5 - 1 1 . 8 - 2 . 6

Farm laborers and foremen____ _ 6 . 8 2. 7 5. 2 2. 3 -15. 7 -4 . 9

Farm laborers, wage workers __ __ 4. 3 . 5 3. 8 . 4 - 2 . 4 -9 . 3

Farm laborers, unpaid family workers._ _________ _____ 2. 5 2 . 1 1. 4 1. 9 -37. 8 - 4 . 2

1 Not all detailed occupations are shown. Those not shown separately represent less than 0.5 percent of nonwhite male or nonwhite female employment in

that occupation in 1965.

N ote.—Dashes (...) indicate no change.

Because of rounding, sums of individual items may not equal totals.

Source: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics; data are from a special detailed analysis by occupation of each year’s statistics from the Current Population Survey.

Digitized for 

116

FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
A m ong detailed m ale occupations, significant increases am ong n on w h ites occurred in the 1950-60

decade in law , d en tistry, and teach in g. Sharp increases also took place am ong m ail carriers, painters

and welders in in d u stry. M ajor declines were in farm ing, m anagerial occu p ation s, and the m in istry, as

w ell as in p rivate household work.

T a b l e IIB -6 .— N eg ro a n d W h ite M a le E m p lo y m e n t in S elected O c c u p a tio n s, 1 9 5 0 a n d 1 9 6 0

Occupation 1950 1960 Negroes as percent of employment

Percent change 1950-60

Total Negro White Total Negro White 1950 1960 Negro White

Employed males, 14 and 

over _ _____ __ 40, 510 3, 500

(In tho 

36, 830

usands) 

43, 467 3, 644 39, 462 9 8 4 7

Professional, technical, and kindred workers________ 2, 970 75 2, 887 4, 479 113 4, 324 3 3 49 50 Clergymen _ _ _ 161 18 142 196 14 181 1 1 7 -2 3 28 Dentists_____ ____ 73 1 71 81 2 78 2 3 31 1 0 Lawyers and judges. ______ 174 1 173 205 2 2 0 2 1 1 47 17 Musicians and music teachers _ 76 6 70 82 6 76 7 7 3 9

Physicians and surgeons___ 180 4 176 213 4 205 2 2 1 2 17 Teachers. . . . 286 19 266 475 31 442 7 6 65 6 6 Farmers and farm managers 4, 190 464 3, 699 2, 388 154 2 , 2 1 2 1 1 6 -6 7 -4 0 Managers, officials, and 

proprietors _ . . . 4, 341 67 4, 258 4, 630 63 4, 539 2 1 - 6 7

Clerical and salesworkers__ 5, 199 145 5, 042 5, 993 226 5, 732 3 4 55 14 Mail carriers . _ . __ 162 1 2 149 192 2 0 172 8 1 0 64 15 Real estate agents and brokers______ . 12 0 2 118 147 2 144 2 2 16 2 2 Craftsmen, foremen, and kindred workers . _ _ _ 7, 537 269 7, 256 8 , 489 357 8 , 082 4 4 32 1 1 Bakers___ _ __ 106 6 99 91 7 83 6 8 16 -1 6 Cabinetmakers and pattern­ makers____ _ _ _ __ _ 107 2 104 103 2 101 2 2 -1 6 - 4 Carpenters 908 35 872 816 36 773 4 4 4 - 1 1 Compositors and typesetters. __ ____ 164 2 162 164 4 160 1 2 63 - 1 Electricians_____________ 307 3 303 335 5 327 1 1 54 8

Masons, tile setters_______ 173 18 155 191 2 2 168 1 0 1 1 2 1 9

Painters. . . 410 2 2 387 386 26 357 5 7 2 0 - 8 Plasterers and cement finishers____ 89 17 72 87 19 67 19 2 2 9 - 6 Plumbers and pipefitters___ 276 8 267 303 1 0 292 3 3 2 2 9

Operatives and kindred workers _ _ 8 , 127 738 7, 368 8 , 642 887 7, 702 9 1 0 2 0 5

Painters, excluding con­ struction and maintenance- __ 103 7 96 125 13 111 7 1 0 74 16 Welders and flame cutters __ 251 9 241 344 19 322 4 6 109 34 Service, excluding private household _ _ 2, 373 464 1, 883 2, 599 508 2, 050 2 0 2 0 9 9

Private household workers. . 73 36 34 61 27 32 49 45 -2 4 - 8 Farm laborers and foremen 1, 950 360 1, 556 1, 2 0 2 257 916 19 2 1 -2 9 -4 1 Laborers, excluding farm and 

m ine.. __ 3, 290 828 2, 442 2, 998 745 2 , 2 2 1 25 25 - 1 0 - 9 Occupation not reported 458 51 405 1, 987 307 1, 652 1 1 16 506 308

Note.—Totals include occupations not shown separately.

Source: 1960 C en su s o f P o p u la tio n , D etailed, C h a racteristics, U n ite d S ta te s S u m m a ry , PC(1)-1D, table 205,1 9 5 0 C en su s o f P o p u la tio n , Vol. II, C h a ra cteristics o f

th e P o p u la tio n , Part 1, U n ite d S ta te s S u m m a ry , table 159.

1X7

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
T h e m ost significant recent advances (1962-64) in n on w h ite m ale em p loym en t w ere in con stru ction ,

retail and w holesale trade, and in ed u cation al services; for n on w h ite w om en, h ow ever, ad van ces w ere

greatest in retail trade, en tertain m ent and recreation, ed u cation services, and in the h ealth field (m edical

and h osp ital services).

T a b l e IIB-7.— E m p lo y e d P e r s o n s , b y I n d u s tr y

Industry

Males

1962 1964

Nonwhite White Nonwhite White

Total employed (in thousands) _ _ _ — 4, 220 40, 672 4, 429 41, 710 Percent distribution _ _ 1 0 0 . 0 1 0 0 . 0 1 0 0 . 0 1 0 0 . 0

Agriculture____________________________________ 14. 4 9. 0 1 1 . 2 8 . 1

Nonagricultural industries, ___ _ _ ___ 85. 6 91. 0 8 8 . 8 91. 9 Forestry, fisheries, and mining . 6 1. 5 . 7 1. 4 Construction------- -------------- - ------------ 9. 5 9. 1 10. 3 9. 1 Manufacturing ------ ---------- --------------- 24. 5 29. 8 24. 3 30. 5 Durable goods ._ -------- - - 15. 0 18. 3 15. 5 19. 0 Lumber and wood products._ __ — 2 . 8 1. 1 2. 5 1. 2

Furniture and fixtures______________ . 5 . 8 . 6 . 8

Stone-clay-glass products________ _ _ 1. 1 1. 0 1. 0 1. 0

Primary metal industries___________ 2. 9 2 . 1 3. 3 2. 4 Fabricated metal products----------------- 1. 6 2. 7 1. 9 2 . 6

Machinery, except electrical--------- . 9 3. 4 1. 2 3. 6

Electrical machinery __ . -------------- 1. 1 2. 4 1. 1 2. 3 Transportation equipment _ . . . 3. 5 3. 4 3. 4 3. 8

Automobiles.. _________________ 2 . 1 1. 6 2 . 2 1. 8

All other. _ _ — — ------------ 1. 4 1. 8 1. 2 2 . 0

Instruments___________________ . 2 . 7 . 1 . 6

Miscellaneous manufacturing— -------- . 4 . 7 . 4 . 1

Nondurable goods ----- -------- ----------- 9. 5 11. 5 8 . 8 11. 5 Food and kindred products______ — 3. 5 2. 9 3. 4 3. 1 Textile mill products. --------------- . 8 1. 2 . 8 1. 2

Apparel --------------------- ------------- . 8 . 7 . 6 . 7 Printing and publishing industry--------- 1. 1 2. 1 . 9 2 . 0

Chemicals and allied products------- 1. 2 1. 8 1. 2 1. 7 Other nondurable goods --------- 2 . 1 2 . 8 1. 9 2 . 8

Transportation and public utilities. _ — 8 . 3 8 . 4 8 . 7 8 . 3 Railroads and railway express.. ------------- 1. 7 1. 9 1. 6 1. 7 Other transportation. _ __________ — 4. 2 3. 5 4. 1 3. 6

Communications------------ -------------- . 2 1. 0 . 3 1. 1

Other public utilities________ ________ 2 . 2 2 . 0 2. 7 1. 9 Trade _ ------------- --------------- --------------- 16. 1 18. 2 17. 3 18. 3 Wholesale trade. __ ----------- 3. 8 4. 5 4. 1 4. 4

Retail trade___ ._ ----------------- ._ 12. 3 13. 7 13. 2 13. 9 Eating and drinking places. _ _ 3. 2 1. 8 3. 6 1. 8

Other retail trade. _ ____________ 9. 1 11. 9 9. 6 1 2 . 1

See footnotes at end of table.

118

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Detail, Color, and Sex, 1962 and 1964 (annual averages)

Nonwhite as a percent of total males

Females Nonwhite as a percent of total females 1962 1964

1962 1964 Nonwhite White Nonwhite White 1962 1964

9. 4 9. 6 2 , 878 20, 077 3, 052 21, 167 12. 5 1 2. 6

1 0 0. 0 1 0 0 . 0 1 0 0 . 0 1 0 0 . 0

14 3 1 2. 8 7. 7 3. 5 6. 2 3. 2 23. 9 21. 7

8 . 9 9. 3 92. 3 96. 5 93. 8 96. 8 1 2. 1 12. 3

4. 4 4. 9 0 )

. 2 0 ) . 2 (2) (2) 9. 8 10. 7 . 2 . 9 . 1 . 9 3. 1 1. 5 7. 8 7. 8 9. 6 20. 5 1 0. 0 20. 7 6. 2 6. 5 7. 8 8 . 0 3. 3 8 . 3 2. 9 8 . 4 5. 3 4 8

20. 7 18. 8 . 1 . 2 . 1 . 1 (2) (2)

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

9. 9 9. 6 . 1 . 4 . 1 . 3 3. 2 4 1

12. 4 1 2. 8 . 1 . 3 . 1 . 4 3. 1 4 5

5. 9 7. 1 . 3 1. 1 . 3 1. 2 3. 8 3. 8

2 . 8 3. 3 . 2 1. 1 . 2 1. 2 2 . 2 2. 0

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

11. 5 11. 9 . 1 . 4 . 2 . 4 5. 4 7. 6

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

2. 9 2 . 2 . 1 . 6 . 1 . 5 2. 4 1. 7 5. 4 6. 2 . 8 . 8 . 7 . 9 1 1. 6 10. 4 7. 9 7. 5 6. 3 1 2 . 2 7. 1 12. 3 6 . 9 7. 7

1 1. 0 1 0. 6 1. 6 1. 7 1. 3 1. 8 1 1. 6 9. 6

6 . 4 6. 8 . 3 1. 9 . 5 1. 9 2. 5 3. 8

10. 5 8 . 3 2. 7 4 0 3. 0 4. 1 8 . 8 9. 4 5. 4 4. 7 . 6 1. 5 . 7 1. 4 5. 4 6 . 4

6 . 6 7. 1 . 2 . 8 . 3 . 8 3. 0 5. 3

7. 2 6 . 5 . 9 2. 3 1. 3 2. 3 5. 3 7. 8

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

8 . 3 9. 2 . 1 . 2 . 1 . 2 (2) 4 7

1 1. 0 1 0 . 8 . 3 1. 0 . 3 . 9 4 4 4. 3

2. 4 3. 2 . 6 2 . 1 . 9 1. 9 4. 0 6 . 1

1 0. 0 13. 1 . 1 . 7 . 1 . 5 1. 5 3. 5

8 . 4 9. 1 10. 5 22. 9 1 1 . 0 22. 4 6 . 2 6. 6

8 . 1 9. 1 . 9 2. 4 . 6 2 . 1 5. 2 4. 1

8 . 5 9. 1 9. 6 20. 5 10. 4 20. 3 6 . 3 6 . 9 15. 4 17. 4 4 5 5. 3 4. 6 5. 1 10. 9 11. 5 7. 4 7. 7 5. 1 15. 2 5. 8 15. 2 4. 6 5. 2

119

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Table IIB -7 .— Employed Persons, by Industry

Males

Industry 1962 1964

Nonwhite White Nonwhite White

Nonagricultural industries—Continued Service and finance . ________ __ . ----- 20. 4 18. 3 21. 2 18. 5 Finance, insurance, and real estate 2. 3 3. 8 2. 3 4. 0 Service industries _____ 18. 1 14. 5 18. 9 14. 5 Business and repair services _ _ _ _ 3. 4 3. 3 3. 1 3. 2

Business services . 9 1. 3 1. 0 1. 3

Repair services _ 2. 5 2. 0 2. 1 1. 9 Personal services ____ . _____ 6. 3 2. 7 5. 9 2. 6 Private household 2. 2 . 6 2. 3 . 6 Other personal services __ 4. 1 2. 1 3. 6 2. 0 Entertainment and recreation - _ 1. 2 . 9 1. 3 . 9 Professional services _ 7. 2 7. 6 8. 6 7. 8 Medical services _. _ . _ . 5 . 9 . 6 . 9 Hospital________ ________ — 2. 7 1. 0 2. 7 1. 0 Welfare and religion . 8 . 8 . 8 . 8 Educational services . ------ 2. 5 3. 2 3. 7 3. 3 Other professional services _ . . 7 1. 7 . 8 1. 8 Public administration _____ 6. 2 5. 6 6. 2 5. 8 Postal service __ — 2. 1 1. 1 1. 7 1. 1 Federal administration _ _ ---------- 2. 4 2. 0 2. 6 1. 9 State administration . . . _ . 5 . 7 . 5 . 8 Local administration _ _ _ _ _ 1. 2 1. 8 1. 4 2. 0

1 Less than 0.05 percent.

2 Percent not shown where base is less than 50,000.

Source: U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics.

120

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Detail, Color, and Sex, 1962 and 196^ (annual averages)—Continued

Nonwhite as a percent of total males

Females Nonwhite as a percent of total females 1962 1964

1962 1964 Non white White Non white White 1962 1964

10. 3 10. 8 66. 9 44. 0 67. 2 44. 5 17. 9 17. 9

6. 0 5. 8 1. 8 6. 6 1. 8 6. 8 3; 7 3. 7

11. 4 12. 1 65. 1 37. 4 65. 4 37. 7 20. 0 20. 0 9. 7 9. 4 . 6 1. 9 . 7 2. 0 3. 9 4. 6

6. 5 7. 8 . 5 1. 5 . 6 1. 7 4. 1 4. 5

11. 6 10. 5 . 1 . 4 . 1 . 3 2. 7 5. 5

19. 1 19. 3 45. 3 12. 4 42. 5 11. 9 34. 5 34. 1

26. 5 28. 8 35. 7 6. 6 33. 1 6. 3 43. 7 43. 2

16. 7 15. 9 9. 6 5. 8 9. 4 5. 6 19. 3 19. 5

11. 4 13. 0 . 6 . 9 . 6 . 8 8. 9 10. 2

9. 0 10. 4 18. 6 22. 2 21. 6 23. 0 10. 7 11. 9

6. 1 6. 6 1. 8 2. 8 2. 4 3. 1 8. 4 10. 2

22. 3 22. 9 8. 2 5. 9 8. 9 6. 1 16. 6 17. 3

8. 6 9. 9 . 9 1. 3 . 9 1. 2 9. 3 9. 5

7. 7 10. 4 7. 1 10. 3 8. 7 10. 6 9. 0 10. 6

4. 1 4. 1 . 6 1. 9 . 7 2. 0 4. 1 4. 6

10. 3 10. 3 4. 2 4. 1 4. 1 4. 4 12. 8 11. 8 16. 3 14. 9 . 2 . 3 . 4 . 3 10. 4 14. 9

11. 0 12. 5 2. 2 1. 7 2. 1 1. 7 15. 2 15. 4

6. 8 6. 2 . 6 . 8 . 7 1. 0 9. 7 9. 0

6. 7 7. 1 1. 2 1. 3 . 9 1. 4 12. 0 8. 3

121

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Over the decade 1950-60, m ost of the relative decline in labor or service jobs among Negroes and

whites reflected gains in the skilled and semiskilled occupations, but among the Chinese and Japanese,

m ost of the shift was toward white-collar jobs.

T a b l e IIB -8 .—P erce n t D is tr ib u tio n o f E m p lo y e d M a le s , b y R a c e a n d B r o a d O c c u p a tio n G ro u p , C o n te r m in o u s U n ite d S ta te s,

1 9 5 0 a n d 1 9 6 0

Occupation group Negroes Chinese Japanese White

1950

All occupations__ __ — 1 0 0 . 0 1 0 0 . 0 1 0 0 . 0 1 0 0 . 0

Professional, managerial, clerical, sales 1 2 1 . 6 41. 1 39.4 43. 1 Farmers and farm managers. _ 13.3 1.4 15.3 1 0 . 0 Craftsmen and operatives 2__ 28.8 19.8 17.4 39. 7 Laborers and service 3 _ 48. 5 37.8 42. 1 16. 0

Occupation unknown__ 1.5 1.3 1. 1 1 . 1

1960

All occupations _ - 1 0 0 . 0 1 0 0 . 0 1 0 0 . 0 1 0 0 . 0

Professional, managerial, clerical, sales 1 15. 3 47. 3 56.7 42.6

Farmers and farm managers. _ _ . . . 4.3 .7 17. 1 5.6 Craftsmen and operatives 2_ 34. 2 17. 6 2 0 . 1 40. 0 Laborers and service 3 _ 42. 1 28.0 18. 5 13.2

Occupation unknown____ __. . . ----- 8.4 7. 1 4. 8 4. 2

1 Covers professional, technical, and kindred workers; farmers and farm

managers; managers, officials, and proprietors; clerical and kindred workers;

and sales workers. 2 Covers craftsmen, foremen, and kindred workers, and operatives and

kindred workers.

3 Covers all laborers (farm, nonfarm, and mine), private household workers,

and service workers.

Source: I960 C en su s o f P o p u la tio n , D eta ile d C h ara cteristics, U n ited S ta te s

S u m m a ry , Final Report PC(1)-1D, table 205; 1950 C en su s o f P o p u la tio n ,

Vol. II, Part 1, U n ited S ta tes S u m m a ry , table 159; 1960 C en su s o f P o p u la tio n ,

S u b ject R e p o rts, N o n w h ite P o p u la tio n by R a ce, PC(2)-1C, tables 39 and 40;

and 1950 C en su s o f P o p u la tio n , Vol. IV, S p ec ia l R e p o r ts, Part 3, Chapter B,

N o n w h ite P o p u la tio n by R a ce, tables 11 and 12.

N ote.—Because of rounding, sums of individual items may not total

100.0.

The proportion of nonwhite children enrolled in school has increased since 1953, so that almost

equal proportions of nonwhite and white 5-17 year olds were in school in 1964, but a much smaller proportion of nonwhites were of college age.

T a b l e IIC-1.—P e r c e n t o f P e r s o n s 5 - 2 4 Y e a r s O ld E n ro lle d in S ch o ol, b y A g e a n d C olor, O ctober o f S elected Y e a rs , 1 9 5 3 - 6 5

Age

1953 1958 1960 1965 Percentage points by which white exceed nonwhite

Non­ white White Non­ white White Non­ white White Non- wrhite White 1953 1958 1960 1965

5 and 6 _ 63 81 74 81 73 82 79 85 18 7 9 6

7-13_______________________ 97 1 0 0 99 1 0 0 99 1 0 0 99 99 3 1 1 0 )

14-17______________________ 82 8 6 83 90 87 91 92 93 4 7 4 1

18-19______________________ 28 32 34 38 35 39 40 47 4 4 4 7

20-24______________________ 5 12 9 14 8 14 1 0 2 0 7 5 6 1 0

1 Less than 0.5 percent.

Source: C u rren t P o p u la tio n R e p o rts, P o p u la tio n C h a racteristics, “ School Enrollment, October 1963,” Series P-20, No. 129, p. 3, table D for 1953, 1958, and

1963; unpublished data from Current Population Survey for 1965 (U.S. Bureau of the Census).

122

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
School enrollment among 14-17 and 18-19 year olds has risen more sharply for non whites than

whites, during 1948-63. The white/nonwhite gap has been virtually eliminated among 14-17 year olds

and has been substantially reduced for the others.

T a b l e IIC-2.—P erce n t o f M a le s 1J+-19 Y e a rs O ld E n ro lle d in S ch o ol, b y C olor a n d A g e G ro u p , 1 9 4 8 - 64 (3 -y e a r m o vin g

avera ges, cen tered , a n n u a lly )

Year

Nonwhite 1 White

Year

Non white 1 White

14 to 17

years

18 and 19 

years

14 to 17

years

18 and 19 

years

14 to 17

years

18 and 19 

years

14 to 17

years

18 and 19

years

1948_____ 6 8 . 4 23. 6 82. 7 33. 5 1957_____ 84. 5 39. 6 91. 0 46. 2

1949_____ 70.7 23.3 84.5 35. 1 1958_____ 8 6 . 2 39. 1 91.7 46.4

1950_____ 74.3 23. 2 85. 2 34. 4 1959_____ 87. 5 38. 6 91.6 48.2

1951_____ 75.6 (2) 8 6 . 2 36. 5 1960_____ 87.8 38.0 92. 1 48.7

1952_____ 75.5 (2) 87.2 36.7 1961_____ 8 8 . 8 39.6 92.9 50.6

1953_____ 78.1 (2) 8 8 . 2 39.9 1962_____ 90.2 42. 8 93.8 51.3

1954_____ 82.4 29.7 88.9 41.8 1963_____ 91.4 42. 5 94.4 52.2

1955_____ 83. 1 30.4 89.6 44.5 1964_____ 92. 1 45. 0 94.3 53.8

1956— . . . 83.7 36. 1 90.4 44. 8

1 The percentage figures for nonwhite males, and especially for those aged

18 and 19 years, have an especially large standard error because they are

computed from a small base.

2 Data not available.

Note.—Enrollment as of October in each year. Alaska and Hawaii

included beginning 1960.

Source: C u rren t P o p u la tio n R e p o r ts, Series P-20, Nos. 19, 24, 30, 34, 40, 45,

52, 54, 66, 74, 80, 93,101, 110,117,126, 129,148, and unpublished data from the

current Population Survey (U.S. Bureau of the Census).

A t ages 14-17, Negro boys and girls were enrolled in school in equal proportions in 1960. At

ages 18-29, a larger proportion of Negro young men then young women were enrolled. Among the

white and other races, however, the ratio of male to female enrollment was higher at all ages 14-29.

T a b l e IIC-3.—P e r c e n t o f P e r s o n s 14~%9 Y e a rs O ld E n r o lle d in S ch o ol, b y A g e , R a ce, a n d S ex , C o n te r m in o u s U n ite d S ta te s,

1 9 6 0

Age

Percent enrolled in school Enrolled males per 100 females

Negro Other nonwhite 1 White Negro Other nonwhite White

Male Female Male Female Male Female

14 and 15 years__ 90 90 91 92 95 94 1 0 0 106 105 16 and 17 years 73 73 78 77 82 82 1 0 0 108 105 18 and 19 years 39 36 54 45 48 38 99 1 2 1 123 20 and 24 years 1 1 9 33 19 2 1 1 0 109 189 197 25 and 29 years 6 4 23 7 1 0 3 127 285 312

1 Includes Chinese, Japanese, Indians, Koreans, Hawaiians, Aleuts, etc.

Source: 1960, C en su s o f P o p u la tio n : S u bject R e p o rts, E m p lo y m e n t S ta tu s a n d W ork E x p erien ce, PC(2)-6A, table 10 (U.S. Bureau of the Census).

217-817 0-H&6-------9 123

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Labor force participation rates among teenagers (14 to 19 years old) have tended to decline (1954-

65) as more remained in school, but the decline has been least in the 16-17 year old group. Also, because the 1 6 -17-year-olds compete for jobs with those 18 and 19— who have more education and

experience— and because they are more often looking for part-tim e and interm ittent work, they tend to

show the highest unemployment rates among all teenagers.

T a b l e IIC-4.—E m p lo y m e n t S ta tu s o f T ee n a g ers, b y C olor, S ex , a n d A g e , 1 9 5 4 , 1 9 6 1 , a n d 1 9 6 5 (a n n u a l a ve ra g e s)

Year

Employed persons (in thousands) Unemployment rates

Male Female Male Female

Nonwhite White Nonwhite White Nonwhite White Nonwhite White

18- AND 19-YEAR-OLDS

1954_________________________ 153 964 81 874 13. 5 11. 9 2 0 . 8 9. 0 1961_________________________ 160 1, 164 105 1, 056 23. 9 15. 1 28. 2 13. 6

1965_________________________ 181 1, 453 1 1 1 1, 217 2 0 . 2 11. 4 27. 8 13. 4 Percent change: 1954-65__________________ 18. 3 50. 7 37. 0 39. 2 49. 6 -4 . 2 33. 7 48. 9

1961-65__________________ 13. 1 24. 8 5. 7 15. 2 -15. 5 -24. 5 -1 . 4 -1 . 5

16- AND 17-YEAR-OLDS

1954_________________________ 11 0 774 56 492 13. 4 13. 5 17. 6 1 1. 1

1961_________________________ 98 891 51 581 31. 0 16. 5 31. 1 17. 0

1965_________________________ 126 1, 159 57 733 27. 1 14. 7 37. 8 15. 0 Percent change: 1954-65__________________ 14. 5 49. 7 1. 8 49. 0 1 0 2. 2 8. 9 114. 8 35. 1

1961-65__________________ 28. 6 30. 1 1 1. 8 26. 2 - 1 2. 6 -10. 9 21. 5 - 1 1. 8

14- AND 15-YEAR-OLDS

1954_________________________ 75 473 42 192 5. 1 4. 4 10. 5 6. 3

1961_________________________ 6 6 597 38 351 14. 3 8. 0 13. 6 6 . 6

1965_________________________ 72 622 32 365 20. 3 7. 1 19. 0 4. 4 Percent change:

1954-65__________________ -4 . 0 31. 5 -23. 8 90. 1 298. 0 61. 4 79. 2 -30. 2

1961-65__________________ 9. 1 4. 2 -15. 8 4. 0 42. 0 -11. 3 39. 7 -33. 3

Digitized 

124

for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Table IIC -4.—Employment Status of Teenages,by Color, Sex, and Age, 1954,1961, and 1965 (annual averages)—Continued

Labor force participation rates Nonwhite to white ratios

Year Male Female Unemployment rate Labor force partici­ pation rate

Nonwhite White Nonwhite White Male Female Male Female

1954

1961

1965 Percent change: 

1954-65.-. 1961-65...

1954

1961

1965 Percent change: 1954-65... 

1961-65...

1954

1961

1965 Percent change: 1954-65... 

1961-65...

18- AND 19-YEAR-OLDS

78. 4 70. 4 37. 7 52. 1 1. 13 2. 31 1. 1 1 0. 72 70. 5 6 6 . 2 44. 6 51. 9 1. 58 2. 07 1. 06 . 8 6

6 6 . 7 65. 8 40. 0 50. 6 1. 77 2. 07 1. 0 1 . 79

-14. 9 - 6. 5 6. 1 -2 . 9

- 5 . 4 - 0. 6 -10. 3 -2 . 5

16- AND 17-YEAR-OLDS

46. 7 47. 1 24. 5 29. 3 0. 99 1. 59 0. 99 0. 84 42. 5 44. 3 2 1 . 6 29. 4 1. 8 8 1. 83 . 96 . 73

39. 3 44. 6 20. 5 28. 7 1. 84 2. 52 . 8 8 . 71

-15. 8 - 5 . 3 -16. 3 - 2. 0

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

14- AND 15-YEAR-OLDS

27. 2 24. 5 16. 2 10. 5 1. 16 1. 6 8 1. 1 1 1. 54

19. 2 2 2 . 2 1 1. 0 13. 5 1. 79 2 . 06 . 8 6 . 81

18. 9 21. 7 8. 1 12. 9 2. 8 6 4. 32 . 87 . 63

— 30. 5 -11. 4 — 50. 0 22. 9

- 1. 6 -2 . 3 -26. 4 -4 . 4

Source: U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics. Data are annual averages from the regular monthly Current Population Survey.

125

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
The ratio of nonwhite to white unemployment rates has become greatest in recent years for teenage

girls; unemployment rates for the nonwhite girls are usually the highest in the labor force.

T a b l e IIC-5.— U n e m p lo y m e n t R a te s f o r A ll W o rk e rs a n d f o r T ee n a g ers,1 b y C olor a n d S ex , 1 9 5 4 - 6 5

Total civilian labor force Male

All ages Teenage All ages Teenage

Total Nonwhite White Total Nonwhite White Total Nonwhite White Total Nonwhite White

1954________ 5. 6 8 . 9 4. 6 11. 4 13. 8 10. 3 4. 9 9. 2 4. 4 1 1. 2 11. 7 1 1. 0

1955________ 4. 4 8 . 0 3. 6 1 0. 2 14. 2 9. 0 3. 9 8 . 2 3. 4 9. 9 13. 2 9. 6

1956________ 4. 2 7. 5 3. 3 10 4 15. 9 8 . 8 3. 5 7. 3 3. 1 9. 6 13. 6 8 . 9 1957________ 4. 3 8 . 0 3. 9 1 0. 8 18. 0 9. 9 4. 1 8 . 4 3. 7 11. 3 17. 5 10. 5 1958________ 6 . 8 1 2. 6 6. 1 14. 4 25. 0 13. 0 6 . 8 13. 7 6. 1 15. 2 24. 3 14. 0

1959________ 5. 5 10. 7 4. 9 13. 2 23. 5 11. 9 5. 3 11. 5 4. 6 13. 8 2 2 . 8 12. 5

1960________ 5. 6 1 0. 2 5. 0 13. 6 2 2 . 1 12. 4 5. 4 10. 7 4. 8 14. 0 2 2 . 0 12. 9

1961_______ 6. 7 12. 5 6 . 0 15. 2 25. 4 13. 8 6 . 5 12. 9 5. 7 15. 4 24. 7 14. 1

1962________ 5. 6 1 1. 0 4. 9 13. 3 23. 7 1 2. 0 5. 3 1 1. 0 4. 6 13. 3 20. 7 12. 3

1963________ 5. 7 10. 9 5. 1 15. 6 28. 4 14. 0 5. 3 1 0. 6 4. 7 15. 5 25. 4 14. 2

1964________ 5. 2 9. 8 4. 6 14. 7 26. 2 13. 3 4. 7 9. 1 4. 2 14. 5 23. 3 13. 4 1965________ 4. 6 8 . 3 4. 1 13. 6 25. 3 1 2. 2 4. 0 7. 6 3. 6 13. 1 2 2 . 6 1 1. 8

Female Ratio, nonwhite to white

All ages Teenage Total Male Female

Total Non white White Total Nonwhite White All

ages

Teenage

All

ages

TeenageAll

ages

Teenage

1954_________ 5. 4 8. 2 4. 9 1 0. 0 17. 1 9. 3 1. 93 1. 34 2. 09 1. 06 1. 67 1. 84 1955_________ 4. 3 7. 5 3. 9 9. 0 16. 2 8 . 2 2 . 2 2 1. 58 2. 41 1. 38 1. 92 1. 98 1956_________ 4. 3 8 . 0 3.8 9. 9 19. 6 8 . 6 2. 27 1. 81 2. 35 1. 53 2 . 1 1 2 . 28 1957_________ 4. 7 7. 4 4. 3 1 0. 1 18. 9 9. 1 2. 05 1. 82 2. 27 1. 67 1. 72 2 . 08 1958_________ 6 . 8 1 0 . 8 6. 2 13. 1 26. 2 1 1. 6 2. 07 1. 92 2. 25 1. 74 1. 74 2 . 26 1959_________ 5. 9 9. 5 5. 3 12. 3 24. 9 1 0. 6 2 . 18 1. 97 2. 50 1. 82 1. 79 2. 35

1960_________ 5. 9 9. 5 5. 3 12. 9 22. 7 11. 9 2. 04 1. 78 2. 23 1. 71 1. 79 1. 91

1961_________ 7. 2 11. 9 6 . 5 14. 8 26. 6 13. 5 2 . 08 1. 84 2 . 26 1. 75 1. 83 1. 97 1962_________ 6. 2 1 1. 1 5. 5 13. 2 28. 2 11. 5 2. 24 1. 98 2. 39 1. 6 8 2 . 0 2 2. 45

1963_________ 6 . 5 11. 3 5. 8 15. 7 33. 1 13. 6 2. 14 2. 03 2 . 26 1. 79 1. 95 2. 43 1964_________ 6. 2 1 0. 8 5. 5 15. 0 30. 6 13. 2 2. 13 1. 97 2. 17 1. 74 1. 96 2. 32

1965_________ 5. 5 9. 3 5. 0 14. 3 29. 8 1 2. 6 2 . 0 2 2. 07 2 . 1 1 1. 92 1. 8 6 2. 37

1 Civilian labor force, 14-19 years old.

Source: M a n p o w e r R e p o rt o f the P re sid e n t, March 1965, appendix, tables A-4, A -ll, A-12, A-13, and E m p lo y m e n t a n d E a rn in g s, Bureau of Labor Statistics,

U.S. Department of Labor, February 1965, page x.

126

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
The unemployment rate was lower for nonwhite and white male high school graduates and dropouts

16-24 years old in October 1965 than in October 1959. The rate for young women rose among both

graduates and dropouts.

T a b l e IIC -6 .— U n e m p lo y m e n t R a tes A m o n g H ig h S ch o o l G ra d u a te s N o t E n ro lle d in S ch o o l a n d H ig h S ch o o l D r o p o u ts ,

P e r s o n s 1 6 - 24 Y e a r s O ld , b y C olor a n d S ex , O ctober 1 9 5 9 a n d O ctober 1 9 6 5

School status and color October 1959 October 1965 Unemployment rate ratios, nonwhite.to white

Nonwhite White Non white White October 1959 October 1965

High school graduates: 1

Male . _ __ 10. 4 6 . 0 9. 8 6. 1 1. 7 1. 6

Female. 14. 6 6. 6 19. 4 8 . 9 2 . 2 2 . 2

High school dropouts: 1

Male _ _ __ _ _ . . _ 18. 1 1 2. 2 16. 0 1 1. 8 1. 5 1. 4 Female. _____ 16. 6 16. 1 24. 8 18. 2 1. 0 1. 4

Special Labor Force Report No. 54, tables A and B, and “Employment of

June 1959 High School Graduates, October 1959,” Special Labor Force Report

No. 5, table B. Unpublished data for high school graduates in 1959 are from

the October supplement to the Current Population Survey.

1 Graduates have completed 4 years of high school or more; dropouts

completed less than 4 years of high school.

Source: U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics. Data

are from “Employment of High School Graduates and Dropouts in 1964,”

127

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
A larger proportion of nonwhite than white high school graduates in October 1965 were in jobs

requiring little or no skill. Since 1959, however, a substantial decrease took place in the proportion of

nonwhite male graduates and dropouts employed as nonfarm laborers, and a significant increase in

production work.

T a b l e IIC-7.—P erce n t D is tr ib u tio n o f E m p lo y e d P e r so n s 1 6 - 2 4 Y e a rs O ld , b y O c c u p a tio n G ro u p f o r H ig h S ch o o l G ra d u a te s

N o t E n r o lle d in S ch o ol a n d H ig h S ch o o l D ro p o u ts , b y C olor a n d S ex , O ctober 1 9 5 9 a n d O ctober 1 9 6 5

Occupation group and education status

Male Female

1959 1965 1959 1965

Non­ white White Non­ white White Non­ white White Non­ white White

Graduates: 1

All occupation groups: Number (in thousands) __ ___ 180 2 , 116 365 2, 877 173 2, 097 336 3, 071

Percent _ _ _ _ 1 0 0 . 0 1 0 0 . 0 1 0 0 . 0 1 0 0 . 0 1 0 0 . 0 1 0 0 . 0 1 0 0 . 0 1 0 0 . 0

Professional, technical, and kindred workers. 2 . 2 1 1 . 6 6 . 8 10.4 1 1 . 6 13. 0 6 . 0 12. 5 Managers, officials, and proprietors, except farm 5. 4 2. 7 6 . 4 1. 2 . 9 . 8

Clerical and kindred workers. 1 0 . 0 14.9 8 . 2 11.5 26. 5 65. 9 29.2 57.8 Salesworkers. _ _ _ _ _ 2 . 2 7.7 1. 4 7. 1 3. 5 4.4 5. 1 4. 9 Craftsmen, foremen, and kindred workers 1 1 . 1 15. 9 9. 3 14. 4 1 . 2 . 5 . 5 Operatives and kindred workers 25. 0 25.4 37.8 31. 2 1 1 . 6 6 . 6 17.6 9. 4 Private household workers___ . 1 . 1 . 1 15. 6 1. 6 15. 2 1 . 8

Service workers, except private house- hold 17.8 3. 1 15.6 4. 8 19. 6 5.8 24. 7 1 1 . 0 Farmers, farm managers, laborers and foremen____ 4.4 6 . 1 3.0 4.3 8 . 1 . 9 1. 2 . 9 Laborers, except farm and mine 26. 1 9.8 15. 1 9.8 1 . 2 . 5 1 . 2 .3 Dropouts: 1

All occupation groups: Number (in thousands) 406 1, 523 370 1, 561 203 630 187 636

Percent 1 0 0 . 0 1 0 0 . 0 1 0 0 . 0 1 0 0 . 0 1 0 0 . 0 1 0 0 . 0 1 0 0 . 0 1 0 0 . 0

Professional, technical, and kindred workers _ 0 . 2 1. 0 1. 3 2. 5 2 . 1 0 . 6

Managers, officials, and proprietors, except farm. _ 1. 4 1. 9 2 . 8 1 . 1 . 5

Clerical and kindred workers 3.0 3.2 2 . 2 3.4 1.5 14.8 4.8 13. 1

Salesworkers _ . 5 3. 1 2. 7 3. 0 7. 5 1. 6 8 . 0

Craftsmen, foremen, and kindred

workers. 5.7 14.2 6 . 2 13.7 . 5 2.5 1. 1 . 9

Operatives and kindred workers_____ 19. 0 37.9 33.2 42. 5 1 2 . 8 34.0 17.6 37. 9

Private household workers . 1 31. 0 9. 8 29. 9 1 1 . 0

Service workers, except private house- hold . 1 1 . 8 6 . 4 11. 9 4. 5 26. 1 21.4 25. 7 21. 7

Farmers, farm managers, laborers and foremen 23. 9 13. 5 15. 1 9. 1 22. 7 6 . 7 18. 2 5. 0

Laborers, except farm and mine___ _ 36. 0 19.3 29. 5 2 0 . 1 . 2 1. 1 1. 3

1 Graduates completed 4 years of high school or more; dropouts completed less than 4 years of high school.

Note.—Because of rounding, sums of individual items may not equal totals.

Source: U.S. Department of Labor, Buieau of Labor Statistics. Data are unpublished from the October 1959 and 1965 supplements to the Current

Population Survey.

Digitized for 

128

FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
The median wage or salary of nonwhite high school graduates 16 to 21 years old in February 1963

was about 15 percent below wages of white dropouts in the same age group.

T a b l e IIC -8 .— W e e k ly E a r n in g s 1 o n F u ll- T im e J o b s o f 1 6 - 2 1 Y e a r-O ld Y o u th s N o t in S ch o ol, b y Y e a rs o f S ch o ol C o m p le te d

a n d C olor, F e b ru a ry 1 9 6 S

Years of school completed and color Total Under $40 $40 to $49 $50 to $59 $60 to $69 $70 and 

over

Median income

High school graduates: 2

Nonwhite.. ___ 10 0. 0 28. 8 23. 8 16. 9 17. 5 13. 1 $49 White______________________ 1 0 0 . 0 7. 4 14. 5 2 2 . 1 35. 7 20. 3 62 School dropouts: 2

N o n w h ite ..__- 10 0. 0 63. 2 18. 4 2. 5 9. 2 6 . 7 34 White- - - _ ______ 10 0. 0 15. 9 19. 1 19. 3 29. 1 16. 5 58

1 From wages or salary.

2 Graduates completed 4 years of high school or more; dropouts completed less than 4 years of high school.

Source: U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics. Data are from the February 1963 supplement to the Current Population Survey.

129

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
A t every age group among young men 16-22 years old, a larger proportion of nonwhite than white

students worked 35 hours or more a week in 1960, but a larger proportion of white than nonwhite students

were employed.

T a b l e I I C —9.— E m p lo y m e n t S ta tu s a n d H o u r s W o rk e d A m o n g Y o u th s (a g e d 1 6 —2 2 ) E n r o lle d in S c h o o l, b y S e x , A g e , a n d

C olor, U n ite d S ta te s , 1 9 6 0

Sex and employment status

Age and color

16 years 17 years 18 years 19 years 2 0 years 2 1 and 2 2 

years

Non­ white White Non­ white White Non­ white White Non­ white White Non­ white White Non­ white White

Percentage distribution

MALE

Enrolled in school__ 10 0. 0 1 0 0. 0 1 0 0. 0 1 0 0. 0 1 0 0. 0 1 0 0 . 0 1 0 0. 0 1 0 0. 0 1 0 0. 0 1 0 0. 0 1 0 0 . 0 1 0 0 . 0

In the labor force. 16. 7 27. 9 22. 7 37. 7 31. 1 43. 2 38. 3 46. 7 45. 2 50. 5 54. 7 56. 8

Civilian labor force_______ 16. 7 27. 8 22. 4 37. 3 30. 2 41. 9 36. 9 43. 8 42. 8 46. 7 50. 5 53. 1 Employed__ 14. 3 25. 2 19. 4 34. 3 26. 5 38. 4 32. 4 40. 5 37. 7 43. 8 45. 6 50. 0 With a job, not at at work___ . 7 . 6 . 9 . 8 1. 1 1. 0 1. 1 1. 2 1. 0 1. 4 1. 3 1. 4 At work _ 13. 6 24. 5 18. 5 33. 5 25. 4 37. 4 31. 4 39. 3 36. 7 42. 4 44. 3 48. 6

1-14 hours 7. 1 13. 8 8 . 4 16. 0 9. 3 14. 5 9. 6 13. 8 9. 5 13. 8 8 . 9 12. 7 15-34 hours 4. 3 8. 9 6 . 1 14. 2 7. 7 14. 4 8 . 7 1 2. 7 1 0. 2 12. 7 1 0. 6 13. 6

35 hours or more___ 2. 3 1. 8 4. 0 3. 3 8. 4 8. 4 13. 0 1 2. 8 17. 0 15. 9 24. 9 22. 3 Unemployed___ 2. 4 2. 7 3. 0 3. 0 3. 7 3. 5 4. 4 3. 3 5. 1 2. 9 4. 9 3. 1 Not in the labor force 83. 3 72. 1 77. 3 62. 3 6 8 . 9 56. 8 61. 7 53. 3 54. 8 49. 5 45. 3 43. 2

FEMALE

Enrolled in school. _ 1 0 0 . 0 1 0 0. 0 1 0 0 . 0 1 0 0 . 0 1 0 0. 0 1 0 0. 0 1 0 0 . 0 1 0 0. 0 1 0 0 . 0 1 0 0. 0 1 0 0. 0 1 0 0 . 0

In the labor force 7. 6 14. 8 1 1. 6 24. 1 18. 8 30. 9 26. 0 37. 2 32. 2 41. 1 36. 3 44. 8

Civilian labor force_______ 7. 6 14. 8 1 1. 6 24. 1 18. 8 30. 8 26. 0 37. 1 32. 1 41. 0 36. 2 44. 7 Employed_____________ 6. 3 13. 4 9. 7 2 2 . 0 15. 9 28. 5 2 2 . 6 35. 1 28. 7 39. 4 ‘32. 4 42. 8

With a job, not at work _ _ . 6 . 5 . 7 . 7 . 7 . 9 1. 0 1. 0 1. 0 1. 1 1. 1 1. 3 At work . 5. 7 12. 9 9. 0 21. 3 15. 2 27. 7 2 1 . 6 34. 0 27. 7 38. 3 31. 4 41. 5 1-14 hours 3. 4 8. 5 5. 0 12. 3 6. 4 1 2 . 8 7. 5 14. 5 9. 3 15. 5 8. 1 13. 5 15-34 hours 1. 4 3. 6 2. 5 7. 3 4. 0 8. 1 5. 1 8. 2 6 . 5 8. 7 6. 7 9. 1 35 hours or more___ . 8 . 7 1. 5 1. 7 4. 8 6. 8 9. 0 11. 4 11. 9 14. 1 16. 6 18. 9 Unemployed 1. 3 1. 4 1. 9 2 . 0 2 . 8 2. 3 3. 4 2 . 1 3. 4 1. 5 3. 8 1. 9 Not in the labor force 92. 4 85. 2 8 8 . 4 75. 9 81. 2 69. 1 74. 0 62. 8 67. 8 58. 9 63. 7 55. 2

Source: 1960 C en su s o f P o p u la tio n : D e ta iled C h aracteristics PC(1)-1D, table 197 (U.S. Bureau of the Census).

130

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
In the 4 years 1961-65, there was a gain of 92,000 Federal employees of whom 26,000 were Negro,

representing a 9-percent increase in the Federal employment of Negroes and a 3-percent increase for all

others. In 1965, 13.5 percent of all Federal employees were Negroes, compared to 12.9 percent in 1961.

T a b l e IID -1.— F e d e ra l E m p lo y m e n t, b y R ace, 1 9 6 1 - 6 5

[In thousands]

Year Total Negro White and other 1

Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent

1961__________________________ 2 , 197 1 0 0. 0 283 12. 9 1, 915 87. 1

1962__________________________ 2, 252 1 0 0. 0 293 13. 0 1, 959 87. 0

1963__________________________ 2, 300 1 0 0. 0 302 13. 1 1, 998 8 6 . 9

1964__________________________ 2, 270 1 0 0. 0 299 13. 2 1, 971 8 6 . 8

1965__________________________ 2, 289 1 0 0. 0 309 13. 5 1, 980 8 6 . 5 Change, 1961-65 92 + 4 26 + 9 65 + 3

1 White workers, and non white workers other than Negroes.

Source: Civil Service Commission, S tu d y o f M in o r ity G ro u p E m p lo y m e n t in the F ederal G overn m en t, 1964, table series 1; and S tu d y o f M in o r ity G ro u p E m p lo y ­

m e n t in the F ed eral G o vern m en t, 1965, table 1-1.

