The full text on this page is automatically extracted from the file linked above and may contain errors and inconsistencies.
) 570~7 city worker’s family budget FOR A LIVING MODERATE STANDARD A u t u m n 1 9 6 6 - B u lle tin N o . 1 5 7 0 -1 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF LABOR BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS city worker’s family budget FOR A LIVING MODERATE STANDARD A u tu m n 1 9 6 6 -B u I let in N o . 1570-1 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF LABOR Will ardWi rtz, Secretary BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS Arthur M. Ross, Com missioner For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office Washington, D.C. 20402 - Price 30 cents Contents Page Introduction ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Costs in urban areas -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------A moderate standard: Present and past ------------------------------------------------------------Intercity differences---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Data sources and estimating methods -------------------------------------------------------------Food------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Shelter c o s ts----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Transportation ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Medical care ---------Other goods and services -------------------------------------------------------------------------------Other c o s ts ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- v 1 2 8 16 17 18 19 19 20 21 T able s : 1. Annual costs of the city worker’ s family budget by major components urban United States, 39 metropolitan areas, and nonmetropolitan areas byregions, autumn 1966 ----------------------------2. Indexes of comparative living costs based on the city worker's family budget, autumn 1966 --------------------------------------------------- 13 Appendix contents ------------------- — -------------------------------------------------------------------------- 23 iii 9 Introduction The City Worker’ s Family Budget described in this bulletin provides one answer to the question, "How much does it cost to live? " The question, however, is deceptively simple. The answers are multiple and complex, depending pri marily on: (1) the age, size, and type of family; and (Z) the standard of living to which the family aspires. All benchmark estimates of living costs are based on specific family situ ations. The cost estimates of the City Worker! s Family Budget are for a fam ily of 4 persons: an employed husband, age 38; a wife not employed outside the home; and two children, a girl age 8 and a boy 13. This type represents a middle stage in the typical family life cycle. The man is presumed to be an experienced worker and well-advanced in his trade or profession. He has been married for 15 years or more. The family group is well established and has average inventories of clothing, housefurnishings, major durables