131

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
The greatest proportionate gain in Negro Federal em ploym ent from 1962 to 1965 took place in

the upper grades of the Classification Act, W age Board, and Postal Field Service pay plans. However,

the numerical increase of Negro workers was greatest in the lower or middle grades of all pay plans

except the W age Board, where expansion took place almost exclusively in the $6,500 to $7,999 bracket.

Y et, in 1965, almost half of the lowest grade ($4,499 or less) Federal employees under the W age Board

plan were Negroes, compared to slightly under 20 percent under the Classification Act (GS 1-4) and

Postal Field Service (PFS 1-4).

T a b l e IID -2.— F ed era l E m p lo y m e n t, b y G ra d e a n d S a la r y G ro u p ,

Pay category

1965

Total Negro Other

Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent

Total, all pay plans. ___ . . __ 2, 288, 615 1 0 0 308, 675 13 1, 979, 940 87

Classification Act 1------ . ------ 1, 124, 281 1 0 0 106, 456 9 1,017, 825 91

GS 1-4_______________________________ 335, 642 1 0 0 64, 651 19 270,991 81

GS 5-11______________________________ 575, 380 1 0 0 38, 987 7 536,393 93

GS 5-8___________________________ 310, 681 1 0 0 29, 897 1 0 280, 784 90

GS 9-11__________________________ 264, 699 1 0 0 9, 090 3 255, 609 97

GS 12-18_____________________________ 213, 259 1 0 0 2,818 1 210,441 99

Wage Board.. . . . . 520, 819 1 0 0 102, 794 2 0 418, 025 80

$4,499 or less 63,172 1 0 0 29, 736 47 33, 436 53 $4,500-$7,999_________________________ 411,403 1 0 0 72, 035 18 339, 368 82

$4,500-$6,499____________________ 239, 675 1 0 0 58, 138 24 181,537 76 $6,500-$7,999_____________________ 171,728 1 0 0 13, 897 8 157,831 92

$8 , 0 0 0 and over 46, 244 1 0 0 1, 023 2 45, 221 98

Postal Field Service 2_ 585,935 1 0 0 92, 022 16 493,913 84

PFS 1-4______________________________ 495, 772 1 0 0 84, 944 17 410,828 83

PFS 5-11_____________________________ 8 6 , 270 1 0 0 7, 023 8 79, 247 92

PFS 5-8_______________ __________ 72, 572 1 0 0 6 , 765 9 65,807 91 PFS 9-11.. ______________________ 13, 698 1 0 0 258 2 13, 440 98

PFS 12-20____________________________ 3, 893 1 0 0 55 1 3, 838 99

All other pay plans.. . 57, 580 1 0 0 7, 403 13 50, 177 87

$4,499 or less 19, 162 1 0 0 6 , 140 32 13,022 6 8 $4,500-$7,999_________________________ 15,589 1 0 0 869 6 14, 720 94

$4,500-$6,499_____________________ 10, 136 1 0 0 715 7 9, 421 93 $6,500-$7,999_____________________ 5, 453 1 0 0 154 3 5, 299 97

$8 , 0 0 0 and over.. _ ____ 22, 829 1 0 0 394 2 22, 435 98

1 Or similar pay plan. Per annum salary ranges for QS ratings are as

follows: GS-1: $3,507-$4,578; GS-2: $3,814-$4,975; GS-3: $4,149-$5,409; GS-4:

$4,641—$6,045; GS-5: $5,181-$6,720; GS-6: $5,702-$7,430; GS-7: $6,269-$8,132;

GS-8: $6,869-$8,921; GS-9: $7,479-$9,765; GS-10: $8,184-$10,704; GS-11:

$8,961—$11,715; GS-12: $10,619-$13,931; GS-13: $12,510-$16,425; GS-14: $14,680-

$19,252; GS-15: $17,055-$22,365; GS-16: $19,619-$25,043; GS-17: $22,217-

$25,325; GS-18: $25,382.

2 PFS-1-4 includes 4th class postmasters and rural carriers. Per annum

salary ranges for PFS ratings are as follows: PFS-1: $4,086-$5,571; PFS-2:

$4,424-$6,019; PFS-3: $4,780-$6,551; PFS-4: $5,181-$7,062; PFS-5: $5,536-

132

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
and Race, 1965; and Percent Change From 1964 and 1962 to 1965

Change from 1964 Change from 1962

Total Negro Other Total Negro Other

Number Percent Num ber Percent Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent

18, 420 1 9, 511 3 8 , 909 — 36, 281 2 15, 590 5 20, 691 1

14, 634 1 3, 759 4 10, 875 1 60, 633 6 9, 919 1 0 50,714 5

-1 ,2 8 0 — 740 1 - 2 , 0 2 0 - 1 -2 7 , 984 - 8 -1,2 89 - 2 -2 6 , 695 - 9

6 , 641 1 2, 538 7 4, 103 1 43, 694 8 9, 797 34 33, 897 7

1, 058 — 1,593 6 -535 — 6 , 418 2 6 , 577 28 -159 —

5, 583 2 945 1 2 4, 638 2 37, 276 16 3, 220 55 34, 056 15

9, 273 5 481 2 1 8 , 792 4 44, 923 27 1,411 1 0 0 43, 512 26

-1 1 , 152 - 2 -124 — -11,028 - 3 -4 7 , 794 - 8 - 2 , 860 - 3 -4 4 , 934 - 1 0

- 7 , 821 - 1 1 - 3 , 750 - 1 1 - 4 , 071 - 1 1 -4 0 , 745 -3 9 -1 4 , 937 -3 3 -2 5 , 808 -4 4

- 9 , 134 - 2 3, 227 5 -1 2 , 361 - 4 -2 9 , 706 - 7 11, 204 18 -4 0 , 910 - 1 1

-2 1 , 638 - 8 297 1 -2 1 , 935 - 1 1 -9 3 , 687 -2 8 1,832 3 -9 5 , 519 -3 4

12,504 8 2, 930 27 9, 574 6 63, 981 59 9, 372 207 54, 609 53

5, 803 14 399 64 5, 404 14 22, 657 96 873 582 21,784 93

4, 437 1 2, 307 3 2, 130 — 15, 367 3 5, 142 6 10, 225 2

-1,0 90 — 1, 627 2 -2,7 17 - 1 3, 855 1 3, 057 4 798 —

5, 262 6 665 1 0 4, 597 6 11, 254 15 2, 046 41 9, 208 13

4, 645 7 629 1 0 4, 016 6 9, 997 16 1, 933 40 8 , 064 14

617 5 36 16 581 5 1, 257 1 0 113 78 1, 144 9

265 7 15 38 250 7 258 7 39 244 219 6

10, 501 2 2 3, 569 93 6 , 932 16 8 , 075 16 3, 389 84 4, 6 8 6 1 0

9, 488 98 3, 408 125 6 , 080 8 8 6 , 532 52 3, 450 128 3, 087 31

-233 - 1 119 16 -352 - 2 - 5 , 228 -2 5 -233 - 2 1 - 4 , 995 -2 5

-243 - 2 91 15 -334 - 3 - 3 , 973 -2 8 -162 -1 8 - 3 , 811 -2 9

1 0 — 28 2 2 -1 8 — - 1 , 255 -1 9 -7 1 -3 2 - 1 , 184 -1 8

1, 246 6 42 1 2 1, 204 6 6 , 766 42 172 77 6 , 594 42

$7,582; PFS-6: $5,941-$8,108; PFS-7: $6,361-$8,481; PFS-8: $6,888-$8,940

PFS-9: $7,449—$9,681; PFS-10: $8,110-$10,585; PFS-11: $8,961-$11,715; PFS-12

$9,914-$12,947; PFS-13: $10,956-$14,358; PFS-14: $12,077-$15,857; PFS-15

$13,349-$17,498; PFS-16: $14,751-$19,368; PFS-17: $16,320-$21,450; PFS-18

$18,078-$23,766; PFS 19: $20,042-$24,935; PFS-20: $22,217-$25,325.

Note.—Dashes (—) equal zero or round to zero.

Source: Civil Service Commission, S tu d y o f M in o rity G ro u p E m p lo y m e n t

in the F ederal G overn m en t, 1965, tables 1-1 and 1-3.

133

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Of the various Federal pay plans, the W age Board plan showed the highest proportion of Negroes

in 1965— 20 percent, compared with 9 percent under the Classification Act and 15 percent under other

plans. The Government Printing Office and the General Services Administration had the largest proportion of Negro employees in 1965— 41 percent and 34 percent respectively. However, the Defense

Departm ent and the Post Office Departm ent together employed almost two-thirds of all Negroes in the

Federal service.

T a b l e IID -3.— T o ta l a n d N eg ro F e d e ra l E m p lo y m e n t, b y P a y P la n a n d A g e n c y , J u n e 1 9 6 5 1

[Agencies with 5,000 or more employees in June 1965 are listed separately] 2

Selected agencies

All pay plans Classification Act (or similar pay plans)

All employees

Negro All employees

Negro

Number Percent Number Percent

All agencies 3 _ 2, 288, 615 308, 675 13 1, 124, 281 106, 456 9

Department of Defense__ - __ — 922,937 106, 788 1 2 513,169 38, 260 7

Office of the Secretary 38, 298 7, 351 19 29, 131 4, 048 14 Army _ . __- - ------- 315, 004 37, 021 1 2 2 0 1 , 1 2 1 16, 834 8

N av y._ 299,775 41, 267 14 130, 184 9, 966 8

Air Force. 269, 860 21, 149 8 152, 733 7, 412 5

Post Office Department. _ _ _ _ 587, 780 92,265 16 1, 795 2 2 2 1 2 Veterans Administration-- 149, 090 36,811 25 1 1 1 , 2 0 1 2 2 , 2 1 1 2 0 Department of Agriculture _ 95, 769 4, 321 5 83, 152 3,090 4

Department of the Treasury _ _ 8 8 , 561 12,194 14 80, 552 8 , 760 1 1 Department of Health, Education, and Welfare. _ 84,171 16, 711 2 0 70,979 12, 659 18 Department of the Interior 62,032 2, 529 4 47, 956 1, 395 3

Federal Aviation Agency _ 41, 641 1, 506 4 38, 320 1, 005 3

General Services Administration _ 35, 049 11, 910 34 17, 434 3, 115 18 National Aeronautics and Space Administration. 33, 859 1, 092 3 26, 644 648 2

Department of Justice 32, 492 1, 682 5 30, 196 1, 489 5

Department of Commerce___ 28, 483 3, 803 13 25, 191 2, 995 1 2

Department of State 4__ 2 2 , 207 2, 407 1 1 7, 759 1, 797 23 Tennessee Valley Authority. _ 16,315 1, 144 7

Housing and Home Finance Agency__ 13,336 1, 728 13 13, 092 1, 580 1 2

Department of Labor 9, 198 1, 910 2 1 8 , 962 1, 772 2 0

Atomic Energy Commission 7, 198 308 4 6 , 957 261 4

Government Printing Office 6 , 993 2, 864 41 1, 271 486 38

Selective Service System 5, 585 320 6 955 50 5

See footnotes at end of table.

134

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
T a b l e IID-3.— T o ta l a n d N eg ro F ed era l E m p lo y m e n t, b y P a y P la n a n d A g e n c y , J u n e 1 9 6 51—Continued 

[Agencies with 5,000 or more employees in June 1965 are listed separately] 2

Selected agencies

All pay plans Classification Act (or similar pay plans)

All employees

Negro All employees

Negro

Number Percent Number Percent

Wage Board Other pay plans (including Postal Field Service) 5

All agencies3 . . . -- — 520, 819 102, 794 2 0 643, 515 99, 425 15

Department of Defense. _ 399, 122 65, 221 16 10, 646 3, 307 31

Office of the Secretary — 7, 273 2, 241 31 1, 894 1 , 062 56 Army__ - - - — 110,948 19, 343 17 2, 935 844 29

Navy______ - . — - -- - - 168, 305 31, 274 19 1,286 27 2

Air Force. 112,596 12, 363 1 1 4, 531 1,374 30

Post Office Department. . . . 40 2 1 53 585, 945 92, 022 16 Veterans Administration.. 33, 755 13,392 40 4, 134 1,208 29 Department of Agriculture 10, 165 1,008 1 0 2, 452 223 9

Department of the Treasury----------- . . . 7, 678 3,427 45 331 7 2

Department of Health, Education, and Welfare.. 6 , 488 3, 390 52 6 , 704 662 1 0 Department of the Interior 13,515 1, 103 8 561 31 6

Federal Aviation Agency. . 3, 142 413 13 179 8 8 49 General Services Administration__ _ _ _ 17, 610 8 , 795 50 5

National Aeronautics and Space Administration. 6 , 451 346 5 764 98 13 Department of Justice_____ . . 1, 404 93 7 892 1 0 0 1 1 Department of Commerce__ 1, 763 579 33 1, 529 229 15 Department of State 4__ 469 242 52 13,979 368 3

Tennessee Valley Authority 9, 727 767 8 6 , 588 377 6

Housing and Home Finance Agency. _ 238 147 62 6 1 17 Department of Labor__ 105 91 87 131 47 36

Atomic Energy Commission __ __ 76 2 2 29 165 25 15 Government Printing Office__ 5, 440 2, 371 44 282 7 2

Selective Service System __ 16 13 81 4, 614 257 6

1 Includes full-time employees in all executive departments and agencies,

except the National Security Council and the Central Intelligence Agency.

The Government Printing Office was also included.

2 Agencies not listed separately employed 29,826, or 1.3 percent of all

employees.

3 Includes agencies not listed separately.

* Includes Agency for International Development, Peace Corps, and the

the International Boundary and Water Commission.

3 The Post Office is the only agency using the postal field service pay plan.

Source: U.S. Civil Service Commission, S tu d y o f M in o r ity G ro u p E m p lo y ­

m en t in the F ederal G overn m ent, 1965, tables 1-1 and 1-4 through 1-26.

135

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
More Negroes— over 63,000— were employed by the Federal Government in the W ashington, D .C .,

area in 1965 than in any other place, followed by N ew York and Chicago with about 25,000 each.

Chicago has the largest proportion of Negro Federal workers (36 percent), followed by D etroit and

Cleveland. In all cities and regions except W ashington, D.C., however, proportionately more Negro

workers were under the postal field service or the wage board plan than under the Classification Act.

T a b l e IID-4.— T o ta l a n d N e g ro F ed era l E m p lo y m e n t,1 b y S e le c te d P a y P la n s in th e C iv il S e r v ic e R e g io n s2 a n d S ele c te d

S ta n d a r d M e tr o p o lita n S ta tis tic a l A r e a s ,3 J u n e 1 9 6 5

Civil Service region and selected standard metro­ politan statistical areas

All pay plans 4 Classification Act (or similar pay plans)

All employees

Negro All employees

Negro

Number Percent Number Percent

Summary, worldwide........ ............ . — 2, 288, 615 308, 675 13 1, 124, 281 106, 456 9

All regions 5__ __ _ - -------- 2, 250, 143 307, 887 14 1, 105, 594 106, 087 1 0 Atlanta region___ _ . 277, 110 31, 805 1 1 126, 157 5, 133 4

Atlanta, _ ____ 21,383 3, 245 15 12, 838 567 4

Charleston, S.C_______________ ____ 12 , 188 1, 990 16 4,360 84 2

Huntsville___ _ - _ ___ 18, 014 459 3 14, 158 161 1

Macon____ . ___ 16, 783 1, 902 1 1 7, 553 123 2

Mobile___ _ ------------- 14, 659 2, 165 15 6 , 761 289 4

Boston region____ _ ________ . -------- 108, 071 3, 830 4 40, 095 1, 181 3

Boston, _____ _ __ 39, 830 1, 847 5 16, 177 621 4

Chicago region, _ — _ _ _ 313, 501 61, 095 19 136, 439 20, 141 15 Chicago, _, — _____ _ , , 6 8 , 247 24, 721 36 29, 621 6 , 431 2 2 Cincinnati___ 11, 865 2,417 2 0 5, 129 663 13 Cleveland____ 19, 906 5, 785 29 9, 024 1, 766 2 0 Detroit__ ___ _ ------------- 25, 475 8 , 2 2 0 32 11, 813 3, 060 26 Indianapolis____ ________ __ 15, 392 4, 024 26 8 , 757 1, 976 23 Dallas region______ _ _ __ 2 0 2 , 180 17, 359 9 98, 852 3, 754 4

D allas,,, _ , _____ 9, 778 1, 124 1 1 5, 754 246 4

Houston, _ — _ 13,318 2, 777 2 1 7, 478 614 8

New Orleans, _ 10, 934 2, 542 23 6 , 351 488 8

San Antonio 32, 526 2, 045 6 15, 946 474 3

Denver region, . , , --- ----- 117, 247 3, 836 3 67, 297 1, 742 3

Denver___ _ 20, 038 1,796 9 13,413 838 6

New York region, _ , , 227, 932 34, 452 15 8 6 , 448 10,213 1 2 New York, 123,952 25, 367 2 0 43, 058 6 , 876 16 Philadelphia region_____ 258, 451 46, 595 18 123, 713 14, 856 1 2 Baltimore_____ ___ 30, 278 7, 938 26 18,449 3, 242 18 Philadelphia, _ _ __ 67, 081 15, 910 24 35, 593 7, 016 2 0 Pittsburgh, 16, 702 2, 761 17 5, 746 689 1 2

Newport News,, 13, 659 2 , 6 8 8 2 0 7, 781 640 8

Norfolk-Portsmouth____ 29, 360 7,551 26 9, 060 652 7

St. Louis region. 140, 517 11,248 8 6 6 , 343 4, 387 7

Kansas City__ __ 18, 063 2, 939 16 10, 412 970 9

St. L o u is ,__ 30, 708 5, 882 19 17, 794 2,425 14

San Francisco region, . — 255,684 32,176 13 112, 914 8,260 7

Los Angeles-Long Beach, __ 55, 372 11,446 2 1 23, 871 3, 287 14 San Francisco-Oakland 72, 092 14, 074 2 0 28, 410 3, 360 1 2 Seattle region___ 90, 263 2,236 2 46, 046 620 1

Washington, D.C, _ ___ 259, 187 63, 255 24 201, 290 35, 800 18

See footnotes at end of table.

136

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
T a b l e IID-4.— T o ta l a n d N e g ro F ed era l E m p lo y m e n t,1 b y S e le c te d P a y P la n s in the C iv il S e r v ic e R e g io n s 2 a n d S elected

S ta n d a r d M e tr o p o lita n S ta tis tic a l A r e a s ,3 J u n e 1 9 6 5—Continued

Civil Service region and selected standard metro­ politan statistical areas

All pay plans 4 Classification Act (or similar pay plans)

All employees

Negro All employees

Negro

Number Percent Number Percent

Wage board Postal field service

Summary, worldwide__ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 520, 819 102, 794 2 0 585, 935 92, 022 16 All regions 5 __ _ 515, 303 102, 709 2 0 585,935 92, 022 16 Atlanta region___ 82,280 19, 433 24 58, ‘487 5, 970 1 0 Atlanta____ ______ - ____ . __ 3, 152 1, 192 38 5, 003 1,434 29 Charleston, S.C. _ .__ _ _ _ 7, 301 1, 787 24 485 99 2 0 Huntsville - __ 3,231 2 2 0 7 373 14 4

Macon. _ _ ______ 8 , 812 1, 684 19 376 92 24

Mobile . . . __ ______ . . . 7, 013 1, 633 23 715 215 30

Boston region 25, 236 1, 025 4 41, 523 1, 549 4

Boston__ _____ _____ _ ___ 7, 852 450 6 15, 272 737 5

Chicago region. _ . 48, 505 10, 198 2 1 123, 878 29, 870 24 Chicago 6,518 2, 645 41 31, 344 15, 393 49

Cincinnati. _________ _____ ______ 609 256 42 5, 844 1, 475 25 Cleveland________ __. . . 2, 424 584 24 8 , 214 3,362 41

Detroit___________ ____________ 1,982 926 47 11,275 4, 139 37

Indianapolis... . . . . . . __ 2, 540 577 23 3,988 1,443 36

Dallas region__ _ . _ ____ __ 54, 789 7, 544 14 45, 343 5, 330 1 2

Dallas... __ _ . . . 637 266 42 3,217 577 18

Houston. _ ___ . _ 1, 116 466 42 4, 513 1, 641 36

New Orleans 1, 543 575 37 2, 683 1, 387 52

San Antonio 14, 749 1, 404 1 0 1, 772 164 9

Denver region__ _ __ 32, 965 1,293 4 15, 315 657 4

Denver__ __________ . 2, 482 431 17 3, 916 505 13

New York region. 38, 912 6 , 810 17 1 0 0 , 0 0 1 16, 955 17

New York. . . . 17, 825 4, 181 23 61, 674 14, 002 23

Philadelphia region _ 72,375 19, 629 27 57, 783 10, 505 18

Baltimore___ 5, 561 2, 704 49 5, 629 1,899 34

Philadelphia. . . . . . . 15, 860 4, 118 26 15, 178 4, 622 30

Pittsburgh.. . . . . . . . . . . 1, 519 416 27 9,276 1, 624 18

Newport News 5, 164 1, 667 32 519 297 57 Norf olk-Portsmouth 18, 373 6 , 250 34 1, 660 638 38

St. Louis region___ __ . . . 15, 349 2, 054 13 57, 074 4, 590 8

Kansas City__ . _ . 1, 151 402 35 6,297 1, 518 24

St. Louis_____ _ _ _ 3, 913 1, 1 2 0 29 8 , 685 2, 251 26

San Francisco region _ 82, 754 13,215 16 56, 855 10, 189 18 Los Angeles-Long Beach. 8 , 271 2, 245 27 22, 550 5, 803 26

San Francisco-Oakland.. 30, 299 7, 016 23 12,719 3, 576 28

Seattle region _ 24, 532 923 4 18, 029 606 3

Washington, D.C__ 37, 606 20, 585 55 11,647 5, 801 50

1 Includes full-time employees in all executive departments and agencies,

except the National Security Council and Central Intelligence Agency.

The Government Printing Office was also included.

2 Civil Service regions are defined as follows: Atlanta: Alabama, Florida,

Georgia, Mississippi, North Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee, and

Virgin Islands; Boston: Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hempshire, Rhode Island, and Vermont; Chicago: Illinois, Indiana, Kentucky,

Michigan, Ohio, and Wisconsin; Dallas: Arkansas, Louisiana, Oklahoma,

and Texas; Denver: Arizona, Colorado, New Mexico, Utah, and Wyoming;

New York: New Jersey and New York; Philadelphia: Delaware, Maryland,

except Montgomery and Prince Georges Counties, Pennsylvania, Virginia,

except Alexandria and Falls Church cities, and Arlington and Fairfax

counties, and West Virginia; St. Louis: Iowa, Kansas, Minnesota, Missouri,

Nebraska, North Dakota, and South Dakota; San Francisco: California

and Nevada; Seattle: Idaho, Montana, Oregon, and Washington.

2 Standard metropolitan statistical areas as defined by the U.S. Bureau

of the Budget in 1961.

* Includes 57,580 employees (of whom 7,403 or 13 percent were Negroes)

under other pay plans.

s Includes Washington, D.C., SMSA.

Note.—Data exclude employment in Alaska, Hawaii, and Puerto Rico.

Source: U.S. Civil Service Commission, Study of Minority Group

Employment in the Federal Government, 1965, tables 1-1; 2-1 through 2-10;

4-1, 2, 4-8; 10-12, 15-17, 20, 22, 24, 27, 30, 32-36, 38-41.

137

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
The median income of nonwhite families was

less than three-fifths that of white families throughout the 1947-64 period. It was highest during the

Korean war, and in 1964, the most recent full year

for which data are available.

T a b l e IIIA-1.—M e d ia n F a m ily I n c o m e , b y C olor o f

F a m ily H e a d , 1 9 4 7 - 6 4

Year Nonwhite White Nonwhite as percent of white

1947__________ $1, 614 $3, 157 51. 1

1948___________ 1, 768 3,310 53. 4

1949___________ 1, 650 3, 232 51. 1 1950___________ 1, 869 3, 445 54. 3

1951__________ 2, 032 3, 859 52. 7

1952___________ 2, 338 4, 114 56. 8

1953___________ 2, 461 4, 392 56. 0 1954___________ 2, 410 4, 339 55. 5

1955__________ 2, 549 4, 605 55. 4

1956___________ 2 , 628 4, 993 52. 6

1957___________ 2, 764 5, 166 53. 5

1958___________ 2, 711 5, 300 51. 2

1959__________ 2, 917 5, 643 51. 7

1960__________ 3, 233 5, 835 55. 4

1961___________ 3, 191 5, 981 53. 4 1962__________ 3, 330 6 , 237 53. 4

1963___________ 3, 465 6 , 548 52. 9

1964__________ 3, 839 6 , 858 56. 0

Source: C u rren t P o p u la tio n R e p o r ts, In co m e o f F a m ilie s a n d P erso n s in the

U n ite d S ta te s, Series P-60, No. 43, and unpublished Current Population

Reports tabulations (U.S. Bureau of the Census).

The ratio of nonwhite to white median income

is usually less for men than for women, and has

risen or declined appreciably with the economic

cycle. The ratio for men and women in 1964 was

m ost similar for year-round, full-time workers— 66

percent for men and 69 percent for women.

T a b l e I I I A - 2 .— R a tio o f N o n w h ite to W h ite M e d ia n

I n c o m e o f P e r s o n s ,1 b y S ex , 1 9 4 8 - 6 4

[Percent]

Year

All persons Year-round, full­ time workers 2

Male Female Male Female

1948________ 54. 3 43. 4

1949________ 48. 4 46. 3 1950________ 54. 3 44. 7

1951________ 55. 1 42. 4 1952________ 54. 8 38. 6

1953________ 55. 1 58. 4 1954________ 50. 0 54. 3

1955________ 52. 7 52. 3 60. 8 51. 3 1956________ 52. 3 57. 4 59. 1 55. 4 1957________ 53. 1 57. 8 61. 2 58. 4 1958________ 49. 8 58. 6 62. 9 58. 8

1959________ 47. 0 61. 6 58. 4 64. 4

1960________ 52. 5 62. 0 6 6 . 1 67. 8

1961________ 51. 7 67. 0 63. 5 6 6 . 0

1962________ 49. 2 67. 1 59. 7 61. 0

1963________ 52. 1 6 6 . 8 64. 4 61. 8

1964________ 58. 5 58. 1 6 6 . 0 69. 3

114 years old and over. Includes income from all sources, including wages and salaries.

2 Year-round, full-time data not available for years 1948-54.

Source: C u rren t P o p u la tio n R e p o r ts, In co m e o f F a m ilie s a n d P erso n s in th e

U n ite d S ta te s, Series P-60, Nos. 6-43, and 47. (U.S. Bureau of the Census).

138

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Among all workers and year-round, full-time workers, the lower ratio of nonwhite to white median

earnings among men as compared to women, in addition to larger increases in the ratio for women

(1957-63), obscures the fact that nonwhite men average more income than either white or nonwhite

women.

T a bl e I I I A - 3 .— M e d ia n W a g e or S a la r y in c o m e o f P e r s o n s 1 a n d o f Y e a r -R o u n d , F u ll- T im e W o rk ers, b y C olor a n d S e x ,

1 9 5 7 a n d 1 9 6 8

Median wage or salary income

Sex

1957 1963

Nonwhite White Nonwhite as percent of white Nonwhite White Nonwhite as percent of white

All workers: Male- $2, 436 $4, 396 55. 4 $3, 217 $5, 663 56. 8

Female__ 1, 019 2, 240 45. 5 1, 448 2, 723 53. 2 Y ear-round, full-time workers: Male__________ ____ 3, 137 4, 950 63. 4 4, 104 6 , 277 65. 4 Female 1, 8 6 6 3, 107 60. 1 2, 368 3, 723 63. 6

114 years old and over.

Source: C u rren t P o p u la tio n R e p o rts, In com e o f F a m ilies a n d U n rela ted In d ivid u a ls in the U n ited S ta te s, Series P-60, No. 35, table 37, and No. 43, table 33.

(U.S. Bureau of the Census.)

The ratio of nonwhite to white family income in 1964 varied from 49 percent in the South to over

70 percent in the North Central and West, so that the average ratio of 56 percent (which has changed

little in the 1960’s) masks wide variations among regions.

T a b l e IIIA-4.— M e d ia n F a m ily In c o m e , b y C olor a n d R eg io n , 1 9 6 0 - 6 4

Region

Year and color United States Northeast North Central South West

1960:Nonwhite___ ___ $3, 233 0 )

(i) 0 )(i) $2, 117 $4, 905 43

0 )

White __ ___ _ _ ___ _____ $5 , 835 (') Ratio 55 6 8 74 81

1961:Nonwhite _ $3, 191 $5, 981 53

0 )

(x) 67

0 )

C) 72

$2 , 1 1 2 $4, 945 

43

0 )

(■ ) 87 White______________________________ Ratio _ _ 1962:Nonwhite White________________________________ Ratio - . _

$3, 330 $6 , 237 53

$4, 424 $6 , 740 

6 6

$4, 339 $6 , 384 

6 8

$2, 455 $5, 213 47

$4, 973 $6 , 858 73

1963:Nonwhite________ _ _ $3, 465 $6 , 548 

53

$4, 615 

$7, 082 

65

$4, 926 

$6, 712 

73

$2, 520 $5, 565 

45

$5, 417 $7, 153 

76 White______________________________

Ratio _ _ _____

1964:

Nonwhite__ $3, 839 $6 , 858 

56

$4, 943 $7, 418 

67

$5, 063 $7, 000 

72

$2, 898 

$5, 889 

49

$5, 774 $7, 408 

78

White - _ _ _

Ratio ___ _ __

Ratio obtained from source, but median income not available by region.

Source: C u rren t P o p u la tio n R e p o rts, C o n su m er In com e, In co m e o f F a m ilie s a n d P erso n s in the U n ited S ta tes, Series P-60; No. 37, table 16; No. 39, table 18;

No. 41, table 11; No. 43 table 13. Additional data for 1960, 1961, and 1964 are from unpublished Current Population Survey tabulations (U.S. Bureau of the Census).

217-817 O— 66------10 139

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
One in live nonwhite families had incomes under $3,000 in 1964 in the Northeast and W est, but

one in four in the North Central region, and one in two in the South.

T a bl e IIIA-5.— P e r c e n t D is tr ib u tio n o f F a m ilie s b y I n c o m e , C olor, a n d R eg io n , 1 9 6 4

Region

Family income Northeast North Central South West

Nonwhite White Nonwhite White Nonwhite White Nonwhite White

Percent 100. 0 100. 0 100. 0 100. 0 100. 0 100. 0 100. 0 100. 0

Under $3,000 21. 5 11. 3 26. 9 14. 8 51. 6 20. 7 19. 7 13. 5 $3,000 to $4,999_______________ 29. 2 13. 6 22. 3 15. 2 26. 8 19. 9 23. 2 14. 5 $5,000 to $6,999_______________ 23. 4 20. 7 25. 5 2 0 . 0 9. 8 20. 9 19. 0 18. 1

$7,000 to $9,999_______________ 14. 8 26. 2 15. 0 26. 1 8 . 0 20. 5 19. 3 25. 3 $1 0 , 0 0 0 and over___ 11. 4 28. 2 1 0. 0 23. 9 3. 8 18. 0 18. 9 28. 7 Median income ___

Head year-round full-time worker: Percent of total, excluding

$4, 943 $7, 418 $5, 063 $7, 000 $2, 898 $5, 889 $5, 774 $7, 408

Armed Forces. 55. 3 6 8 . 3 51. 8 6 8 . 2 51. 0 65. 9 61. 5 63. 8

Median income $5,960 $8 , 395 $6 , 203 $7, 814 $3, 791 $6 , 979 $7, 447 $8 , 805

N o t e .— Because of rounding, sums of individual items may not equal totals.

Source: Data are from unpublished Current Population Reports tabulations (U.S. Bureau of the Census).

140

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
The ratio of nonwhite to white family income in 1964 was considerably less for farm than nonfarm

families— 45 percent compared to 57 percent— partly explaining low median earnings and lower nonwhite to white ratios in the South where much more of the non white population is rural than in the other

regions.

T a bl e IIIA -6 .— P e r c e n t D is tr ib u tio n o f F a m ilie s b y In co m e, C olor, a n d F a r m a n d N o n fa r m R esid en ce , 1 9 5 9 a n d 1 9 6 4

Total money income United States Nonfarm Farm

Nonwhite White Nonwhite White Nonwhite White

1959

Number (in t h o u s a n d s ) ______ 4, 234 40, 828 3, 776 37, 486 458 3,342 Percent___ _ _ _ _ _ 1 0 0 . 0 1 0 0 . 0 1 0 0 . 0 1 0 0 . 0 1 0 0 . 0 1 0 0 . 0 Under $3,000______ _ _ _ 51. 5 19. 9 46. 1 17. 0 89.7 47. 5 $3,000 to $4,999_________________________________ 25.8 21.4 28.4 2 1 . 0 6.9 26.2 $5,000 to $6,999_________________________________ 12. 3 25.4 13. 6 26. 6 3.0 13. 1 $7,000 to $9,999_________________________________ 8 . 1 2 0 . 1 9. 1 21. 3 . 6 7.5 $1 0 , 0 0 0 and o v e r .__ _ 2.4 13.3 2.7 13.9 0 ) 6 . 0 Median income _ _ $2 , 917 $5, 643 $3, 225 $5, 825 $1, 136 $3,151 Ratio, nonwhite to white income__ 51.7 55.4 36. 1 Head year-round full-time worker: Percent of total, including Armed Forces _ _ _ 46.6 64. 6 (2) (2) (2) (2) Median income. _ $4, 064 $6 , 518 (2) (2) (2) (2)

1964

Number (in thousands) _ _ _ _ _ _ 4, 754 43, 081 4, 471 40, 266 283 2, 815 Percent 1 0 0 . 0 1 0 0 . 0 1 0 0 . 0 1 0 0 . 0 1 0 0 . 0 1 0 0 . 0 Under $3,000._ __ _ 37.3 15.4 34.8 13.6 80. 1 39.0 $3,000 to $4,999_________________________________ 25.9 15.9 26.7 15. 5 14. 2 21. 7 $5,000 to $6,999_________________________________ 16. 4 2 0 . 1 17.2 20.4 1.9 16.9 $7,000 to $9,999_________________________________ 1 2 . 1 24.4 1 2 . 6 25.3 2 . 8 1 2 . 6 $1 0 , 0 0 0 and over__ 8.3 24. 1 8.7 25. 2 .9 9.7 Median income $3,839 $6 , 858 $4, 021 $7, 045 $1,750 $3, 8 6 8 Ratio, nonwhite to white income 56. 0 57. 1 45. 2 Head year-round full-time worker: Percent of total, excluding Armed Forces 53.3 66.9 (2) (2) (2) (2) Median income. ._ _______ _ _ $5, 184 $7,913 (2) (2) (2) (2)

1 Entry rounds to zero.

2 Not available.

N o t e .—Because of rounding, sums of individual items may not equal totals.

Source: Data for 1959, from C u rren t P o p u la tio n R e p o rts, In com e o f F a m ilies a n d P erso n s in the U n ited S ta tes, 1959, Series P-60, No. 35, table 1; and for 1964,

from unpublished Current Population Reports tabulations (U.S. Bureau of the Census).

141

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Little improvement occurred between 1959 and 1964 in the ratio of nonwhite to white farm income,

and the difference continued substantially larger for the nonfarm families.

T a b l e IIIA-7.—P e r c e n t D is tr ib u tio n o f P e r s o n s 1 4 Y e a r s O ld a n d O ver, b y In c o m e , C olor, S ex , a n d F a r m a n d N o n fa r m

R esid en ce , 1 9 5 9 a n d 1 9 6 4

Total money income

United States Nonfarm Farm

Non white White Nonwhite White Nonwhite White

1959

MALE

Total persons with income: Number in thousands 5, 294 48, 991 4, 597 44, 567 697 4, 424 Percent __ __ 1 0 0 . 0 1 0 0 . 0 1 0 0 . 0 1 0 0 . 0 1 0 0 . 0 1 0 0 . 0

Under $1,000____ _ _ 32. 3 14. 4 25.3 1 2 . 8 73.3 30. 1 $1,000 to $2,999___________________________ 32. 7 20. 9 34.4 19.3 2 2 . 6 36.3 $3,000 to $4,999___________________________ 24. 5 25.3 28. 1 25.7 3.3 2 0 . 0 $5,000 to $6,999___________________________ 8 . 8 22. 5 1 0 . 2 24. 0 . 8 8 . 0 $7,000 to $9,999___________________________ 1. 2 1 1 . 0 1. 4 11. 9 2. 4 $1 0 , 0 0 0 and over____ . 6 6 . 0 . 7 6 . 3 3. 1 Median income. _ _ _ _ _ ___ $1, 977 $4, 208 $2, 347 $4, 425 $664 $2, 003 Ratio, nonwhite to white. ___ 47.0 53. 0 33.2 Year-round full-time workers: Percent of all income recipients . ____ 46. 1 59. 8 0 ) 0 ) 0 ) 0 )

Median income . __ $3, 150 $5, 391 0 ) C) () 0 )

FEMALE

Total persons with income: Number in thousands. 4, 243 30, 137 3, 752 28, 409 491 1, 728 Percent. . . . 1 0 0 . 0 1 0 0 . 0 1 0 0 . 0 1 0 0 . 0 1 0 0 . 0 1 0 0 . 0

Under $1,000 58. 0 43. 3 53. 2 42. 2 91.9 62. 1

$1,000 to $2,999____________________________ 32.7 33.2 36.3 33. 5 6.7 26. 0

$3,000 to $4,999___________________________ 8.3 18. 2 19. 1 18. 6 1. 3 9. 4 $5,000 to $6,999. . . . ___ . . . . . . . . 7 4. 1 . 9 4. 3 1. 9 $7,000 to $9,999 . . . . . . _. . . . . . 2 . 8 . 4 . 8 . 4 $1 0 , 0 0 0 and over__ _ _ . 2 . 5 . 2 . 5 . 4 Median income _ _ _ . . . $809 $1, 313 $928 $1, 361 $311 $665 Ratio, nonwhite to white. 61. 6 6 8 . 2 46. 8

Year-round full-time workers: Percent of all income recipients. 2 2 . 0 28. 1 ( 0 C ) 0 ) 0 )

Median income. _ $2, 125 $3, 300 0 ) (') C) C )

See footnote at end of table.

142

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
T a b l e IIIA-7.—P erce n t D is tr ib u tio n o f P e r so n s 1 4 Y e a r s O ld a n d O ver, b y In c o m e , C olor, S ex , a n d F a r m a n d N o n fa r m

R esid en ce , 1 9 5 9 a n d 1 9 6 4—Continued

Total money income

United States Nonfarm Farm

Nonwhite White Non white White Nonwhite White

1964

MALE

Total persons with income: Number in thousands ---- 5, 784 52, 749 5, 320 48, 992 464 3,757

Percent 1 0 0 . 0 1 0 0 . 0 1 0 0 . 0 1 0 0 . 0 1 0 0 . 0 1 0 0 . 0 Under $1,000 _ . 22.5 13.4 19. 6 12.3 55. 5 27. 0 $1,000 to $2,999___________________________ 29. 9 18. 6 29.4 17. 6 37. 4 31.4 $3,000 to $4,999___________________________ 25.4 18. 6 27. 0 18.6 6 . 6 19.0 $5,000 to $6,999___________________________ 14. 1 2 1 . 1 15.4 2 1 . 8 . 6 12. 5 $7,000 to $9,999 _______ _ _ . _ 6 . 1 17. 1 6 . 5 18. 0 6 . 1

$1 0 , 0 0 0 and over _ _ _ 2 . 1 1 1 . 2 2 . 2 1 1 . 8 3. 9 Median income $2, 797 $4, 936 $3, 052 $5, 135 $883 $2, 379

Ratio, nonwhite to white. 56.7 59.4 37. 1 Year-round full-time workers: Percent of all income recipients. 50.3 60. 5 C1) 0 ) 0) 0 ) Median income.. ._ . . . _ — _ $4, 234 $6 , 457 0 ) 0 ) 0) 0 )

FEMALE

Total persons with income: Number in thousands. 5, 090 36,614 4, 769 34,832 321 1, 782

Percent 1 0 0 . 0 1 0 0 . 0 1 0 0 . 0 1 0 0 . 0 1 0 0 . 0 1 0 0 . 0

Under $1,000 48.3 38.9 45.6 37.9 90. 1 56. 7

$1,000 to $2,999_________________________ 34.4 31. 7 36. 2 32.0 8.3 26. 0

$3,000 to $4,999___________________________ 12.3 19. 1 13. 1 19. 5 . 8 1 1 . 2

$5,000 to $6,999___________________________ 3. 5 7.4 3. 8 7. 6 . 8 4. 1

$7,000 to $9,999 1. 3 2 . 2 1. 4 2 . 2 1. 6

$1 0 , 0 0 0 and over . 2 . 8 . 2 . 8 . 2

Median income $1, 066 $1, 513 $1, 162 $1, 572 $379 $816

Ratio, nonwhite to white 70. 5 73.9 46.4

Year-round full-time workers: Percent of all income recipients___ . . — 26. 1 28. 5 0) (*) (0 0)

M ed ia n in co m e $2, 663 $3, 835 0 ) (') 0 ) 0)

1 Not available.

Note.—Because of rounding, sums of individual items may not equal totals.

Source: Data for 1959 are from Current Population Reports, Income of Families and Unrelated Individuals in the United States, 1959, No. 35, table 21, and

for 1964, from unpublished Current Population Reports tabulations (U.S. Bureau of the Census).

143

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
In 1963, nonwhite working wives contributed relatively more to the family income than white

working wives, although they earned less.

T a b l e IIIA -8 .—P erce n t D is tr ib u tio n o f N o n fa r m H u s b a n d -W ife F a m ilie s ,1 b y In c o m e , W o r k E x p e r ie n c e o f W iv e s , a n d

C olor, 1 9 6 3

Family income Ratio of

Work experience of wife Under $3,000 $3,000 to $4,999 $5,000 to $6,999 $7,000 and 

over

Median family income

nonwhite to white median family income Non­ (percent) white W hite Non­ white W hite Non­ white W hite Non­ white W hite Non­ white White

Total 100. 0 100. 0 100. 0 100. 0 100. 0 100. 0 100. 0 100. 0 $4, 443 $7,024 63.3

Worked during the year___ 47. 0 23.9 46.9 34.7 56. 2 40.4 74. 8 50. 5 5, 058 7, 939 63. 7

50 to 52 weeks, full

time 2_____________

27 to 49 weeks, full 1 0 . 1 4. 1 14. 5 7. 6 17. 9 1 1 . 0 37. 5 23.0 6 , 227 9, 229 67. 5

time 2____________

1 to 26 weeks, full 

time, 2 or 1 to 52

4.6 2 . 8 8.3 5. 7 13. 0 7. 1 16. 1 8 . 5 5, 906 7, 942 74. 4

weeks, part time 3__ 32.3 17. 1 24. 1 21. 4 25.3 22.4 2 1 . 2 19. 0 4, 020 6 , 836 58. 8

Did not work during the

y ear.. . . . 53.0 76. 1 53. 1 65.3 43. 8 59.6 25. 2 49. 5 3, 911 6 , 445 60. 8

1 Data relate to the civilian noninstitutional population 14 years of age and

over. The proportion of wives with work experience is slightly understated

by the exclusion of a relatively small number of wives with work experience

whose earnings and/or family income were not reported.

2 Worked 35 hours or more per week during a majority of the weeks worked.

3 Worked less than 35 hours per week during a majority of the weeks worked.

Source: U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics. Data are from “Marital and Family Characteristics of Workers in March 1964,” Special

Labor Force Report No. 50, table P.

144

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Labor force participation rates of nonfarm married women with husbands presept are greater for

the nonwhite than the white regardless of husband’s income and presence or ages of children.

T a b l e IIIA-9.—L a b o r F orce P a r tic ip a tio n R a te s 1 o f N o n fa r m M a r r ie d W o m e n W ith H u s b a n d P re s e n t, b y I n c o m e o f

H u s b a n d , A g e o f C h ild re n , a n d C olor, M a rc h 1 9 5 9 a n d M a rc h 1 9 6 4

Color and age of children

Income of husband

Total No children under 18 years Children 6 to 17 years only Children under 

6 years

Non­ white White Non­ white White Non­ white White Non­ white White

MARCH 1959

INCOME IN 1958 Total______________ 43. 9 30. 2 54. 4 35. 6 52. 0 39. 7 29. 3 17. 4 Under $3,000 . _ 47. 1 33. 0 55. 0 31. 2 51. 7 52. 1 35. 2 25. 8

$3,000 to $4,999______________________ 42. 6 34. 8 55. 3 42. 4 53. 0 46. 0 26. 7 2 0 . 2

$5,000 to $6,999______________________ 34. 3 29. 1 (2) 39. 2 (2) 38. 5 (2) 15. 0 $7,000 and over___ (2) 20. 5 (2) 27. 2 (2) 26. 6 (2) 9. 1 Median income____ _ _ _ $2, 794 $4, 360 $2 , 648 $4, 016 $3, 126 $4, 826 $2 , 756 $4, 363

MARCH 1984

INCOME IN 1963 Total _ . _ — 46. 1 33.4 50.5 37.4 56. 7 41.3 36.1 2 1 . 2

Under $3,000. 46. 2 30. 7 46. 7 28. 4 63. 3 46. 3 38. 4 28. 3 $3,000 to $4,999______________________ 44. 8 38. 6 51. 2 41. 6 56. 7 49. 6 35. 5 27. 5 $5,000 to $6,999______________________ 48. 1 37. 5 58. 8 44. 9 53. 6 48. 1 35. 3 22. 3 $7,000 and over 46. 4 28. 2 (2) 39. 1 (2) 32. 2 (2) 14. 3

Median income.. . . . ___ $3, 385 $5, 566 $2, 969 $5, 123 $4, 012 $6 , 079 $3, 385 $5, 438

1 Labor force as percent of population in March 1959 and March 1964.

2 Rate not shown where base is less than 100,000.

Source: U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics. Data

are from “Marital and Family Characteristics of Workers in March 1964,”

Special Labor Force Report No. 50, table M, and “ Family Characteristics

of Workers, 1959,” Special Labor Force Report No. 7, table Q.

145

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Nonwhite families with heads 65 years or over and having an annual income under $2,000 dropped

from two-thirds of all nonwhite families in 1960 to one-half in 1963; among white families, the proportion

is much lower and declined less (from 29 to 24 percent).

T a b l e IIIA-10.—P e r c e n t D is tr ib u tio n o f F a m ilie s W ith H e a d 6 5 Y e a rs O ld a n d O ver, b y I n c o m e a n a C olor, U n ite d S ta te s ,

1 9 6 0 a n d 1 9 6 3

Percent distribution of families

Family income 1960 1963

Nonwhite White Nonwhite White

Number of families: In thousands ............................ 430 5, 770 545 6 , 214

Percent ______ 100. 0 100. 0 100. 0 100. 0

Under $3,000 _ _ _ 81. 2 49. 5 71. 1 42. 7

Under $2,000__ 6 6 . 2 28. 6 50. 0 24. 0

$2,000 to $2,999____________________________________ 15. 0 20. 9 2 1 . 0 18. 7 $3,000 to $4,999________________________________________ 13. 7 2 1 . 0 15. 7 2 2 . 1

$5,000 to $6,999________________________________________ 3. 9 11. 9 7. 8 13. 8

$7,000 to $9,999________________________________________ . 7 9. 1 2. 3 10. 4

$1 0 , 0 0 0 and over _ __ . 6 8. 5 3. 1 10. 9

Median income..- $1, 457 $3, 041 $2 , 0 0 0 $3, 512

Source: C u rren t P o p u la tio n R e p o rts, In co m e o f the E ld e r ly in 1963, Series P-60, No. 46, table 1 (U.S. Bureau of the Census).

The nonwhite to white earnings ratio by occupation is usually narrowest in the youngest age groups

in which education and experience levels are more nearly similar.

T a b l e IIIA-11.—R a tio o f N o n w h ite to W h ite M e d ia n E a r n in g s o f M a le s , 1 8 - 6 4 Y e a r s O ld, in the E x p e rie n c e d L a b o r F orce,

by O c c u p a tio n G ro u p , A g e , a n d R eg io n , 1 9 6 0

Male experienced civilian labor force by age group

Occupation group 18-24 25-34 35-44 45-54 55--64

N orth and West South N orth and West South N orth and West South N orth and West South N orth and West South

Total___ _ _ _ _ 82 55 74 51 73 48 72 49 71 47 Professional, technical, and kindred

workers 8 6 69 82 64 77 59 70 59 6 6 48 Farmers and farm managers__ 50 1 1 2 33 143 35 129 40 123 45 Managers, officials, and proprietors (ex- cept farm) _ _ 75 51 6 6 49 57 41 55 47 Clerical and kindred workers. 93 8 6 84 76 8 6 80 8 8 78 87 74

Salesworkers__ 79 54 69 53 70 49 70 50 6 8 51

Craftsmen, foremen, and kindred workers. _ 78 61 78 56 79 54 78 56 79 53

Operatives and kindred workers _ 82 62 83 63 85 6 6 8 8 71 Service workers (including private house. _ hold)_____________________________ 115 80 71 60 73 63 79 6 8 8 6 75

Farm laborers and foremen. _ 81 81 75 62 8 8 59 99 63 1 1 0 6 8

Laborers except farm and mine 93 8 8 85 79 87 83 87 8 6 94 87

Source: 1960 C en su s o f P o p u la tio n , O ccu p a tio n by E a rn in g s a n d E d u c a tio n , PC(2)-7B, tables 1 and 4 (U.S. Bureau of the Census).

146

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
The nonwhite to white ratio of earnings among men of all ages was greatest in 1959 in government

(Federal or local) employment, in which an equal pay for equal work policy generally prevails.

T a b l e IIIA-12.— M e d ia n E a r n in g s o f M a le s in th e E x p e rie n c e d C iv ilia n L a b o r F orce, b y A g e a n d C olor, in S elected O ccu ­

p a tio n s , 1 9 5 9

Median earnings Ratio,

non- Occupation and age Non­ white White white to white

Automobile mechanics and 

repairmen:

18-24________________ $2, 114 $2, 772 76. 3

25-34________________ 3, 267 4, 495 72. 7

35-44________________ 3, 494 4, 962 70. 4 45-54________________ 3, 246 4, 648 69. 8

55-64________________ 3, 060 4, 405 69. 5 Brickmasons, stonemasons, and tilesetters:

18-24________________ 1, 813 3, 529 51. 4 25-34________________ 3, 032 5, 525 59. 8

35-44________________ 3, 510 5, 462 64. 3

45-54________________ 2, 982 5, 137 58. 0 55-64________________ 2, 249 4, 8 6 8 46. 2 Carpenters:

18-24________________ 1, 733 3, 008 57. 6

25-34________________ 2, 671 4, 790 55. 8

35-44________________ 2, 765 4, 918 56. 2 45-54________________ 2, 365 4, 231 55. 9

55-64________________ 1, 829 3, 754 48. 7 Mail carriers:

18-24________________ 3, 701 25-34________________ 4, 783 5, 192 92. 1

35-44________________ 5, 269 5, 389 97. 8

45-54________________ 5, 346 5, 430 98. 5 55-64________________ 5, 278 5, 459 96. 7 Mechanics, and repairmen:

18-24________________ 2, 174 3, 008 72. 3

25-34________________ 3, 506 4, 960 70. 7 35-44________________ 3, 849 5, 337 72. 1 45-54________________ 3, 643 5, 011 72. 7 55-64________________ 3, 447 4, 678 73. 7 Painters, construction and 

maintenance: 18-24________________ 1, 712 2, 374 72. 1 25-34________________ 2, 712 4, 262 63. 6

Occupation and age

Median

Non­ white

earnings

White

Ratio, 

non­ white to white

Painters, construction and maintenance—Continued 35-44________________ $2, 833 $4, 438 63. 8

45-54________________ 2, 599 4, 073 62. 8

55-64________________ 1, 8 8 6 3, 584 52. 6

Postal clerks:

18-24________________ 3, 761 3, 494 107. 6

25-34________________ 4, 962 5, 270 94. 2

35-44________________ 5, 248 5, 470 94. 9

45-54________________ 5, 316 5, 555 95. 7 55-64________________ 5, 338 5, 604 95. 2 Protective service workers:

18-24_______________ 3, 605 25-34________________ 4, 732 5, 162 91. 7 35-44________________ 4, 936 5, 475 90. 2 45-54________________ 3, 970 5, 112 77. 7 55-64________________ 3, 762 4, 284 87. 8

Shipping and receiving clerks:

18-24________________ 2, 697 2, 823 95. 5 25-34________________ 3, 395 4, 390 77. 3

35-44________________ 3, 6 8 6 4, 803 76. 7

45-54________________ 3, 810 4, 787 79. 0

55-64________________ 3, 678 4, 520 81. 4 Teachers:

18-24________________ 2, 403 3, 065 78. 4

25-34________________ 3, 988 5, 121 77. 9 35-44________________ 4, 776 6 , 406 74. 6

45-54________________ 5, 340 6 , 738 79. 2

55-64. . . __________ 6 , 551 Truck-tractor drivers: 18-24________________ 1, 721 2 , 8 6 6 60. 0

25-34________________ 2, 701 4, 621 58. 5 35-44________________ 2, 903 5, 042 57. 6

45-54________________ 2, 877 4, 621 62. 3

55-64________________ 2 , 750 4, 267 64. 4

Source: 1960 C en su s o f P o p u la tio n , O ccu p a tio n by E a rn in g s a n d E d u c a tio n PC(2)-7B, tables 1 and 4 (U.S. Bureau of the Census).

147

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
About half of Negro as well as white urban families had incomes in the middle range of $3,000 to

$7,500 in 1960-61, but among the remaining city families Negroes were concentrated below $3,000 and

whites above $7,500. Food took about one-quarter of expenditures in both groups, but Negroes spent

more of their smaller incomes than white consumers on the other “basic expenses”— shelter and clothing.

T a b l e IIIB-1.—S u m m a r y o f I n c o m e a n d S p e n d in g o f F a m i l i e s b y R e g io n a n d R a ce, U rb a n U n ite d S ta te s , 1 9 6 0 - 6 1

(a n n u a l a vera g e)

Item United States Northeast North Central South West

Negro White Negro White Negro White Negro White Negro White

Percent distribution of families: Negro __ _ 1 0 0 23 2 2 48 7

White 1 0 0 30 29 23 18 Money income after taxes (average)- $3, 840 $6, 169 $4, 440 $6 , 479 $4, 391 $6 , 095 $3, 200 $5, 653 $4, 431 $6 , 439 Percent of families having incomes of: Under $3,000 __ 42 18 30 16 33 18 55 23 33 16 $3,000 to $7,499_________ 50 55 60 54 55 55 42 55 56 54 $7,500 and over, _ __ 8 27 1 0 30 1 2 27 3 2 2 1 1 30 Total expenditures for current con- sumption (annual average)__ $3, 707 $5, 609 $4, 329 $5, 981 $4,218 $5, 378 $3, 110 $5, 186 $4, 103 $5, 907

Percent distribution of total expenditures_____ ______ 10 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0

“Three basic expenses” 58 52 59 55 56 53 58 50 55 52

Food ._ _ 25 24 26 26 23 24 26 23 23 24 Shelter, fuel, light, refrig- eration, and w a te r__ 2 0 18 2 0 19 2 1 19 19 17 2 0 18 Clothing, including upkeep. 13 1 0 13 1 0 1 2 1 0 13 1 0 1 2 1 0

All other. _ 42 48 41 45 44 47 42 50 45 48

Household operations and furnishings 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 1 Medical care 5 7 4 6 5 7 5 7 5 7

Transportation . 1 2 15 1 0 13 13 14 1 2 17 14 16 Miscellaneous___ 14 15 15 15 14 15 13 14 14 14

1 Including single consumers.

Note.—Because of rounding, sums of individual items may not equal total.

Source: U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics.

Digitized for 

148

FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Urban Negro consumers spent about two-thirds as much as urban whites in both 1960-61 and 1950.

Both groups increased their outlays for shelter and medical care proportionately more than for other

goods and services, and least of all, for food.

T a b l e IIIB-2.— A vera g e E x p e n d itu r e s o f F a m ilie s ,1 b y R ace, U rb a n U n ite d S ta te s, 1 9 5 0 2 a n d 1 9 6 0 -6 1

[Current and constant dollars]

Type of expenditures

1950 expenditures (current dollars) 1960-61 expenditures (current dollars) 1950 expenditures (in 1960 dollars) 3

Percent change, 1950 to 1960-61 (current dollars)

Negro White Percent, Negro of white Negro White Percent, Negro of white Negro White Negro White

Expenditures for current consumption, total. _ _ __ $2,614 $3, 938 6 6 $3, 707 $5, 609 6 6 $3, 201 $4, 864 42 42

“Three basic ex­ penses”. _ 1,618 2 , 2 2 2 73 2, 125 2, 956 72 1,958 2, 695 31 33

Food. . _______ 834 1, 162 72 929 1,357 6 8 989 1,378 1 1 17 Shelter, fuel, light, refrigeration, and water____ 428 614 70 732 1,028 71 567 813 71 67 Clothing, includ­ ing upkeep 356 446 80 464 571 81 402 504 30 28

All other___ 995 1, 717 58 1, 582 2, 654 60 1, 243 2, 169 59 55

Household opera­ tions and fur­ nishings _ _ _ 295 455 65 431 619 70 341 532 46 36 Medical care___ 96 208 46 178 378 47 139 301 85 82

Transportation___ 253 538 47 435 839 52 329 700 72 56 Miscellaneous _ _ 351 516 6 8 538 818 6 6 434 636 53 59

1 Including single consumers.

2 Alaska and Hawaii not included in 1950.

3 After adjustment for the change in the Consumer Price Index.

Note.—Because of rounding, sums of individual items may not equal totals.

Source: U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics.

149

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
In 1960-61 and in 1950, and at each income level, Negro urban consumers spent a somewhat larger

share of living expenses for clothing but smaller shares for medical care and transportation than the

white, in part because Negro families tended to be younger and larger. A t each income level, smaller

proportions of Negro than white families owned homes or automobiles. Among both groups, the lower

the income the more was spent, relatively, on the 3 basic expenses— food, shelter, and clothing.

T a bl e IIIB-3.—P e r c e n t D is tr ib u tio n o f F a m ily 1 E x p e n d itu r e s , b y I n c o m e a n d R a c e, U rb a n U n ite d S ta te s , 1 9 5 0 a n d 1 9 6 0 - 6 1 (ia n n u a l a ve ra g e)

Item

Money incon 

1950 2

le after taxes 

1960-61

Negro White Negro White

All incomes

Total expenditures for current consumption (average) $2 , 614 $3, 938 $3, 707 $5, 609 Percent distribution of total expenditures 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0

“Three basic expenses” . ---------- ----- 62 57 58 52

Food . . 32 30 25 24 Shelter, fuel, light, refrigeration, and water 16 16 2 0 18 Clothing, including upkeep 14 1 1 13 1 0

All other. _ __ __ 38 43 42 48

Household operations and furnishings 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1

Medical care _ _ _ 4 5 5 7

Transportation . . . . . . . . 1 0 14 1 2 15 Miscellaneous _ _ __ _______ 13 1 2 14 15

Family characteristics: Size (number of persons) ____ ___ ___ 3. 1 3. 0 3. 2 3. 1 Age of family head (years) 45 47 46 48 Percent homeowners ____ 32 50 31 56

Percent automobile owners 25 62 43 76

Under $2,000 Under $3,000

Total expenditures for current consumption (average) $1, 373 $1, 656 $1, 978 $2, 192

Percent distribution of total expenditures 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0

“Three basic expenses” _____ __________ 70 65 64 63

Food.. ______ 37 34 29 29

Shelter, fuel, light, refrigeration, and water _ 2 1 23 25 27

Clothing, including upkeep 1 2 8 1 0 7

A llother.. ____ 30 35 36 37

Household operations and furnishings. 1 1 9 1 1 9

Medical care . . . . _ _ 4 6 5 9

Transportation . . . . _ 4 8 6 8

Miscellaneous__. . . . . .. _____ . . . ___ 11 1 2 14 11

Family characteristics: Size (number of persons) _ _ . . . ___ __ 2. 4 1. 8 2. 4 1. 8

Age of family head (years) _ . . _ _ _ . 49 59 50 61

Percent homeowners _ _ _ _ 28 41 24 41

Percent automobile owners 8 26 17 31

See footnotes at end of table.

15 0

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
T able IIIB -3.—Percent Distribution of Family 1 Expenditures, by Income and Race, Urban United States, 1950 and 1960-61

(iannual average)—Continued

Money income after taxes

Item 1950 2 1960-61

Negro White Negro White

$2,000 to $5,999 $3,000 to $7,499

Total expenditures for current consumption (average) ___ $3, 244 $3, 838 $4, 537 $5, 100 Percent distribution of total expenditures _ _ 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0

‘'Three basic expenses” _ _ _ _ ________ 60 57 57 54

Food 31 30 25 25 Shelter, fuel, light, refrigeration, and water 15 16 19 19 Clothing, including upkeep _ __ - _____ 14 11 13 1 0

All other _ _ _ 40 43 43 46

Household operations and furnishings _ _________ 11 1 1 1 1 1 1

Medical care. 4 5 5 7

Transportation 11 14 13 15 Miscellaneous. _ 14 13 14 13

Family characteristics: Size (number of persons) . . . _ _ 3. 5 3. 2 3. 8 3. 1 Age of family head (years) _ _ — 43 43 42 44

Percent hom eowners.___ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ 34 49 33 52

Percent automobile ow ners___ _ _ _ 35 6 8 59 82

$6 , 0 0 0 and over $7,500 and over

Total expenditures for current consumption (average) _ __ $6 , 536 $7, 285 $7, 983 $8 , 942 Percent distribution of total expenditures --------- 10 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0

“Three basic expenses” _ __ -------- 59 53 53 50

Food __ — 26 26 2 1 23 Shelter, fuel, light, refrigeration, and water 13 14 16 16 Clothing, including upkeep 2 0 13 16 11

All other 41 47 47 50

Household operations and furnishings. 13 13 13 1 2

Medical care 3 5 4 6

Transportation 1 0 15 14 16

Miscellaneous _ 15 14 16 16

Family characteristics: Size (number of persons) 4. 8 3. 8 4. 1 3. 9

Age of family head (years) 44 48 44 46

Percent homeowners. 48 72 54 75

Percent automobile owners. _ ____ 58 8 6 8 8 95

1 Including single consumers. N ote— Because of rounding, sums of individual items may not equal total.

2 Alaska and Hawaii not included in 1950. The 1950 income classes were Source: U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, selected to represent approximately equivalent purchasing power of 1960-61

income classes.

1 5 1

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Negro and white urban consumers spent about the same proportion on the “three basic expenses”

of food, shelter, and clothing in the South as in the North Central in 1960-61 at each income level except

the lowest (under $3,000), in which both Negro and white consumers tended to spend a larger share for

necessities in the N orth Central than in the South.

T a b l e IIIB-4.—P e r c e n t D is tr ib u tio n o f F a m ily E x p e n d itu r e s ,1 b y In c o m e a n d R ace, U r b a n P la c e s in S o u th e rn a n d N o r th -

C en tra l R eg io n s, 1 9 6 0 - 6 1 (a n n u a l average)

All income classes Item

Negro White

Money income after taxes

Under $3,000

Negro White

$3,000 to $7,499

Negro White

$7,500 and over

Negro White

Southern Region

Total expenditures for current consumption (average)__________________________

Percent distribution of total expenditures__________________________

“Three basic expenses”____________

Food________________________

Shelter, fuel, light, refrigeration, and water__________________ Clothing, including upkeep_____

All other_________________________

Household operations and furnishings— Medical care_________________

Transportation_______________

Miscellaneous_________________

Family characteristics: Size (number of persons)___________ Age of family head (years)_________ Percent homeowners_______________ Percent automobile owners_________

$3, n o 

100

$5, 186 

100

$1, 889 

100

$2, 164 

100

$4, 326 

100

$4, 984 

100

$7, 410 

100

$8, 887 

100

58 50 63 58 56 51 52 48

26 23 30 28 25 24 21 21

19 17 22 23 17 17 17 15

13 10 11 7 14 10 14 12

42 50 37 42 44 49 48 52

12 12 12 11 11 12 13 13

5 7 6 10 5 7 5 6

12 17 6 10 14 17 14 17

13 14 13 11 14 13 16 16

3. 2 3. 0 2. 5 2.0 4. 1 3.2 4. 2 3. 7

49 47 53 59 44 43 45 44

37 59 30 48 43 55 64 78

39 81 18 44 64 90 84 98

See footnote at end of table.

15 2

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
T able IIIB-4.—Percent Distribution of Family Expenditures,l by Income and Race, Urban Places in Southern and NorthCentral Regions, 1960-61 (annual average)— Continued

All income Money income after taxes

Item classes Under $3,000 $3,000 to $7,499 $7,500 and over

Negro White Negro White Negro White Negro White

North-Central Region

Total expenditures for current consump- tion (average) _ 4, 218 5, 378 2, 193 2, 159 4, 588 4, 901 8 , 345 8 , 461 Percent distribution of total expenditures 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0

“Three basic expenses” __ 56 53 6 6 62 56 54 51 50

Food. 23 24 28 28 24 25 18 2 2

Shelter, fuel, light, refrigeration, and w a t e r .__ 21 19 29 28 2 1 2 0 16 16 Clothing, including upkeep 1 2 1 0 9 6 1 1 9 17 1 2

All other 44 47 34 38 44 46 49 50

Household operations and fur- nishings 1 2 11 9 9 1 1 1 1 14 1 1

Medical care. 5 7 4 9 5 7 4 6

Transportation 13 14 8 7 14 15 16 17

Miscellaneous _ 14 15 13 13 14 13 15 16

Family characteristics: Size (number of persons) 3.4 3. 1 2. 5 1 . 7 3.8 3. 2 3.8 3. 9 Age of family head (years) . . 42 47 45 61 41 44 42 45

Percent homeowners___ . .. 31 61 16 48 34 56 55 78

Percent automobile owners__ 50 79 2 2 31 57 85 97 96

i Including single consumers.

Note.—Because of rounding, sums of individual items may not equal totals.

Source: U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics.

153

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
W hite families with incomes of $3,000-$4,999 showed a larger net increase in debt than nonwhite

families in 1960-61, and those in the $5,000-$7,499 income group showed less savings. In both income

groups, nonwhite families were larger than white families; also, white families were more likely to own

homes and automobiles.

T a b l e IIIB-5.-—S a v in g s , I n s u r a n c e , a n d S elected C h a r a c te ris tic s o f F a m ilie s 1 in S elected I n c o m e C la sses, b y R e g io n a n d

R a c e, U rb a n U n ite d S ta te s, 1 9 6 0 - 6 1 ( A n n u a l A ve ra g e)

Item United States Northeast North-central South West

Negro White Negro White Negro White Negro White Negro White

Money income after taxes, $3,000 to $4,999

Savings—net change in assets and debts. — $85 -$163 -$115 -$317 — $39 — $15 — $79 -$125 -$180 -$198

Net change in assets. _ $74 $129 — $3 -$122 -$212 $304 $261 $313 $94 — $9 Net change in debts. _ $159 $292 $113 $195 -$173 $320 $340 $438 $275 $188

Personal insurance (including social security)____ 204 199 194 213 199 205 221 199 148 163

Family characteristics: Size (number of persons). . 3. 6 2. 7 3. 2 2. 6 3. 5 2. 8 4. 0 2. 9 3. 4 2. 5 Age of family head (years) 43 47 40 48 43 47 44 45 42 45

Percent homeowners _ _ 29 41 13 36 30 46 38 45 22 36

Percent automobile owners____ 51 73 34 60 47 76 59 83 72 76

Money income after taxes, $5,000 to $7,499

Savings—net change in assets and

debts _. _ . $120 $73 $53 — $14 — $42 $227 $293 $95 $207 — $59

Net change in a sse ts__ $504 $568 $177 $454 $550 $562 $564 $631 $1, 099 $685

Net change in debts._ $384 $495 $124 $468 $591 $334 $271 $536 $892 $744

Personal insurance (including social security) _ _ 341 352 288 357 373 355 383 343 305 330

Family characteristics: Size (number of persons)______ 4. 0 3. 5 3. 4 3. 4 4. 3 3. 5 4. 4 3. 5 3. 8 3. 4 Age of family head (years) 42 43 43 45 38 42 45 42 38 41

Percent homeowners. 42 60 35 52 40 64 57 66 24 59

Percent automobile owners. _ __ 71 90 59 81 74 91 75 96 89 95

1 Including single consumers.

Note—Because of rounding, sums of individual items may not equal totals.

Source: U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics.

1 5 4

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
The number of poor persons is estimated to have declined slightly in both the nonwhite and white

populations between 1963 and 1964. Preschool children remained over 20 percent of all the poor

among the nonwhite, compared to about 15 percent in the white population. In contrast, the

elderly (65 years old and over) continued to comprise about 20 percent of the white poor, but were

less than 10 percent of the nonwhite poor.

T a bl e IIIC-1.— T o ta l N u m b e r o f the P o o r, A c c o r d in q to S o c ia l S e c u r ity A d m in is tr a tio n C r ite r ia,* bu C olor, F a m ily S ta tu s

a n d A g e , 1 9 6 3 - 6 4

[In millions]

Family status and age

Non white White

Family status and age

Nonwhite White

1963 1964 1963 1964 1963 1964 1963 1964

Total persons 10. 9 10. 6 24. 4 23. 7 Age groups: Under 6_ 2. 3 2. 3 3. 6 3. 5 Family status: 6-64________________ 7. 8 7. 5 15. 7 15. 6

Unrelated individuals__ . 8 . 9 4. 1 4. 4 65 and over . 7 . 8 4. 7 4. 6

Members of families___ 10. 1 9. 7 19. 3 19. 3

The figures for 1963 have been adjusted from a 60- to the 70-percent approximation.

Source: Mollie Orshansky, “ Who’s Who Among the Poor: A Demographic View of Poverty,’’ Social Security Bulletin, July 1965, p. 4, table A,

p. 27; Dimensions of Poverty in 1964, Office of Economic Opportunity, October

1965, table 2, p. 4.

1 Based on 1963 and 1964 incomes of $1,580 a year for a nonfarm single person

under 65 ($1,470 aged 65 and over) to $5,090 for a nonfarm family of 7 or more

persons. The 1964 income level was the same as that in 1963 because the

food plan that is the core of the index did not go up in price.

N ote.—The figures for 1964 are based on a 70-percent farm-nonfarm equivalence ratio, based on the assumption that farm families need 70 percent as

much cash income as a nonfarm family of the same size and composition.

217-817 O— 11 155

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
W ithin each population group— white and nonwhite, farm and nonfarm,— there tended to be more

poor persons in the prime years of 22-54 than at any other age.

T a b l e IIIC -2.— P o o r P e r s o n s ,1 b y A g e , L o c a tio n , a n d C olor, M a rc h , 1 9 6 5

Age United States Nonfarm Farm

Total Nonwhite White Total Nonwhite White Total Nonwhite White

Numbers (in millions)

All ages. _ 34. 3 10. 6 23. 7 29. 9 9. 3 20. 6 4. 4 1. 3 3. 1

Under 6 _ 5. 8 2. 3 3. 5 5. 1 2. 0 3. 1 . 7 . 3 . 4 6-15_______________ 8. 1 3. 1 5. 0 6. 8 2. 7 4. 1 1. 3 . 4 . 9 16-21______________ 3. 0 . 9 2. 1 2. 6 . 7 1. 9 . 4 . 2 . 2 22-54______________ 9. 3 2. 9 6. 4 8. 0 2. 6 5. 4 1. 3 . 3 1. 0 55-64______________ 2. 7 . 6 2. 1 2. 4 . 6 1. 8 . 3 . 3 65 and over__ __ 5. 4 . 8 4. 6 5. 0 . 7 4. 3 . 4 . 1 . 3

Percent of each age group

All ages. 100 31 69 100 31 69 100 30 70

Under 6 100 40 60 100 39 61 100 43 57 6-15_______________ 100 38 62 100 40 60 100 31 69 16-21______________ 100 30 70 100 27 73 100 50 50 22-54______________ 100 31 69 100 33 67 100 23 77 55-64______________ 100 22 78 100 25 75 100 100 65 and over___ 100 15 85 100 14 86 100 25 75

Percent distribution by location and color

All ages 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100

Under 6 _ 17 22 15 17 22 15 16 23 13 6-15_______________ 24 29 21 23 29 20 30 31 29 16-21______________ 9 8 9 9 8 9 9 15 6

22-54______________ 27 27 27 27 28 26 30 23 32 55-64______________ 8 6 9 8 6 9 7 10 65 and over. __ __ 16 8 19 17 8 21 9 8 10

1 Based on 1964 annual family cash income, and according to criteria Source: Dimensions of Poverty in 196J,[, Office of Economic Opportunity,

established initially by the Social Security Administration (see table IIIC-1). October 1965, table 2, p. 4.

N ote.—Because of rounding, sums of individual items may not equal

totals.

156

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Nonwhite family heads who were poor were more likely than white family heads to be employed

and working full time in 1964, especially in the age group 22-54.

T a b l e IIIC-3.— W o r k E x p e rie n c e o f P o o r F a m ily H e a d s/ b y A g e a n d C olor, 1 9 6 4

Percent distribution

Age Total family heads

Worked in 1964

Did not work Total 40-52 weeks 1-39 weeks

Full time Part time Full time Part time

Total Non­ white Total Non­ white Total Non­ white Total Non­ white Total Non­ white Total Non­ white Total Non­ white

All ages.. 100 100 65 74 38 43 6 7 14 15 7 9 35 26

Under 22__ __ 3 3 2 2 1 1 1 1

22-54__________ 61 72 48 58 31 36 3 4 11 11 4 7 13 14

55-64_________ 14 12 9 9 5 5 1 1 2 2 1 1 5 3

65 and over__ 22 14 5 5 2 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 17 9

1 Data are preliminary and relate only to heads of families of 2 or more.

Note.—Because of rounding, sums of individual items may not equal totals.

Source: Dimensions of Poverty in 1964, Office of Economic Opportunity, October 1965, table 4a, p. 13.

157

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Nearly half of the nonwhite population and 60 percent of nonwhite children (under 18) lived in

poverty in 1963, according to Social Security Administration criteria.

T a b l e IIIC-4.—T o ta l N u m b e r o f the P o o r in 1 9 6 3 , A c c o r d in g to S o c ia l S e c u r ity A d m in is tr a tio n C r ite r ia ,1 a n d P erce n t

D is tr ib u tio n b y C olor, F a m ily S ta tu s , a n d A g e D e ta il, a s o f M a rc h 1 9 6 f

Age, sex, and family status

Nonwhite White

Number

poor

Percent of total popu­ lation 1 2 in category

Number

poor

Percent of total popu­ lation 2 in category

M illio n s M illio n s Total persons 10.7 49 23.9 14

Unrelated individuals. _ . 8 58 4. 1 42 Members of family units 9.9 49 19.8 13

Children under 18 3 5. 8 60 9. 3 16

Under 6 2.3 60 3. 6 17 6-13______________________________________________ 2.6 62 4. 1 16 14-17_____________________________________________ .9 53 1. 5 13

Persons 18-45. 2. 9 40 6. 2 11

Unrelated individuals 4 . 2 43 .7 30 Members of family units . _ 2.6 39 5. 4 10

Persons 45-64.. 1. 4 39 3. 9 11

Unrelated individuals. . 4 61 1. 0 31 Members of family units 1. 0 35 2.8 9

Persons 65 and over____ _ .7 55 4. 6 29

Unrelated individuals. .3 74 2. 3 58 Members of family units___ . 4 48 2. 3 19

1 Based on 1963 income of $1,580 a year for a nonfarm single person under 65

($1,470 aged 65 and over) to $5,090 for a nonfarin family of 7 or more persons.

The poverty line for single persons and families living on a farm was put at

60 percent of the above. This percentage was recently revised to 70 percent,

but information incorporating the 70 percent measure (using income data

for 1964 and characteristics as of 1965) is not yet available.

2 Noninstitutional. As of March 4 there were 2 million persons in institutions, including 270,000 children under age 18; 1,100,000 persons aged 18-64;

and 700,000 persons aged 65 or older. These persons, as well as the 200,000

children under age 14 who live with a family to no member of which they are

related, are not represented in the poverty index because income data are not

collected for inmates of institutions or unrelated individuals under age 14.

3 Includes never-married own children of the family head and all other

never-married relations under 18; excludes an additional 300,000 children

under age 14 (200,000 in households of nonrelatives and 100,000 in institutions) .

4 Also includes all unrelated individuals aged 14-17.

Note.—Numbers in this report based on actual counts of individual

persons in the households sampled, weighed and aggregated by family weights

with units, then adjusted by Bureau of the Census procedures to conform to

known population characteristics, such as age, sex, and race. Group totals

may therefore differ slightly from corresponding totals in other Census

reports based on person rather than family weights. The counts of persons

in families may also differ slightly from those in “Counting the Poor,” which

were derived from distributions of family units with an estimated average

number assumed for units including 7 or more persons, or 6 or more related

children under age 18.

Source: Mollie Orshansky, “ Who’s Who Among the Poor: A Demographic

View of Poverty,” Social Security Bulletin, July 1965, table A, page 27.

158

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
The incidence of poverty among whites, as well as nonwhites, is greatest in the South. W ithin

each region, it is greatest among unrelated individuals first, and then among families with female heads.

However, in all instances, the nonwhite incidence is greater than the white.

T a b l e IIIC-5.—I n c id e n c e o f P o v e r ty in 1 9 6 3 , A c c o r d in g to S o c ia l S e c u r ity A d m in is tr a tio n C r ite r ia ,1 b y C olor a n d S e x o f

H o u seh o ld H e a d a n d b y R eg io n , a s o f M a rc h 1 9 6 f

[Numbers in thousands] v

Sex and race of head

Total, United States Northeast South North central West

Total Percent of poor Total Percent of poor Total Percent of poor Total Percent of poor Total Percent of poor

Families of 2 or more

Male head 42, 550 12. 3 10, 700 7. 5 12, 720 21. 0 12, 150 9. 1 6, 980 9. 0

Non white 3, 690 34. 1 680 19.9 1, 820 51.0 700 17.0 490 14.5 White___________ 38, 870 10.2 10,020 6.6 10, 900 16. 0 11,450 8. 7 6, 490 8. 5

Female head- 4, 880 40. 1 1, 210 30.4 1, 670 51.9 1, 200 35. 7 800 36.4

Nonwhite 1, 090 70.8 210 49.4 570 81.2 190 71. 6 120 51. 2 White___________ 3, 800 31. 2 1,000 26. 4 1, 100 36. 3 1, 020 28. 6 680 33.7

Unrelated individuals

Male. 4, 280 33. 7 1, 130 28.0 1, 030 44. 6 1, 090 36. 1 1, 030 26.6

Nonwhite_ 680 46. 2 130 40.6 300 58.4 120 47. 1 130 21. 6 White. 3, 590 31. 3 1, 000 26.3 730 38. 5 970 34.8 900 27.4

F emale 6, 910 50.3 1,990 50. 2 1, 800 57. 3 1, 890 51.0 1, 220 39. 0

Nonwhite_ 780 67.8 210 46.4 360 84. 6 140 68.9 70 (2) White 6, 130 48. 1 1, 790 50. 5 1, 440 50. 7 1,750 49. 6 1, 150 38. 9

1 Based on 1963 income of $1,580 a year for a nonfarm single person under

65 ($1,470 aged 65 and over), to $5,090 for a nonfarm family of 7 or more persons.

The poverty line for single persons and families living on a farm was put at

60 percent of the above. This percentage was recently revised to 70 percent,

but information incorporating the 70 percent measure (using income data

for 1964 and characteristics as of 1965) is not yet available.

2 Not shown for base less than 100,000.

Source: Mollie Orshansky, “Who’s Who Among the Poor: A Demographic

View of Poverty,” Social Security Bulletin, July 1965, table G, p. 32.

159

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
The incidence of poverty is 3% times as great

among nonwhite as white families. Among the

nonwhite, poverty is concentrated in families in

which there are 2 or more children, and the heads

are in the prime of life, in contrast to white

families, among whom poverty is m ost prevalent

among the aged and in households with 1 or no

children.

T a bl e IIIC-6.—P r o p o r tio n o f F a m ilie s P o o r in 1 9 6 3 ,

A c c o r d in g to S o c ia l S e c u r ity A d m in is tr a tio n C r ite r ia ,1 a n d

D is tr ib u tio n o f the P o o r, by C olor a n d b y S elected F a m ily

C h a ra c te ristic s in M a rc h 1 9 6 4

Family characteristics

Percent poor in each category

Percent dis­ tribution of poor families in each category

Non­ white W hite Non­ white W hite

All families 43 12 100 100

RESIDENCE

All families _ _ ____ 43 12 100 100 Nonfarm__ 41 12 91 90 Farm____ 62 19 9 10

AGE OF HEAD

All families__ - ___ 43 12 100 100

14-24_________________ 60 21 10 10

25-34_________________ 43 11 22 18

35-44_________________ 40 11 24 21 45-54_________________ 35 7 17 12

55-64_________________ 38 11 12 14

65 and over. 53 21 14 25

NUMBER OF PERSONS IN

FAMILY

All families _ 43 12 100 100

2_____________________ 33 14 22 39

3_____________________ 29 9 13 15

4_____________________ 42 8 16 13

5_____________________ 45 11 12 13

6_____________________ 54 14 11 8

7 or more 68 25 26 12

NUMBER OF RELATED

CHILDREN UNDER AGE 18

All families___ 43 12 100 100

None 27 12 20 40

1_____________________ 33 10 15 15

2_____________________ 43 8 16 13

T a bl e IIIC-6.—P r o p o r tio n o f F a m ilie s P o o r in 1 9 6 3 ,

A c c o r d in g to S o c ia l S e c u r ity A d m in is tr a tio n C r ite r ia ,1 a n d

D is tr ib u tio n o f th e P o o r, b y C olor a n d b y S elected F a m ily

C h a ra c te ristics i n M a rc h 1 9 6 4—Continued

Family characteristics

Percent poor in each category

Percent dis­ tribution of poor families in each category

Non­ white W hite Non­ white W hite

NUMBER OF RELATED

CHILDREN UNDER AGE 18--COn.

All families

3_____________________ 48 14 12 14

4_____________________ 61 17 12 8

5_____________________ 74 27 10 6

6 or more. _________ 77 35 15 6

REGION

All families _ _ 43 12 100 100 Northeast. _ _ 27 8 12 18 North Central__ ___ 30 10 13 25 South _ _____ 58 18 69 42

West 21 11 6 15

TYPE OF FAMILY

All families__ 43 12 100 100 Male head _ 34 10 62 77 Married, wife present... 34 10 59 75 Wife in paid labor force ____ 26 4 19 10 Wife not in paid labor force. _ 41 13 40 64 Other marital status__ 2 31 15 27 3

Female head __ _ _____ 71 31 38 23

NUMBER OF EARNERS

All families _ _ 43 12 100 100

None... 84 49 19 31

1_____________________ 49 13 44 46

2_____________________ 29 6 26 19

3 or more. 35 4 11 4

1 Based on 1963 income of $1,580 a year for a nonfarm single person under 65

($1,470 aged 65 and over), to $5,090 for a nonfarm family of 7 or more persons.

The poverty line for single persons and families living on a farm was put at

60 percent of the above. This percentage was recently revised to 70 percent,

but information incorporating the 70 percent measure (using income data for

1964 and characteristics as of 1965) is not yet available.

2 Base between 100,000 and 200,000.

Note.—Because of rounding, sums of individual items may not equal

totals.

Source: Mollie Orshansky, “Counting the Poor: Another Look at The

Poverty Profile,” Social Security Bulletin, January 1965, table 8, p. 19.

160

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Nonwhite families with children and a female

head have almost twice the incidence of poverty

as similar white families, or 78 percent compared

to 45 percent. In contrast, families of 2 or more

with a male head are much more numerous and

more are poor, but the percent of poor is less— 34

percent of the nonwhite and 10 percent of the

white.

T a b l e IIIC-7.—H o u seh o ld s W ith 1 9 6 3 In co m e B elo w

P o v e r ty L evel, A c c o r d in g to S o c ia l S e c u r ity A d m in is tr a tio n

C r i t e r i a b y C olor a n d F a m ily S ta tu s , a s o f M a rc h 1 9 6 4

Family status

Total number of house­ holds in population

Households below poverty level

Number Percent of total

Millions Millions

Unrelated individuals 11.2 4.9 44

Male__ __ 4.3 1.4 34

Nonwhite- _ __ .7 .3 46 White__ _____ 3.6 1. 1 31

Female__ 6.9 3. 5 50

Non white. __ .8 . 5 68 White_____________ 6. 1 2.9 48

Families of two or more__ 47.4 7.2 15

Male head___ 42.6 5. 2 12

Nonwhite. ______ 3.7 1.3 34 White_____________ 38.9 3. 9 10

Female head___ 5. 9 2.0 40

Non white 1. 1 .8 71 White__ 3.8 1.2 31

With children, total----- 28.3 4.8 17

Male head 25. 5 3.2 12

Nonwhite. 2.4 .9 37 White__ 23. 1 2. 2 10

Female head 2. 8 1. 6 55

Nonwhite__ .9 .7 78 White_____________ 2.0 .9 45

1 Based on 1963 income of $1,580 a year for a nonfarm single person under 65

($1,470 aged 65 and over), to $5,090 for a nonfarm family of 7 or more persons.

The poverty line for single persons and families living on a farm was put at

60 percent of the above. This percentage was recently revised to 70 percent,

but information incorporating the 70 percent measure (using income data for

1964 and characteristics as of 1965) is not yet available.

Note—Because of rounding, sums of individual items may not equal totals •

Source: Mollie Orshansky, “Who’s Who Among the Poor: A Demographic

View of Poverty,” Social Security Bulletin, July 1965, table 2.

The incidence of children’s poverty in 1963 was

almost 4 times as great among the nonwhite as the

white in families with male heads. In families

with female heads the nonwhite-white difference

in the incidence of children’s poverty was not

quite as large, and was least when the children

were under 6 years old.

T a b l e IIIC-8.—In c id e n c e o f P o v e r ty A m o n g C h ild re n in

1 9 6 3 , A c c o r d in g to S o c ia l S e c u r ity A d m in is tr a tio n C r ite r ia ,1 b y C olor, A g e, a n d S ex o f F a m ily H e a d , M a rc h 1 9 6 4

Nonwhite White

All children Percent of poor All children Percent of poor

All children under

18____________

M illio n s

9. 7 60

M illio n s

59. 2 16

MALE HEAD

Children under 18. 7. 1 50 55. 1 13 Under 6. 3. 0 50 19. 9 14

6-13________ 2. 9 52 24. 5 12

14-17_______ 1. 2 41 10. 6 11

FEMALE HEAD

Children under 18. 2. 6 86 4. 1 55 Under 6 . 9 88 1. 1 72

6-13________ 1. 2 87 1. 9 57 14-17_______ . 5 80 1. 1 34

1 Based on 1963 income of $1,580 a year for a nonfarm single person under 65

($1,470 aged 65 and over), to $5,090 for a nonfarm family of 7 or more persons.

The poverty line for single persons and families living on a farm was put at

60 percent of the above. This percentage was recently revised to 70 percent,

but information incorporating the 70 percent measure (income data for 1964

and characteristics as of 1965) is not yet available.

Source: Mollie Orshansky, “ Who’s Who Among the Poor: A Demographic

View of Poverty,” Soical Security Bulletin, July 1965, table 5, p. 17.

161

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Of all the nonwhite heads of poor families, 72 percent worked in 1963 and about half worked at fulltime jobs. In comparison, 62 percent of white fam ily heads who were poor were employed, with half

working at full-time jobs.

T a b l e IIIC-9.—P r o p o r tio n o f F a m ilie s P o o r in 1 9 6 3 , A c c o r d in g to S o c ia l S e c u r ity A d m in is tr a tio n C r ite r ia ,l a n d D is tr ib u tio n o f P o o r F a m ilie s b y S elected C h a r a c te ris tic s o f F a m ily H e a d s, a s o f M a rc h 1 9 6 4

Employment status, occupation, and work experience of family head

All families________________________________

Not in labor force * 3912_________________________

Unemployed_______________________________ Employed_________________________________ Professional, technical, and kindred workers. Managers, officials, and proprietors_______

Farmers and farm managers_____________ Clerical and sales workers_______________ Craftsmen and foremen_________________

Operatives____________________________ Service workers, including private household. 

Laborers______________________________

All families________________________________

Worked in 1963 4___________________________ Worked at full-time jobs________________

50-52 weeks______________________

40-49 weeks_______________________

39 weeks or less____________________

Worked at part-time jobs___________________

Did not work in 1963_______________________

111 or disabled__________________________ Keeping house_________________________ Could not find work____________________ Going to school________________________ Other________________________________

Percent of poor in each category Percentage distribution of poor families in each category

Non white White Nonwhite White Nonwhite White

43 12 100 100

65 30 35 45

53 24 6 6

35 8 59 50 100 100

11 2 1 2 2 4

3 22 5 1 6 2 12 3 77 27 4 9 7 18

17 4 2 3 3 7

21 5 4 6 7 12

30 9 13 11 22 23

40 12 16 5 27 10

50 21 18 7 30 14

43 12 100 100

37 9 72 62 (100) (100)

32 7 53 49 (74)100 (79)100

26 5 32 27 59 56

39 11 8 7 14 14

53 25 14 15 27 31

68 29 19 13 (26) (21) 70 34 28 39 100 100

68 41 10 12 37 30

83 43 11 11 40 29

s 42 1 3

3 53 25 5 14 16 37

1 Based on 1963 income of $1,580 a year for a nonfarm single person under 65

($1,470 aged 65 and over), to $5,090 for a nonfarm family of 7 or more persons.

The poverty line for single persons and families living on a farm was placed

at 60 percent of the above. This percentage was recently revised to 70 percent, but information incorporating the 70-percent measure is not yet available.

2 Includes members of the Armed Forces.

3 Base between 100,000 and 200,000.

4 Work-experience data, including data for year-round full-time workers,

limited to civilian workers.

Note.—Because of rounding, sums of individual items may not equal totals.

Source: Mollie Orshansky, “ Counting The Poor: Another Look At the

Poverty Profile,” Social Security Bulletin, January 1965, table 8, p. 19.

162

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
The proportion of nonwhite families with incomes under $3,000 (in constant dollars) has declined

substantially since 1950, and even since 1960, from 45 to 38 percent. Among white families the ratio

has declined also, but has not even been as high as 20 percent since 1956 and was about 16 percent in

both 1963 and 1964.

T a b l e IIIC-10.—F a m ilie s W ith In c o m e s U n d e r $ 3 ,0 0 0 (in 1 9 6 3 d o lla rs) b y C olor, f o r S elected Y e a rs, 1 9 5 0 - 6 4

[Numbers in thousands. Families as of the following year]

Year

Families 1950 1956 1960 1963 1964

Non­ white White Non­ white White Non­ white White Non­ white White Non­ white White

All families____ 3, 300 36, 522 3, 994 39, 451 4, 331 41, 104 4, 773 42, 663 4, 754 43,081

With incomes under $3,000___________

Percent of all 2, 000 10, 357 2, 021 7, 646 1,945 7, 499 2, 057 6, 776 1, 805 6, 762

families 60.6 28.4 50.6 19.4 44. 9 18. 2 43. 1 15. 9 38.0 15.7

Source: Data are from Current Population Reports, Low Income Families 2 for 1950-1963 and No. 47, table 1 for 1964. (U.S. Bureau of the Census.)

and Unrelated Individuals in the United States: 1963, Series P-60, No. 45, table

163

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
A large proportion of both employed and unemployed nonwhite persons were in families with less

than $3,000 income in 1964 (26 and 36 percent, respectively). In fact, median family income was

similar among nonwhite families regardless of employm ent status, but varied appreciably among white

families according to whether individual family members were employed or not.

T a b l e IIIC-11.—P e r s o n s1 in F a m ilie s, T o ta l a n d N o n w h ite , by M a rc h 1 9 6 5 E m p lo y m e n t S ta tu s , A g e , a n d F a m ily In c o m e

in 1964. (below $ 3 ,0 0 0 a n d m e d ia n )

Total Nonwhite

Item Persons (in thousands)

Percent with family income under $3, 000

Median family income

Persons (in thousands)

Percent with family income under $3, 000

Median family income

Total persons in families _. ___ 121,861 15.4 $6,960 12, 504 33.7 $4, 238

Employed. _ 64, 626 9. 6 7, 731 6, 473 25.9 4, 885 Unemployed . . . 3, 361 20. 2 5, 806 660 36.4 4, 003

Not in labor force . . . 53,874 22. 1 6, 148 5, 372 42. 7 3, 535

Keeping house, going to school, unable to work. _ 47, 552 19. 3 6, 437 4, 765 41. 6 3,614 All other _ _ _ _ _ 6, 322 42. 6 3, 681 608 51.3 2,934 65 years of age and over.. 4, 356 45.8 3, 405 304 54.9 2, 801

Teenagers 19, 400 14. 7 7, 258 2,490 36. 6 3, 948

Employed 4, 767 11.7 8, 000 394 29. 2 4,617 Unemployed 773 18.9 6, 019 147 40. 1 3, 667

Not in labor force. _ _ . _ 13,861 15.5 7, 038 1, 949 37.8 3, 847

Keeping house, going to school, unable to work _ _ _ 13,593 15.3 7, 102 1, 876 38. 1 3, 854 All other____ _ . . . . 268 25. 0 4, 860 72 31.9 3, 749

1 14 years of age and over.

Note.—Because of rounding, sums of individual items may not equal totals.

Source: U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics. Unpublished data from the March 1965 supplement to the Current Population Survey.

Nearly one-fourth of the nonwhite families headed by a full-time year-round worker had incomes

under $3,000 compared to only 8 percent of all families headed by a full-time worker in 1964.

T a b l e IIIC-12.-—F a m ily H e a d s, T o ta l a n d N o n w h ite , b y W eek s W o rk ed , a n d F a m ily I n c o m e , 1 9 6 4 (below $ 3 , 0 0 0 a n d

m e d ia n )

Weeks worked in 1964

Total Nonwhite

Persons (in thou­ sands)

Percent with family in­ come under $3,000

Median family income

Persons (in thou­ sands)

Percent with family in­ come under $3,000

Median family income

Total family heads 47, 729 17. 5 $6, 569 4, 749 37. 4 $3, 970

Worked 50-52 weeks 30, 515 7. 9 7, 745 2, 553 23. 5 4, 956

Usually worked full time 29, 553 6. 8 7, 864 2, 380 20. 7 5, 201

Usually worked part time. 962 44. 0 3, 457 173 62. 4 2, 390

Worked 27-49 w ee k s.__ 5, 582 17. 8 5, 960 746 40. 9 3, 684

Worked 14-26 weeks 1, 565 36. 7 4, 017 269 59. 9 2, 503

Worked 1-13 weeks 1, 071 55. 5 2, 737 177 72. 9 1, 887

Did not work in 1964 6, 375 51. 7 2, 923 732 66. 3 2, 259

Not available _. 2, 621 18. 7 5, 526 272 35. 7 3, 854

Source: U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics. Unpublished data from March 1965 supplement to the Current Population Survey.

164

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
The percent of families with under $3,000 income in 1964 was nearly identical for nonwhite families

with e m p lo y e d heads and all families with u n e m p lo y e d heads. The lowest incidence among nonwhite

families of those with incomes under $3,000 in 1964 was for husband-wife families with the wife in the

labor force and children present. Families of this type, in general, had the highest median fam ily

income in 1964— $5,763 among nonwhite families and $8,086 in all such families.

T a b l e IIIC-13.—E m p lo y m e n t S ta tu s o f F a m ily H e a d s in M a rc h 1 9 6 5 , T y p e o f F a m ily , a n d N u m b e r o f O w n C h ild re n

U n d e r 18, b y F a m ily I n c o m e in 1 9 6 4 , T o ta l a n d N o n w h ite ( U n d e r $ 3 ,0 0 0 a n d M e d ia n )

Total Nonwhite

Item Persons (in thou­ sands)

Percent with family in­ come under $3,000

Median family income

Persons (in thou­ sands)

Percent with family in­ come under $3,000

Median family income

Employment status: Total family heads 47, 729 17. 5 $6, 569 4, 749 37. 4 $3, 970

No children under 18 20, 637 23. 6 5, 965 1, 865 38. 3 3, 933 One child under 18 8, 431 14. 3 6, 857 787 35. 2 4, 381 Two children under 18 8, 053 9. 7 7, 254 656 30. 6 4, 349 Three children under 18 5, 272 12. 1 7, 098 503 37. 0 4, 065 Four or more children under 18 5, 337 16. 3 6, 363 939 42. 4 3, 495

Head employed 38, 671 10. 4 7, 265 3, 589 28. 4 4, 572

No children under 18 13, 938 12. 7 7, 292 1, 261 27. 4 4, 738 One or more children under 18____ 24, 733 9. 1 7, 253 2, 329 29. 0 4, 489

Head unemployed__ 1, 208 27. 8 4, 949 233 51. 9 2, 912

No children under 18. 518 24. 3 5, 177 82 42. 7 0) One or more children under 18__ 690 30. 3 4, 771 151 56. 3 2, 683

Head not in the labor force 7, 850 51. 0 2, 953 927 68. 7 2, 136

No children under 18 6, 181 48. 1 3, 169 522 64. 2 2, 347 One or more children under 18 . 1, 670 61. 6 2, 390 405 74. 6 (2)

Type of family: Male head, married, spouse present, wife in labor force 14, 534 7. 8 8, 081 1, 635 19. 6 5, 554

No children under 18 6, 673 10. 3 8, 071 711 26. 0 5, 219 One or more children under 18 7, 860 5. 8 8, 086 923 14. 7 5, 763

Male head, married, spouse present, wife not in labor force 27, 126 17. 7 6, 361 1, 846 37. 3 3, 855

No children under 18... 10, 552 29. 4 5, 033 632 42. 4 3, 475 One or more children under 18 16, 573 10. 2 6, 945 1, 214 34. 5 4, 081

All other family heads 6, 069 40. 1 3, 870 1, 268 60. 6 2, 475

No children under 18 3, 412 31. 6 4, 724 520 50. 4 2, 988 One or more children under 18 2, 655 51. 0 2, 944 748 67. 4 2, 219

1 Median income not computed where base was less than 100,000. Source: U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics. Unpub2 Under $2,000. lished data from March 1965 supplement to Current Population Survey.

Note.—Because of rounding, sums of individual items may not equal

totals.

165

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Of all persons in the experienced civilian labor force in 1960, those in selected very low-wage occupations (which include a number of jobs in which women predominate) were much less likely to be heads

of families than workers in higher wage occupations. Among fam ily heads, however, about two-thirds

of both the white and nonwhite workers in the low-wage jobs had children under 18.

T a b l e IIIC-14.—F a m ily R e s p o n s ib ilitie s o f P e r s o n s in th e E x p e rie n c e d C iv ilia n L a b o r F orce a n d in S elected N o n a g r ic u ltu r a l L o w -W a g e O c c u p a tio n s ,1 b y C olor, U n ite d S ta te s, 1 9 6 0

Nonwhite White

Occupation

Total experi­ enced

Heads of families as a percent of total civilian labor force ‘ Total experi­ enced

Heads of families as a percent of total civilian labor force

Family heads—per­ cent with children under 18 civilian labor force With chil- Fam­ ily size

civilian labor force With chil- Fam­ ily size (in thou­ sands) Total dren under 18

5 or 

more

(in thou­ sands) Total dren under 18

5 or 

more Non­ white W hite

Total experienced civilian labor force. 7, 217 46 32 18 60, 790 56 37 15 69 65 Total, those in selected low-wage occupations__ 3, 026 34 23 12 14, 329 33 20 8 68 61 Professional, technical, and kindred work- ers: Musicians and music teachers 10 33 19 7 186 32 20 6 58 62 Managers, officials, and proprietors, ex­ cept farm: Salaried, retail trade (n.e.c.) . 12 60 41 21 606 77 54 21 70 70 Salaried, personal services__ 4 44 23 13 74 60 34 12 (2) 57 Clerical and kindred workers: Attendants, physician’s and dentist’s office. _ 3 14 10 4 71 9 6 1 (2) 69 Bookkeepers . 14 23 14 6 926 19 11 3 64 56 Cashiers. _ . 20 23 16 7 475 16 9 3 68 58 File clerks. . . . 11 20 15 6 130 12 6 2 (2) 53 Messengers and office boys.. _ 9 51 28 15 55 25 8 3 55 33

Receptionists. _ __ ._ _ 5 15 11 1 136 8 5 1 (2) 58 Stock clerks and store keepers _ 39 52 36 18 311 56 34 12 70 61 Wholesale and retail trade (n.e.c.)___ 20 31 21 12 406 27 16 5 68 58 Sales workers—’retail trade: Food and dairy products stores 27 34 22 10 493 34 20 7 66 60 General merchandise, retailing. 13 17 11 6 582 19 11 3 (2) 56 Limited price variety stores 4 10 7 2 181 7 4 1 (2) 59 Apparel and accessories. _ 8 21 13 4 333 24 12 4 (2) 51 Other retail trade 22 37 24 11 829 48 29 11 64 61 Craftsmen, foremen, and kindred workers: Shoemakers and repairers, except factory 5 61 40 20 32 79 36 14 65 45

Operatives and kindred workers: Attendants, auto service and parking. 38 58 40 23 342 49 33 13 69 67

Checkers, examiners, and inspectors, manufacturing__ 21 46 32 14 497 50 33 13 69 66 Dressmakers and seamstresses, ex- cept factory. . 12 22 14 6 113 13 5 1 64 39

Laundry and dry cleaning operatives.. 156 31 22 10 254 28 17 6 71 59

Packers and wrappers (n.e.c.) 61 41 29 15 436 27 18 7 70 66

Sawyers. _ 17 67 50 35 75 79 54 27 74 68

Sewers and stitchers, manufacturing._ 38 20 14 5 578 13 7 2 71 55

Spinners, textile__ (2) (2) (2) (2) 54 26 16 7 (2) (2)

See footnotes at end of table.

166

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
T a b l e IIIC-14.— F a m ily R e s p o n s ib ilitie s o f P e r so n s in th e E x p e rie n c e d C iv ilia n L a b o r F orce a n d in S elected N o n a g r ic u ltu r a l L o w -W a g e O c c u p a tio n s ,1 b y C o lo r, U n ite d S ta te s, 1 9 6 0—Continued

Nonwhite White

Occupation

Total experi­ enced

Heads of families as a percent of total civilian labor force Total experi­ encedHeads of families as a percent of total civilian labor force

Family heads—per­ cent with children under 18 civilian labor force With chil- Fam­ ily size 5 or 

more

civilian labor force With chil- Fam­ ily size (in thou­ sands) Total dren under 18

(in thou­ sands) Total dren under 18

5 or 

more Non­ white W hite

Operatives and kindred workers—Con. Food and kindred products___ 79 51 37 22 389 57 39 18 72 69 Knitting mills __ ______ 4 36 26 13 57 23 14 5 (2) 64

Yarn, thread, and fabric mills. _ 9 64 48 31 244 47 32 13 75 68 Apparel and accessories. 45 25 17 6 352 27 15 4 66 57 Paper and allied products. 16 65 50 30 212 66 49 21 76 74 Footwear, except rubber 2 (2) (2) (2) 145 39 23 8 (2) (2) Wholesale and retail trade___ . 41 52 37 21 175 54 35 15 71 66

Private household workers: Private house­ hold workers, except babysitters. _ 941 20 14 6 521 11 3 1 73 22

Service workers, except private household: Attendants, hospital and other institutions. ______ 104 31 23 10 303 23 13 5 76 60

Attendants, professional and personal service (n.e.c.)____________ 21 25 17 8 54 24 13 5 69 56

Chambermaids and maids, except private household. _ . . _ _ 112 20 15 6 70 13 8 2 73 59

Charwomen and cleaners__ 52 32 22 11 142 27 15 6 69 55

Cooks, except private households___ 150 38 26 13 449 31 18 7 69 59

Counter and fountain workers. 20 21 15 5 147 17 10 3 71 60

Elevator operators__ _ ___ 24 41 22 11 54 55 22 10 53 40

Hairdressers and cosmetologists. . . . 37 16 11 3 274 15 10 2 65 63

Housekeepers and stewards, except private household.. _ . _ 19 30 18 8 134 21 10 4 59 50

Janitors and sextons____ . _ 180 65 39 23 444 64 29 13 60 45

Kitchen workers (n.e.c.) except pri­ vate household _ _ _ . __ 96 24 17 8 236 19 10 4 70 54

Porters. _ 117 62 36 19 39 55 26 13 57 48 Practical nurses__ 37 20 14 5 182 13 7 2 72 54

Waiters and waitresses.. 88 31 21 9 807 14 10 2 67 73

Laborers, except farm and mine: Garage laborers, car washers, and 

greasers.. _ ___ 41 50 35 21 51 39 26 11 70 66

Wardens and groundskeepers.. 47 57 32 20 167 55 27 13 56 49

Lumberman, raftsmen, and wood- choppers. _ 42 57 43 32 94 70 52 29 77 75

Sawmills, planning mills—millwork (n.e.c.)__ 30 66 52 36 68 69 48 25 (2) 69

Wholesale and retail trade (n.e.c.)___ 71 50 36 21 298 30 19 9 (2) 64

Personal services (n.e.c.) __ 34 47 24 14 44 30 13 6 (2) 44

1 Occupations in which a third of the workers earned less than $3,000 in 1959.

2 Number less than 500. Base less than 2,500.

Source: 1960 Census of Population, Subject Reports, Occupational Characteristics, PC(2)-7A, tables 3 and 33 (U.S. Bureau of the Census).

167

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Among women employed in selected nonagricultural low-wage occupations, a larger proportion of

nonwhite (54 percent) than white women (44 percent) were self-supporting or supported families they

headed in 1960. Nonwhite women in low-wage jobs were twice as likely to be supporting children as

were white women in low-wage jobs.

T a b l e IIIC-15.—F a m ily R e s p o n s ib ilitie s o f A ll E m p lo y e d W o m e n a n d W o m e n E m p lo y e d in S elected N o n a g r ic u ltu r a l L o w -

w age O c c u p a tio n s ,l b y C olor, 1 9 6 0

Non white White

Percent Percent

Occupation Total number (in thou­ sands)

Total single, and

ever Single

Ever married

spouse absent

Total number (in thou­ sands)

Total single, and

ever Single

Ever married

spouse absent

married,

spouse absent With chil­ dren 2

No chil­ dren

married,

spouse absent With chil­ dren 2

No chil­ dren

Total, employed women_____ _ 2, 618 52 18 11 23 18, 538 44 24 5 14 Total, employed in 14 low-wage 

occupations . _ . 1, 321 54 16 11 27 4, 846 44 21 5 17 Professional, technical, and kindred workers: Musicians and music teachers. 4 52 26 6 20 105 41 26 2 12 Clerical and kindred workers: Bookkeepers__ 10 51 31 9 11 754 38 23 5 10 Cashiers 14 48 24 10 14 356 40 23 6 11 Sales workers: Retail trade_____ 37 46 23 7 16 1,357 37 19 4 14 Operatives and kindred workers: Checkers, inspectors, and exami­ ners, m anufacturing.___ 9 42 11 11 20 207 32 13 6 14 Dressmakers and seamstresses, excluding factory. 10 52 8 9 35 106 49 12 3 33 Laundry and drycleaning operatives ____ __ __ 104 50 15 11 24 171 40 14 7 20 Operatives and kindred workers (n.e.c.): Food and kindred products. _ _ _ _ 22 41 15 11 15 94 32 12 7 13 Private household workers .. 889 56 15 11 30 767 70 36 4 31 Service workers, excluding private household: Attendants, hospital and other 

institutions _ 67 51 20 14 17 222 44 19 6 19 Cooks. 84 47 10 14 22 278 33 6 7 21 Hairdressers and cosmetologists. _ 35 43 13 10 21 237 35 17 6 12 Housekeepers and stewards. 12 47 11 7 29 106 61 21 4 36 Laborers, except farm and m ine.. . 26 60 25 10 26 85 43 25 6 12

1 14 nonagricultural occupations in which a third of the workers earned less

than $3,000 in 1959, and for which data relating to family responsibilities were

available.

2 Own children under 18 years in household.

Mote.—Because of rounding, sums of individual items may not equal

totals.

Source: 1960 Census of Population, Subject Reports, Occupational Characteristics, PC(2)-7A, table 34 (U.S. Bureau of the Census).

168

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Nonwhite farm wage workers with wages from nonfarm plus farm work earned approximately half

the annual average wages of similar white farm workers in 1964, although they averaged only 15 percent

fewer days of work.

T a b l e I I I C - 1 6 .— F a r m W a g e W o rk ers, b y A vera g e N u m b e r o f D a y s W o rk ed , W a g e s E a r n e d a t F a r m a n d N o n fa r m W o rk ,

a n d b y C olor, S ex , R eg io n , a n d M ig r a to r y S ta tu s , 1964-

Number Farm and nonfarm Farm Nonfarm

Selected characteristics of workers (thou- Days Wages earned Days Wages earned Days Wages earned

sands) worked Per

year

Per day 1

worked Per

year

Per day 1

worked Per

year

Per day 1

All workers, 1964 _ 3, 370 118 $956 $8 . 05 80 $578 $7. 15 38 $378 $1 0. 1 0

Color and sex: 

Nonwhite. 1, 048

2, 322

105 586 5. 55 79 401 5. 05 26 185 7. 10 White__________ ________ 124 1, 123 9. 05 81 657 8 . 05 43 466 10. 90

Male _ 2, 398 139 1, 2 0 2 8 . 60 95 719 7. 50 44 483 1 1. 0 0

Nonwhite. _ 603 125 790 6 . 30 96 529 5. 50 29 261 9. 00 White. 1, 795 144 1, 340 9. 25 95 782 8 . 2 0 49 558 11. 40

Female. _ _ _ __ 972 6 6 349 5. 25 44 229 5. 15 2 2 1 2 0 5. 55

Nonwhite. _____ 445 79 311 3. 95 56 228 4. 00 23 83 3. 70 White___________ .. 527 55 381 6. 90 34 230 6 . 71 2 1 151 7. 15

REGION AND COLOR

Northeast__ ____ 292 162 1, 388 8 . 55 1 0 2 763 7. 45 60 625 10. 40

Nonwhite2 __ 22

White __ 270 163 1, 388 8 . 50 108 806 7. 50 55 582 10. 55

North Central. 632 124 1, 063 8 . 50 75 538 7. 10 49 525 10. 75

Nonwhite 2__ 28

White_____________ _____ 603 126 1, 086 8 . 65 76 546 7. 20 50 540 10. 85

South___ 1, 797 108 690 6 . 40 79 454 5. 70 29 236 8 . 2 0

Nonwhite. 958 104 528 5. 10 80 379 4. 75 24 149 6 . 35 White_______ 839 112 875 7. 75 78 540 6. 95 34 335 9. 75

West. 649 121 1, 395 11. 50 80 874 10. 90 41 521 12. 75

Nonwhite 2__ _ 40 White__ 609 1 2 0 1, 383 11. 50 79 861 10. 85 41 522 1 2. 80

See footnotes at end of table.

169

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
T a b l e IIIC-16.—F a r m W a g e W o rk ers, b y A ve ra g e N u m b e r o f D a y s W o rk ed , W a g e s E a r n e d a t F a r m a n d N o n f a r m W o rk ,

a n d b y C olor, S ex , R e g io n , a n d M ig r a to r y S ta tu s , 1 9 6 4—Continued

Selected characteristics

Num ber of workers (thou­ sands)

Farm and nonfarm Farm Nonfarm

Days worked

Wages earned Days worked

Wages earned Days worked

Wages earned

Per

year

Per day 1Per

year

Per day 1

Per

year

Per day 1

REGION, MIGRATORY STATUS, AND

COLOR

All workers: Migratory: Nonwhite_ 89 151 1, 104 7. 30 109 740 6 . 75 42 364 :8 . 60 White___ 297 125 1, 281 10. 25 81 795 9. 80 44 486 11. 05 Nonmigratory: Nonwhite _ 959 1 0 1 538 5. 30 76 370 4. 80 25 168 6. 85 White ___ ____ 2, 025 124 1, 1 0 0 8 . 85 81 637 7. 80 43 463 10. 90

South: Migratory____ _ 178 133 1, 091 8 . 15 1 0 0 776 7. 75 33 315 9. 55

Nonwhite_ 55 148 930 6 . 30 129 802 6. 2 0 19 128 3 6 . 90 White___________________ 123 127 1, 163 9. 15 87 764 8 . 75 40 399 3 10. 05

Nonmigratory 1, 619 105 645 6 . 15 77 419 5. 45 28 226 8 . 1 0

Nonwhite_ 903 1 0 1 503 4. 95 77 353 4. 55 24 150 6 . 30 White___________________ 716 1 1 0 825 7. 50 76 502 6 . 55 34 323 9. 65

West:Migratory 1 0 2 1 2 0 1, 520 1 2. 70 87 1, 029 1 1. 80 33 491 315. 35

Nonwhite 2 ___ _ __ 13

White. _ _ _ _ _ _ 89 117 1, 541 13. 15 87 1, 043 11. 90 30 498 316. 85

Nonmigratory 547 1 2 1 1, 372 11. 35 78 846 10. 75 43 526 12. 45

Nonwhite 2_ _ 27 White___________________ 520 1 2 1 1. 356 11. 15 78 830 10. 55 43 526 1 2. 2 0

1 Rounded to the nearest 5 cents.

2 Averages not shown where base is less than 50,000 persons.

3 Number of workers who did nonfarm wage work is less than 50,000.

Note.—Because of rounding, sums of individual items may not equal totals.

Source: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service, The Hired Farm Working Force of 1964, August 1965, table 7.

170

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Negro children constituted somewhat less than

half of all children receiving A FD C in the country

in 1961r but slightly more than half in the South

and North Central regions.

T a b l e IIIC-17.'—P e r c e n t D is tr ib u tio n o f A F D C C h ild re n

b y R eg io n o f R e s id en ce a n d R ace, N o v e m b e r -D e c e m b e r

1 96 1

Region Total Negro White American Indian Other

United States 1___ 10 0 46 49 2 3

Northeast1 1 0 0 43 45 (2) 3 1 2

North central 1 0 0 52 46 2 (2) South 1 0 0 53 46 1 (2) West 1 1 0 0 26 6 6 5 3

1 Does not include Massachusetts (Northeast) and Oregon (West).

2 Less than 0.5 percent.

3 Most families reported under “Other” in Northeast are of Puerto Rican

descent.

Source: Characteristics of Families Receiving Aid to Families With Dependent Children, Not ember-December 1961, table 3 (U.S. Department of Health,

Education, and Welfare, April 1963).

Of children receiving A FD C in 1961, Negroes

were nore than 3 times as likely as whites to live

in large central cities. In these cities, % of the

children aided were nonwhite whereas in rural

nonfarm areas, nearly % were white.

T a b l e IIIC-18.—P e r c e n t D is tr ib u tio n o f C h ild re n R e ­

ce iv in g A i d to F a m ilie s o f D e p e n d e n t C h ild re n { A F D C ) ,

b y U r b a n -R u r a l a n d L a rg e C e n tr a l C ity R e sid en ce ,

N o vem b er-D ecen ^ b er 1 961

Distribution of each race by location

Color distri­ bution within each location

Location

Negro

White

American IndianTotalNon white

White

Total 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 50 50

Central cities of 250,000 or more population 50 16 7 1 0 0 75 25 Other urban__ 34 47 2 1 1 0 0 42 58 Rural nonfarm. 1 1 32 63 1 0 0 28 72 Rural farm _ 6 6 9 1 0 0 47 53

N ote.—Because of rounding, sums of individual items may not equal

totals.

Source: U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, Welfare

Administration, Bureau of Family Services, unpublished data.

217-817 0 — 61 12 171

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
In 1961 the median m onthly income from all

sources for Negro families receiving A D C was

$125, compared to $137 for white families.

T a b l e IIIC-19.—I n c o m e1 o f A D C 2 F a m ilie s b y R a c e,

e a r ly 1 961

Families Total monthly income

Negro White

All incomes __ 10 0 1 0 0

Less than $40 6 6

$40 to $80____________________ 16 1 2

$80 to $ 1 2 0 ___________________ 24 2 1

$ 1 2 0 to $160__________________ 26 26 $160 to $ 2 0 0 __________________ 16 17

$200 to $240__________________ 7 1 0 $240 and above______ 5 8

Median income $125. 12

1

$136. 77

1 Includes ADC payments.

2 Aid to Dependent Children. Program designation before Aid to Dependent Children of the Unemployed (PL 87-31) and the Social Security

Amendments of 1961 established Aid to Families of Dependent Children

(AFDC) including unemployed fathers.

Source: M. Elaine Burgess and Daniel O. Price, An American Dependency

Challenge, table 4.5, page 66 (Durham, N .C ., Seeman Printery, 1963).

Among Negroes as well as whites the largest

proportion of A D C recipients were married, or

widowed in 1961; a much larger proportion of

Negro than white recipients were single, leaving

about the same proportion of Negro and white

A D C homemakers in families broken by marital

discord (divorced, legally separated, or deserted).

T a bl e IIIC-20.—M a r ita l S ta tu s o f A D C 1 H o m e m a k e rs ,

b y R a ce, 1 961

Marital status Negro White

Total. _ __ _ _ _ 1 0 0 1 0 0

Single. _ _______ 18 6

Married _ _ 37 54 Widowed _ 11 8

D ivorced____ _ __ 5 14

Legally separated 2 2

Deserted 28 16

1 Aid to Dependent Children. Program designation before Aid to D ependent Children of the Unemployed (PL 87-31) and the Social Security

Amendments of 1962 established Aid to Families of Dependent Children

(AFDC) including unemployed fathers.

Note.— Because of rounding, sums of individual items may not equal

totals.

Source: M. Elaine Burgess and Daniel O. Price, An American Dependency

Challenge, table 2.4, page 19 (Durham, N.C., Seeman Printery, 1963).

172

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Most Negro as well as white children receiving AD C in 1961 were legitimate. For both Negro 

and white, illegitimacy among AD C recipients was substantially higher in urban than in rural areas. 

In a study of cases closed early in 1961, one-third of the Negro and one-fourth of the white illegitimate children in AD C families were born after the first AD C payment.

T a bl e IIIC-21.— B ir th S ta tu s o f A D C 1 C h ild re n b y R esid en ce , R ace, a n d S ta tu s o f C ase, 1 961

[Percent distribution]

Birth status

Cases closed i 

Negro

n early 1962 2

White

Active late ]

Non­ white

case, 961 3

White 4

Total Urban Rural Total Urban Rural

Total 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0

Born in wedlock. _ __ 66 64 74 89 87 93 62 8 6 Illegitimate. 34 36 26 1 1 13 7 37 13 Born before first ADC payment. __ 23 23 2 0 8 9 5

Born since first ADC payment ___ 11 1 2 6 3 4 1

Unknown (5) (5) (5) 1 (5) 1 (5) 1

5 Less than 0.5 percent.

Note.—Because of rounding, sums of individual items may not equal

totals. Dashes indicate data not available.

Source: M. Elaine Burgess and Daniel O. Price, An American Dependency

Challenge, table 6.2, page 95 (Durham, North Carolina: Seeman Printery,

1963); and Characteristics of Families Receiving Aid to Families with Dependent

Children, November-December 1961, table 34 (U.S. Department of Health,

Education, and Welfare, Welfare Administration, Bureau of Family Services,

Division of Program Statistics and Analysis, April 1963).

1 Aid to Dependent Children. Program designation before Aid to Dependent Children of the Unemployed (PL 87-31) and the Social Security Amendments of 1962 established Aid to Families of Dependent Children (AFDC)

including unemployed fathers.

2 Every third case closed during the month of January, February, or March

1961. Study made by Institute for Research in Social Science of the University of North Carolina for the American Public Welfare Association.

3 A minimum sample of 500 cases or 1 percent of the active caseload of each

State for either November or December 1961.

4 Includes children for whom the color was unknown.

173

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
M edian and per capita AD C paym ents were larger for whites than for Negroes in 1961, and were

the sole income for a larger proportion of white than Negro recipients.

T a b l e IIIC-22.— S ele c te d C h a r a c te ris tic s o f A D C H o m e m a k e rs a n d

Selected characteristics

Metropolit

Cities 500,000 and over

an counties

Cities 50,000 to 499,999

Negro White Negro White

Median

Median years of school of ADC homemakers 9. 4 8 . 6 8.7 9.4 Median number of months ADC payments received. 2 0 . 8 11. 5 22.9 12.3 Median size assistance group. . . 3. 2 3.5 3.3 3.4 Median ADC payment per assistance group. _ $107.20 $118. 2 0 $80. 40 $103.20 Median ADC payment per person _ $33.50 $33.80 $24.40 $30. 40 Median number persons per room . . 1. 04 .94 .99 .87

Percent of ADC families

No income except ADC 54 57 44 56 Mother not in labor force. _ . . . 35 43 2 1 35 Homemaker not employed during ADC___ . . __ 77 84 54 74

1 Aid to Dependent Children. Program designation before Aid to Dependent Children of the Unemployed (PL 87-31) and the Social Security

Amendments of 1962 established Aid to Families of Dependent Children (AFDC) including unemployed fathers.

2 Based on less than 50 cases.

174

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
ADC 1 Families by Size of Community and Race, Early 1961

Metropolitan counties—Continued Nonmetropolitan counties

Cities 2,500 to Rural nonfarm Cities 2,500 to Rural nonfarm Rural farm 49,999 49,999

Negro White Negro White Negro White Negro White Negro White

Median—Continued

8 . 6 1 0 . 0 7.7 8 . 5 7.7 8.5 6.9 7.7 5.3 6.9

19.0 1 0 . 2 2 17.6 14. 5 2 0 . 0 16.8 24. 1 19.3 32.2 19. 2

3. 6 3. 4 3.1 3.7 4.0 3.3 3.9 3. 5 3. 5 3. 3

$78.20 $99.20 $70.00 $101.40 $72.40 $8 6 . 2 0 $63.40 $82.20 $40. 80 $72. 40 $21.70 $29.20 $22.60 $27.40 $18.10 $26.10 $16.30 $23.50 $11.70 $21. 90

1 . 16 .84 2 1 . 18 .90 1 . 16 . 85 1.30 .90 1.39 1. 0 0

Percent of ADC families—Continued

44 53 48 58 37 45 48 54 39 58

32 36 30 50 16 39 30 55 16 57

56 74 44 74 42 67 44 73 27 79

Source: M. Elaine Burgess and Daniel 0 . Price, An American Dependency Challenge, tables III, X X I, X X II, 3.6, 4.9, pp. 50, 74, 246, 264 (Durham

N .C ., Seeman Printery, 1963).

175

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
The proportion of Negro AD C recipients with

household conveniences, cars or trucks, or appliances, including especially washing machines,

telephones, and television sets, was smaller than

among white AD C recipients, according to a

1961 national sample survey.

T a b l e IIIC-23.—P e r c e n t o f A D C 1 F a m ilie s b y T en u re

a n d H o u seh o ld C on ven ien ces, b y R ace a n d U r b a n -R u r a l

R esid en ce , E a r ly 1961

Housing characteristics Negro W hite

Urban Rural Urban Rural

Tenure: Owner occupied. 13 34 2 0 41 Renter occupied. 85 36 78 46 Rent free 2 30 2 1 2 Facilities: Electricity — . _ 99 90 1 0 0 97 No running water in house _ _ ___ 5 73 3 35 Pump in house or porch ... 1 8 1 7

Cold running water___ 17 1 2 9 16 Hot and cold running 

water. _ 76 7 87 42

Bathroom facilities: 

None____ 9 90 7 55 None but share one with others _ 9 1 5 1

T a b l e IIIC-23.—P e r c e n t o f A D C 1 F a m ilie s b y T e n u re

a n d H o u seh o ld C o n ven ien ces, b y R a c e a n d U r b a n - R u r a l

R esid en ce , E a r ly 1 9 6 1—Continued

Housing characteristics Negro White

Urban Rural Urban Rural

Bathroom facilities—Con. P a rtia l___ 10 1 7 6

1 complete______ 69 7 78 36 i y 2_________________ 1 2 1

2 or more__ 1 1 1 (2) Beds: 3 or more persons than beds... _ ____ 26 47 16 25 Appliances: Car or truck. . . 9 24 29 53 Washing machine__ 36 41 63 79 Refrigerator- 89 73 93 8 8 Ice box.. 4 1 1 2 2

Telephone . 32 1 0 40 30 Radio . . 6 8 61 73 70 Television__ 66 38 73 64 Sewing machine _ . 13 27 31 47 None of the above. . (2) 3 (2) 1

1 Aid to Dependent Children. Program designation before Aid to Dependent Children of the Unemployed (Public Law 87-31) and the. Social

Security Amendments of 1962 established Aid to Families of Dependent

Children (AFDC) including unemployed fathers.

2 Less than 0.5 percent.

Source: M. Elaine Burgess and Daniel O. Price, An American Dependency

Challenge, tables 5.3, 5.5, 5.6, 5.8, 5.9, X X III, pp. 85, 86, 87, 89, 90, 265 (Durham, N.C., Seeman Printery, 1963).

176

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Old-age assistance rates, which reflect the inability to earn adequate social security credits during

the work life, were over 3 times as high in the nonwhite as the white population aged 65 and over in 1960

(on the basis of the number of recipients per 1,000 population of this age). They tended to be highest

in nonindustrial States.

T a b l e IIIC-24.— P r o p o r tio n o f P o p u la tio n R ec eivin g O ld -A g e A s s is ta n c e (R e c ip ie n t R a te s) b y C olor, S elected S ta te s , J u l y -

S e p te m b e r 1 9 6 0

State

Number of recipients per 1,000 population aged 65 and over State

Number of recipients per 1,000 population aged 65 and over

Total Non­ white White Total Non­ white White

T otal1. . _ _ _ 140 378 119 Missouri 228 437 215 Alabama - 380 542 315 Montana 103 425 97 Alaska _ 266 638 114 Nebraska 90 (3)475

8 8 Arizona 155 498 130 Nevada 143 127 Arkansas 287 438 249 New Hampshire 73 (3)157

73 California. 185 329 179 New Jersey 34 28 Colorado 2 _ 298 (3)245

296 New Mexico 214 550 195 Connecticut . 58 54 New York 46 143 42 Delaware. _____ _ 36 145 23 North Carolina 155 269 126 District of Columbia 44 108 18 North Dakota 119 648 114 Florida 125 510 90 Ohio 97 259 89

Georgia . ____ 332 559 253 Oklahoma 355 579 335 Hawaii __ 49 58 23 Oregon 90 (3)179

89 Idaho 123 (3)264

1 2 2 Pennsylvania 44 38 Illinois. 73 61 Rhode Island 75 256 73 Indiana 59 192 54 South Carolina 2 1 2 367 140 Iowa _ . . 1 0 2 (3)214

1 0 2 South Dakota 1 2 2 366 117

Kansas 116 1 1 2 Tennessee . . . 176 338 147 Kentucky 191 311 182 Texas. 297 556 263 Louisiana 519 786 394 Utah____________________ 129 (3) (3)

1 1 1

128

Maine 109 (3)151

108 Vermont. _. . . . 127 127 Maryland ________ _ . 43 28 Virginia__ _ _ . . . . 50 36 Massachusetts 134 247 132 Washington . 173 290 171 Michigan 95 323 83 West Virginia 1 1 1 116 1 1 1

Minnesota 127 (3)596

126 Wisconsin____ 83 337 81 Mississippi 421 310 Wyoming 125 (3) 123

1 Includes Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands.

2 Rates based on data excluding 3,689 white recipients aged 60-64; male 1,263, female 2,426.

s Not computed; number of recipients in sample too small.

Source: Social Security Administration, Characteristics and Financial Circumstances of Recipients of Old-Age Assistance, 1960, pt. II, State data, Public assistance Report No. 48, June 1962, table 7.

Digitized for FRASER 

177

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
During July-Septem ber 1960, about 8 in 10 of the old-age assistance recipients were white and the

remainder virtually all Negroes. There was wide variation among States, but Negroes were the majority

of recipients only in the D istrict of Columbia, Mississippi, and South Carolina.

T a b l e IIIC-25.— O ld -A g e A s s is ta n c e R e c ip ie n ts , b y R ace, 5 0 S ta te s, J u ly - S e p te m b e r 1 9 6 0

State Total recipients

Percen

Total

t of recipien 

Nonwhite 

Negro

ts of specifk 

Other

)d race 

White

Total L . 2, 336, 595 20. 7 19. 9 0 . 8 79. 3

Alabama. . . . _ _ _ 99, 139 40. 8 40 8 59 2 Alaska _ 1, 432 69. 6 . 6 69. 0 30. 4 Arizona. _ . — . . . . . . — 13, 977 2 2 . 0 7. 6 14. 3 78. 0 Arkansas 55, 781 30. 6 30. 5 . 1 69. 4 California _ ----- — 254, 401 7. 3 5. 8 1. 5 92. 7 Colorado.. - — -- 50, 809 2. 4 2 . 1 . 3 97. 6

Connecticut _ _ _ __ 14, 065 7. 9 7. 5 . 3 92. 1 Delaware _ _ _ 1, 270 42. 9 42. 6 . 4 57. 1 District of Columbia____ — . . — ___ 3, 072 71. 7 71. 0 . 7 28. 3 Florida__ _ — - - 69, 050 34. 2 34. 1 . 1 65. 8

Georgia 96, 523 43. 6 43. 6 56. 4 Hawaii _ - ____ _________ - _________ - -_ 1, 434 8 8 . 1 8 8 . 1 11. 9 Idaho___ - — -------- 7, 169 2. 3 . 2 2 . 1 97. 7 Illin o is ._____ 70, 970 20. 4 2 0 . 2 . 2 79. 6

Indiana _ _ _ - ___ - ____________ 26, 497 11. 9 11. 9 8 8 . 1

33j 460 1. 2 1. 1 . 2 98. 8

Kansas. . . . 27, 882 6 . 6 6 . 2 . 5 93. 4 Kentucky. _ _. __ __ 55, 951 12. 3 12. 3 87. 7

Louisiana___. . . - - - . — 125, 362 48. 3 48. 0 . 2 51. 7 Maine_____ . — — — - -- - - — 11, 655 1. 2 . 4 . 8 98. 8

Maryland _ _ 9, 662 42. 8 42. 8 57. 2 Massachusetts ----- _ ------ --------- — — 76’ 583 2 . 6 2 . 2 . 4 97. 4 Michigan . . . 60, 510 17. 2 16. 5 . 7 82. 8

Minnesota __ . 44, 933 1. 3 . 6 . 7 98. 7

M ississippi__ 80, 081 55. 2 55. 2 44. 8

Missouri __ _ _ _ _ __ ___ 115, 015 11. 9 11. 9 8 8 . 1

Montana___ . ----- - - - -- 6 , 745 7. 7 . 5 7. 1 92. 3 Nebraska___ . . - - - - — 14, 730 3. 1 2. 3 . 8 96. 9 Nevada.. . . . 2 , 600 14. 9 4. 8 1 0. 1 85. 1 New Hampshire. _ _ _ _ _. 4, 931 . 1 . 1 99. 9 New Jersey__ . . . 18, 950 22. 3 2 2 . 2 . 2 77. 7

New Mexico . . . 10, 963 13. 9 1. 0 12. 9 8 6 . 1

New York _ _ _ 78, 468 1 2. 7 1 2. 0 . 6 87. 3 North Carolina----- 48, 266 35. 2 34. 1 1. 1 64. 8

North Dakota. . 6 , 982 4. 8 4. 8 95. 2

Ohio___ _. . . 87, 419 13. 2 13. 2 8 6 . 8

Oklahoma. _ 8 8 , 289 13. 0 1 1. 1 1. 9 87. 0

Oregon._ . . 16, 571 2. 3 1. 2 1. 0 97. 7

Pennsylvania. 50, 101 18. 7 18. 4 . 2 81. 3

Rhode Island. 6 , 755 4. 8 4. 7 . 1 95. 2

South Carolina__ __ 31, 945 55. 0 55. 0 45. 0 South Dakota. _ 8 ’ 729 6 . 1 . 1 6 . 0 93. 9

Tennessee. . _ __ 54, 442 29. 2 29. 2 70. 8

Texas______ . . 2 2 l" 727 2 2 . 0 2 2 . 0 78. 0

See footnote at end of table.

178

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
T a b l e IIIC-25.—O ld -A g e A s s is ta n c e R e c ip ie n ts , b y R a c e, 5 0 S ta te s , J u ly - S e p te m b e r 1 9 6 0—Continued

Percent of recipients of specified race

State Total recipients

Total

Non white 

Negro Other

White

Utah__ . ___ ______ _ __ 7, 759 2 . 6 . 5 2 . 0 97. 4 Vermont. _ _ _ __ ____ 5, 554 . 2 . 1 . 1 99. 8

Virginia__ 14, 552 41. 8 41. 5 . 2 58. 2 Washington 48, 283 2. 9 . 6 2. 3 97. 1 West Virginia________ ___ __ _ __ 19, 185 5. 5 5. 2 . 3 94. 5

Wisconsin. 33, 373 3. 1 1. 6 1. 5 96. 9

Wyoming 3, 227 2 . 2 . 7 1. 5 97. 8

1 Includes Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands.

Source: Social Security Administration, Characteristics and Financial Circumstances of Recipients of Old-Age Assistance, 1960, pt. II, State Data, Public

Assistance Rpt. No. 48, June 1962, table 2.

From 1960 to 1964, the ratio of husband-wife families to all families continued to be 3 in 4 among

nonwhites, and 9 in 10 for whites.

T a bl e IV A -1 .— F a m ilie s b y T y p e a n d C olor, U n ite d S ta te s , M a r c h o f 1 9 6 0 - 6 4 (8 -y e a r m o vin g avera ges, M a rc h o f 1 9 5 9 - 6 5)!

Type of family

1960 1961 1962 1963 1964 Change 1960-64

Non­ white White Non­ white White Non­ white White Non­ white White Non­ white White Non­ white White

Percent distribution

All families. . . . 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 1 5

Husband-wife__ 73 89 73 89 73 89 73 89 73 89 1 1 5

Other male head 4 3 4 3 4 3 4 3 3 2 - 8 (2) Female head_____ 22 9 2 2 9 23 9 23 9 23 9 15 6

Number (in thousands)

All families. 4, 186 40, 714 4, 339 41, 273 4, 431 41, 765 4, 558 42, 253 4, 645 42, 625 459 1, 911

Husband-wife. 3, 073 36, 109 3, 187 36, 601 3, 231 37, 058 3, 322 37, 511 3, 401 37, 827 328 1, 718 Other male head 172 1, 068 179 1, 063 179 1, 085 175 1, 089 158 1, 064 -1 4 - 4 Female head ___ 941 3, 537 973 3, 609 1, 0 2 1 3, 623 1, 061 3, 653 1, 086 3, 734 145 197

1 Figures given are averages of annual reports for 3 consecutive years;

average represents middle year.

2 Less than 0.5 percent.

Note.—Because of rounding, sums of individual items may not equal

totals.

Source: Current Population Reports, Population Characteristics, “Household and Family Characteristics, March 1960,” series P-20, No. 106, table 4;

“* * * April 1960,” series P-20, No. 100, table 4; “ * * * March 1961,” series

P-20, No. 116, table 4; “* * * March 1962,” series P-20, No. 125, table 4;

“Households and Families by Type: 1963,” series P-20, No. 124, table 1;

“ * * * 1964,” series P-20, No. 130, table 1; “* * * 1965,” series P-20, No.

140, table 1 (U.S. Bureau of the Census).

179

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
In 1950 and 1960, nonwhite and white families with a female head were more likely to live in urban 

areas than any other type of family. However, during this decade, the urban portion of nonwhite 

families with a female head increased much more than similar white families.

T a b l e IV A -2 .—Families by Type and Color, by Region and

Type of family

Region and residence (percent by type of family) Region and residence (percent distribution by region and residence)

United States North­ east North- central South W est1 Urban Rural

non­ farm

Rural farm United States North­ east North- central South

TYPE OF FAMILY AND COLOR,

1950

All families Nonwhite_______ ______ 10 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 14 16 64

White.. __. . . ___ 10 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 28 32 27 Husband-wife Nonwhite______________ 78 73 79 78 82 76 77 8 6 1 0 0 13 16 64

White______ . . . . . . 88 8 6 89 89 89 87 90 91 1 0 0 27 32 27 Other male head Non white_________ _ _. 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 10 0 15 15 63

White.. ______ . _ 4 4 4 3 3 3 3 5 10 0 34 32 23

Female head Nonwhite____ . . . _. __ 18 2 2 17 18 13 2 0 18 9 1 0 0 17 15 64

White__________________ 9 1 0 8 8 8 1 0 7 4 1 0 0 32 29 26

TYPE OF FAMILY AND COLOR,

1960

All families Nonwhite______________ 10 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 16 18 55

White__ ______ _____ 10 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 26 30 27

Husband-wife Nonwhite______________ 75 72 76 74 81 74 77 84 1 0 0 16 19 54

White______________ 89 8 8 90 89 90 8 8 91 92 1 0 0 26 31 27

Other male head Nonwhite_______ ______ 4 4 4 4 4 4 5 5 10 0 17 17 55

White------------- - --------- 3 3 3 2 2 3 2 4 10 0 33 30 23

Female head Nonwhite______________ 21 23 2 0 2 2 15 2 2 19 1 1 1 0 0 18 18 56

White__________________ 8 9 7 8 8 9 7 4 1 0 0 30 27 28

1 Includes Alaska and Hawaii In 1960.

Note.—Because of rounding, sums of individual items may not equal totals.

180

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
U r b a n -R u r a l R esid en ce , U n ite d S ta te s, 1 9 5 0 a n d 1 9 6 0

Region and residence (percent distri­ bution by region and residence)— Continued Region and residence (number in thousands)

W est1 Urban Rural

non­ farm

Rural farm United States North­ east North- central South West 1 Urban Rural

non­ farm

Rural farm

6 6 6 16 18 3, 432 471 545 2, 205 2 1 1 2 , 271 534 627 14 6 6 2 0 14 3 5 , 021 9, 691 1 1 , 1 0 2 9, 348 4, 880 23, 088 7, 095 4, 838

7 64 15 2 0 2, 665 344 430 1,717 174 1,717 411 537 14 65 2 1 14 30, 821 8,316 9, 8 6 6 8 , 291 4, 348 2 0 , 068 6 , 363 4, 390

7 64 16 2 0 162 25 25 1 0 2 1 1 104 26 32

1 1 63 18 19 1,234 420 389 285 141 774 2 2 0 240

4 74 16 1 0 605 1 0 2 90 386 26 450 97 58 13 76 17 7 2, 966 955 848 772 392 2, 246 512 208

1 1 76 18 7 4, 256 694 780 2, 323 459 3, 229 747 279 16 70 2 2 8 40, 873 10, 780 12, 339 11, 189 6 , 565 28, 711 9, 109 3, 053

1 2 75 18 7 3, 186 501 591 1,723 370 2, 378 573 235 16 70 23 8 36, 455 9, 430 1 1 , 128 1 0 , 006 5, 891 25, 346 8 , 303 2 , 806

1 1 74 18 8 181 31 31 99 2 0 134 33 14 14 70 19 1 1 1, 113 369 332 259 153 781 215 117

8 81 16 3 889 162 158 500 69 718 141 30 16 78 18 4 3, 305 981 878 924 521 2, 584 591 129

S o u rce: I960 C ensus of P opu la tion , General Characteristics of F am ilies, S p e cia l R e p o r ts, v o l. IV , p t . 2, c h . A , ta b le s 4 a n d 5; 1960 C ensus of P opu la tion , D etailed Characteristics, U .S . S u m m ary, P C ( 1 ) - 1 D , ta b le s 188 a n d 247 ( U .S . B u r e a u o f th e C e n su s).

181

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
All other regions gained proportionately much more than the South in nonwhite families headed

by women between 1950 and 1960. In numbers, however, the increases were much larger in the South

than elsewhere, and occurred chiefly in urban areas.

T a b l e IVA-3.—F a m ilie s b y T y p e a n d C olor, b y R eg io n a n d U r b a n -R u r a l R esid en ce , U n ite d S ta te s, 1 9 5 0 - 6 0 C h a n g e

Region and residence

Type of family, color

All families Husband-wife Other male head Female head

Nonwhite White Nonwhite White Nonwhite White Nonwhite White

Percent change

United States. _ 24 17 2 0 18 1 1 - 1 0 47 1 1 Northeast. 47 1 1 46 13 23 - 1 2 59 3

North-central _. 43 1 1 37 13 24 -1 5 75 4

South _ 5 2 0 0 2 1 - 3 - 9 30 2 0 West 2_ . . . 118 35 113 36 90 9 161 33 Urban. _ _ 42 24 39 26 29 1 59 15 Rural nonfarm... 40 28 39 31 27 - 3 46 15 Rural farm. _ . . . -5 5 -3 7 -5 6 - 3 4 -5 6 -5 1 -4 7 -3 8

Number (in thousands)

United States. _ _ 824 5, 852 521 5, 634 19 - 1 2 1 284 339 Northeast _ 223 1, 087 157 1, 114 6 -5 1 60 26 North-central. 235 1, 237 161 1, 262 6 -5 7 6 8 30 South__. . . 118 1,841 6 1,715 - 3 -2 6 114 152 West 2__ ______ 248 1, 685 196 1, 543 9 1 2 43 129 Urban 959 5, 623 661 5, 278 30 7 268 338 Rural nonfarm. _ 213 2, 014 162 1, 940 7 - 5 44 79 Rural farm_____ __ -348 -1,7 85 -302 -1 ,5 8 4 100

-123 -2 8 -7 9

1 Less than 0.5 percent.

2 Includes Alaska and Hawaii in 1960.

N ote.—Because of rounding, sums of individual items may not equal totals.

Source: Census of Population: 1950, General Characteristics of Families, Special Reports, vol. IV, pt. 2, ch. A, tables 4, 5; and Census of Population: 1960,

Detailed Characteristics, U.S. Summary, PC(1)-1D, tables 188, 247 (U.S. Bureau of the Census).

182

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
In 1960, female family heads were proportionately younger among nonwhites than among

whites. The difference in age distribution was

least in the South and greatest in the North-Central

region. In general, female heads tended to be

younger in both the white and nonwhite groups in

1960, as compared with 1950. T a b l e IVA-4.— F em a le F a m ily H e a d s b y A g e , C olor, a n d

R e g io n , U n ite d S ta te s, 1 9 5 0 a n d 1 9 6 0

[Cumulative distribution]

Region and age of family head

1950 1960

Non­ white White Non­ white W hite

Percent

United States: Under 35 years______

26 1 2 29 15 Under 45 years 49 29 53 34 Under 65 years. _ _ _ 85 73 8 6 75 Northeast: Under 35 years.. _ _ . 36 1 0 33 1 1 Under 45 years . _ _ 59 26 60 29 Under 65 years.. ____ 92 72 92 73 North-Central: Under 35 years. 35 1 1 38 13 Under 45 years. 59 27 64 31 Under 65 years. 90 71 91 72 South: Under 35 years____ _ 20 13 23 16 Under 45 years. 43 31 46 36 Under 65 years.. 82 73 82 75

West:Under 35 years _ 36 17 38 2 2 Under 45 years. 62 37 64 46 Under 65 years.. . . . 89 77 91 81

Number (in thousands)

United States. _ _ _ _ _ 605 2, 966 889 3, 305 Northeast___ 10 2 955 162 981 North-Central _ 90 848 158 878 South . . . ________ . 386 772 500 924

W e st.____ _______ __

24 392 69 521

N ote.—Because of rounding, sums of individual items may not equal

totals.

Source: Census of Population: 1950, General Characteristics of Families,

Special Reports, vol. IV, pt. 2, ch. A, tables 5 and 6; Census of Population:

1960, Detailed Characteristics, U.S. Summary, PC(1)-1D, table 247 (U.S.

Bureau of the Census).

183

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Among whites as well as nonwhites, the proportion of husband-wife families rose and the proportion of families headed by women decreased with each higher income group, in 1960.

T able IV A -5.— T y p e o f F a m ily b y I n c o m e G ro u p in 1 9 5 9 , b y C olor, S e le c te d R eg io n s, a n d A r e a s , U n ite d S ta te s , 1 9 6 0 1

Family income in 1959

Type of family, residence, and region Total Under $3,000 $3,000-$7,999 $8 , 0 0 0 and over

Nonwhite White Non white White Nonwhite White Nonwhite White

United States: All families (in thousands) _ _ _ _ __ 4, 262 40, 887 2, 034 7, 616 1, 840 21, 683 388 11, 587

Percent__________ _ _____ ____ 10 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0

Husband-wife________ _ 75 89 64 78 85 91 87 94 Other male head______ _ 4 3 4 4 4 3 5 2

Female family head _ ____ 21 8 32 19 1 1 7 8 4

Head under 35 _______ 6 1 10 4 2 1 1 (2) Head 35-64. ____ 12 5 17 1 0 8 4 6 2

Head 65 and o v e r______ 3 2 5 5 1 2 1 1

Central cities of urbanized areas, United States: All families (in thousands) . . . 2, 293 12, 461 806 1, 783 1, 206 6 , 676 281 4, 002

Percent_______________________ . . 10 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0

Husband-wife________________ 73 8 6 54 69 84 87 8 6 92 Other male head_______ _____ 4 3 4 4 4 3 5 3

Female head__ . . . 22 1 1 42 27 1 2 9 9 5

Head under 35____ . . . 8 2 17 7 3 1 1 (2) Head 35-64_______________ 13 6 2 1 14 8 6 7 3

Head 65 and over________ 2 3 4 6 1 2 1 2

North: 3 All families (in thousands)___ . . . 1, 475 23, 131 454 3, 623 823 12, 505 198 7, 003

Percent___ _ _ . ______ 10 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0

Husband-wife.. . . __ _ . 74 89 52 76 84 90 8 6 93 Other male head_______ . 4 3 4 4 4 3 5 3

Female head_______ _____ _ 22 8 44 2 0 1 2 7 9 4

Head under 35__. . . 8 1 19 4 3 1 1 (2) Head 35-64_______________ 1 2 5 2 1 1 0 8 4 7 3

Head 65 and over... _____ 2 2 3 5 1 2 2 1

South: All families (in thousands)____ 2, 325 11, 187 1, 460 3, 014 773 5, 791 93 2, 383

Percent____ . . . . . _____ 10 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0

H usband-w ife.___ _ 74 89 6 8 80 85 92 8 6 95 Other male head______ _ . . _ _ 4 2 4 3 4 2 4 2

Female head 2 2 8 28 16 1 1 6 1 0 3

Head under 35. ________ 5 1 7 3 1 1 1 (2) Head 35-64_______________ 13 5 16 9 8 4 8 2

Head 65 and over. __ .. _ 4 2 5 4 2 1 2 1

See footnotes at end of table.

184

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
T a b l e IVA-5.— T y p e o f F a m ily b y I n c o m e G ro u p in 1 9 5 9 , b y C o lo r, S elected R e g io n s, a n d A r e a s , U n ite d S ta te s . 1 9 6 01— Continued

Family income in 1959

Type of family, residence, and region Total Under $3,000 $3,000--$7,999 $8 , 0 0 0 and over

Nonwhite White Nonwhite White Nonwhite White Nonwhite White

West:All families (in thousands) _ _ ------ 462 6 , 569 1 2 0 980 245 3, 388 97 2 , 2 0 1

P ercent--- -------- --------------------- 10 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0

Husband-wife. _ ____ 81 90 61 74 87 91 91 95 Other male head.. _________ 4 2 4 3 4 2 4 2

Female head __ 15 8 35 23 9 7 4 3

Head under 3 5 ___ _ 6 2 16 8 2 1 (2) (2) Head 35-64 ___ _ _ 8 5 17 11 6 5 3 2

Head 65 and over____ 1 1 2 4 1 1 1 1

1 These data are from a 5-percent sample, so that totals do not exactly agree

with those in other tables derived from the full census.

3 Less than 0.5 percent.

3 Includes Northeast and North Central.

Note.—Because of rounding, sums of individual items may not equal

totals.

Source: C ensus of P opu la tion : 1960, Subject R eports, F am ilies, PC(2)-4A,

table 14 (U.S. Bureau of the Census).

185

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
V irtu ally no change has occurred from 1950-65 in th e m arital sta tu s of n on w h ite m ales or fem ales.

A lm ost 9 in 10 w ere either single, m arried w ith spouse present, or w idow ed or divorced. T h ose

sep arated from their spouse rem ained an alm ost con stan t p ercen tage of th e to ta l during this period.

T a b l e I V A -6 .— Marital Status, by Sex and Color, 1950 and 1960-65 1

M arital status

Female

1950 1960 1961 1962 1963 1964 1965

Nonwhite

White

Non white

White

NonwhiteWhiteNonwhiteWhite

i

NonwhiteWhite

Nonwhite

i

White

Nonwhite

i

White

’otal population (14 years old

and over)___ — 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100

Single __ - _ ---------- 21 20 22 19 21 19 22 19 23 20 22 20 23 20

Married, spouse present . . 51 64 49 64 49 63 47 63 46 63 49 62 47 62

Widowed or divorced- 17 14 17 15 18 15 18 15 18 15 17 15 17 15

Married, spouse absent---- 11 3 12 3 12 3 12 3 13 3 12 3 13 3

Separated2 — - — - 9 1 8 1 9 1 9 1 9 1 9 1 9 2

Other 3 (including in

Armed Forces) _ __ 3 1 4 2 3 1 3 2 4 2 4 1 4 1

Male

Total population (14 years old

and over)_______ — -- - -- 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100

Single____ _ - - -- 29 26 30 24 32 25 32 25 32 25 33 26 33 26

Married, spouse present 55 65 53 68 54 68 52 68 52 68 54 67 53 66

Widowed or divorced 7 6 7 5 6 5 8 5 7 5 6 5 7 5

Married, spouse absent. _ 10 3 10 3 8 2 8 2 9 2 7 2 8 2

Separated 2 -------— 6 1 5 1 6 1 6 1 6 1 6 1 6 1

Other 3 (including in

Armed Forces)------ . 4 2 4 2 2 1 3 1 3 1 2 1 2 1

1 Data for 1950 and 1960 are from the decennial census, and for the remaining

years, from the Current Population Survey. Comparable Census and CPS data were matched for 1960 and found to be similar; such comparable data

are not available for 1950.

2 Separated persons include those with legal separations, those living

apart with intentions of obtaining a divorce, and other persons permanently

or temporarily estranged from their spouse because of marital discord.

3 Includes those with spouse in Armed Forces, those with spouse employed

and living for several months at a considerable distance from their home,

immigrants whose spouse remained in other areas, husbands or wives of

inmates of institutions, and all other (except those reported as separated)

whose place of residence was not the same as that of their spouse.

N ote.—Because of rounding, sums of individual items may not equal totals.

Source: Census of Population: 1950, Vol. I I , Part I , United States Summary,

table 104, Census of Population: 1960, Detailed Characteristics, United States

Summary, PC(1), table 176 (U.S. Bureau of the Census); Current Population

Reports, Population Characteristics, “Marital Status and Family Status,”

Series P-20, tables 1 and 3, No. 114 (March 1961); tables 1 and 3, No. 122

(March 1962); tables 1 and 4, No. 135 (March 1964 and 1963); tables 1 and 3,

No. 144 (March 1965). (U.S. Bureau of the Census.)

186

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
A t every age lev el and w ith each typ e of fam ily com position n on w h ite fam ilies averaged m ore m em ­

bers than w h ite fam ilies in 1960.

T a b l e IVA-7.—Average Number of Persons in Family, Members of Family 18 Years Old and Over, and Families With Own

Children Under 6 Years Old, by Type of Family and Color, United States, 1960

Type of family and age

Average number of persons in family Percent of family members 18 years old and over

Percent of families with one or more own children under 6 years

Nonwhite White Nonwhite White Nonwhite White

Husband-wife. . . . ___ _ . . . 4.4 3.7 27 19 38 33 Head:

Under 25 y e a r s ..____ . . ---------- --- 3.7 3. 1 11 4 73 64

25-34 years . . . . __ . . . 4.8 4. 2 13 6 70 75

35-44 years . . _______ . 5. 1 4.5 25 16 46 43

45-54 years . . . __. . . 4.5 3.7 38 33 21 11

55-64 years. ............................. ......... 3.8 2.8 38 29 8 2

65-74 years. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ -------- 3.3 2.5 34 23 3 1

75 and over. _____ _ ---------------- --- 3.0 2.4 31 21 2 (9 Other male head. _ . . _ _ ____ __ _ _ 3.6 2.8 81 87 11 6

Female h e a d ._____ ____ __ 4.0 2.9 57 68 29 13

Head:

Under 35 years____________ __ _ 4. 2 3.3 22 21 66 60

35-44 years. _ _______ __ _ _ 4.4 3.4 52 41 32 19

45-64 years _ . ______ 3.9 2.8 77 80 5 2

65 and over. _ _ 3.4 2.6 87 97 1 1

1 Less than 0.5 percent.

Source: C en su s o f P o p u la tio n : 1960, D eta iled C h a racteristics, U n ited S ta tes S u m m a ry , PC(1)-1D, table 187 (U.S. Bureau of the Census).

217-817 0 — 66------- 13 187

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
F ertility rates for w h ite and n on w h ite w om en dropped sharply betw een 1961 and 1964, b u t th e

n on w h ite drop lagged sligh tly behind th e w h ite, so th a t th e n on w h ite/w h ite fertility ratio increased to

1.42— the highest recorded in recent years.

T a b l e IVA-8.— Fertility Rates, by Color, United States, 1940-64 (per 1,000 women age 15-44)

Year Nonwhite White Ratio, nonwhite to white

Births adjusted for underregistration

1940________________ 102. 4 77. 1 1. 33

1941________________ 105. 4 80. 7 1. 31

1942________________ 107. 6 89. 5 1. 20

1943________________ 111. 0 92. 3 1. 20

1944________________ 108. 5 86. 3 1. 26

1945________________ 106. 0 83. 4 1. 27

1946________________ 113. 9 100. 4 1. 13

1947________________ 125. 9 111. 8 1. 13

1948________________ 131. 6 104. 3 1. 26

1949________________ 135. 1 103. 6 1. 30

1950________________ 137. 3 102. 3 1. 34

1951 1_______________ 142. 1 107. 7 1. 32

1952________________ 143. 3 110. 1 1. 30

1953________________ 147. 3 111. 0 1. 33

1954________________ 153. 2 113. 6 1. 35

1955________________ 155. 3 113. 8 1. 36

Year Nonwhite White Ratio, nonwhite to white

Births adjusted for underregistration— Continued

1956________________ 160. 9 116. 0 1. 39

1957________________ 163. 0 117. 7 1. 38

1958________________ 160. 5 114. 9 1. 40

1959________________ 162. 2 114 6 1. 42

Registered births

1959________________ 156. 0 113. 9 1. 37

1960________________ 153. 6 113. 2 1. 36

1961________________ 153. 5 112. 2 1. 37

1962 2 _______________ 148. 7 107. 5 1. 38

1963 1 2_______________ 144 8 103. 7 1. 40

1964________________ 141. 5 99. 8 1. 42

1 Based on a 50-percent sample of births, since 1951. Before 1951, based on

total count.

2 Excludes data for New Jersey.

Note.—Refers only to births occurring within the United States. Alaska

included beginning 1959, and Hawaii, 1960. Rates for 1940, 1950, and 1960 are

based on population enumerated as of April 1; for all other years, estimated

as of July 1.

Source: Vital Statistics of the United States, 1963, Vol. I, Natality, table 1-2

for 1940-63; Monthly Vital Statistics Report, Vol. 14, No. 8, table 1 for 1964.

(U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare.)

188

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
N o n w h ite m others average m ore children than w h ite m others, b u t the difference is greatest at

fifth and later births, for w hich th e b irth-rate decline in recen t years has been greater am ong n on w h ite

than w h ite m others.

T a b l e IVA-9.— Birth Rates, by Order of Birth and Color, United States, 19^0-64

[Per 1,000 women, age 15-44]

Year

Live-birth order

1st 2d 3d 4th 5th and over

Non­ white White Non­ white White Non­ white White Non­ white White Non­ white White

Births adjusted for under registration

1940_________________ 28.6 29.4 19.6 20.0 14. 1 10. 5 10. 5 5.9 29. 5 11. 2

1941_________________ 29.8 32.5 20.6 20.7 14. 5 10.7 10.6 5.9 29.9 10.7

1942 ________________ 31. 0 38.3 21. 1 23. 1 14.9 11. 5 10.8 6. 1 29.7 10.5

1943_________________ 31.0 35.2 22.2 25.9 15. 5 13.2 11. 4 6.9 31.0 11.0

1944_________________ 28.7 30.4 21. 1 24. 2 15.6 13.6 11.7 7. 1 31.5 11.2

1945_________________ 27.9 29.0 20. 1 23.3 14.7 13. 2 11.3 7.0 31.9 10.9

1946_________________ 31. 1 39. 5 23.4 28.5 16.0 14.4 11.8 7.3 31.7 10.7

1947_________________ 38.4 47.8 26. 2 30. 8 17.3 15.3 12. 1 7.4 31.8 10. 5

1948_________________ 37.3 39.9 29. 5 31. 1 19.4 15.7 12.9 7.4 32.5 10.2

1949_________________ 35.4 36. 3 30.8 32.2 21. 2 16.6 14.0 7.9 33.8 10.5

1950_________________ 33.8 33.3 30.3 32.3 22.9 17.9 15.3 8.4 35.0 10. 3

1951 1________________ 34. 1 35.0 29.9 32. 9 23.9 19. 5 16.9 9.4 36.9 10.9

1952_________________ 33. 1 34. 1 29. 2 33. 1 24. 0 21. 0 18. 1 10.4 39.0 11. 5

1953_________________ 34. 1 33.3 29. 5 32.9 23.8 21. 6 18.4 11.1 41. 5 12.2

1954_________________ 35. 6 33.3 29.7 32.8 24. 4 22. 6 19. 1 12.0 44.2 13.0

1955_________________ 35. 0 32.6 30. 7 32. 0 24.4 22.9 19. 1 12. 6 46. 1 13. 6

1956_________________ 35.9 33.2 31. 7 31.9 25. 2 23.4 19. 7 13. 1 48.7 14.4

1957_________________ 36. 1 33.4 31.6 31. 7 25.7 23.7 19.8 13.7 49.9 15.3

1958_________________ 34.7 31.9 31. 0 30.6 25.4 23. 1 19. 5 13. 8 49.9 15.6

1959_________________ 34.9 31.3 30.9 30.0 25.3 23.0 19.8 14. 1 51. 1 16. 2

Registered births

1959_________________ 33.9 31. 2 29.8 29.9 24.4 22.9 19. 1 13.9 48. 8 16.0

1960_________________ 33.6 30.8 29. 3 29.2 24.0 22.7 18. 6 14. 1 48. 1 16. 4

1961_________________ 33.6 30. 7 28. 8 28.3 23.7 22. 2 18.8 14. 0 48. 5 17.0

1962 2________________ 33. 0 29.7 28.0 26. 9 22.8 20.9 17.8 13.3 47. 0 16.6

1963 2________________ 33.8 29.4 27.6 25. 9 21.8 19.6 16.9 12.6 44. 8 16. 1

1964_________________ 34. 8 29.7 27.4 24. 8 21. 1 18.4 16. 0 11.7 42.3 15.0

1 Based on a 50 percent sample of births since 1951. Before 1951 based on

total count.

2 Figures exclude data for residents of New Jersey.

Note.—Refers only to births occurring within the United States. Alaska

included beginning 1959, and Hawaii, 1960. Rates are enumerated as of

April 1 for 1940, 1950, and 1960 and estimated as of July 1 for all other years.

Live-birth order refers to number of children born alive to 1 mother. Figures

for order of births not stated are distributed.

Source: Vital Statistics of the United States, 196S, vol. I Natality, table 1-9

for 1940-63; Monthly Vital Statistics Report, vol. 14, No. 8, table 5 for 1964

(U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare).

189

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
T h e n on w h ite-w h ite gap in birth rates is greatest in the y o u n g est and old est age groups, although,

at all ages, n on w h ites h ave a higher birth rate than w hites.

T a b l e I V A -1 0 .— Birth Rates, by Age of Mother and Color, United States, 1940-64

[Live births per 1,000 Women]

Age of mother

Year 10-14 years 15-19 years 20-24 years 25-29 years

Nonwhite White Nonwhite White Nonwhite White Nonwhite White

Births Adjusted For Under Registration

1940__________________ 3.7 0.2 121.7 45.3 168.5 131.4 116.3 123.6

1941__________________ 4.0 . 2 128.3 47.6 175.0 141.6 118. 1 130. 1

1942__________________ 3.9 .3 131.8 51.8 182.3 162.9 119.6 145.6

1943__________________ 4. 0 .3 133. 4 , 52. 1 187.2 161.1 125. 1 150.7

1944__________________ 3.9 .3 121. 5 45. 3 182.4 147.9 126.8 137.7

1945__________________ 3.9 .3 117.5 42. 1 172.1 134. 7 125.4 133. 1

1946__________________ 3.7 .3 121.9 50.6 197.3 179.8 139. 2 164.0

1947__________________ 4.6 .4 146.6 69.8 223.7 207.9 150.6 179. 1

1948__________________ 4.9 .4 157.3 71. 1 237.0 195.5 159.6 163.9

1949__________________ 5.1 .4 162.8 72. 1 241.3 194.6 167.0 165.2

1950__________________ 5. 1 .4 163.5 70.0 242.6 190.4 173.8 165.1

1951 2_________________ 5.4 .4 166. 7 75.9 252. 5 206.0 184.2 174.2

1952__________________ 5.2 .4 162.9 75.0 254.0 212. 5 194.2 180.5

1953__________________ 5.1 .4 165.4 77.2 261.4 219.6 206.4 181.5

1954__________________ 4.9 .4 170. 3 79.0 274.7 230.7 215.7 185.0

1955__________________ 4.8 .3 168.3 79.2 283.4 236. 0 219.6 186.8

1956__________________ 4.7 .3 172.5 83.2 299. 1 247. 1 225. 9 190. 6

1957__________________ 5.6 .5 172.8 85.2 307.0 253.8 228. 1 195.8 1958__________________ 4. 3 . 5 167. 3 81. 0 305.2 251.4 224. 2 194.8 1959__________________ 4.0 .4 167. 1 79.8 308.9 253.3 227.3 196.7

Registered Births

1959__________________ 4.2 .4 160. 5 79.2 297.9 251.7 220. 2 195.5 1960__________________ 4.0 .4 158.2 79.4 294. 2 252.8 214.6 194.9

1961__________________ 4.0 .4 152.8 78.8 292.9 247.9 221.6 194.3 1962 3_________________ 3.9 .4 144.6 73.2 285.7 238.0 216.8 187.4

1963 3_________________ 4.0 .4 139.9 68.2 278.1 224.9 211.2 181.2 1964__________________ 4. 0 . 3 138. 7 63. 4 269. 3 212. 9 200. 8 175. 7

See footnotes at end of table.

190

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
T a b l e IVA-10.— Birth Rates, by Age of Mother and Color, United States, I 94.O-64—Continued

[Live births per 1,000 women]

Age of mother

Year 30-34 years 35-39 years 40-44 years 45-49 years 1

Nonwhite White Nonwhite White Nonwhite White Nonwhite White

Births Adjusted For Under Registration

1940__________________ 83.5 83.4 53.7 45.3 21.5 15.0 5.2 1.6

1941__________________ 86.2 85.2 54. 1 45. 1 21. 5 14.3 4. 1 1.4

1942__________________ 88.1 92.3 54.0 47.2 20.8 14. 1 4.0 1.3

1943__________________ 93.9 100.2 56.9 52.2 21.5 15.0 3.7 1.3

1944__________________ 97.3 98.2 58.4 54. 1 21. 5 15. 5 3.2 1.2

1945__________________ 97. 1 100.5 61.3 56.3 22.3 16. 0 3.7 1.4

1946__________________ 99.3 110. 0 61.0 58.4 21.8 15.9 3.5 1.3

1947__________________ 102.4 113.0 62.7 58.4 21.4 16.1 3. 1 1.2

1948__________________ 104.1 103.6 62.5 53.5 20.4 15.2 2.8 1.1

1949__________________ 107.3 101.5 63.9 52.2 21.1 14.6 2.5 1.1

1950__________________ 112.6 102.6 64.3 51.4 21.2 14. 5 2.6 1.0

1951 2_________________ 117. 9 106.5 66.5 52.6 22.6 14.6 2.2 1.0

1952__________________ 122.0 111.4 66.6 54.4 21.9 14.8 2.2 .9

1953__________________ 125.7 111.9 70.0 55. 1 23.0 15.0 2.2 .9

1954__________________ 131.3 115. 1 72.9 56.2 22.5 15.4 2.1 .9

1955__________________ 133.5 114. 1 75.4 56.7 22. 1 15.4 2. 1 .9

1956__________________ 139.4 114.4 78.8 57.0 23.6 15.4 2.0 .8

1957__________________ 143.5 115.9 78.7 57.4 23.5 15.4 2.0 .8

1958__________________ 142.3 113.0 78.4 55.8 21.8 14.8 1.9 .8

1959__________________ 143.3 112.0 78.5 55.7 23.3 14.8 1.8 .8

Registered Births

1959__________________ 138.1 111.3 75.0 55.1 21. 2 14.7 1.8 .9 1960__________________ 135.6 109.6 74.2 54.0 22.0 14.7 1.7 .8

1961__________________ 136.0 110. 1 74.9 53.1 22.3 14.8 1.5 .9 1962 3_________________ 132.2 105.0 72.0 50.2 21. 7 14. 1 1. 5 .8

1963 3_________________ 128.9 102.3 68.9 48.8 21.0 13.4 1.5 .8 1964__________________ 126.8 100. 1 67. 5 47. 6 20. 8 12. 9 1. 5 . 7

1 Rates computed by relating births to mother aged 45 years and over to

female population aged 45-49 years.

2 Based on a 50-percent sample of births since 1951. Before 1951, based on

total count.

3 Figures exclude data for residents of New Jersey.

Note.—Refers only to births occurring within the United States. Alaska

included beginning 1959, and Hawaii, 1960. Birth rates are enumerated as

of April 1, for 1940,1950, and 1960 and estimated as of July 1 for all other years.

Figures for age of mother not stated are distributed.

Source: Vital Statistics of the United States, 1963, vol. I, Natality, table 1-6

for 1940-63; Monthly Vital Statistics Report, vol. 14, No. 8, table 4 for 1964 (U.S.

Department of Health, Education, and Welfare).

191

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
F ertility and th e ratio of n on w h ite/w h ite fertility fall w ith rising incom e, and are u su ally lea st in

urban areas. In 1960, for th e incom e group $ 1 0 ,0 00 -1 4,9 99 in urbanized areas, th e fertility of

n on w h ite m oth ers approxim ated th a t of w h ite m others.

T a b l e IVA-11.— Children Ever Born Per 1,000 Mothers 20-39 Years Old, by Age Group, Color, and Selected Family Income

Group, Selected Areas, United States, 1960

Age groups

Color and income class 20-24 years 25-29 years 30-34 years 35-39 years

Total U rb an ­ ized

areas

South Total U rban­ ized

areas

South Total U rb an ­ ized

areas

South Total U rb an ­ ized

areas

South

Total United 

States: 1 

Nonwhite _ _ 2, 498 2, 337 2, 696 3,325 3,075 3, 653 3, 868 3, 431 4, 356 4, 059 4, 112 4, 676

W hite_________ 1,844 1,776 1, 841 2, 497 2, 388 2, 469 2, 861 2, 736 2, 834 2, 953 2, 778 2, 999

Ratio— Nonwhite to white_ 1.35 1. 32 1.46 1.33 1. 29 1.48 1.35 1. 25 1. 54 1.37 1.48 1. 56

Under $4,000 

income: 

Non white 2, 609 2,417 2, 752 3, 688 3,383 3, 865 4,448 3, 834 4, 728 4, 690 3, 794 5, 044

W hite_________ 1,911 1,842 1, 926 2, 755 2, 620 2, 783 3, 271 3, 050 3,368 3, 462 3,076 3,633

Ratio_________ 1. 37 1.31 1.43 1.34 1. 29 1. 39 1.36 1.26 1.40 1.35 1. 23 1.39

$4,000-5,999:

Nonwhite 2, 366 2, 327 2, 506 3, 151 3, 128 3, 259 3, 621 3, 479 3, 820 3, 879 3, 692 4, 225

White _ . 1, 860 1, 807 1,825 2, 525 2, 438 2, 444 2, 913 2, 794 2,817 3, 009 2, 831 3, 003

R a tio ._____ 1. 27 1.29 1.37 1. 25 1.28 1.33 1. 24 1.25 1.36 1.29 1.30 1.41

$6,000-9,999: 

Non white. 2, 112 2, 071 2, 255 2, 565 2, 519 2, 612 3, 036 2, 972 3, 048 3, 284 3, 114 3, 697

White __ 1, 750 1,707 1, 697 2, 377 2, 325 2, 256 2, 734 2, 686 2, 577 2, 829 2, 751 2, 722

Ratio ____ 1. 21 1.21 1.33 1.08 1. 08 1. 16 1. 11 1. 11 1. 18 1. 16 1. 13 1.36

$10,000-14,999:

Nonwhite 2, 059 

1,752

2, 024 

1, 684

2, 410 

2, 289

2, 360 2, 579 2, 628 

2, 628

2, 532 

2, 587

2, 905 

2, 492

2, 884 

2, 724

2, 777 

2, 651

3, 235 White 1, 742 2, 227 2, 205 2, 636

Ratio _ _____ 1. 18 1. 20 1. 05 1. 06 1. 17 1.00 0. 98 1. 17 1.06 1.05 1.23

1 Includes data for all income classes.

Note—Rate and ratio not shown where base is less than 1,000.

Source: 1960 Census of Population, Subject Reports, Women by Number of Children Ever Born, PC(2)-3A, table 38 (U.S. Bureau of the Census).

192

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
F ertility rates tend to decline w ith increasing

edu cation al attain m en t. W hite and nonw hite

m arried w om en 3 5 -5 9 years old in 1960 w ith 4

years or less of school averaged ab out 4 children,

w hile those w ho com pleted high school averaged

about 2.5 children. C ollege educated n on w h ite

w om en had few er children than sim ilarly educated

w h ite w om en.

T a b l e IVA-12.—Number of Births per Ever Married

Woman 35-59 Years Old, by Level of Educational Attainment as of 1960

Years of school completed Births

Non white White

Elementary school:

None______ __ _________ 4. 2 4. 2

1—4 years 4. 0 3. 8

5-8 years 3. 6 3. 0

8 years _ _ ______ 3. 3 2. 9

High school:

1-3 years ___ _ _________ 3. 1 2. 7

4 years _ _ _ _ _ _ __ 2. 5 2. 5

College:

1-3 years _ __ _ 2. 2 2. 5

4 y e a r s .___ _ __ ____ 1. 9 2. 5

4 years or m ore. _ 1. 7 2. 4

Source: I960 C en su s o f P o p u la tio n . S u b ject R e p o rt. W o m en by N u m b e r of

C h ildren E ver B o rn . PC(2)-3A. table 25. (U.S. Bureau of the Census.)

N o n w h ite w om en at all b u t th e low est level of

schooling reported w an tin g fewer children than

w h ite w om en of th e sam e education, according to

a 1960 stu d y.

T a b l e IVA-13.—Average Total Number of Births Expected

and Children Wanted, White and Nonwhite Wives, by

Education, 1960

Average total number of—

W ife’s education Births expected Children wanted

N onwhite White N onwhite White

T otal______________ 3. 6 3. 1 2. 9 3. 3

College. 2. 4 3. 0 2. 4 3. 3 High school:

4 years. 2. 9 3. 0 2. 7 3. 2

1-3 yeras____ 3. 8 3. 3 2. 7 3. 3

Elementary school

(8 years) _ _ _ . 4. 7 3. 7 3. 5 3. 5

Source: John E. Patterson and Arthur A. Campbell, “Educational Attainment and Fertility in the United States, 1960,” paper read at the annual

meeting of the Population Association of America, Chicago, April 22-25,1965.

Data from the 1960 Growth of American Families Study, by the Scripps

Foundation for Research in Population Problems.

In 1964, illegitim acy rates w ere estim ated to be

7 tim es as high for n on w h ites as w hites. H ow ever,

this gap has narrowed som ew h at since 1954,

reflecting a rela tively greater increase in illeg itim acy rates am ong the w hites.

T a b l e IVA-14.—Estimated1 Illegitimacy Rate, by

Color, 19^7-64

Year Nonwhite White

1947 ___________________________ 168. 0 18. 5

1948_________________ ______ 164. 7 17. 8

1949_____________________________ 167. 5 17. 3

1950____________________ -__ _. 179. 6 17. 5

1951_____________________________ 182. 8 16. 3

1952 ___________________________ 183. 4 16. 3

1953_____________________________ 191. 1 16. 9

1954_____________________________ 198. 5 18. 2

1955_____________________________ 202.4 18. 6

1956_____________________________ 204.0 19. 0

1957_____________________________ 206. 7 19. 6

1958_____________________________ 212.3 20. 9

1959_____________________________ 218.0 22.1

1960_____________________________ 215. 8 22. 9

1961 ___________________________ 223. 4 25. 3

1962 2___________________________ 229.9 27 .5

1963 2___________________________ 235.9 30 .7

1964_____________________________ 245. 0 33. 9

1 34 States and the District of Columbia report legitimacy status on birth

certificates. For the remaining States the illegitimacy ratio is estimated

from the reporting States in each of the 9 geographic divisions. Nevada and

Wyoming did not begin reporting until some time between 1947 and 1950.

The following States do not report legitimacy: Arizona, Arkansas, California,

Colorado, Connecticut, Idaho, Maryland, Massachusetts, Nebraska, New

Hampshire, New Mexico, New York, Oklahoma, Vermont, Georgia, and

Montana. The last 2 States reported before 1957. Alaska has reported

legitimacy status since 1959, and Hawaii since 1960. Since 1951, estimates

have been based on a 50-percent sample of births; prior to that year, the data

are based on a total count.

2 Excludes New Jersey which in 1962-63 only did not require reporting by

color.

N ote.—As stated in the source cited, “No estimates are included for misstatements on the birth record or for failure to register births * * * The decision to conceal the illegitimacy of births is likely conditioned by attitudes in

the mother’s social group towards her and towards children born out of

wedlock. Also, the ability (economic or otherwise) to leave a community

before the birth of the child is an important consideration. These factors

probably result in proportionately greater understatement of illegitimacy

in the white group than in the nonwhite * *

Source: V ita l S ta tistic s o f the U n ited S ta tes, 1963, vol. I, N a ta lity , table

1-26, and unpublished data for 1964 (U.S. Department of Health, Education,

and Welfare).

193

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
A ccording to a census tract analysis for W ashin gton, D .C ., illegitim acy rates tend to fall w ith

rising incom e and education.

T a b l e IVA-15.—Illegitimacy Rates as Related to Income

and Education, by Color, in Integrated Census Tracts (30

to 70 percent nonwhite), in Washington, D.C.1

[Tracts grouped and arrayed in ascending order of median family income]

Median family income 2

Non white White

Illegitimacy

rate (per 1,000 births)

Median

years of school

com­ pleted

Illegitimacy rate (per 1,000 births)

Median

years of school

com­ pleted

$3,000-$3,999____ 336 8. 7 (3) (3) $4,000-$4,999____ 280 9. 3 (3) (3) $5,000-$5,999____ (3) (3) 203 12. 1

$6,000-$7,499____ 190 11. 7 91 12. 2

$7,500 or m ore___ 138 12. 5 42 12. 2

1 Birth data relate to 1963; other data to 1959-60.

2 Relates to the group for which illegitimacy rates are given.

3 No census tracts in this income class, for the group shown.

Source: Birth data from Washington, D.C., Department of Public Health;

other data from 1960 C en su ses o f P o p u la tio n a n d H o u sin g , Final Report

PHC(1)-166, Census Tracts, Washington, D.C., Standard Metropolitan

Statistical Area, tables P-1 and P-4 (U.S. Bureau of the Census).

There has been a steady and sharp rise in the

past century in nonwhite literacy, which reached

almost 93 percent by 1959.

T a b l e IVB—1.—Percent Illiterate1 in the Population,

by Color, 1870-1959

[Data for 1870-1940 are for the population 10 years old and over; data for

1947, 1952, and 1959 are for the population 14 years old and over]

Year Total Non white White

1870________________ 20. 0 79. 9 11. 5

1880________________ 17. 0 70. 0 9. 4

1890___________ 13. 3 56. 8 7. 7 1900___________ 10. 7 44. 5 6. 2

1910________________ 7. 7 30. 5 5. 0 1920_______________ 6. 0 23. 0 4. 0 1930________________ 4. 3 16. 4 3. 0 1940 2__________ 2. 9 11. 5 2. 0 1947_____________ 2. 7 11. 0 1. 8 1952________________ 2. 5 10. 2 1. 8 1959________________ 2. 2 7. 5 1. 6

1 Persons who could not both read and write a simple message either in

English or any other language were classified as illiterate.

2 Estimated.

Source: C u rren t P o p u la tio n R e p o r ts, Series P-20, No. 99, table A. (U.S. Bureau of the Census.)

194

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Increases in ed u cation al atta in m en t of b oth th e w h ite and n on w h ite p op u lation 25 years and over

were su b stan tial even in th e relatively short period 1959-64. T h e rise w as esp ecially sharp am ong th e

you nger n on w h ite adults, 25 to 44 years old, for w hom those w ith 4 years of high sch ool or m ore

rose from alm ost 3 in 10 to alm ost 4 in 10.

T a b l e IVB-2.— Educational Attainment of Persons 25 Years Old and Over, by Age and Color, March 1959 and March 1964.

Years of school completed

Total 25 to 44 years

1959 1964 1959 1964

Non­ white White Non­ white White Non­ white White Non­ white White

Total __ ___... ____ 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0

N o n e____ _ . - - 6. 1 1.8 4.4 1. 5 2.6 .6 1.4 .4

Elementary, 1 to 8 years _______ 55.4 33.7 47.0 30.6 43.9 18.4 31.4 15.4

High school:

1 to 3 years 17.8 18.4 21. 1 17.6 24.9 20. 1 28. 0 18.7

4 years _ ------------- _ _ 13.6 28.8 17.9 31.3 19.5 39.9 26.7 41.5

College:

1 to 3 years _ _ _____ ___ 3.7 8.7 4.9 9.3 5. 1 10.3 6.4 11.3

4 years ___ ___ 2.1 5.5 3.0 6.0 2.6 6.9 3.8 8.0

5 years or more. _ — 1. 2 3.0 1.7 3.6 1.4 3.8 2.3 4.6

8 years or less of school 61. 5 35. 5 51.4 32. 1 46.4 19.0 32.8 15.8

4 years or more of high school 20. 6 46.0 27.5 50.2 28.6 60.9 39.2 65.4

1 year or more of college____ ______ 7.0 17. 2 9.6 18. 9 9. 1 21. 0 12. 5 23.9

45 to 64 years 65 years and over

Total___________ _______ 100. 0 100. 0 100.0 100.0 100. 0 100.0 100. 0 100.0

N o n e__ . ____ _ _ _ _ __ 7. 1 1.7 4. 1 .9 19.8 5.6 17.0 5.3

Elementary, 1 to 8 years __ _ _________ 69.4 41.9 62.5 35. 5 66. 9 61. 0 66.2 58.3 High school:

1 to 3 y ears._ . ___ 11.0 18.7 15.9 18.7 5.2 12.3 7.8 12.8

4 years _ _ _______ 7.2 22. 2 10.2 27.9 5.4 11. 1 4.7 13. 1 College:

1 to 3 years _ _ _ _ 2.6 . 1 3.7 8.7 . 6 5.4 2.4 5. 5

4 years. ______ . . . 1.6 4.8 2.3 5.0 1.5 3. 1 1.4 3.3

5 years or more _ . . 1. 1 2. 7 1.2 3.3 . 6 1. 5 .4 1. 7

8 years or less of school 76. 5 43.6 66. 6 36.4 86. 7 66. 6 83. 2 62.6 4 years or more of high school _. . 12. 5 37.8 17.4 44. 9 8. 1 21. 1 8.9 23. 6 1 year or more of college__ . . 5.3 15.6 7.2 17. 0 2.7 10. 0 4.2 10. 5

Note.—Because of rounding, sums of individual items may not equal totals.

Source: C u rren t P o p u la tio n R e p o rts, P o p u la tio n C h a racteristics, L ite ra c y a n d E d u c a tio n a l A tta in m e n t: M arch 1959, Series P-20, No. 90, tables 1 and 2; and

E d u c a tio n a l A tta in m e n t: M arch 1964, Series P-20, No. 138, table 1. (U.S. Bureau of the Census.)

195

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
B etw een 1950 and 1960, N egroes show ed th e greatest relative increase in th ose atta in in g a high

school education or m ore. H ow ever, in 1960, N egroes had th e lo w est m edian years of schooling

of all races except Indians.

T a b l e IVB-3.—Educational Attainment of the Population 14 Years and Over, by Race, United States, 1950 and 1960

Years of school completed Negro Indian Japanese Chinese Filipino White

1950 1960 1950 1960 1950 1960 1950 1960 1950 1960 1950 1960

T o tal.. ------- 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100

8 years or less. _ _ _______ 69 55 71 59 27 26 52 40 59 49 42 35

High school:

1 to 3 years______ 18 24 17 23 15 18 14 14 18 19 21 23

4 years__ 9 14 9 12 40 36 17 19 14 17 23 26

College:

1 to 3 y e a rs._ 3 4 2 4 11 11 9 12 7 8 8 9

4 years or more. 2 3 1 1 7 9 9 15 3 7 6 7

Median years of school _ _ 7. 3 8. 6 7. 4 8. 4 12. 2 12. 2 8. 8 11. 1 8. 3 9. 2 10. 1 11. 0

Percent with less than 4 years

of high school. 86 79 88 82 42 44 66 54 76 68 64 58

Percent with 1 year or more of

college__ 5 7 3 5 18 20 17 27 10 15 14 16

N ote.—Does not include persons with school years not reported in 1950.

Because of rounding, sums of individual items may not equal totals.

Source: 1960 Census of Population: Detailed Characteristics, United Stales

Summary, PC(1)-1D, table 173; 1950 Census of Population: Special Reports,

Vol. IV, Part 5, Chapter B, Education, table 5; 1960 Census of Population:

Subject Reports, Nonwhite Population by Race, PC(2)-1C, tables 9, 10,11, 12,

and 13; 1950 Census of Population: Special Reports, Vol. IV, Part 3, Chapter

B, Nonwhite Population by Race, tables 9, 10, 11, 12, and 13 (U.S. Bureau of

the Census).

196

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
C om parison of th e educational levels of m en 2 0 -6 4 years old in 1962 w ith th a t of their fathers reveals su b stan tial upw ard m ovem en t betw een th e generations. T h e uptrend w as sligh tly sharper am ong

n on w h ite m en, of w hom 1 in 4, as com pared to 1 in 10 of their fathers, had at lea st 4 years of high school.

T a b l e IVB-4.— Percent Distribution by Educational Level of Men 20-64 Years Old and of Their Fathers, by Color, March 1962

[Excludes cases with no report on education of the father]

Years of school completed and color Men Fathers Difference Ratio of men to fathers

Nonwhite _ _ _______ _ _____ 100. 0 100. 0 1. 0

Less than 8 years__ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ 36. 8 63. 4 -2 6 . 6 . 6

Elementary 8 to high school 3 years . _______ ______ 34. 6 25. 2 + 9. 4 1. 4

High school 4 years or more_________ _____ _________ 28. 5 11. 4 4-17. 1 2. 5

High school 4 years_ _ __ _ __ __ 18. 1 7. 0 4-11. 1 2. 6

College 1 year or more______ __ _ _ ____ _ _ ____ 10. 4 4. 4 4-6. 0 2. 4

White _ _ _ _ __ ___ ____ 100. 0 100. 0 1. 0

Less than 8 years.__ _____ T _ 12. 6 36. 5 -2 3 . 9 . 3

Elementary 8 to high school 3 years____ _ _ __ __ 32. 2 38. 8 - 6 . 6 . 8

High school 4 years or more______ __ _ ______ 55. 2 24. 7 4-30. 5 2. 2

High school 4 years__ __ __ _ __ __ 29. 6 14. 4 4-15. 2 2. 1

College 1 year or m ore. _ ___ _ _. _ _ _ __ 25. 6 10. 3 + 15. 3 2. 5

N ote.—Because of rounding, sums of individual items may not equal totals.

Source: C u rren t P o p u la tio n R e p o r ts, E d u c a tio n a l C hange in a G eneration : M a rch 1962, Series P-20, No. 132, table E. (U.S. Bureau of the Census.)

197

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
A m on g b oth w h ites and nonw hites, m edian years of school com p leted w as greater am ong persons

in th e labor force than outside. A lth ou gh n on w h ite m ales in th e civilian labor force averaged less

schooling than w h ite m ales in M arch 1965— 10 versus 12 years— th e difference had decreased since 1959.

T h e n on w h ite/w h ite education difference w as greater in farm than in nonfarm areas, and in th e S ou th

th an in oth er regions of the country.

T a b l e I V B - 5 .— Educational Attainment of the Population 18 Years Old and Over, by Labor Force Status, Color, Sex, Residence

and Region, March 1959 and March 1965

Years of school completed, residence, region, and year

Male Female

In labor force Not in labor force In labor force Not in labor force

Non­ white White Non­ white White Non­ white White Non­ white White

Percent distribution, by years of school completed

1959

Total:

Number (in thousands) 4, 330 39, 956 721 6, 945 2, 786 18, 770 3, 015 33,113

Percent 100. 0 100. 0 100. 0 100. 0 100. 0 100. 0 100. 0 100. 0

No school years completed. __ 4. 4 . 8 14. 8 5. 5 2. 3 . 4 5. 2 2. 0

Elem entary:

1 to 4 years 17. 1 3. 5 28. 5 12. 2 9. 9 1. 8 14. 9 4. 6

5 to 7 years _ 22. 9 9. 6 19. 0 18. 0 21. 1 6. 5 22. 7 11. 6

8 y e a rs.. . . . _ . 11. 7 16. 1 7. 4 20. 3 12. 8 12. 7 12. 6 16. 9

High school:

1 to 3 years 19. 4 19. 9 15. 9 12. 4 22. 5 18. 3 23. 0 19. 1

4 years. . ------- 13. 3 28. 2 6. 6 12. 7 19. 7 40. 2 15. 3 31. 2

College:

1 to 3 years _ _ 4. 1 9. 5 3. 3 11. 0 5. 0 10. 3 3. 6 8. 9

4years_. 2. 0 6. 4 1. 1 2. 9 3. 3 6. 1 . 9 3. 7

5 years or more__ __ __ 1. 5 4. 6 . 4 2. 1 1. 3 2. 4 . 1 . 8

School years not reported. _ 3. 6 1. 4 3. 1 2. 9 2. 2 1. 3 1. 6 1. 3

Median school years completed, by residence and region

Total 8. 3 11. 9 5. 8 8. 6 9. 4 12. 2 8. 5 11. 2

Nonfarm_____ __ ____ 8. 7 12. 1 5. 9 8. 7 8. 7 12. 3 8. 8 11. 6

United States, excluding South______ 9. 7 12. 1 7. 7 8. 7 10. 8 12. 3 9. 7 11. 6

South___ 7. 4 11. 7 4. 3 8. 9 8. 5 12. 2 7. 7 11. 5

Farm____ _ ____ _ _ _ _ 5. 9 8. 9 5. 4 8. 2 8. 1 11. 7 6. 9 9. 0

See footnotes at end of table.

198

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
T a b l e IVB-5.—Educational Attainment of the Population 18 Years Old and Over, by Labor Force Status, Color, Sex, Resi­ dence and Region, March 1959 and March 1965—Continued

Years of school completed, residence, region, and year

Male Female

In labor force Not in labor force In labor force Not in labor force

Non­ white White Non­ white White Non­ white White Non­ white White

Percent distribution, by years of school completed

1965

Total:

Number (in thousands)____ - _ 4, 603 41, 651 1, 030 8, 763 3, 262 21, 607 3, 383 34, 727

Percent__ _ _ 100. 0 100. 0 100. 0 100. 0 100. 0 100. 0 100. 0 100. 0

No school years c o m p leted .______ __ 2. 1 . 5 12. 6 4. 8 . 9 . 3 5. 0 1. 8

Elem entary:

1 to 4 years __ 13. 3 2. 7 24. 8 10. 2 5. 9 1. 4 13. 4 3. 8

5 to 7 years _ ■__ 16. 0 7. 7 18. 1 16. 9 13. 6 5. 0 19. 7 9. 9

8 y ears._ _ _ _ . 10. 4 13. 1 9. 5 21. 1 11. 3 10. 3 12. 0 15. 3

High school:

1 to 3 years . . . . 24. 4 18. 8 16. 1 14. 4 25. 7 17. 7 25. 8 19. 3

4 y ears._ 21. 4 33. 2 11. 2 14. 7 28. 6 43. 9 18. 0 34 8

College:

1 to 3 years 6. 0 11. 0 5. 6 12. 8 6. 3 11. 0 4. 4 10. 2

4 years__ __ __ 3. 7 7. 7 1. 1 2. 9 5. 6 7. 1 1. 4 4. 1

5 years or more___ _____ _____ 2. 7 5. 4 1. 0 2. 2 2. 2 3. 3 . 4 . 9

Median school years completed, by residence and region

Total___ ____ ________ 10. 0 12. 2 7. 1 8. 9 11. 1 12. 3 9. 0 12. 0

Nonfarm_____ ____ _______ 10. 3 12. 3 7. 0 8. 9 11. 2 12. 4 9. 2 12. 0

United States, excluding South. __ . 11. 1 12. 3 8. 3 8. 9 12. 0 12. 4 10. 2 12. 2

South _ ____ ___ __ 9. 1 12. 1 5. 6 8. 8 10. 1 12. 3 8. 2 11. 4

Farm___ . . . __ 6. 1 9. 4 C1) 8. 5 8. 5 12. 1 6. 9 10. 2

1 Median not shown where base is less than 100,000.

N ote.—Because of rounding, sums of individual items may not equal totals.

Source: U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics. Data for 1959 are from “Educational Attainment of Workers, 1959,” Special Labor Force

Report No. 1, table F. Data for 1965 are unpublished from the March 1965 supplement to the Current Population Survey.

199

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
A m ong persons 18 years old and over in th e civilian labor force, th e proportion of non w h ite workers

com pleting at lea st 4 years of high school doubled from 1952 to 1965, rising to 38 percent, w h ile th e

proportion of w h ite w orkers has risen b y nearly one-third to 60 percent.

T a b l e IV B -6.— Percent of the Civilian Labor Force 18 Years Old and Over, by Selected Levels of Educational Attainment and by Color and Sex, Selected Years, 1952-65

Years of school completed and period Both sexes Male Female

Nonwhite White Nonwhite White Non white White

Elementary—8 years or less: 1

October 1952_______ __ _____ ______ 66. 5 34. 9 69. 5 38. 7 62. 3 26. 5

March 1957__ __________ ______ 57. 6 30. 5 (2) (2) (2) (2) March 1959____ _ 53. 8 27. 7 58. 1 30. 4 47. 1 21. 7 M arch 1962___ _ _ _ _____ 45. 2 24. 7 50. 5 27. 2 37. 6 ' 19. 5 March 1964__ _____ 40. 8 22. 6 44. 7 24. 8 35. 1 18. 1

March 1965_____ __ _ . _ _ 37. 6 21. 6 41. 8 23. 9 31. 6 17. 1

High school—4 years or more:

October 1952._ __ _ 17. 4 46. 1 15. 1 42. 1 20. 4 55. 1

March 1957.. .............. 22. 7 50. 1 (2) (2) (2) (2) March 1959__ _ _____________ ______ 25. 0 52. 6 21. 7 49. 4 29. 9 59. 8 March 1962.. _ ________. . . 31. 5 56. 6 27. 3 53. 5 37. 6 62. 7

March 1964.. . . . 34. 6 58. 9 30. 8 56. 2 39. 7 64. 2

March 1965____ _ _ _ _ _ .___ 37. 5 60. 0 33. 8 57. 3 42. 7 65. 2

College—4 years or more:

October 1952___________ __________ _ __ 2. 6 8. 6 1. 9 8. 6 3. 6 8. 3

March 1957__ _________ ____ 3. 5 9. 8 (2) (2) (2) (2) M arch 1959_____________________________ 4. 0 10. 3 3. 6 11. 2 4. 7 8. 6

M arch 1962. ________________ _________ 4. 8 11. 8 3. 6 12. 6 6. 7 10. 0 M arch 1964__ _ _________ _ __ 5. 8 11. 8 6. 0 12. 7 5. 2 10. 1

M arch 1965________________________ _. 7. 0 12. 2 6. 4 13. 1 7. 8 10. 3

1 Includes persons reporting no school years completed.

2 Not available.

Source: U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics. Data for 1952-64 are from “Educational Attainment of Workers, March 1964,” Special Labor Force Report No. 53, table 2. Data for 1965 are unpublished from the March 1965 supplement to the Current Population Survey.

200

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
The labor force participation rate for nonwhite men 18 years old and over was almost the same as 

for white men in March 1965, and for both groups the rates increased with education. At each educational level, nonwhite women were more likely to be in the labor force than white women.

T a b l e IVB-7.— Labor Force Participation Rates 1 of Persons 18 Years Old and Over, by Age Group, Color, Sex, and Years

of School Completed, March 1965

Years of school completed

Total 18 years and over 18 to 24

years

25 to 34 

years

35 to 44 

years

45 to 54 

years

55 years and over

and sex Non­ white White Non­ white White Non­ white White Non­ white White Non­ white White Non­ white White

MALE

Total. __ _ 81. 8 82. 6 78. 0 75. 3 96. 4 97. 2 92. 6 97. 7 92. 4 95. 8 55. 4 57. 5 Elem entary:

Less than 8 years. 71. 7 61. 7 78. 1 83. 3 91. 7 91. 4 87. 0 91. 4 91. 2 90. 6 49. 9 40. 7 Less than 5 years _ 64. 9 50. 2 (2) (2) (2) 85. 6 81. 9 86. 5 88. 1 84. 6 49. 0 32. 3

5 to 7 years 79. 9 68. 2 (2) 96. 5 95. 9 94. 4 91. 0 93. 4 94. 1 93. 2 51. 7 46. 3

8 years______________ 83. 0 74. 7 (2) 93. 4 (2) 98. 0 92. 4 95. 9 92. 9 95. 0 63. 2 54. 9

High school:

1 to 3 years__________ 87. 1 86. 1 77. 9 75. 2 98. 0 98. 3 95. 0 97. 5 90. 9 95. 3 68. 7 67. 4

4 years 89. 7 91. 5 83. 2 84. 9 97. 2 98. 7 96. 3 98. 9 (2) 97. 3 (2) 69. 5

College:

1 year or more __ 87. 8 86. 5 61. 3 58. 5 97. 3 95. 9 95. 2 99. 1 (2) 98. 4 (2) 74. 1

1 to 3 years 82. 8 80. 3 61. 2 53. 9 96. 0 96. 0 (2) 98. 8 (2) 98. 1 (2) 70. 8

4 years or more______ 93. 1 92. 4 (2) 77. 9 98. 4 95. 8 (2) 99. 2 (2) 98. 6 (2) 76. 6

FEMALE

T o tal.. ________ _____ 49. 1 38. 4 47. 0 47. 5 54. 3 36. 6 57. 3 44. 2 60. 6 49. 2 29. 5 24. 5

Elem entary:

Less than 8 years. _ . _ 33. 8 21. 4 (2) 19. 9 38. 2 26. 8 43. 8 38. 5 52. 9 36. 2 22. 1 14. 0

Less than 5 years_____ 25. 9 16. 3 (2) (2) (2) 26. 8 35. 5 30. 1 50. 4 32. 2 18. 2 10. 6

5 to 7 years__________ 39. 9 24. 0 (2) 16. 3 44. 3 26. 8 47. 7 41. 6 54. 1 37. 5 27. 0 16. 1

8 years______________ 47. 7 29. 6 (2) 30. 5 45. 6 33. 0 58. 0 45. 2 59. 4 46. 1 34. 8 19. 6

High school:

1 to 3 years__________ 49. 1 36. 3 40. 3 33. 2 50. 6 34. 4 55. 2 44. 0 60. 6 46. 7 38. 8 26. 2

4 years . . . _____ 60. 4 43. 9 57. 9 53. 3 55. 2 36. 6 66. 6 44. 8 69. 1 51. 8 (2) 32. 1

College:

1 year or more___^___ 68. 9 46. 7 52. 4 53. 4 79. 4 41. 9 73. 7 44. 6 (2) 57. 4 (2) 39. 6

1 to 3 years 58. 0 40. 1 40. 7 45. 7 74. 8 35. 7 (2) 37. 7 (2) 50. 8 (2) 31. 8

4 y e a r s o r m o re 81. 2 56. 6 (2) 80. 8 84. 0 49. 4 (2) 54. 0 (2) 66. 0 (2) 49. 5

1 Civilian labor force as percent of civilian noninstitutional population.

2 Rate not shown where base is less than 100,000.

Source: U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics. Data are unpublished from the March 1965 supplement to the Current Population Survey.

201

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Labor force participation rates for men aged 25 and over with 8 years or less of schooling declined 

substantially between 1950 and 1960 for both whites and nonwhites, since these were mostly older 

persons. However, participation rates for men with some college education increased, especially for 

nonwhites. Participation rates for women, both white and nonwhite, increased considerably at all 

levels of educational attainment.

T a b l e IVB-8.—Labor Force Participation Rates 1 of Persons 25 Years Old and Over, by Sex, Color, and Educational

Attainment, United States, 1950 and 1960

Educational attainm ent

Male Female

Nonwhite White Nonwhite White

1950 1960 1950 1960 1950 1960 1950 1960

Total . _ _ _ . . 82 79 85 84 40 46 27 34

Elementary, 8 years or less___ 83 74 80 71 37 40 20 24

High school:

1-3 years 87 87 92 89 44 50 28 36

4 years. 88 90 93 93 49 54 32 38

College:

1-3 years_____ __________ __ 81 88 88 91 54 58 35 40

4 y e a rs.. . _ 87 91 91 94 70 76 46 51

1 Civilian labor force as percent of civilian noninstitutional population.

Source: 1950: C en su s o f P o p u la tio n , vol. IV, Special Reports, part 5, chapter 3, Education, table 9; 1960 C en su s o f P o p u la tio n , S u bject R e p o r ts, E d u c a tio n a l

A tta in m e n t, PC(2)-5B, tables 4 and 5 (U.S. Bureau of the Census).

Digitized for 

202

FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
A sharp increase in educational level of nonwhite workers in blue-collar occupations occurred from 

1959 to 1965. In white-collar jobs, the proportion of white and nonwhite men with at least 4 years of 

high school rose at almost the same rate in that period. In 1965, a somewhat larger proportion of 

nonwhite than white women in white-collar occupations had 4 years or more of high school.

T a b l e IVB-9.—Percent Distribution of Employed Persons 18 Years Old and Over, by Years of School Completed, Occupation

Group, Color, and Sex, March 1959 and March 1965

Year, sex, and years of school

Total employed White-collar occupations 1 Blue-collar occupations 2 Service occupations 3 Farm occupations 4

completed Non­ white White Non­ white White Non­ white White Non­ white White Non­ white White

1959 5

Male:Total: Number (in thousands). 3,597 37,230 453 14, 793 2, 150 16,941 495 2, 034 499 3, 462

Percent _ _ __ 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100. 0 100. 0 100.0 100.0 100. 0 100.0

Elementary: 8 years or less 6__ 58.3 29.7 19.9 13.0 64.3 37.4 45.6 40.3 79.7 57.5

High school:

1 to 3 years 19.7 19.9 12.8 12.4 22.0 26.9 23.8 23.2 11.8 15.8

4 years or m ore.. ____ 22. 1 50.4 67.3 74.7 13.8 35.7 30.7 36.4 8.4 26.8

Female:

Total: Number (in thousands). 2, 426 17, 539 431 10, 764 358 3,004 1, 553 3,212 84 559

P e rc e n t_____ . ____ 100. 0 100.0 100. 0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 (7) 100.0

Elementary: 8 years or less__ 47.3 21.2 13.2 7.9 44.7 41. 5 55.2 41.3 52.6

High school:

1 to 3 years ____ 22. 1 17. 9 9. 5 12. 2 29. 6 30. 3 24. 5 25. 6 15. 9

4 years or more________ 30. 6 60. 9 77. 2 79. 8 25. 7 28. 2 20. 3 33. 0 31. 6

1965

Male:

Total: Number (in thousands). 4, 236 39, 983 736 16, 891 2,513 18, 147 638 2, 325 349 2, 620

Percent _ _ _ _ 100. 0 100.0 100.0 100. 0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100. 0 100.0 100.0

Elementary: 8 years or less 6_. 41.8 23.5 12.6 9.3 45. 0 31. 3 40. 3 30.4 83. 1 55.3

High school:

1 to 3 years . _ 23.3 18.4 13.3 10.4 26.8 25.9 28.7 23.3 9.2 14.2

4 years or more _ . 34.9 58.0 74.0 80.3 28.2 42.8 31.0 46.3 7.7 30.4

Female:

Total: Number (in thousands). 2, 969 20, 581 771 12, 976 487 3, 607 1,660 3, 560 51 438

Percent_________ . . 100. 0 100.0 100. 0 100. 0 100.0 100.0 100. 0 100. 0 (7) 100.0

Elementary: 8 years or less__ 32. 5 16.9 3.8 5.8 35.1 38.5 43.6 31.8 47. 5

High school:

1 to 3 years 23. 9 17. 3 11. 0 11. 6 28. 1 29.2 29. 0 26. 0 16. 7

4 years or m o re________ 43.7 65.8 85.2 82.7 36.8 32.3 27.5 42.2 35.8

1 Includes professional, technical, managerial, clerical, and sales workers.

2 Includes craftsmen, foremen, operatives, and laborers, except farm and

mine.

3 Includes private household workers.

4 Includes farmers and farm managers, foremen, and laborers.

s Excludes persons not reporting years of school completed.

8 Includes persons reporting no school years completed.

7 Percent not shown where base is less than 100,000.

Note.—Because of rounding, sums of individual items may not equal

totals.

Source: U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics. Data

for 1959 are from “Educational Attainment of Workers, March 1964,” Special

Labor Force Rpt. No. 53, table 7. Data for 1965 are unpublished from the

March 1965 supplement to the Current Population Survey.

217-817 O— «< 14 203

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
A much larger proportion of white than nonwhite men with high school or college training were 

likely to be in white-collar jobs in 1965, and the proportions had not changed appreciably since 1959. 

The proportion of nonwhite women with at least a high school diploma holding white-collar jobs increased significantly, however, with most of the gain in clerical positions.

T a b l e IVB-10.—Percent Distribution of Employed Persons, by Occupation Group, Years of School Completed, Color and

Sex, March 1959 and March 1965

Years of school completed and color

Total Elementary High school College

Year, sex, and occupation group 8 years or less 1 to 3 years 4 years 1 year or more

Non­ white White Non­ white White Non- •white White Non­ white White Non­ white White

1959

MALE

All occupation groups:

Number (thousands)________ 3, 597 37, 230 2, 130 11, 055 688 7, 401 480 10, 768 299 8, 006

Percent. . . . . ___ 100. 0 100. 0 100. 0 100. 0 100. 0 100. 0 100. 0 100. 0 100. 0 100. 0

White-collar workers _ _ ___ 12. 5 39. 8 4. 2 17. 4 8. 3 24. 8 22. 6 42. 3 64. 7 81. 3 Professional and technical__

Managers, officials, and pro4. 2 11. 4 . 5 1. 2 1. 0 2. 2 2. 3 6. 5 40. 7 40. 6

proprietors- . _ . 2. 2 15. 0 2. 0 10. 4 1. 2 12. 4 3. 3 16. 4 4 7 22. 1

Clerical workers . . 5. 1 7. 0 1. 4 3. 0 4. 9 5. 8 15. 4 11. 0 15. 7 8. 3

Sales workers___ ____ . 9 6. 3 . 3 2. 8 1. 2 4. 3 1. 7 8. 4 3. 7 10. 3

Blue-collar w o rk e rs.__ 59. 6 45. 4 64. 7 57. 1 68. 3 61. 4 48. 5 46. 0 20. 7 13. 6 Craftsmen and foremen _. 9. 3 20. 5 7. 5 22. 2 13. 5 27. 1 10. 6 23. 7 10. 3 7. 7

O peratives.. __ ________ 23. 6 19. 1 23. 6 25. 1 32. 0 27. 2 22. 6 18. 2 5. 3 4 8

Nonfarm laborers.. . . . 26. 7 5. 8 33. 6 9. 8 22. 8 7. 1 15. 4 4. 1 5. 0 1. 2

Service w o rk ers__ __ _____ 13. 8 5. 5 10. 6 7. 5 17. 1 6. 4 23. 0 5. 1 14. 0 2. 5

Farm w orkers_______ 14. 2 9. 3 20. 5 18. 0 6. 4 7. 4 5. 8 6. 6 . 7 2. 6

Farmers and farm managers__ 5. 7 7. 1 8. 4 13. 2 1. 7 5. 8 3. 1 5. 5 2. 2

Farm laborers and foremen___

1965

MALE

8. 4 2. 2 12. 0 4. 8 4 6 1. 6 2. 7 1. 2 . 7 . 5

All occupation groups:

Number (thousands)____ 4, 236 39, 983 1, 771 9, 411 987 7, 370 917 13, 376 561 9, 826

Percent___ _ __

White-collar workers

100. 0 

17. 4

100. 0 

42. 2

100. 0 

5. 3

100. 0 

16. 7

100. 0 

9. 9

100. 0 

23. 9

100. 0 

20. 2

100. 0 

41. 0

100. 0 100. 0

Professional and technical___

Managers, officials, and pro6. 7 13. 4 . 5 1. 2 1. 1 2. 0 4 5 7. 2 39. 6 41. 9

prietors._ __ _ _ _ 3. 8 15. 5 3. 3 9. 9 2. 6 11. 4 3. 6 16. 6 7. 5 22. 6

Clerical workers. 5. 5 7. 4 . 9 3. 2 4. 8 6. 1 9. 4 10. 4 15. 2 8. 3 Sales workers. 1. 4 5. 9 . 6 2. 3 1. 4 4. 4 2. 7 6. 7 2. 0 9. 5 Blue-collar workers. . 59. 3 45. 4 63. 9 60. 4 68. 3 63. 7 61. 2 48. 3 26. 2 13. 3 Craftsmen and foremen. _ 10. 8 19. 7 10. 0 23. 2 11. 6 25. 8 13. 2 22. 7 7. 7 7. 6

Operatives_____ 27. 6 20. 0 26. 6 27. 0 33. 7 30. 2 32. 0 21. 0 12. 8 4. 4 Nonfarm laborers . 21. 0 5. 7 27. 2 10. 2 23. 0 7. 7 16. 0 4 6 5. 7 1. 3

Service workers . __ 15. 1 5. 8 14. 5 7. 5 18. 5 7. 4 16. 1 6. 0 8. 9 2. 7 Farm w o rk e rs__ _ _ _ 8. 2 6. 6 16. 4 15. 4 3. 2 5. 1 2. 5 4. 7 . 7 1. 8 Farmers and farm managers__ 2. 5 5. 0 5. 0 11. 3 1. 1 3. 5 . 5 3. 9 . 4 1. 4

Farm laborers and foremen___ 5. 7 1. 6 11. 3 4. 1 2. 1 1. 5 2. 0 . 8 . 4 . 3

204

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
T a b l e IVB-10.—Percent Distribution of Employed Persons, by Occupation Group, Years of School Completed, Color and

Sex, March 1959 and March 1965— Continued

Years of school completed and color

Year, sex, and occupation group

Total Elementary High school College

8 years or less 1 to 3 years 4 years 1 year or more

Non­ white White Non­ white White Non­ white White Non­ white White Non- white White

1959

FEMALE

All occupation groups:

Number (thousands) __ _ 2, 426 17, 539 1, 147 3, 733 537 3, 142 489 7, 229 253 3, 435

P e rc e n t___ ._ 100. 0 100. 0 100. 0 100. 0 100. 0 100. 0 100. 0 100. 0 100. 0 100. 0

White-collar workers _ 17. 7 61. 3 5. 0 22. 9 7. 6 42. 0 29. 2 75. 1 74. 3 91. 8

Professional and technical____ 6. 8 14. 2 . 2 1. 0 1. 5 2. 3 4. 5 7. 9 52. 2 52. 8

Managers, officials, and

proprietors. _ _ _ 2. 3 6. 0 3. 1 6. 0 1. 3 5. 9 1. 4 6. 1 2. 4 5. 9

Clerical workers. _ 7. 4 33. 0 . 9 8. 2 4. 1 23. 4 21. 5 52. 3 17. 0 28. 0

Sales workers. . 1. 2 8. 1 . 8 7. 7 . 7 10. 3 1. 8 8. 7 2. 8 5. 2

Blue-collar w o rk ers__ 14. 6 17. 1 13. 8 33. 5 19. 4 29. 0 15. 7 10. 7 5. 5 2. 2

Craftsmen and foremen . 5 1. 0 . 2 1. 7 . 6 1. 2 1. 2 1. 0 . 3

Operatives __ 13. 4 15. 7 13. 0 30. 9 18. 2 27. 4 13. 1 9. 4 5. 5 1. 8

Nonfarm laborers . 7 . 4 . 6 . 8 . 6 . 4 1. 4 . 3

Service workers 64. 2 18. 4 75. 1 35. 7 70. 9 26. 2 54. 2 12. 3 20. 2 5. 0

Private household workers___ 38. 8 4. 8 53. 6 13. 6 36. 9 5. 0 21. 3 2. 2 10. 3 . 7

Other service workers__ 25. 4 13. 5 21. 6 22. 1 34. 1 21. 3 32. 9 10. 1 9. 9 4. 4

Farm workers. _ 3. 5 3. 2 6. 1 7. 9 2. 0 2. 8 . 8 2. 0 1. 0

Farmers and farm managers . 2 . 6 . 5 1. 9 . 5 . 2 . 2

Farm laborers and foremen___ 3. 3 2. 6 5. 6 6. 1 2. 0 2. 3 . 8 1. 7 . 8

1965

FEMALE

All occupation groups:

Number (thousands) _ 2, 969 20, 581 964 3, 479 709 3, 551 844 9, 060 452 4, 491

P e rcen t... . . . . 100. 0 100. 0 100. 0 100. 0 100. 0 100. 0 100. 0 100. 0 100. 0 100. 0

White-collar workers _ 26. 0 63. 0 3. 0 21. 5 12. 0 42. 2 34. 7 73. 1 80. 5 91. 4

Professional and technical. 9. 7 15. 3 . 8 1. 1 2. 5 3. 2 3. 1 7. 5 52. 4 51. 3

Managers, officials, and

proprietors. 2. 0 5. 2 1. 1 4. 3 2. 3 4. 7 1. 3 5. 5 4. 4 5. 5

Clerical workers__ 12. 6 34. 6 . 5 8. 7 5. 6 22. 3 27. 7 51. 5 21. 2 30. 2

Sales workers___ ._ 1. 6 8. 1 . 5 7. 4 1. 6 11. 9 2. 6 8. 6 2. 4 4. 3

Blue-collar workers____ 16. 4 17. 5 17. 7 39. 9 19. 3 29. 7 18. 7 11. 7 4. 6 2. 4

Craftsmen and forem en._ _ . 6 1. 3 . 3 1. 8 . 4 2. 1 1. 2 1. 0 . 4 . 6

Operatives. 14. 9 15. 9 15. 9 37. 1 18. 1 27. 0 17. 3 10. 4 3. 3 1. 7

Nonfarm laborers ____ . 9 . 4 1. 6 1. 0 . 8 . 6 . 2 . 2 . 9 . 1

Service workers. _ 55. 9 17. 3 75. 0 32. 6 67. 8 26. 1 46. 2 13. 9 14. 6 5. 4

Private household. . . . 31. 2 3. 4 50. 1 10. 7 35. 4 4. 1 21. 0 1. 7 3. 3 . 7

Other service workers. _ 24. 7 13. 9 24. 9 21. 9 32. 4 22. 0 25. 2 12. 2 11. 3 4. 7

Farm workers_____ . . . . 1. 7 2. 1 4. 3 6. 0 . 8 2. 1 . 4 1. 3 . 2 . 8

Farmers and farm managers . 2 . 5 . 7 1. 5 . 7 . 2 . 4

Farm laborers and foremen___ 1. 5 1. 6 3. 5 4. 5 . 8 1. 4 . 4 1. 1 . 2 . 4

Note.—Because of rounding, sums of the individual items may not equal totals.

Source: U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics. Data for 1959 are from “Educational Attainment of Workers, March 1964,” Special Labor

Force Rpt. No. 53, table 7, and unpublished data from the 1959 supplement to the Current Population Survey. Data for 1965 are unpublished from theMarch

1965 supplement to the Current Population Survey.

205

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
In 1965, unemployment rates for white and non white persons tended to decline with increasing 

age (up to 45 years) and were generally lower for high school graduates than for workers with less education.

T a b l e IVB-11.— Unemployment Rates of Persons 18 years Old and Over, by Years of School Completed, and by Age, Sex,

and Color, March 1962 and March 1965

Yeai, sex, and years of school completed

Total, 18 years and over 18 to 24 years 25 to 34 years 35 to 44 years 45 years and 

over

Non­ white White Non­ white White Non­ white White Non­ white White Non­ white White

1962

Total, m ale___________ - ___ 12.7 5.2 18.3 11.2 11.2 4.9 12.5 3.9 11.6 4.5

Elementary: 8 years or less 12.8 7.5 19.2 18.6 7.5 9.8 13.4 6.9 13.0 6.4

High school:

1 to 3 years . . ____ 16.6 6.7 23.4 15.3 19.2 6.5 14. 1 5.7 8.6 4.4

4 years or more__________ 9. 5 3.5 12.7 8.5 8.0 3.3 9.9 2. 1 8.0 2.6

Total, female. . _ ____________ 11.2 5.2 24.0 9.2 12.0 5.6 8.9 4.7 6.0 3.6

Elementary: 8 years or less 9. 6 6.2 (2) 17.4 13.6 8.4 10.0 6.7 5. 1 5.0

High school:

1 to 3 y e a r s .____ . _ _ 13.6 8.3 26.7 17.3 15.4 9.2 10.2 7.5 5. 1 5. 1

4 years or more_________ 11. 1 4.0 19.2 7.0 9.2 4.3 6.8 3.5 9.3 2.2

1965

Total, male ______ 8. 1 4.0 13.2 8.6 7.9 3.1 6.5 3. 1 6.7 3.5

Elem entary: 8 years or less 1 _ _ 7.8 5.5 5.9 11.8 8.3 7.0 8.4 5.3 7.9 4.8

High school:

1 to 3 years. ___ 12. 1 6.0 25.3 12.2 10.9 5.4 5.3 5.1 5.9 4.4

4 years or more _ 5.4 2.7 6. 1 7.0 6.2 1.9 5.8 1.8 2.5 2.0

Total, female_____ . ___________ 9.0 4.8 18.4 8.9 10.4 5.5 6.7 4.0 5.1 3.0

Elementary: 8 years or less L . 6.6 5.6 (2) 13.3 15.8 7. 1 6. 1 8.4 4.9 4.3

High school:

1 to 3 y e a r s------------ ._ 15. 3 7. 1 31. 0 19. 9 12. 7 6. 6 9. 5 4. 2 10. 3 4. 4

4 years or m ore.. ---------- 7.0 3.9 13. 1 6.8 7.5 5. 1 5.2 3.0 1.9 1.9

1 Includes persons reporting no school years completed.

2 Rate not shown where base is less than 100,000.

Source: U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics. Data for 1962 are from “Educational Attainment of Workers, March 1962”, Special Labor

Force Rpt. No. 30, table K. Data for 1965 are unpublished from the March 1965 supplement to the Current Population Survey.

206

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Among nonwhite workers, the drop in unemployment between 1962 and 1965 was relatively greater 

at the ends of the educational scale—among those with only grade school training (usually older workers 

with experience) and those who attended college—than among those who attended high school. Among 

whites, the decline was greatest among those with least schooling.

T a b l e IVB-12. Percent Distribution of Unemployed Persons 18 Years Old and Over, by Years of School Completed and by

Age and Color, March 1962 and March 1965

Years of school

Total, 18 years and 

over

18 to 24 

years

25 to 34 

years

35 to 44 

years

45 to 54 

years

55 years and over

Non­ white White Non­ white White Non­ white White Non­ white White Non­ white White Non­ white White

1962

Total: Number (thousands)___ 911 3, 138 249 843 205 622 206 608 143 574 108 491

Percent._ _ __ 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0

Elem entary:

Less than 5 years _ _ 16.0 5.0 2.0 .8 4.9 2.7 19.4 3.0 25.2 7.5 51.9 14.9

5 to 7 years______________ 13.4 12. 5 11. 2 6.5 9.2 10.0 14.6 11. 5 16. 1 20. 2 20.4 17.5

8 years________ 14.4 16r 4 14. 0 7.5 9.7 12.8 16.5 17.8 16. 1 24.4 17.6 25.3

High school:

1 to 3 years______________ 29.4 26. 1 38.0 31.3 45.6 25.7 24.8 30. 1 16.8 22.0 4.6 17.7

4 years____ - - 21. 5 29.5 28. 4 43. 1 24.3 33.7 19.9 26.2 23. 1 18. 1 .9 17.9

College: 1 year or more_______ 5.3 10.5 6.4 10.8 6.3 15. 1 4.9 11.5 2.8 7.8 4.6 6.7

1965

Total: Number (thousands)___ 666 2, 700 206 834 167 475 124 508 100 442 69 441

Percent.. 100. 0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 (2) 100.0

Elem entary:

Less than 5 years 1________ 10. 8 4. 6 1. 4 3. 6 2. 7 8. 9 3. 9 26. 3 6. 3 11. 8

5 to 7 years______________ 14. 0 9.5 1. 9 2.4 13.3 6.8 19.4 15. 1 25.3 14.7 14. 5

8 years__ _____ 8. 1 13. 9 2. 9 5. 4 8. 4 11. 8 10. 5 12. 9 12. 1 19. 7 27. 4

High school:

1 to 3 years__ 39.6 27.5 63.3 32.4 36. 1 24.7 29. 0 27. 1 24.2 27.7 21. 5

4 years________ __ 23.7 32. 1 27.5 43. 2 33. 1 36. 3 26. 6 28. 0 12. 1 26. 1 17. 0

College: 1 year or more_______ 3.8 12. 4 4.3 15. 2 5.4 17.7 5.6 12. 9 5.4 — 7.7

1 Includes persons reporting no school years completed.

2 Percent not shown where base is less than 100,000.

Note.—Because of rounding, sums of individual items may not equal totals.

Source: U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics. Data for 1962 are from “Educational Attainment of Workers, March 1962,” Special Labor

Force Report No. 30, table L. Data for 1965 are unpublished from the March 1965 supplement to the Current Population Survey.

207

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
The median income of nonwhite men lagged behind that of white men at every educational level 

in both 1958 and 1963, but incomes in both groups increased substantially during that period. In both 

years, nonwhite men’s income more closely approximated the income of the least educated white men 

than that of men with some college education.

T a b l e IV B-13.— Median Yearly Income of Males 14- Years Old and Over With Income, by Color and Years of School Completed, 1958 and 1963

Years of school completed

Total Nonwhite White Percent change 1958 to 1963 Nonwhite as a percent of white

1958 1963 1958 1963 1958 1963 Total Non white White 1958 1963

Elem entary:

Less than 8 

years______ _ $1, 905 $2, 194 $1, 447 $1, 731 $2, 076 $2, 408 15 20 16 70 72

8 years _____ 3, 214 3, 610 2, 328 2, 740 3, 276 3, 749 12 18 14 71 73

High school:

1 to 3 years 3, 594 3, 902 2, 224 2, 459 3, 774 4, 150 9 11 10 59 59

4 years _ ___ 4, 548 5, 482 2, 994 3, 821 4, 654 5, 600 21 28 20 64 68

College: 1 year or 

more____ 5, 702 6, 674 3, 679 4, 070 5, 810 6, 829 17 11 18 63 60

Note.—All income data are expressed in current dollars.

Source: Data are from C u rren t P o p u la tio n R e p o rts, C o n su m er In co m e, “Income of Families and Persons in the United States: 1958,” series P-60, No. 33,

table 26, and C u rren t P o p u la tio n R e p o rts, C o n su m er In co m e, “Income of Families and Persons in the United States: 1963,” series P-60, No. 43, table 21 (U.S.

Bureau of the Census).

At every income level a substantially larger proportion of housing occupied by nonwhite than white 

households was substandard (according to Census definition). At the lowest income level (under $3,000), 

only 30 percent of white housing was substandard, compared to 61 percent of nonwhite housing.

T a b l e IVC-1.— Condition of Housing by Income Class of Household in 1959 and by Color, United States, 1960

Income class

Total number (in thousands) Standard

Perce 

1 housing

nt in

Substandard housing

Nonwhite White Nonwhite White Nonwhite White

T otal__________________ . . ___ 5, 144 47, 880 56 87 44 13

Less than $3,000_____. . _______ 2, 755 12, 047 39 70 61 30 $3,000 to $4,999______________________________ 1, 186 9, 536 67 85 33 15 $5,000 to $6,999______________________________ 645 10,512 81 93 20 7

$7,000 and over. _ _ _ ___ _________ _ 558 15, 786 89 97 12 3

1 Standard housing, as defined by the Census, had slight or no defects, hot Source: 1960 C en su s o f H o u sin g , vol. II, M etro p o lita n H o u sin g , pt. I, U n ited

and cold running water and exclusive use of a flush toilet and bathtub (or S ta tes a n d D iv isio n s, tables A-4, A-13 (U.S. Bureau of the Census), shower) within the unit.

N ote.—Because of rounding, sums of individual items may not equal

totals.

208

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Among white and nonwhite households in all regions, the extent of substandard housing and overcrowding was greatest outside of SMSA’s, and tended to be least in central cities of SMSA’s.

T a b l e IV C -2.— Selected Characteristics of Housing Units by Color of Household Head, by Region, Inside and Outside S M S A ’s

Urban and Rural, 1960

Percent of units 1

Location Substandard 2 W ith 1.01 or more 

persons per room

Non white White Nonwhite White

United States. _ . __ ___________ ______ __ _ _ _ ___ 56. 0 23. 1 28. 3 9. 7

Inside SMSA . . . ___________________________________ 43. 2 15. 6 24 7 8. 8

In central cities__ . . _____ ______ 40. 8 16. 9 23. 5 8. 4

Not in central cities.. __ _________ ____ . _. __ 53. 7 14. 1 29. 8 9. 0

Outside SMSA. __ ________________ 82. 8 35. 5 36. 0 11. 5

Urban _ _ _ _. _______ _ _ _ ________ _____ 46. 4 15. 6 24 7 8. 5

Rural 88. 6 40. 1 40. 8 12. 9

Nonfarm ________ ______________ _______ 86. 8 38. 8 38. 4 13. 5

Farm__ _ _ __________ 93. 9 45. 0 47. 6 11. 4

REGIONS

N ortheast__ _____ ____ _ . _____ . . . __ ____ 42. 1 18. 0 20. 3 7. 3

Inside S M S A __ _ ____ _ _ 41. 4 15. 3 20. 2 7. 2

In central cities _ _ ______ __ _ _ _ _ 41. 3 17. 5 20. 3 8. 2

Not in central cities . ______ _ 42. 2 13. 0 19. 9 6. 3

Outside SMSA . ____________________________ 55. 1 26. 7 22. 3 7. 2

Urban _ _ _ __________ ______________ . 41. 4 14. 9 20. 2 7. 0

Rural _ _ _____ _ _ _ _ _ _______ _ 61. 3 28. 9 24 6 8. 1

Nonfarm . . . _ _ _ _ _ _ 60. 4 28. 4 24 3 8. 4

Farm _ _ _ . . _ _ _ _ . 76. 0 34. 8 29. 5 5. 9

North Central ________________ ________ _ _ . _______ 43. 0 24. 5 23. 7 9. 2

Inside SMSA__________________________________________________ 40. 4 16. 4 23. 3 9. 1

In central cities______ . . . __ ______ _____ 39. 1 18. 3 23. 0 8. 2

Not in central cities_. __ . . _____________ ________ 51. 1 14 2 25. 7 10. 2

Outside SM SA. _ ______ _ _ . 69. 1 34. 9 28. 1 9. 2

U rb a n___ _ ______ ________ ____ 41. 5 16. 6 23. 2 8. 6

R ural__. _ _ . ________ . __ 76. 3 39. 8 34 9 10. 2

Nonfarm _____ . ___ ____________ 74. 8 39. 4 34. 9 11. 4

F arm________ _______ . _ _ _______ 84. 6 40. 9 35. 0 8. 6

South_______ ._ _ _____ _ _ _ __________ 69. 4 30. 3 33. 1 12. 5

Inside SMSA __ _ _ __ 51. 8 17. 3 29. 5 10. 4

In central cities__ ________ _ _______ 46. 5 17. 2 27. 3 10. 1

Not in central cities____ __ _________ _________ _ 70. 4 17. 5 37. 1 11. 1

Outside SMSA_____________ _________________________________ 85. 9 42. 5 36. 5 14 5

Urban __ _ _ ______ 56. 6 17. 6 28. 6 8. 3

Rural _ . ______ _ __________ 91. 9 48. 9 41. 0 16. 5

Nonfarm _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ____ __________ 90. 5 46. 9 38. 3 16. 9

F arm__. . . . . . _____ _ _ _ 95. 8 56. 3 48. 2 14 9

See footnotes at end of table.

209

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
T a b l e IV C -2.—Selected Characteristics of Housing Units by Color of Household Head, by Region, Inside and Outside S M S A ’s

Urban and Rural, 1960—Continued

Percent of units 1

Location Substandard 2 W ith 1.01 or more 

persons per room

Non white White Non white White

regions—continued

W est____ ______________________ - - _________________________ 33. 4 17. 1 25. 2 10. 3

Inside SMS A__________________________________________________ 26. 5 19. 0 21. 5 8. 9

In central cities__________ _ _ ----------------- 26. 0 13. 2 19. 7 7. 1

Not in central cities________ _____ __________________ _ _ 28. 0 12. 4 26. 3 10. 5

Outside SMSA _ _____ - - ________— 63. 5 28. 2 41. 5 14. 0

U rb a n_______ _____________ _ _ _ _________________ ____ 26. 7 12. 7 21. 2 8. 9

R ural__________ - _ ___________________________________ 67. 1 32. 4 45. 5 15. 9

Nonfarm__ _ ________ _ _ 67. 2 33. 1 45. 5 16. 4

F arm___________ _______ _____ __ ------ 66. 3 28. 6 45. 4 14. 3

1 Occupied units in all instances except in the case of data on condition.

The data for whites include vacant units.

2 Standard housing as defined by the Census had slight or no defects, hot

and cold running water and exclusive use of a flus toilet and bathtub (or

shower) within the unit.

Source: 1960 C en su s o f H o u sin g , HC(1) No. 1, tables 2, 22, and 23 (U.S.

Bureau of the Census).

2 1 0

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Of the 16,836,000 housing units added to the “standard housing” supply between 1950 and 1960, 

almost 9 in 10 went to white occupants. In that period the number of white-occupied substandard 

units dropped by 50 percent compared to less than a 20-percent decline in the nonwhite-occupied 

substandard units.

T a b l e IVC-3.— Shifts in Housing Characteristics, by Color of Occupants, 1950-60

Occupied housing units and characteristic Nonwhite White Difference, 1950-60

1950 1960 1950 1960 Nonwhite White

Number (thousands of units)___ _ _ 3, 868 5, 144 39, 101 47, 880

(number

1,276

change)

8, 779

S tandard1____________________ ______ 1, 068 

2, 800

2, 881 

2, 263

26, 646 

12, 455

41, 669 

6, 211

1,813

-5 3 7

15, 023 

Substandard-_ _ _ - _____ - 6 , 244

Percent______ - _ _ _ _ _____ 100 100 100 100

(percent

33

change)

22

S tandard1 __________ ________ _ _ _____ 28 56 68 85 170 56 Substandard _ _ _ _____ 72 44 32 15 - 1 9 - 5 0

Owner-occupied (percent) _ _____ 35 38 57 64

(percenta

chai

3

ge points 

age)

7

N ortheast____ 22 27 50 58 5 8

North Central______________ _ . _______ 34 36 62 69 2 7

South. _ ___ __________ _ _____- 37 42 58 66 5 8

West _______ _________ 40 45 58 63 5 5

Tenant-occu'pied (percent) _ _ __ _______ 65 62 43 36 — 3 - 7

N ortheast____ _ _ _ ____ 78 73 50 42 — 5 - 8

North Central. 66 64 38 31 — 2 — 7

South. . __ __ 63 58 42 34 — 5 — 8

West____ _________ ______ _- _ _____ 60 55 52 37 — 5 - 5

(numbei change)

Seriously overcrowded,2 total number of nonfarm housing units (in thousands)__ _ ____ 548 633 1, 450 1, 071 85 -3 7 9

Owner-occupied 106 156 480 439 50 — 41 Tenant-occupied______ _______ ________ 442 477 970 632 35 -3 3 8

Overcrowded as a percent of all occupied__

Median rent of tenant-occupied18 13 4 2$27 $58 $44 $75

(percent

115

change)

70

Median value of owner-occupied _ ____ _ $3, 000 $6, 700 $7, 700 $12, 230 123 59

1 Standard housing, as defined by the Census, had slight or no defects, hot and cold running water, and exclusive use of a flush toilet and bathtub (or

shower) within the unit.

2 With 1.51 persons per room.

Source: O u r N o n w h ite P o p u la tio n a n d Its H o u sin g ; T he C hange B e tw e e n 1950 a n d 1960, May 1963, pp. 12,13,16, and 19 (Housing and Home Finance Agency).

211

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
The sharpest decline in the proportion of substandard units among nonwhite households from 1950

to 1960 occurred in urban areas. There was little change in rural farm areas.

T a b l e IVC-4.—Housing Conditions Among Households With Nonwhite Heads, by Urban-Rural Location, United States,

1950 and 1960

Location

1950 1 1960

Number (in thou­ sands)

Percent Number (in thou­ sands)

Percent

Total Standard2 Sub­ standard Total S tandard2 Sub­ standard

United States ______. . _ _ 3, 868 100 28 72 5, 144 100 56 44

Urban___ _ _ ___ 2, 544 100 40 61 3, 978 100 68 32

Rural nonfarm _ _ _ 644 100 6 93 866 100 17 83

Rural farm . 679 100 3 97 299 100 8 92

1 1950 figures adjusted to include Alaska and Hawaii.

2 Standard housing as defined by the Census had slight or no defects, hot

and cold running water, and exclusive use of a flush toilet and bathtub

(or shower) within the unit.

N ote.—Because of rounding, sums of individual items may not equal

totals.

Source: 1960 U nited States C ensus of H ousing, Vol. 1, States an d S m all

A rea s, U nited States S u m m ary, HC(1)-1, table 27; 1950 C ensus of H ousing,

Vol. 1, General Characteristics, U .S . S u m m ary, Pt. 1 (U.S. Bureau of the

Census); Our N on w h ite P op u la tio n an d Its H ousing, The Changes B etw een

1950 an d 1960, table 24 (Housing and Home Finance Agency).

A much larger proportion of the housing for non whites than for whites in 1960 was seriously overcrowded (1.51 persons or more per room) regardless of location or tenure. Overcrowding was high in

renter-occupied housing and highest of all among nonwhite household tenants in rural areas and outside

of SMSA’s.

T a b l e IV C-5.—Percent of Housing Seriously Overcrowded,1 Inside and Outside SMSA’s, Urban and Rural, by Tenure and

Color of Occupants, 1960

Location Renter-occupied Owner-occupied

Nonwhite White Non white White

United States total . . . _______ 17 4 9 2

Inside SMSA’s . . _ __________ 13 3 6 i

Outside SMSA’s_______________________________________ 27 6 14 2

Urban _____ _ ________ _ _ _____ . . _ _ _ 14 3 6 1

R ural__ ________ . . . __________ 31 7 17 3

11.51 persons per room or more.

Source: Our N on w h ite P opu la tion an d Its H ousing; The Changes B etw een 1950 an d 1960, May 1963, table 35 (Housing and Home Finance Agency).

212

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Most of the owner-occupied nonwhite housing in 1960 was valued at less than $7,500 whereas most

of the housing owned by whites was valued at $10,000 or more. Likewise, in renter-occupied housing,

nonwhite families tended to live in low-rent houses or apartments. Home values and rents were highest

in SMSA’s and lowest in rural areas for whites and nonwhites.

T a b l e IVC-6.— Percent Distribution of Owner- and Renter-Occupied Housing Units by Value or Gross Monthly Rent, Inside

and Outside S M S A ’s, Urban and Rural, by Color of Occupants, 1960

Total Inside SMSA’s Outside SMSA’s Urban Rural

Non­ white White Non­ white White Non­ white White Non­ white White Non­ white White

Renter occupied

GROSS RENT

T o ta L ____________ 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100

Less than $30_ 12 4 6 2 28 9 9 2 25 12

$30-$49____________ 21 15 22 11 20 21 23 13 10 21

$50-$59____________ 12 12 15 11 5 13 14 12 3 11

$60-$69____________ 12 14 15 14 3 13 14 14 2 11

$70-$79____________ 10 13 13 13 2 11 12 13 1 9

$80-$99____________ 12 19 16 21 2 14 15 21 2 12

$100-$119 _________ 5 10 7 11 1 5 6 10 (2) 5

$120 or more _ _ _ 3 9 4 11 (2) 3 4 10 (2) 4

N o c a s h re n t.. _ _ _ 14 6 4 4 38 10 3 4 56 15

Median________ $58 $75 $64 $79 $33 $65 $61 $76 $27 $66

Owner occupied

VALUE 1

Total_________________ 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100

Less than $ 5 ,00 0 -__ 36 11 19 5 68 22 27 6 72 25

$5,000-$7,400_______ 20 12 21 8 17 18 21 10 15 18

$7,500-$9,900_______ 15 13 19 12 7 16 17 13 5 14

$10,000-$12,400_____ 11 16 15 16 4 15 13 17 3 13

$12,500-$14,900 ___ 7 14 10 16 2 10 9 16 1 9

$15,000-$17,400_____ 5 11 6 13 1 7 6 13 1 7

$17,500-$19,900_____ 2 8 3 9 1 4 3 9 1 4

$20,000-$24,900 ___ 2 8 3 9 1 4 3 9 1 5

$25,000 or more __ 2 8 3 10 (2) 3 2 9 (2) 5

Median. _ _ _____ $6,700 $12, 230 $8, 800 $13, 810 $5, 000 $9, 002 $7, 800 $13, 088 $5, 000 $8, 695

1 Single housing unit properties without business.

2 Less than 0.5 percent.

Note.—Because of rounding, sum of individual items may not equal totals.

Source: Out N onw hite P opu la tion and Its H ousing; The Changes B etw een

1960 an d 1960, May 1963, tables 38 and 40 (Housing and Home Finance

Agency).

213

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
The greatest concentration of substandard housing in 1960 was in the South—over three-fifths of

the units occupied by nonwhite households and one-fifth of those occupied by whites. The incidence

of substandard housing rises with declining income in each region in each location (inside or outside

SMSA’s).

T a b l e IV C -7.— Substandard Housing Units 1 by Income Class of Household in 1959, by Color, Region, and Residence Inside

and Outside SMSA’s, I960

Location

Total Under $3,000 $3,000 to 4,999 $5,000 to 6,999 $7,000 and over

Non­ white White Non­ white White Non­ white White Non­ white White Non­ white White

Percent substandard

United States________ . _ _ _ _ 44 13 61 30 33 15 20 7 11 3

Inside SMSA’s__________ 28 7 42 19 25 10 15 5 9 2

Outside SMSA’s _________ 77 23 85 41 61 22 47 12 34 6

N ortheast.. ________ ____ 22 8 32 20 21 11 15 5 9 2

Inside SMSA’s__________ 22 7 31 17 21 9 14 5 9 2

Outside SMSA’s . _ _____ 38 14 50 28 35 16 26 8 17 4

North Central . . __ _ _ 27 14 40 31 25 17 16 9 9 3

Inside SMSA’s__________ 24 8 35 22 23 13 15 6 8 2

Outside SMSA’s_________ 56 22 70 38 44 22 32 13 22 7

South____ __ 62 20 73 41 45 19 31 9 21 3

Inside SMSA’s__________ 40 9 52 22 32 10 21 5 13 2

Outside SMSA’s________ 82 31 87 51 67 27 55 14 44 7

West _____ ________ 21 7 38 18 20 9 11 4 7 1

Inside SMSA’s__________ 14 5 26 14 14 7 8 3 4 1

Outside SMSA’s _________ 53 12 72 25 45 13 32 6 23 3

Number (in thousands)

United States_________ 2, 263 6, 210 1, 686 3, 615 388 1, 431 126 734 64 430 Inside SMSA’s__________ 982 2, 230 629 1, 143 227 549 83 332 43 206

Outside SMSA’s______ 1, 281 3, 981 1, 057 2, 472 160 883 43 402 21 224

N ortheast___________________ 196 1, 054 107 515 54 276 23 160 13 103

Inside SMSA’s__________ 180 686 97 330 50 176 21 108 12 73

Outside SMSA’s _________ 16 368 9 185 4 100 2 52 1 30 North C e n tra l_____ ______ 251 2, 033 150 1, 106 60 478 28 279 14 169

Inside SMSA’s__________ 203 693 116 324 51 170 24 122 12 76

Outside SMSA’s_____ __ 48 1, 340 34 783 9 308 3 156 2 93

South__________ ____ 1, 697 2, 556 1, 357 1, 668 247 549 64 225 29 115

Inside SMSA’s__________ 535 549 379 314 111 136 30 63 14 35

Outside SMSA’s _________ 1, 162 2, 007 978 1, 354 136 413 33 161 15 79

W est_______________________ 120 568 72 326 27 128 12 70 8 43

Inside SMSA’s__________ 64 302 36 176 15 66 7 38 5 22

Outside SMSA’s . _ __ 56 266 36 150 12 62 5 32 3 21

1 Substandard housing includes units lacking some or all plumbing facilities, and all delapidated units.

Note: Because of rounding, sum of individual items may not equal totals.

Source: 1960, C ensus of H ousing: vol. II, M etropolitan H ousing, pt. 1, U nited States an d D ivisions, tables A-4, B-4, C-4, A-13, B-13, C-13 (U.S. Bureau of

the Census).

214

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
A smaller proportion of nonwhite than white one-family homeowner properties were mortgaged in

1960. FHA or VA financing was less prevalent for nonwhite than white owners who had mortgages.

T a b l e IVC-8.—Mortgage and Government Insurance Status of 1-Unit Homeowner Properties, by Color of Household Head,

1960

Mortgage and Government insurance status

Total properties..............

Nonmortgaged properties 

Mortgaged properties___

FH A_____ ________

VA________________

C onventional...........

Mortgaged properties___

FH A______________

VA________________

Conventional______

Total properties................

Nonmortgaged properties 

Mortgaged properties___

FH A______________

VA........ ...................

Conventional______

Total 1-dwelling unit properties

Nonwhite White

Percent distribution

100 100 100

42 51 42

58 49 58

11 5 11

14 9 14

34 35 34

100 100 100

19 10 19

23 19 24

58 71 58

Number (in thousands)

24, 954 1, 321 23, 633

10, 501 673 9, 828

14, 454 648 13, 805

2, 667 68 2, 600

3, 381 124 3, 257

8, 406 457 7, 949

N ote.—Because of rounding, sums of Individual Items may not equal total.

Source: 1960 C ensus of H ousing, R esidential F inance, H om eow ner P roperties, vol. V, pt. 1, tables 1, 2; R esiden tial F inance, H om eow ner P roperties, N onw hite

fa m ilies, vol. V, pt. 1, supplement, tables 1, 2 (U.S. Bureau of the Census).

215

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Most of the homes purchased or acquired by nonwhite occupants had been previously occupied

(74 percent), according to the 1960 Census of Housing. Housing costs were over one-fourth of family

income among nonwhite homeowners with conventionally financed mortgages, but only one-fifth among

those with FHA or VA financing.

T a b l e IV C-9.—Percent Distribution of Homes by Age of Owner and Financial Obligation Incurred, Total and

Nonwhite, 1960 1

Owner characteristics

All properties FHA first 

mortgage

Properties with

VA first mortgage Conventional first mortgage

Non­ white Total Non­ white Total Non­ white Total Non­ white Total

Age of household head:

Under 35 years_____________ 19 29 41 31 24 36 14 25

35 to 44 years _ . _ . __ 35 34 34 35 52 46 30 30

45 to 64 years ._ _ _______ 39 32 25 31 22 16 46 39

65 years and over__ ___________ _ 8 5 3 2 2 11 7

Median years____________ _______ 44 41 38 40 40 38 48 44

Previous tenure:

New____ _ __ _ _ __ 26 43 37 47 33 48 23 40

Previously occupied. _____________ 74 57 63 53 67 52 77 60

M anner of acquisition:

By purchase or construction_______ 99 99 100 100 100 100 98 99

Made new m ortgage____ _____ 77 82 83 81 86 76 74 85

Assumed mortgage from former owner. 11 13 12 16 6 20 12 9

Assumed mortgage from former owner,

made new second mortgage 2 2 3 3 6 3 1 1

Borrowed, other than mortgage__ __ 4 2 3 (2) 22 (2) 5 2

All cash ___ _ ____ 4 1 (2) 5 2

By gift, inheritance, or other nonpurchase transaction 1 1 (2) 2 1

Total housing costs as a percent of income:

Acquired before 1959 (number in

thousands)_______________________ 545 12, 333 50 2, 149 111 3, 042 383 7, 141

Less than 10 percent ________ 4 6 7 6 4 5 6

10-14 percent. _. _____________ 14 21 22 25 22 24 10 19

15-19 percent__________________ 20 27 29 29 25 31 17 25

20-29 percent _ _ ______ _ 29 31 27 29 38 32 27 31

30-39 percent _ _______________ 14 8 5 6 6 6 17 9

40 percent or more__________ . 20 7 10 4 8 3 25 10

Median percent____ _________ . 24 19 19 18 21 19 27 20

Purchase price-annual income ratio :

Acquired by purchase 1957 to 1960

(part) (number in thousands)______ 210 5, 274 35 1, 157 34 995 141 3, 122

Less than 1.0 _____________ 5 7 2 3 7 10

1.0 to 1.4______________________ 22 17 26 17 14 19 23 17

1.5 to 1.9______________________ 19 27 22 35 22 31 18 23

2.0 to 2.4______________________ 20 24 29 26 23 25 16 22

2.5 to 2.9______________________ 15 12 14 13 16 14 15 12

3.0 to 3.9______________________ 8 8 3 5 10 7 9 9

4.0 or more . . . _________ 12 6 5 3 15 3 12 7

Median ratio___________________ 2. 1 2. 0 2. 0 2. 0 2. 1 2-0

See footnotes at end of table.

216

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Table IV C -9.— Percent Distribution of Homes by Age of Owner and Financial Obligation Incurred, Total and

Nonwhite, 1960 1— Continued

Owner characteristics

All properties FHA first mortgage

Properties with

VA first mortgage Conventional first mortgage

Non­ white Total Non­ white Total Non­ white Total Non­ white Total

Interest and principal payments on first

mortgage as percent of income:

Regular payments of interest and/or

principal (number in thousands)___ 646 14, 402 68 2, 667 124 3, 381 455 8, 354 Less than 5 percent___ _ __ 5 6 5 7 1 3 6 7

5 to 9 percent____ ______ 25 36 42 41 37 44 19 32

10 to 14 percent__________ __ 28 35 37 37 40 39 23 33

15 to 19 percent. _ _ _ _ _ 16 12 8 9 12 9 18 14

20 to 29 percent- __ ____ 14 6 6 3 5 3 18 9

30 to 39 percent____ 6 2 3 1 3 1 7 2

40 percent or more__ _____ 7 3 2 3 1 9 3

Median percent____ _________ 14 11 11 10 11 10 15 12

Real estate tax as percent of income:

Acquired before 1959 (number in 1

thousands). _ _ ----------- ----- 545 12, 333 50 2, 149 111 3, 042 383 7, 141

Less than 1.0 percent. _ . . . 24 13 7 12 11 8 30 16

1.1 to 1.9 percent._ __ _ __ 20 22 34 21 17 22 18 22

2.0 to 2.9 percent. ________ 21 21 21 25 31 22 19 20

3.0 to 3.9 percent. _ _________ 10 16 23 17 10 20 9 14

4.0 to 4.9 percent __________ 8 10 4 9 18 12 5 10

5.0 to 9.9 percent____'_________ 13 14 11 13 11 14 13 14

10 percent or more _ _ _ 5 4 3 2 2 6 5

Median percent ______ ______ _____ 2. 3 2. 7 2. 4 2. 7 2. 7 2. 9 2. 1 2. 6

1 Financial and income statistics relate to annual data.

2 Less than 0.5 percent.

N ote.—Because of rounding, sums of individual items may not equal totals.

Source: 1960 Census of H ousing, R esiden tial F inance, H om eow ner P roperties, vol. V, pt. 1, table 2; R esiden tial F inance, H om eow ner P roperties, N on w h ite

F am ilies, vol. V, pt. 1, supplement, table 2 (U.S. Bureau of Census).

217

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
T h e m edian price paid for m ortgaged h ouses b ou gh t b y n on w h ite hom eow ners from 1957 to 1960

w as m ore than th e estim ated value in 1960. T w o-fifths of n on w h ite-ow ned m ortgaged hom es had been

b u ilt in 1929, or earlier, b u t rela tively few w ere d ilapidated.

T a b l e IVC-10.— P e r c e n t D is tr ib u tio n o f M o rtg a g e d H o m es f o r S elected P r o p e r ty C h a r a c te ris tic s , T o ta l a n d N o n w h ite , 1 9 6 0

Property characteristics

All mortgaged properties

Properties with—

FHA first mortgage YA first mortgage Conventional first mortgage

Non­ white Total Non­ white Total Non­ white Total Non­ white Total

Year built:

1958-59__________________________ 7 1 0 1 2 14 4 6 8 1 0 1955-57__________________________ 9 19 16 18 14 26 6 17 1950-54__________________________ 17 25 39 32 29 35 1 1 19 1940-49__________________________ 14 18 1 0 2 2 1 1 17 16 18 1930-39__________________________ 13 7 9 4 1 1 4 14 9

1929 or e a rlie r.,__ _____ _ _ 40 2 1 14 1 0 32 1 2 46 29 Condition: Not dilapidated_____ - ________ 93 99 97 99 99 98 91 98 Dilapidated _ ------------------------- 7 1 3 1 1 2 9 2

Rooms: Less than 4 rooms____ ____ 4 2 1 2 (!) 6 3

4 rooms _ _ _ ---------------- 17 14 19 15 13 15 17 14

5 rooms___ - - _ 31 36 36 45 35 43 29 31

6 rooms___ — - -------- - 29 28 26 27 32 29 28 29

7 rooms or more__ 20 19 19 1 2 18 13 2 0 23 Median__ ______ _ _ 5.5 5.4 5.3 5.3 5.5 5.3 5. 5 5. 6

Purchase price as percent of value: Purchased 1957 to 1960 (part) (num- ber in thousands) 2 1 0 5, 274 35 1, 157 34 995 141 3, 122 Less than 80 percent___________ 10 1 1 5 8 6 13 14

80 to 89 percent. __ -------- 15 2 0 16 16 17 2 0 14 2 1

90 to 99 percent 26 33 42 45 17 38 24 26

1 0 0 percent or m ore_________ _ 50 37 42 35 58 36 50 38

Median _ _ _ _ _______ _ 10 0 + 96 97 96 1 0 0 + 95 Purchased 1950 to 1956 (number in thousands)______ — — 293 7, 028 31 1, 2 2 1 75 2, 133 186 3,674

Less than 60 p ercen t___ 5 6 6 3 3 7 1 0

60 to 79 percent _______ - _ 25 27 46 26 16 26 25 27

80 to 89 percent. __ _ 23 29 17 33 2 1 33 25 26

90 to 99 percent. - _______ 19 2 0 1 2 2 0 33 23 14 18

1 0 0 percent or more________ 28 18 2 0 19 30 14 28 19

Median ____ _______ __ 88 8 6 87 94 8 6 87 85

Real estate tax per $1,000 value: Acquired before 1959____ _____ _ 545 12, 333 50 2, 149 111 3,042 383 7, 141

Less than $5_ _ _ _ _ __ 21 11 18 8 1 0 7 24 14

$5 to $9 ____________________ 24 19 9 2 1 18 14 27 2 1

$10 to $14____________________ 21 28 38 27 15 31 2 0 26

$15 to $19____________________ 18 2 2 9 2 2 33 26 15 2 0

$20 to $29____________ ______ 12 16 19 19 2 1 19 9 15

$30 or more. . _____ - 5 4 7 3 4 3 5 5

Median _____ 11 14 13 14 16 15 1 0 13

1 Less than 0.5 percent.

Note.—Because of rounding, sums of individual items may not equal totals.

Source: 1960 C en su s o f H o u sin g , R e sid e n tia l F in a n ce, H o m eo w n er P ro p e r tie s , vol. v, pt. 1, table 2; R e sid e n tia l F in a n ce, H o m eo w n er P ro p e rtie s, N o n w h ite

F a m ilie s, vol. v, pt. 1, supplement, table 1 (U.S. Bureau of the Census).

218

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
A lth ough m ortgage loans as a percent of purchase price for n on w h ite hom eow ners tend ed to be

higher and th e in terest on their loans w as higher than for w h ite hom eow ners, ou tstan d in g d eb t as a

percent of th e valu e of their hom es w as about th e sam e, according to th e 1960 C ensus of H ou sin g.

T a b l e IVC-11.— P e r c e n t D is tr ib u tio n o f H o m eo w n e r P r o p e r tie s , b y M o rtg a g e C h a r a c te ris tic s , a n d O w n e r ( T o ta l a n d N o n ­

w h ite ), 1 9 6 0

Mortgage characteristics

All properties FHA first mortgage

Properties with 

VA first mortgage Conventional first mortgage

Non­ white Total Non­ white Total Non­ white Total Non­ white Total

Number of mortgages:

1 mortgage ____ _ ____ 87 93 84 90 95 95 85 92

2 mortgages or more _ _____ 13 7 i 16 1 1 0 5 5 15 8

First mortgage loan: Less than $2,000___ __ _______ 12 3 (2) 17 5

$2,000-$3,999_____________________ 19 1 1 3 3 1 26 17 $4,000-$5,999_____________________ 2 1 15 16 13 16 7 2 2 18 $6,000-$7,999_____________________ 17 16 23 18 34 17 1 1 15 $8,000-$9,999_____________________ 18 17 19 23 33 2 2 14 13 $10,000-$l 1,999___________________ 7 15 15 18 1 0 23 5 1 1 $12,000-$13,999___________________ 4 1 2 16 14 4 19 2 8

$14,000 or more ___ _ ____ 3 12 9 1 2 3 1 1 2 13 Median amount. __ _______ _ __ $5, 900 $8 , 700 $8 , 800 $9, 500 $8 , 0 0 0 $1 0, 2 0 0 $4, 600 $7, 300 Term of first mortgage: Indefinite. ________ _____ ______ _ 3 1 5 2

On demand____ _______ ____ 1 1 2 2

Less than 8 years _ _ 17 8 (2) 25 13

8 to 1 2 years _ _ _ _ _ __ ____ 25 16 3 (2) 1 36 27 13 to 17 years_______________ ____ 18 15 5 3 18 6 2 0 2 2 18 to 2 2 years__ _ _ ________ 17 28 32 34 30 26 1 2 27 23 to 27 years 1 0 2 0 29 43 31 39 2 6

28 to 32 years______________ 6 11 2 2 19 2 1 28 1

33 years or more_______________ _ 1 (2) 1 0 1 (2)

Median____ ____ _____ 14 yrs. 2 0 yrs. 25 yrs. 24 yrs. 23 yrs. 25 yrs. 1 1 yrs. 15 yrs. Selected interest rates of first mortgage:

4.0 percent._ _ _ __ ____________ 7 11 4 38 34 4

4.5 percent _ __ --------- 16 24 50 43 49 56 2 5

5.0 percent _ _________ _ 5 15 5 1 (i) 7 24 5.1 to 5.4 p ercen t____ _ _ _ 5 7 43 28 3 3 1

5.5 percent___ _ __________ 6 8 0 ) 9 13

6 .0 percent_______ ________ __ 39 2 2 55 39 6.1 to 7.9 percent._______ ____ 11 4 15 7

8 .0 percent or more___ ________ 6 1 9 2

All other rates___ _________ 4 8 7 19 8 7 3 5

Median amount _ _______ __ 6. 0 5. 1 4. 6 4. 6 4. 5 4. 5 6 . 1 5. 6

Year first mortgage made or assumed: 1959 and 1960 (part). _ _ _ 23 19 25 2 0 1 0 1 0 26 23 1957 and 1958____________________ 25 27 26 24 17 19 27 30 1955 and 1956____________________ 23 23 2 2 2 0 28 30 2 2 2 2

1950 to 1954______________________ 25 25 24 25 34 33 23 2 1 1949 or earlier___ _ _______ __ 5 6 3 10 1 0 7 3 4

See footnotes at end of table.

217-817 0 - 6 6 - 1 5 219

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
T able IVC-11.—Percent Distribution of Homeowner Properties, by Mortgage Characteristics, and Owner (Total and Nonwhite), 1960—Continued

Mortgage characteristics

All properties FHA first mortgage

Properties with 

VA first mortgage Conventional first mortgage

Non­ white Total Non­ white Total Non­ white Total Non­ white Total

Holder of first mortgage: Commercial bank or trust company__ 11 17 14 25 1 1 15 1 0 15 Mutual savings bank__ __ _ _ 7 12 14 16 2 0 2 2 3 6

Savings and loan associations______ 35 34 16 15 35 24 37 44 Life insurance company____________ 7 17 34 33 7 25 3 9

Federal or State agency____ _ ___ 7 5 15 6 24 1 2 1 2

Individual or individual’s estate____ 26 1 1 ( i ) 37 2 0 Other_____________ — _ 8 4 7 4 4 2 10 4

Total outstanding debt as a percent of

value: Less than 20 percent. . ________ 19 1 2 3 5 6 3 24 17

20-39 percent_________ _______ 17 2 1 3 13 18 14 19 27

40-59 percent__ ______ ------ 22 26 25 27 13 2 1 24 28

60-79 percent___ — ----- -------- 22 26 2 1 29 32 37 19 2 0

80-99 percent __ ___ __— 17 14 41 26 26 23 1 1 7

1 0 0 percent or more______________ 4 1 8 1 6 2 3 1

Median------- -------- ----------- 54 53 78 64 69 67 46 44

All mortgage loans as a percent of purchase

price: 3

Tjp s s than 5 0 percent _ _ 4 8 2 3 2 6 14

50-69 percent._ ______ — 15 23 6 16 7 8 2 0 35

70-79 percent. --- -------- 13 16 1 0 17 14 1 0 14 19

80-89 percent___________ — . . . 23 2 1 26 32 1 1 25 26 14

90-99 percent_________ — — 24 2 1 36 28 39 34 16 1 0

1 0 0 percent or m ore... __________ 21 1 1 2 2 5 27 2 1 19 8

Median_________________________ 88 81 93 85 94 91 85 70

1 Second mortgages are not permitted at the time FHA insures a first trust. FHA cannot exercise control, however, over second mortgages assumed at a

later date.

2 Less than 0.5 percent. • Acquired by purchase with first mortgage made or assumed at time of purchase.

N ote.—Because of rounding, sums of individual items may not equal total.

Source: 1960 C e n su s o f H o u sin g , Vol. V, pt. 1, R e sid e n tia l F in a n ce, H o m ew o rk er P ro p e r tie s , table 2 (U.S. Bureau of the Census).

220

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
D e a th rates in 1964 were higher for n on w h ites than for w h ites in all age groups excep t 75 or over.

A lth ou gh d eath rates for the n on w h ite h ave im proved m ore on th e average than for th e w h ite pop u lation

since 1900, th ey w ere m ore than double th e w h ite rates for th e prim e ages 25 to 44 in 1964.

T a b l e IVD-1.—Death Rates, by Age and Color, 1900 and 1964

[Rates per 1,000 population in each age group]

Age

1900 1 1964 Percent decrease 

1900-1964

Nonwhite to white ratio of rates per 

1 ,0 0 0 population

Non­ white White Non­ white White Non­ white White 1900 1964

All ages_ ______ 25.0 17.0 9.7 9.4 61.2 44.7 1.47 1.03 Under 1_____ 333.9 159.4 40.9 21. 5 87.8 8 6 . 5 2.09 1.90

1-4______________ 43.5 19.4 1 . 6 . 8 96.3 95.9 2. 24 2 . 0 0

5-14_____________ 9.0 3.8 . 6 .4 93.3 89.5 2.37 1.50

15-24____________ 11.5 5.7 1 . 6 1 . 0 8 6 . 1 82.5 2 . 0 2 1.60 25-34____________ 1 2 .1 8 . 1 3.3 1.3 72.7 84.0 1.49 2.54

35-44____________ 14.8 1 0 . 1 6 . 6 2 . 6 55.4 74.3 1.47 2. 54

45-54____________ 24.3 14. 8 13.2 6 . 8 45.7 54. 1 1.64 1.94

55-64____________ 42. 1 27.0 27. 1 15.9 35.6 41.1 1.56 1.70

65-74____________ 68.9 56.2 50.6 36.7 26.6 34.7 1.23 1.38

75-84____________ 120.9 123.3 69.9 82. 8 42.2 32.8 .98 .84 85 and over_____ 215.2 262. 0 126. 5 206. 5 41.2 2 1 . 2 .82 .61

i Death Registration States included 10 States and the District of Columbia.

Source: U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, W hite a n d N o n w h ite M o rta lity D iffe re n tia ls in the U n ite d S ta te s, June 1965, table 2, and unpublished data for 1964 from the same agency.

A ge-ad ju sted d eath rates h ave decreased stea d ily from 1947 to 1964, b u t th e n on w h ite/w h ite gap

has rem ained su b stan tial for b oth m en and w om en.

T a b l e IVD-2.-—Age-adjusted 1 Death Rates, by Color and Sex, 1947-64

[Rates per 1,000 population in specified group]

Year Nonwhite White Year Nonwhite White

Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female

1947__ 13. 6 11. 4 1 0. 1 7. 1 1956___________ - 11. 9 9. 1 9. 0 5. 7

1948— 13. 8 1 1. 2 1 0. 0 6. 8 1957____________ 12. 3 9. 4 9. 2 5. 7

1949______ _____ 13. 5 1 1. 1 9. 7 6. 6 1958_____________ 1 2. 1 9. 2 9. 1 5. 6

1950___ 13. 6 10. 9 9. 6 6 . 5 1959_____________ 1 1. 8 8. 8 9. 0 5. 5

1951___ 13. 3 1 0. 6 9. 6 6 . 3 1960_____________ 1 2. 1 8 . 9 9. 2 5. 6

1952_____________ 13. 2 10. 3 9. 4 6 . 2 1961_____________ 1 1. 6 8 . 6 8 . 9 5. 4

1953___ . 13. 0 1 0. 0 9. 4 6 . 1 1962 2___________ 12. 0 8. 7 9. 0 5. 4

1954___ -- 12. 0 9. 3 9. 0 5. 7 1963 2___________ 12. 5 8 . 9 9. 2 5. 5

1955_____________ 1 1. 8 9. 1 9. 0 5. 7 1964_____________ 1 2. 2 8 . 6 9. 0 5. 3

> Population groups differ in age composition among groups as well as from

year to year. Since death rates tend to be higher in some age groups than in

others (see table IVD-1) differences in age composition are important in

analyzing overall ueath rates for a population group. The age adjustment

eliminates the difference in age composition as a factor in analyzing overall

death rates.

2 Excludes New Jersey, which did not require reporting of color in 1962-63.

Note.—Alaska included beginning 1959, and Hawaii, 1960.

Source: U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, V ita l S ta tistics

o f the U n ited S ta tes, 1963, vol. II, pt. A, table 1-2, and unpublished data for

1964 from the same agency.

221

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
T h e m atern al d eath rate for n on w h ites w as still 4 tim es th a t of w h ite w om en in 1964. In fa n t

m o rta lity w as also m uch higher in the n on w h ite than th e w h ite pop u lation .

T a b l e IVD-3.— M a te r n a l a n d I n f a n t M o r ta lity R a tes, b y C olor, S elected P e r io d s , 1 9 1 5 - 6 4

Mortality

Period M aternal1

Infant

Neonatal2 Postneonatal3

Nonwhite White Nonwhite White Nonwhite White

1915-19_________________________ 1, 253. 5 

1, 134. 3

700. 3 4 58. 1 4 42.3 4 89. 5 4 49. 6

1920-24 _ _____ ________ _____ 649. 2 51. 1 38.7 64. 2 34. 5

1925-29 ____ ____ \ , 163.7 

1, 080. 7 875. 5

615. 0 47. 9 36. 0 57. 6 29. 1

1930-34 ____________ _______ 575. 4 48.2 32. 5 47. 5 22. 9

1935-39 __________ _________ 439. 9 41.4 29. 5 39.9 19.7

1940-44_________________________ 596.4 238.0 35.6 24. 9 31.3 14. 1

1945-49_____ _______________ 328.4 1 1 0 . 8 30. 3 2 1 . 8 19. 1 9.2

1950-54 _____ ______. . . _ __ 182.7 48.9 27.4 18.6 17.3 6 . 8

1955-59_______________________ . 112. 4 28.2 27.7 17.6 15. 9 5. 8

1960 ____ ____________ 97.9 26.0 26. 9 17. 2 16. 4 5.7

1961 ______ ______ _ - ________ 101.3 24.9 26.2 16.9 14. 5 5. 5

1962 5 _____________ ________ 95.9 23.8 26. 1 16. 9 15. 3 5.5

1963 s_ _ _____________________ 96.9 24.0 26. 1 16. 7 15.4 5.5

1964 ____ _______ 89.9 22.3 26. 5 16. 2 14. 6 5.4

1 Deaths per 100,000 live births.

2 Deaths under 1 month (or 28 days) per 1,000 live births.

* Deaths from 1 month (or 28 days) through 11 months of age per 1,000 live

births.

« Average for 1916-19. 1915 data not available by age.

6 Excludes New Jersey since no provision was made for white-nonwhite

distinction on birth and death certificates.

Source: U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, W hite a n d

N o n w h ite M o rta lity D iffe re n tia ls in the U n ited S ta tes, Washington, D.C.,

June 1965, table 3; Advance Report, Final Mortality Statistics, 1964, 1964

from M o n th ly V ita l S ta tistic s R e p o r t, vol. 14, No. 10, Supplement, Jan. 14,1966,

table 1 and p. 1 2.

222

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
N o n w h ites show ed a considerably higher d eath rate for selected com m unicable diseases than w h ites

in 1964, particularly for tuberculosis, syphilis, and influenza and pneum onia.

T a b l e IVD-4.— A g e -A d ju s te d D e a th R a te s f o r S elected C o m m u n ic a b le D is e a s e s , b y C olor, S e lected Y e a rs , 1 9 3 0 - 6 4

[Rates per 100,000, adjusted for age distribution to 1940 population]

1930 1940 1950 1960 1963 1 1964

Cause of death Non­ white White Non­ white White Non­ white White Non­ white White Non­ white White Non­ white White

Tuberculosis, all forms________ 199. 4 60. 6 132. 9 36. 1 67. 5 16. 6 15. 1 4. 4 1 2. 8 3. 4 11. 5 3. 0 Syphilis and its sequelae. 60. 2 12. 5 61. 6 9. 7 18. 3 2 3. 3 2 5. 2 1. 0 4. 3 . 9 3. 8 . 9 Typhoid fever____ _ ___ 14. 0 3. 6 3. 0 . 8 2. 3 2 . 0 2 . 0 2 . 0 2 . 0 2 . 0 . 0 . 0

Dysentery, all forms_________ 7. 6 2. 4 4. 2 1. 6 2 1. 2 . 4 2. 5 2 . 1 2 . 5 2 . 1 . 4 . 1

Diphtheria__ _____ 2 3. 8 4. 4 2 1. 5 1. 0 2.4 2 . 2 2. 1 . 0 2 . 1 2 . 0 . 0 . 0

Whooping cough_____________ 2 8. 6 2 3. 6 2 4. 9 2 1. 8 2 1. 6 2.4 2 . 2 2 . 0 . 2 . 0 . 2 . 0

Meningococcal infections______ 6. 2 3. 0 2. 6 . 5 2. 7 . 5 2. 5 2. 3 2. 5 2.3 . 6 . 3 Acute poliomyelitis___________ 2 1. 0 1. 1 2. 5 . 8 2. 5 1. 4 2 . 1 2 . 1 2 . 0 2 . 0 . 0 . 0

Measles____________________ Influenza and pneumonia, ex- 2 2 . 6 2. 9 2.7 2. 5 2 .4 2 . 2 . 3 . 1 2 . 2 2. 1 . 2 . 2

cept pneumonia of newborn. _194. 3 99. 1 138. 1 63. 0 56. 9 22. 9 55. 2 24. 6 55. 4 24. 4 40. 8 20. 3

1 Excludes New Jersey which did not require reporting of color in 1963.

2 More than half of the age-specific rates are based on frequencies of less than 20 deaths.

Source: U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, W h ite a n d N o n w h ite M o r ta lity D iffe re n tia ls in the U n ite d S ta te s, June 1965, table 4, and, for

1964, from unpublished data provided by the same agency.

L ife exp ectan cy in 1964 w as low er for n on w h ites than w h ites at all ages in prim e w orking years

(ages 2 5 -5 5 ). N o n w h ite-w h ite differences w ere greater am ong w om en than m en a t each age level.

T a b l e IVD-5.—L ife E x p e c ta n c y in P r im e W o r k in g Y e a rs , b y C olor a n d S ex , 1 9 6 4

[Average number of years of life remaining at given ages, 1964]

Both sexes Males Females

Age Difference Difference Difference Non­ white White nonwhite to white (in years)

Non­ white White nonwhite to white (in years)Non­ white White nonwhite to white (in years)

25_________ 43. 4 48. 6 - 5 .2 40.9 45. 6 - 4 .7 45.9 51.8 - 5 .9

30_________ 38.9 43. 9 - 5 .0 36. 6 41.0 - 4 .4 41.4 47. 0 - 5 .6

35_________ 34. 6 39.2 - 4 .6 32.4 36.3 - 3 .9 36.9 42.2 - 5 .3

40_________ 30. 5 34.6 - 4 . 1 28.5 31.8 - 3 .3 32.7 37. 5 - 4 .8

45_________ 26. 6 30. 1 - 3 .5 24.7 27.4 - 2 .7 28.7 32.9 - 4 .2

50........ ......... 22. 9 25.8 - 2 .9 2 1 . 2 23.2 - 2 . 0 24. 8 28.5 - 3 .7

55_________ 19.6 2 1 . 8 - 2 . 2 18.0 19. 4 - 1 .4 21.4 24. 2 - 2 . 8

Source: U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, Public Health Service, L ife T ables, V ita l S ta tistic s o f the U n ited S ta tes, 1964, vol. II,

sec. 5, table 5-4.

223

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
T h e d isad van tage of the n onw hite com pared to the w h ite pop u lation w ith respect to life ex p ecta n cy

is greatest in th e S ou th A tla n tic and W est N o rth C entral S tates, b oth for m ales and fem ales.

T a b l e IVD-6 .—Life Expectancy 1 in Prime Working Years, by Age, Color, and Sex, United States and Geographical Divisions,

1 9 5 9 - 6 1

Divisions

Males

30-31 40-41

Non­ white White Difference nonwhite to white (in years)

Non­ white White Difference nonwhite to white (in years)

United States. . __ __________ 37. 05 40. 98 -3 . 93 28. 72 31. 73 - 3 . 01 New England. . 37. 71 40. 77 -3 . 06 29. 12 31. 42 -2 . 30 Middle Atlantic________ _________ 36. 42 40. 43 -4 . 01 28. 14 31. 09 -2 . 95 East North Central___ 37. 37 41. 01 -3 . 64 28. 85 31. 71 - 2 . 8 6 West North Central . . . 36. 69 42. 08 - 5 . 39 28. 37 32. 81 -3 . 44 South Atlantic_________ __________ 35. 35 40. 67 - 5 . 32 27. 21 31. 52 - 4 31 East South C entral.. 36. 89 41. 07 - 4 . 18 28. 71 32. 02 - 3 . 31 West South Central __ . 38. 14 41. 40 - 3 . 26 29. 87 32. 25 - 2 . 38 Mountain_________________________ 39. 07 41. 25 - 2 . 18 31. 10 32. 16 - 1. 06 Pacific___________ ________ ____ 41. 35 41. 18 + . 17 32. 54 31. 94 + . 60

Females

United States_____ . ______________ 40. 83 46. 63 - 5 . 80 32. 16 37. 13 - 4 97 New England___________ 42. 10 46. 20 -4 . 10 33. 32 36. 6 8 -3 . 36 Middle Atlantic____________________ 40. 97 45. 53 - 4 . 56 32. 31 36. 0 2 - 3 . 71 East North Central______ ___ _. 40. 8 8 46. 34 -5 . 46 32. 06 36. 83 - 4 77 West North Central___ _____ 40. 48 47. 63 -7 . 15 31. 80 38. 11 - 6. 31 South Atlantic_____________ ___ 39. 76 47. 09 -7 . 33 31. 28 37. 61 - 6. 33 East South Central. _ _ . 40. 15 47. 14 - 6 . 99 31. 69 37. 67 - 5 . 98 West South Central __ 41. 62 47. 85 - 6 . 23 32. 95 38. 36 - 5 . 41 Mountain________________ _____ 43. 14 47. 16 — 4 0 2 34 6 6 37. 74 -3 . 14 Pacific____________________________ 45. 04 47. 11 -2 . 07 35. 95 37. 64 -1 . 69

• Average number of years of life remaining at beginning of age interval.

Source U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, Public

Health Service, U n ited S ta tes L ife , tables: 1950-61, vol. 1, No. 1, December

1964, tables 6, 6, 8,9, and U.S. Department of Health, Education and Welfare

Public Health Service, L ife T ables fo r the G eographic D iv isio n s o f the U n ite d

S la tes: 1959-61, vol. 1, No. 3, May 1965, tables 1-36.

Digitized for 

224

FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
W h ite suicide rates are far higher than n on w h ite b u t in recen t years the difference has decreased

sligh tly. Suicide rates are con sisten tly lo w est am ong n on w h ite w om en.

T a b l e IVD-7.— S u ic id e R a te s , b y S e x a n d C olor, 1 9 4 7 - 6 3

[Rate per 100,000 population In specified group excluding deaths among Armed Forces overseas]

Year Nonwhite White Year Nonwhite White

Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female

1947________ 6.5 1 . 6 18.9 6 . 0 1956_________ 6 . 1 1 . 6 16.9 4.8 1948_________ 6.9 1.5 18.4 5.7 1957_________ 6 . 8 1.4 16.5 4.6

1949________ 7. 1 1.5 19.1 5.5 1958_________ 7.0 1 . 8 18.0 5.1 1950_________ 7.0 1.7 19. 0 5. 5 1959_________ 7.4 1.9 17.8 5.0 1951_________ 6 . 6 1.7 17.3 5.0 1960_________ 7.2 2 . 0 17.6 5.3 1952_________ 6 . 1 1.3 16.9 4.7 1961_________ 7.6 1.9 17. 1 5.3 1953_________ 6.4 1.3 17. 2 4. 6 1962 1_______ 7. 2 2 . 2 17. 8 5. 9 1954________ 6 . 8 1. 5 17. 5 4. 5 1963 1 _ 8.3 2 . 0 17. 3 5.9 1955_________ 6 . 1 1.5 17.2 4.9 1964_________ 7.2 2 . 2 17.2 6 . 1

1 Excludes New Jersey, which did not require reporting of color in 1962 and 1963.

Source: Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, V ita l S t a tis tic s - S p e c ia l R e p o r ts, vol. 43, No. 30; V ita l S ta tistic s o f the U n ited S ta tes (annual reports,

1950-62); M o n th ly V ita l S ta tistic s R e p o r ts, vol. 12, No. 13, Annual Summary for the United States, 1963; M o n th ly V ita l S ta tistic s R e p o rt, Advance Reports, vol.

14, No. 10, Supplement, 1964.

225

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
A m on g th e n on w h ite as w ell as w h ite p op u lation the proportion w ith hosp ital or surgical insurance

increases w ith incom e. R e la tiv e ly few er non w h ites had insurance at each incom e lev el, according to a

1962-63 national su rvey, b u t the gap lessens w ith rising incom e.

T a b l e IVD-8 .— D is tr ib u tio n o f P o p u la tio n , b y H o s p ita l a n d S u r g ic a l I n s u r a n c e C overage, F a m ily I n c o m e , a n d C olor, J u l y

1 9 6 2 - J u n e 1 9 6 8 1

[Data are based on household interviews of the civilian, noninstitutional population]

Total pop- Percent Percent Total pop- Percent Percent Family income and race ulation (in with hos- with sur- Family income and race ulation (in with hos- with sur- thousands) pital in- gical in- thousands) pital in- gical insurance surance surance surance

All incomes: $7,000-9,999: Total __________ 183, 146 70 65 Total________ _____ 32, 652 87 83

Nonwhite ___ 21, 402 

161, 744

45 40 Nonwhite. ___ 1, 481 31, 171

74 71 White__________ 74 69 W hite_________ 8 8 84

Under $2,000: $1 0 ,0 0 0+ : Total 22, 590 34 29 Total ___________ 24, 430 8 8 83

Nonwhite ___ 6 , 249 

16, 341

25 19 Nonwhite______ 854 81 77

White ____ 38 33 White. ________ 23, 576 8 8 83

$2,000-3,999: Income unknown:

Total __________ 32, 485 52 47 Total______________ 9, 314 59 51

Nonwhite 6 , 352 

26, 133

39 34 Nonwhite ___ 1, 186

8 , 128

37 31

White ______ _ 55 50 White. _ ______ 62 54

$4,000-6,999: Total____ ______ 61, 675 79 74

Nonwhite_______ 5, 281 56, 394

6 6 60

W h ite_________ 80 75

1 Includes persons of unknown insurance status.

Source: U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, Public Health Service, H ea lth In su ra n c e C overaqe, U n ite d S ta te s, J u ly 1 9 6 t~ J u n e 1963, August,

1964, table 2.

226

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
A larger proportion of the w h ite than n on w h ite pop u lation reported chronic h ealth conditions in a

1957-61 su rvey, b ut of those w ith chronic conditions, relatively m ore non w h ites had a c tiv ity lim ita tion s.

T a b l e IVD-9.— N u m b e r s a n d P e rc e n t o f P e r s o n s in th e P o p u la tio n W ith O n e or M o r e C h ro n ic C o n d itio n s a n d A c tiv ity

L im ita tio n s , b y C olor a n d A g e , J u l y 1 9 5 7 - J u n e 1 9 6 11 

[Numbers in thousands]

Age, condition, activity limitations

Population: Both sexes Males

Nonwhite White Non white White

Num­ ber Percent Num­ ber Percent Num­ ber Percent Num­ ber Percent

All persons aged 17 and over______ ___ 11, 300 

5, 218

1, 745 

7, 009

2, 491 

515

3, 248 

1, 917

685 

1, 043 

809 

545

101, 491 55, 740 15,312 

55, 404 

25, 324

3, 835 

32, 128 

19, 521

5, 467 

13, 959 

10, 895

6 , 0 1 0

5, 267 

2 , 186 

792 

3,217 

962 

216 

1, 558 854 

310 

492 

370 

267

48, 207

25, 415 

7, 404

26, 354 

11, 411

1, 795 

15, 552

9, 161

2, 690 

6 , 301 

4, 842 

2, 919

With 1+ chronic conditions ________

With activity limitations 2_ ___

17 to 44 _______________ __________

46. 2 

33. 4

54. 9 

27. 5

41. 5 

36. 2

52. 7 

29. 1

With 1 -f chronic conditions._______ With activity limitations 2_____

45 to 64___________________ ________

35. 5 

20. 7 45. 7 

15. 1 29. 9 22. 5 43. 3 

15. 7

With 1 + chronic conditions..______

With activity limitations 2____

65 and over________ _ _ _____________

59. 0 

35. 7 60. 8 

28. 0

54. 8 

36. 3

58. 9 

29. 4

With 1 + chronic conditions _______

With activity limitations 2______

77. 5 

67. 4

78. 0 

55. 2

75. 2 72. 2 76. 8 

60. 3

1 Average number of persons with one or more chronic conditions during

4-ycar period July 1957 through June 1963.

The qualitative measure o f health behavior is the prevalence of one or more

chronic conditions or permanent impairments, ranging in severity from

disabilities which would have little or no effect on employment (depending

on job requirements) to disabilities which would result in total incapacity.

Subjects with one or more chronic conditions reported whether or not these

conditions resulted in activity limitations.

2 Percentage cells for activity limitations show percent of all persons with

one or more chronic conditions reporting activity limitations.

Note.—Health Interview Survey data represent health behavior, rather

than the state of health in an “objective” clinical sense. The survey represents a series of self-appraisals of physical capabilities in functional terms:

what the subject himself believes he can or cannot do.

The Health Interview Survey is based on household interviews conducted

in cooperation with the U.S. Bureau of the Census. The present data are

based on the cumulative sample for 8 quarters of interviewing during the

period July 1961 through June 1963, covering approximately 80,000 households containing about 259,000 persons.

Source: U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, Public

Health Service, Division of Health Interview Statistics.

227

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
A higher proportion of chronic con d ition s w as reported for w h ite m en in th e labor force than for

n on w h ite m en in 1962-63, am ong b oth the em ployed and un em ployed. H ow ever, in all age groups,

a c tiv ity lim itation s, resu ltin g in absence from work, w ere m ore p revalen t am ong th e em p loyed n on w h ite

th an w h ite m en.

T a b l e IVD-10.— N u m b e r a n d P e r c e n t o f M a le s in the L a b o r F orce W ith O ne or M o re C h ro n ic C o n d itio n s , a n d A c tiv ity

L im ita tio n s , b y C olor, A ge, a n d E m p lo y m e n t S ta tu s , J u l y 1 9 6 1 - J u n e 1 9 6 3 1

[Numbers in thousands]

Labor force Currently employed Currently unemployed

Age, condition, activity Non white White Nonwhite White Nonwhite White limitations

Num- Per- Num- Per- Num- Per- Num- Per- Num- Per- Num- Per- ber cent ber cent ber cent ber cent ber cent ber cent

All males aged 17 and

over_ _______ 4, 699 42, 008 4, 268 40, 366 431 1,642 With 1+ chronic contions__ ________ 1,980 42. 1 2 2 , 267 53.0 1, 801 42.2 21,430 53. 1 179 41. 5 837 51.0 With activity limitations 1 2____ 510 25.8 4, 989 22. 4 456 25.3 4, 690 21.9 54 30.2 299 35.7 17 to 24______________ 853 5, 908 692 5, 421 161 487 With 1 + chronic con- ditions____ _ 214 25. 1 2 , 11 1 35.7 170 24. 6 1,944 35.9 44 27.3 167 24.3 With activity limitations 2__- 38 17.8 277 13. 1 31 18. 2 251 12.9 (3)151 (3) (3) 582 (3) 25 to 44_____________ 2 , 186 18, 998 2, 035 18, 416 With 1 -(- chronic con- ditions__________ 843 38.6 9, 495 49.9 778 38.2 9,203 50.0 65 43.0 282 48.5 With activity limitations 2__ 166 19.7 1,580 16. 7 149 19.2 1,491 16.2 (3) (3) 89 31.6

45 to 64 _ _____ 1,482 14,905 1,372 14, 423 1 1 0 482 With 1+ chronic con- ditions____ _ 793 53.5 9, 059 60.8 729 53. 1 8 , 743 60.6 64 58.2 316 65.5 With activity limitations 2 240 30.3 2, 383 2, 197 26.3 213 29. 2 2, 240 25. 6 (3) (3) (3) 143 45.3 65 and over___________ 178 168 2 , 106 91 With 1+ chronic con- ditions_________ 131 73.6 1,611 73.3 124 73.8 1,539 73. 1 72 79. 1 With activity limitations2 ______ 67 51.1 749 46.5 64 51.6 709 46. 1 40 55.6

1 Average number of persons with one or more chronic conditions during

2-year period July 1961 through June 1963.

The qualitative measure of health behavior is the prevalence of one or more

chronic conditions or permanent impairments, ranging in severity from

disabilities which would have little or no effect on employment (depending

on job requirements) to disabilities which would result in total incapacity.

Subjects with one or more chronic conditions reported on whether or not

these conditions resulted in activity limitations.

2 Percentage cells for activity limitations show percent of all persons with

one or more chronic conditions reporting activity limitations.

3 Not shown where number of persons is less than 30,000.

Note.—Health Interview Survey data represent health behavior, rather

than the state of health in an “objective” clinical sense. The survey represents a series of self-appraisals of physical capabilities in functional terms:

what the subject himself believes he can or cannot do.

The Health Interview Survey is based on household interviews conducted

in cooperation with the U.S. Bureau of the Census. The present data are

based on the cumulative sample for 8 quarters of interviewing during the

period July 1961 through June 1963, covering approximately 80,000 households

containing about 259,000 persons. The Health Interview Survey data are not

intended as official labor force estimates, and procedural differences, in the

collection of data concerning employment status result in a lower estimated

rate of unemployment in the Health Interview Survey than in the Current

Population Survey.

Source: U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, Public

Health Service, Division of Health Interview Statistics.

228

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
A fter age 25, n on w h ite persons reported a higher rate of restricted a ctiv ity , bed d isab ility, and a

greater num ber of d ays lo st from work than w h ite persons in 1961-63.

T a b l e IVD-11 — N u m b e r o f D is a b ility D a y s 1 a n d R a te s P e r P e r so n P e r Y e a r b y S ex , A g e , a n d C olor, J u l y 1 9 6 1 - J u n e 1 9 6 3

[Numbers in thousands]

Sex, age, and color Restricted activity Bed disability Work loss

Days Rate Days Rate Days Rate

ALL PERSONS All a g e s_____________ ___________________ 2, 968, 965 16.2 1, 2 1 2 , 843 6 . 6 415, 414 6 . 1

Under 17____ _ ______ _ __ _ 706, 649 10.9 317, 553 4.9 (2) (2) 17 to 24________________________ 196,644 10.4 89,015 4.7 42, 833 4.1 25 to 44_________________________ 630, 318 13.9 247, 116 5.4 157,775 5.3 45 to 64________________________ 809, 329 21.9 291,458 7.9 184, 841 7.6 65 and over_______ _____ _ _ _ 626, 026 37.1 267,700 15.9 29, 966 9.3

Nonwhite: All a g e s____- _________ 389, 876 18.2 172,683 8 . 1 63,912 8.7

Under 17__________ ___________ 82, 156 8.9 41, 622 4.5 (2) (2) 17 to 24________________________ 21, 944 9.4 11,410 4.9 4, 079 3.5 25 to 44________________________ 95, 858 18.9 40, 153 7.9 27, 277 7.6 45 to 64_________ _____ — 117, 989 33.7 46, 967 13.4 29, 400 12.4 65 and over______________________ 71, 929 54.9 32, 531 24.9 3, 156 1 1 . 0

White: All ages. _____ ______ _____ 2, 579, 089 15. 9 1, 040, 159 6.4 351,502 5.8

Under 17_________________ _____ 624, 492 1 1 . 2 275, 932 4.9 (2) (2) 17 to 24________________________ 174, 700 10.5 77,605 4.7 38,754 4.1 25 to 44________________________ 534, 460 13.3 206,963 5. 1 130, 498 5.0 45 to 64________________________ 691, 340 2 0 . 6 244, 490 7.3 155, 441 7.1 65 and o v e r .___________________ 554, 097 35.6 235, 168 15. 1 26, 809 9. 1

See footnotes at end of table.

229

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
T a b l e IVD-11 — N u m b e r o f D is a b ility D a y s 1 a n d R a te s P e r P e r s o n P e r Y e a r b y S ex , A g e , a n d C olor, J u l y 1 9 6 1 - J u n e

1 9 6 3—Continued

[Numbers in thousands]

Sex, age, and color Restricted activity Bed disability Work loss

Days Rate Days Rate Days Rate

ALL MALE

All ages _______ ________________ _ 1,291,455 14. 5 507, 304 5.7 261, 824 5.9

Under 17___ _ ________________ 375, 115 11.4 165, 780 5.0 (1 2) (2) 17 to 24________________________ 65, 749 7. 5 25, 063 2.9 23, 029 3.7 25 to 44________________________ 217,164 1 0 . 0 84, 326 3.9 93, 553 4.6

45 to 64________________________ 368,086 2 0 . 6 124, 820 7.0 120,903 7.6 65 and over_______ ___________ 265, 341 35.3 107,314 14.3 24, 339 10.9

Nonwhite: All ages__ _______________ 163,303 15.9 67, 308 6 . 6 38, 370 9.0

Under 17___ _ ____ ________ 40, 005 8.7 21,616 4.7 (2) (2) 17 to 24_________________________ 6 , 448 6 . 0 2 , 628 2.4 2 , 662 4.0 25 to 44________________________ 32, 870 14.4 11,471 5.0 15, 979 7.8 45 to 64 ________________________ 53, 743 32.0 19, 608 11.7 17, 029 12.5 65 and over. ______ _ . . . __ 30, 237 49.8 11,986 19.7 2, 701 14.1

White: All ages ____________________ 1, 128, 152 14.4 439,996 5.6 223, 454 5.5

Under 17_____________ _________ 335, 111 1 1 . 8 144, 164 5. 1 (2) (2) 17 to 24________________________ 59, 301 7.7 22, 435 2.9 20, 367 3.7

25 to 44________________________ 184, 294 9.5 72,856 3.8 77, 574 4.2

45 to 64_________________________ 314, 342 19.4 105, 212 6.5 103, 875 7.2

65 and over____________ _ ____ 235, 104 34. 1 95, 328 13.8 21,638 1 0 . 6

1 Disability days are estimated annual average for 2 years, July 1961 through

June 1963. Disability days are the quantitative measure of health which

include days of restricted activity, bed disability days, and work loss days.

Disability days reflect short-term illnesses as well as chronic impairments.

The rates based on disability days represent approximate attributes of an

entire population (or a sublcass thereof), since they are computed as the total

number of disability days accumulated by a group as a whole, rather than

as the sums of individual rates.

2 Not shown where number of days is less than 500,000.

Note.—Health Inverview Survey data represent health behavior, rather

than the state of health in an “objective” clinical sense. The survey represents a series of self-appraisals of physical capabilities in functional terms:

what the subject himself believes he can or cannot do.

The Health Interview Survey is based on household interviews conducted

in cooperation with the U.S. Bureau of the Census. The present data are

based on the cumulative sample for 8 quarters of interviewing during the

period July 1961 through June 1963, covering approximately 80,000 households, containing about 259,000 persons. H.I.S. data are not intended as

official labor force estimates, and procedural differences in the collection of

data concerning employment status result in a lower estimated rate of unemployment in the H.I.S. than in the Current Population Survey.

Because of rounding, sums of individual items may not equal totals.

Source: U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, Public Health

Service, Division of Health Interview Statistics.

230

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
For all persons in the labor force and for the employed, days of restricted activity, bed disability,

and work loss were proportionately higher for nonwhites than whites after age 25. Among the unemployed, however, days of restricted activity as well as bed disability were generally lower among nonwhites than whites.

T a b l e IVD-12.—N u m b e r o f D is a b ility D a y s 1 a n d R a te s P e r P e r so n P e r Y e a r f o r N o n w h ite a n d W h ite M a le s in the L a b o r

F orce, b y A g e G ro u p a n d E m p lo y m e n t S ta tu s , J u l y 1 9 6 1 - J u n e 1 9 6 3

[Days in millons, rate per person per year]

For persons in the labor force For currently employed persons For currently unemployed persons

Age group Restricted Bed dis- Work Restricted Bed dis- Work Restricted Bed dis- activity ability loss activity ability loss activity ability

Days Rate Days Rate Days Rate Days Rate Days Rate Days Rate Days Rate Days Rate

All nonwhite males aged 17 and

over. ____ 64 13.7 2 1 4.5 33 7. 1 56 13.2 19 4. 5 33 7.6 8 18. 4 2 4.9

17 to 24_____. . . . 5 5.5 2 2 . 1 2 2 . 6 3 4.8 2 2 . 2 2 3.2 1 8 . 6 (2) (2) 25 to 44________ 26 1 2 . 1 9 4.2 14 6.4 24 11. 7 8 4.1 14 6 . 8 3 17.8 1 4.8

45 to 6 4_____ 29 19. 5 9 6 . 0 15 10.4 25 18.3 8 5.8 15 1 0 . 6 4 33.6 1 9.7 65 years and over. 4 24. 7 1 7.7 2 10.5 4 25. 1 1 8 . 1 2 1 1 . 1 (2) (2) (2) (2)

All white males aged 17 and over___ 472 1 1 . 2 160 3.8 230 5. 5 440 10. 9 150 3.7 224 5. 6 33 19. 8 1 0 6 . 2

17 to 24_________ 40 6 . 8 16 2 . 6 19 3.2 37 6 . 8 14 2.7 19 3.4 4 7.4 1 2 . 2

25 to 44_________ 169 8.9 64 3.4 81 4.3 158 8 . 6 60 3.2 79 4.3 1 0 17.9 4 7.0

45 to 64______ 217 14. 5 65 4.4 109 7.3 2 0 1 13.9 61 4. 2 106 7.4 16 32.8 4 8.4 65 years and over. 47 2 1 . 2 15 7. 0 2 1 9.7 44 20.9 14 6 . 8 2 1 9.8 3 29.8 1 1 2 . 2

Differences in rates between non white and white males (excess of nonwhite, + )

All males aged 17 and over______ + 2.5 + 0.7 + 1 . 6 + 2.3 + 0 . 8 + 2 . 0 - 1 .4 - 1 .3 17 to 24_________ - 1 .3 - . 5 - . 6 - 2 . 0 - . 5 - . 2 + 1 . 2 (2) 25 to 44________ + 3.2 + . 8 + 2 . 1 + 3.1 + .9 + 2.5 - . 1 - 2 . 2

45 to 64_________ + 5.0 + 1 . 6 + 3.1 + 4.4 + 1 . 6 + 3.2 + . 8 + 1.3 65 years and over. + 3.5 + .7 + . 8 + 4.2 + 1.3 + 1.3 (2) (2)

1 Disability days are estimated annual average for 2 years, July 1961 through

June 1963. Disability days are the quantitative measure of health which

include days of restricted activity, bed-disability days, and work-loss days.

Disability days reflect short-term illnesses as well as chronic impairments.

The rates based on disability days represent approximate attributes of an

entire population (or a subclass thereof), since they are computed as the total

number of disability days accumulated by a group as a whole, rather than as

the sums of individual rates.

2 Not shown where number of days is less than 500,000.

Note.—Health Interview Survey (HIS) data represent health behavior,

rather than the state of health in an “objective” clinical sense. The survey

represents a series of self-appraisals of physical capabilities in functional

terms: what the subject himself believes he can or cannot do.

The Health Interview Survey is based on household interviews conducted

in cooperation with the U.S. Bureau of the Census. The present data are

based on the cumulative sample for 8 quarters of interviewing during the

period July 1961 through June 1963, covering approximately 80,000 households,

containing about 259,000 persons. HIS data are not intended as official labor

force estimates, and procedural differences in the collection of data concerning

employment status result in a lower estimated rate of unemployment in the

HIS than in the Current Population Survey.

Source: U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, Public

Health Service, Division of Health Interview Statistics.

231

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Fam ily income influenced the relative number of persons who visited a doctor in 1963-64, among

both nonwhites and whites, regardless of color.

T a b l e IVD-13.'—N u m b e r a n d P e r c e n t o f P e r so n s W ith L a s t P h y s ic ia n V is it W ith in a Y e a r, b y S ex , F a m ily I n c o m e , C olor,

a n d A g e , J u l y 1 9 6 3 - J u n e 1 9 6 4

[Data are based on household interviews of the civilian noninstitutional population]

Family income, color, and age

Both sexes Male Female

All

persons

With visit within a year All males

With visit within a year All females

With visit within a year

N um ber Percent Num ber Percent N um ber Percent

Under $4,000: All ages____ __ 51, 599 31, 375 60. 8 23, 366 13, 152 56. 3 28, 233 18, 233 64. 5 Under 15 years __ __ 14, 217 7, 875 55. 4 7, 167 4, 015 56. 0 7, 051 3, 860 54. 7 15-44 years ____ 16, 896 10, 360 61. 3 7, 569 3, 996 52. 8 9, 327 6 , 364 6 8 . 2

45-64 years _______ 10, 145 6 , 103 60. 2 4, 088 2, 234 54. 6 6 , 057 3, 869 63. 9 65+ years _ _ _ _ 10, 341 7, 038 6 8 . 1 4, 542 2, 907 64. 0 5, 799 4, 131 71. 2 Nonwhite: All ages__ ___ 12, 438 6 , 657 53. 5 5, 6 8 8 2, 791 49. 1 6 , 750 3, 8 6 6 57. 3 Under 15 years _ _ 5, 038 2, 354 46. 7 2, 474 1, 192 48. 2 2, 563 1, 162 45. 3 15-44 years 4, 382 2, 524 57. 6 1, 873 857 45. 8 2, 508 1, 6 6 8 6 6 . 5 45-64 years 2 , 0 2 1 1, 1 2 2 55. 5 877 443 50. 5 1, 144 679 59. 4 65+ years____ __ 998 656 65. 7 463 299 64. 6 535 357 6 6 . 7 White: All ages_ _ __ 39, 161 24, 718 63. 1 17, 678 10, 361 58. 6 21, 483 14, 357 6 6 . 8

Under 15 years 9, 180 5, 520 60. 1 4, 692 2, 823 60. 2 4, 488 2, 698 60. 1

15-44 years 12, 514 7, 836 62. 6 5, 696 3, 139 55. 1 6 , 819 4, 696 6 8 . 9 45-64 years 8 , 124 4, 980 61. 3 3, 211 1, 790 55. 7 4, 913 3, 190 64. 9

65+ years.. __ 9, 343 6 , 382 6 8 . 3 4, 079 2 , 608 63. 9 5, 264 3, 774 71. 7 $4,000+: All ages _ _ _____ 124, 257 85, 493 6 8 . 8 62, 032 40, 787 65. 8 62, 225 44, 707 71. 8

Under 15 years . 42, 238 30, 621 72. 5 21, 494 15, 748 73. 3 20, 744 14, 873 71. 7 15-44 years 51, 898 34, 793 67. 0 25, 231 15, 459 61. 3 26, 667 19, 333 72. 5

45-64 years _ . ____ 24, 726 16, 216 65. 6 12, 773 7, 869 61. 6 11, 953 8 , 347 69. 8

65+ y e a rs___ ____ 5, 395 3, 863 71. 6 2, 534 1, 710 67. 5 2 , 861 2, 153 75. 3 Nonwhite: All ages._____ _____ 7, 994 4, 859 60. 8 4, 048 2, 328 57. 5 3, 946 2, 531 64. 1 Under 15 years ____ 3, 064 1, 889 61. 7 1, 549 988 63. 8 1, 514 901 59. 5 15-44 years. . _ 3, 453 2, 099 60. 8 1, 698 905 53. 3 1, 755 1, 195 6 8 . 1

45-64 years. _____ 1, 246 729 58. 5 693 373 53. 8 533 356 64. 4 65+ years 231 142 61. 5 White: All ages 116, 263 80, 634 69. 4 57, 984 38, 459 6 6 . 3 58, 279 42, 175 72. 4

Under 15 years ___ 39, 174 28, 732 73. 3 19, 944 14, 760 74. 0 19, 230 13, 972 72. 7

15-44 years __ 48, 445 32, 693 67. 5 23, 534 14, 555 61. 8 24, 912 18, 139 72. 8

45-64 years . _ 23, 480 15, 487 6 6 . 0 12, 079 7, 496 62. 1 11, 400 7,991 70. 1

65+ years 5, 164 3, 721 72. 1 2, 427 1, 648 67. 9 2, 737 2, 073 75. 7

Note.—For official population estimates for more general use, see Bureau Source: U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, Public

of the Census reports on the civilian population of the United States, in Health Service, Physician Visits, Interval of Visits and Children’s Routine

Current Population Reports: Series P-20, P-2S, and P-60. Because of round- Checkup, United States, July 1968-June 1961, June 1965, table 17.

ing, sums of individual items may not equal totals.

232

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Nonwhite as well as white persons saw physicians most frequently at the office in 1963-64, and this

number rose with income. Regardless of income, however, a much larger proportion of nonwhite than

white patients sought medical attention at hospital clinics.

T a b l e IVD-14.—P e r c e n t D is tr ib u tio n o f P h y s ic ia n V is its , b y P la c e o f V is it, F a m ily I n c o m e , a n d C olor, J u l y 1 9 6 3 - J u n e 1 9 6 4

Place of visit

Family income and color All places Office Home Hospital clinic

Company or indus­ try health units

Telephone Other and unknown

Under $2,000: Total____ _ — __ . 10 0. 0 65. 2 8 . 3 19. 3 0 . 2 5. 4 1. 5 Nonwhite __ ________ __ 1 0 0 . 0 54. 3 4. 8 36. 2 . 2 3. 5 1. 0

White_________ ____ ___ 10 0. 0 67. 9 9. 2 15. 1 . 1 5. 9 1. 7 $2,000-$3,999: T o ta l.____ _____________ 10 0. 0 6 6 . 4 6 . 0 19. 7 . 3 6 . 5 1. 1

Nonwhite__ _ __ ____ 1 0 0 . 0 56. 3 5. 0 34. 7 . 4 2. 5 1. 2

White. ___ ___ 10 0. 0 6 8 . 3 6. 2 16. 8 . 3 7. 3 1. 1

$4,000-$6,999: Total--------- ------------------------ 1 0 0 . 0 69. 8 4. 6 1 1. 2 . 6 1 1. 8 2 . 1

Nonwhite.. ___ 1 0 0 . 0 57. 0 2 . 8 29. 9 1. 0 5. 3 4. 0 White______ _____ 10 0. 0 70. 8 4. 7 9. 7 . 5 12. 3 2 . 0

$7,000-$9,999: Total___ __ ___ . . 100. 0 72. 3 4. 1 7. 5 1. 1 13. 6 1. 4 Nonwhite _ _ _____ 100. 0 6 6 . 0 4. 9 15. 9 2. 9 7. 8 2. 4 White__________________ 100. 0 72. 5 4. 0 7. 3 1. 1 13. 8 1. 4 $1 0 ,0 0 0 plus: Total 100. 0 73. 5 5. 1 6. 7 . 7 1 2 . 6 1. 4 Nonwhite. __ 100. 0 6 8 . 9 1. 1 22. 4 2 . 2 5. 4 W h ite .__ _ ______ 100. 0 73. 6 5. 2 6 . 2 . 7 1 2. 8 1. 5 Unknown: Total________ _ . 100. 0 6 8 . 5 9. 0 1 1. 6 . 5 8 . 5 1. 9 Nonwhite __ _ ________ 100. 0 47. 0 9. 3 37. 8 1. 0 3. 6 1. 3 White_____ ____________ 100. 0 71. 0 8 . 9 8 . 6 . 4 9. 1 2 . 0

N ote—Because of rounding, sums of individual items may not equal totals.

Source: U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, Public Health Service, Volume of Physician Visits by Place of Visit and Type of Service, United

States, July 1963-June 1964, June 1965, table B.

233

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Reaction to syphilis tests was considerably higher among Negroes (particularly Negro men) than whites in 1960-62.

T a b l e I VD- 1 5 .-—P re va len c e o f R e a c tio n to T ests f o r S y p h ilis in A d u lts , b y R a c e, S ex , a n d T est U se d , 1 9 6 0 - 6 2

KRP 1 VDRL 2 KRP 1 VDRL 2

Race and sex Reac­ tive Weakly reactive Reac­ tive W eakly reactive

Race and sex Reac­ tive Weakly reactive Reac­ tive W eakly reactive

Number of positive reactions per 

1 0 0 adults in specified group Number of positive reactions per 

1 0 0 adults in specified group

Negro m ales_____ 2 0 . 2 3. 0 6 . 3 11. 3 White males ___ 2 . 0 . 3 . 9 2. 5 Negro fem ales___ 16. 1 . 3 5. 4 5. 5 White fem ales___ 1. 6 . 5 . 5 3. 3

i Kolmer Reiter Protein, a method of determining serologic evidence of

syphilis.

4 Venereal Disease Research Laboratory, a method of determining serologic

evidence of syphilis.

N ote.—Sample too small to permit adequate representation of other races.

Source: U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, Public

Health Service, Findings on the Serologic Test for Syphilis in Adults, United

States, 1960-62, June 1965, table A.

Nonwhite male war veterans in all age groups were about 20 percent less likely than white v eterans to have had year-round full-time work in 1964, and were much more likely to have been partyear or part-time workers, or without work.

T a b l e IV E-1 .— W o rk E x p e rie n c e o f M a le W a r V etera n s ( N o n in s titu tio n a l) b y A g e G ro u p a n d C olor, 1 9 6 4

Age in March 1965

Work experience in 1964

All ages Under 30 years 30-39 years

Non­ white White

Ratio,

non­ white to white

Non­ white White

Ratio,

non­ white to white

Non­ white White

Ratio,

non­ white to white

Total (in thousnads)__ ____ 1, 608 

1 0 0. 0

19, 260 

1 0 0 . 0

48

1 0 0 . 0

415 

1 0 0 . 0

538 

1 0 0 . 0

6 , 162 Percent______________________ _ 1 0 0 . 0

Year-round, full-time workers____ Part-time, full-time workers____

Part-time workers_________ Did not work_________ _

61. 9 

2 0 . 1 

7. 3 10. 7

75. 0 

13. 4 

3. 2 

8 . 4

. 83 1. 50

2 . 28 

1. 27

62. 5 

29. 2 

8 . 3 

0 )

79. 3 

16. 6 

2. 9 

1. 2

. 79 1. 76

2 . 8 6

69. 1 

2 1 . 6 4. 5 

4. 8

84. 2 

13. 4 

1. 3 

1. 1

. 82 

1. 61

3. 46 4. 36

Total (in thousands)__ ____

40-49 years 50-59 years 60 years and over

623 

1 0 0 . 0

7, 840 

1 0 0 . 0

226 

1 0 0 . 0

2, 526 

1 0 0 . 0

173 

1 0 0 . 0

2, 317 Percent___ _ ___ 1 0 0 . 0

Year-round, full-time workers____

Part-year, full-time workers____

Part-time workers. Did not work. ________

65. 8 

2 1 . 8 

7. 7 

4. 7

82. 3 

14. 4 

1. 5 

1. 8

. 80

1. 51 

5. 13

2 . 61

67. 7 

2 0 . 8

5. 3

6. 2

76. 8 

14. 1

3. 2 

5. 9

. 8 8 

1. 48 

1. 6 6 

1. 05

17. 9

5. 8 

16. 8 

59. 5

23. 4 

8 . 5 14. 4 

53. 7

. 76 

. 6 8 1. 17 

1. 1 1

1 Less than 0.05 percent.

Source: U.S. Veterans Administration, Office of Controller.

234

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
A larger proportion of nonwhite than white war veterans had availed themselves of GI bill training

by early 1961, but proportionately fewer had received other benefits, such as VA compensation, pension,

or m ilitary retirement pay; GI life insurance; or VA home, farm, or business loans.

T a b l e IVE-2.—M a le W a r V etera n s 1 P a r tic ip a tio n in L ife I n s u r a n c e a n d B en efit P r o g r a m s , b y P r o g r a m a n d C olor

U n ite d S ta te s, L a te 1 9 6 2 - E a r ly 1 9 6 3

Life insurance and benefit programs All war veterans Nonwhite White Percent non­ white of all war veterans participating

All war veterans participating (percent)___ 10 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 7

VA compensation, pension, or military retirement pay: 

Receiving___ ___ 11 8 1 1 5

Not receiving_______ _ ___ _ _ __ 89 92 89 7

GI life insurance: Insured____ ______________ _ _ _ ___ 29 19 30 5

Not insured____ _________ _ _ ___ ___ 71 81 70 8

GI bill training and vocational rehabilitation programs: 2 Trained___ _ _________ 46 53 45 8

Did not t r a i n______ _______ ___ ___________ 54 47 55 6

VA home, farm, or business loan: Obtained loan.. _ _ ____ _ _ _ ___ __ 33 14 35 3

Did not obtain loan___ ______ _ _ _ ___ 67 8 6 65 9

* World War II and Korean war (noninstitutional).

2 Servicemen’s Readjustment Act of 1944, as amended.

Source: U.S. Veterans Administration, Office of the Controller.

Nonwhite war veterans were less than half as likely as white war veterans to have obtained a GI

home loan by 1962-63, and less than % as likely in the South. Of those who did not get a GI home

loan, relatively more nonwhite than white veterans tried but failed.

T a b l e IVE-3.— M a le W a r V e te r a n s ’ 1 U se o f G I L o a n E n title m e n t, b y C olor, U n ite d S ta te s, a n d S o u th , L a te 1 9 6 2 - E a r ly 1 9 6 3

GI loan program and use of entitlement

United States South Percent of nonwhite war veterans in 

group

Non white White Non white White United States South

All war veterans 1 (percent)________ __ 10 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 Obtained GI home loan 2_________ 14 34 1 0 34 3 3

Never obtained GI home loan. _ 8 6 6 6 91 6 6 9 14 Tried but failed__ 12 7 1 0 7 1 2 15 Bought home otherwise (including some who tried but failed) _. . _ _ _____ 26 37 26 40 5 7

Have not bought home since service 3 _ _ 53 25 56 23 14 23

1 World War II and Korean war (noninstitutional).

2 Farm and business loans not included.

8 Includes small proportion who already owned homes before service.

N ote.—Because of rounding, sums of individual items may not equal totals.

Source: U.S. Veterans’ Administration, Office of the Controller.

217-817 0 - 6 6 - 1 6 235

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Proportionately twice as m any nonwhite as white war veterans received VA or Armed Forces

hospitalization between 1947 and 1963, but the proportions receiving VA outpatient care were similar.

T a b l e IVE-4.—Male War Veterans 1 Receipt ofVA Medical Benefits Since 1947, by Color, Late 1962-Early 1963

Color

Received VA (or Armed Forces) hospitalization 2

Received VA outpatient care

Since 1947 Since November 1961 Since 1947 Within 2 months prior to survey

All war veterans 1 (percent)______________________________ 10 2 16 1

Nonwhite____________ _ _ -------------- --------------- 18 6 18 1

White______________________________________ _____ 9 2 16 1

i W orld W ar I I a n d K o r e a n c o n flic t. (N o n in s t itu t io n a l.)

J R e la tiv e ly fe w v e te r a n s w e r e p a tie n ts in A r m e d F o rc e s h o sp ita ls .

S o u rce: U .S . V e te r a n s A d m in is tr a tio n , O ffice o f th e C o n tr o lle r .

236

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
T h e in com e ad van tage of fam ilies h eaded b y m ale w ar veteran s, com pared to all oth er fam ilies

w ith a m ale head, w as m u ch greater am ong n on w h ites than w h ites a t all age levels, according to th e

1960 C ensus.

T a b l e IVE-5.—Income in 1959 of All Families With Male Head and Families With Male War Veteran Head, by Age and

Color, 1960

Head, all ages Under 35 years 35-44 years 45-64 years 65 and over

Income in 1959 Non­ white White Non­ white White Non­ white White Non­ white White Non­ white White

All families, male h e a d________ 10 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0

Under $3,000_____________ 41 17 39 13 31 8 41 14 70 47 $3,000 to $6,999 ___________ 44 44 49 57 50 44 43 40 23 33 $7,000 to $14,999___________ 14 34 1 2 28 18 42 15 39 6 16 $15,000 and over............... ....... 1 5 0 ) 2 1 6 1 8 1 4

Median income____________ $3, 610 $6 , 007 $3, 621 $5, 672 $4, 275 $6 , 854 $3,672 $6 , 664 $1, 857 $3, 249 Ratio: Nonwhite to white median income_______ _ 60.1 63.8 62.4 55.1 57.2

War veteran head..................... 10 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0

Under $3,000______________ 28 9 25 7 24 6 32 1 1 60 33 $3,000 to $6,999 ___________ 51 46 56 56 53 43 49 39 31 39 $7,000 to $14,999___________ 19 39 19 35 2 2 45 18 40 8 2 1 $15,000 and over__________ 1 6 1 2 1 6 1 10 1 6

Median income________ ___ $4, 557 $6 , 593 $4, 636 $6 , 2 1 0 $4, 935 $7, 003 $4, 352 $6 , 943 $2, 420 $4, 441 Ratio: Non white to white median income___________ 69.1 74.7 70.5 62.7 54.5

Percent difference between median income of families with war veteran head and of all families with male head_ 26.2 9.8 28.0 9.5 15.4 2 . 2 18.5 4.2 30.3 36.7

i L e ss th a n 0 .5 p e r c e n t.

N ote.— B e c a u se o f r o u n d in g , s u m s o f in d iv id u a l it e m s m a y n o t e q u a l to ta ls .

S o u rce: 1960 C ensus of P o pu la tion : Subject R epo rts, V eterans, P C (2 )- 8 C , ta b le s 21, 22; 1960 C ensus of P o pu la tion : D etailed C haracteristics, U nited States

S u m m ary, P C ( 1 ) - 1 D , ta b le 224 ( U .S . B u r e a u o f th e C e n s u s ).

237

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
E d u catio n a l a tta in m en t for b oth w h ite and n on w h ite m ale w ar veteran s w as higher in 1960 than

am ong all m ales (w h ite and nonw hite) in every occu p ation al category. L ev el of schooling and m ed ian

earnings, how ever, tend ed to be low er for n on w h ite than w h ite m ales in each occu p ation group, regardless

of veteran sta tu s.

T a b l e IVE-6 .—Earnings, Educational Attainment, and Age of All Males and Male War Veterans, by Occupation Group

and Color, 1960

Median Ratio: Nonwhite to white medians for—

Major occupation group and war veteran status Earnings Years of school Age

Earn- Years of Age

Non­ white White Non­ white W hite Non- white W hite ings school

Total, males 1------------- -------------------------------- $2, 566 $4,735 8 . 6 11.4 39 41 .54 .75 .95 Professional, managerial, and kindred workers___________ _ ____ ____ 4, 220 6 , 634 1 2 . 6 14. 0 40 42 .64 .90 .95 Craftsmen, foremen, and kindred workers___ 3, 400 5, 281 8.9 1 0 . 6 40 42 .64 .84 .95 Operatives and kindred workers_________ 2, 958 4, 392 8.5 9.8 38 38 .67 .87 1 . 0 0 Clerical and sales workers. ____ _ _ 3,738 4, 846 1 2 . 1 12.3 35 39 .77 .98 .90 Service workers _ -------------------- — 2, 365 3, 443 8 . 8 9.9 41 44 .69 .89 .93 Farmers, farm managers, farm laborers.. 706 1,689 5.4 8 . 0 42 48 .42 . 6 8 . 8 8 Laborers, except farm and mine____ ____ 2, 285 3, 076 7.4 8.7 39 36 .74 .85 1.08

War veterans 1________ _________________ 3, 372 5, 479 1 0 . 0 1 2 . 2 39 39 .62 .82 1 . 0 0 Professional, managerial and kindred workers _______ __ . ___________ _ 4, 757 7, 002 15.4 14.6 38 39 . 6 8 1.05 .97 Craftsmen, foremen, and kindred workers___ 3, 852 5, 603 10.3 11.5 39 39 .69 .90 1 . 0 0 Operatives and kindred workers_____ — 3, 485 4, 949 9.6 10.4 38 38 .70 .92 1 . 0 0 Clerical and sales workers_________ 4, 381 5, 507 12.4 1 2 . 6 37 39 .80 .98 .95 Service workers________________ 2, 926 4, 416 1 0 . 0 1 1 . 2 40 41 . 6 6 .89 .98 Farmers, farm managers, farm laborers.. _ _ 883 2, 304 6 . 2 1 0 . 0 42 41 .38 .62 1 . 0 2 Laborers, except farm and mine_______— 2, 914 4, 075 8 . 1 9.3 39 39 .72 .87 1 . 0 0

1 I n c lu d e s d a ta for p e r so n s w it h o c c u p a tio n n o t rep o rted , for w h o m d a ta are n o t s h o w n sep a r a te ly .

Source: C en su s o f P o p u la tio n : 1960, S u b ject R e p o rts, V etera n s, PC(2)-8C, tables 16, 17; D e ta ile d C h ara cteristics, U n ite d S ta tes S u m m a ry , PC(1)-1D, tables

205, 208; and S u b ject R e p o r ts, O ccu p a tio n a l C h a racteristics, PC(2)-7A, tables 9, 10; unpublished tables 14 and 15; and S u b ject R e p o r ts, E d u c a tio n a l A tta in m e n t,

PC(2)-5B, table 8 (U.S. Bureau of the Census).

238

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
T h e n on w h ite lag in m edian years of sch oolin g in 1960 tend ed to be less am ong m ale w ar veteran s

th a n am ong all m ales. In the group 2 5 -2 9 years old, m ed ian years of schooling for n on w h ite w ar veteran s

w ere virtu a lly th e sam e as for w h ite w ar veteran s, in con trast w ith a 2-year gap am ong all m ales in th a t

age group.

T a b l e IVE-7.— E d u c a tio n a l A tta in m e n t o f A ll M e n a n d o f W a r V e te r a n s, b y A g e a n d C olor, 1 9 6 0

Years of school completed

25-29 years 30-34 years 35-44 years 45-54 years 55 and over

Non­ white W hite Non­ white W hite Non­ white W hite Non­ white W hite Non­ white W hite

Total males_______________ _______ ____ 10 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0

Less than 4 years high school_____ ___ 64 37 70 44 76 47 8 6 62 92 78 High school, 4 years_______ 23 33 18 29 15 30 8 2 1 4 1 0 College, 1-3 years___ _ ____________ 8 14 6 1 1 5 1 0 3 9 2 6

College, 4 years or more__ _____ ___ 5 16 6 16 4 1 2 3 9 2 6

Median years___ ________ __ 10.5 1 2 . 6 9.7 1 2 . 8 8 . 2 1 2 . 1 6 . 2 10.7 5.3 7.6

War veterans___ ____ __________ 10 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0

Less than 4 years high school__________ 50 33 61 39 69 43 79 53 89 69 High school, 4 years_______ _______ 32 37 23 30 2 0 32 1 2 23 5 13 College, 1-3 years_____ ______ _ 13 17 9 13 7 1 1 5 1 1 3 9

College, 4 years or more_______________ 6 13 7 18 5 14 4 13 3 1 0

Median years___ __ ______ __ 1 2 . 0 12. 5 1 1 . 0 12.7 1 1 . 2 1 2 . 8 7.5 9.5 5.6 8.4

Notes.—Because of rounding, sums of individual items may not equal totals.

S o u rce: I960 C ensus of P opu la tion : Subject R epo rts, E du cation al A tta in m en t, P C ( 2 ) - 5 B , ta b le 2; 1960 C ensus of P opu la tion : Subject R eports, V eterans, P C ( 2 ) -

8 C , ta b le 7 ( U .S . B u r e a u o f th e C e n s u s ).

239

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
V eteran s’ hou sin g w as gen erally superior to th a t of n on veterans in 1960, b u t th e im p rovem en t w as

m ore pronounced am ong n on w h ites.

T a b l e IVE-8 .—Characteristics of Housing Among All Families With Male Head and Families Headed by War Veterans, by

Tenure and Color, 1960

Households—families with male head

Total War veteran head

Housing characteristics In owner-occu- In renter-occu- In owner-occu- In renter-occu- pied units pied units pied units pied units

Nonwhite W hite Nonwhite White Non white W hite Non white W hite

Total------------------------------------------ - - 10 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 Cooking equipment for exclusive use and direct access in: Sound and deteriorating housing units. 89 98 80 95 92 99 82 93 With all plumbing. _ __________ 65 91 54 84 76 94 63 84 Lacking some or all plumbing----- 24 7 26 1 1 16 5 19 9

Dilapidated housing units__________ 11 2 19 5 7 1 14 4

Without cooking equipment for exclusive use and direct a c c e ss.______________ 0 ) 0 ) 2 0 )

1 0 ) 4 3

Lacks flush toilet for exclusive use_______ 26 7 30 1 1 16 5 2 2 1 1

Lacks hot running water_______________ 31 7 37 1 1 2 0 4 25 8

1 L e ss th a n 0.5 p e r c e n t.

N ote.—Because of rounding, sums of individual items may not equal totals.

S o u rce: U .S . V e te r a n s ’ A d m in istr a tio n ; 1960 Census of P opu la tion : Subject R epo rts, F am ilies, P C (2 )- 4 A , ta b le 34 ( U .S . B u r e a u o f th e C e n s u s .)

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1 9 6 6 O — 2 1 7 -8 1 7

In all age groups the m edian valu e of hom es ow ned

veteran s in 1960.

b y n on w h ite w ar veteran s w as m u ch low er .than th ose ow ned b y w h ite nonT a b l e IVE-9.— Value of Nonfarm Owner-Occupied Housing Units of War Veterans and Others, by Age and Color, 1960

Value of unit

Head, all ages Under 35 years 35-44 years

Non white White Non white White Non white White

War veteran Other 1 War veteran Other 1 War veteran Other 1 War veteran Other 1 War veteran Other 1 War veteran Other 1

All units. ______________ _____ 10 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0

Less than $7,500_______________ 41 57 15 25 34 57 14 25 37 51 13 2 1 $7,500 to $14,900_______________ 44 32 44 43 49 33 49 48 46 34 43 41 $15,000 to $24,900______________ 13 9 32 25 14 8 32 23 15 1 1 34 29 $25,000 to $34,900______________ 2 1 6 5 1 1 4 3 2 2 7 6

$35,000 or more. ______________ 1 1 3 3 (2) (2) 1 1 1 1 3 3

Median value______ _______ ____ $8 , 774 $6 , 550 $13, 629 $11, 960 $9, 412 $6 , 557 $13,265 $11, 505 $9, 313 $7, 323 $14, 101 $12,946

45-54 years 55-64 years 65 years and over

All units. _ _ ______________ ___ 10 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0

Less than $7,500_______________ 43 54 16 2 1 51 58 19 24 65 69 25 33 $7,500 to $14,900_______________ 42 33 41 42 37 31 42 43 27 24 43 44 $15,000 to $24,900______________ 13 1 0 31 27 1 1 9 27 24 8 6 23 18 $25,000 to $34,900______________ 1 1 7 6 (2) 2 7 5 (2) 1 5 3

$35,000 or more. _______ (2) 1 5 4 (2) 1 6 4 (2) 1 5 2

Median value. _ ___________ ____ $8,511 $7, 006 $13, 896 $12,855 $7, 303 $6 , 510 $13, 210 $12, 035 $5, 914 $5, 449 $11,891 $1 0 , 282

1 H e a d n o t a w a r v e te r a n .

* L e ss th a n 0.5 p e r c e n t.

N o t e .— B e c a u s e o f r o u n d in g , s u m s o f i n d iv id u a l ite m s m a y n o t e q u a l to ta ls .

S o u rce: 1960 C en su s o f P o p u la tio n : Subject R eports, Veterans, P C ( 2 ) - 8 C , ta b le s 23, 24 ( U .8 . B u r e a u o f C e n s u s ).

H *

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis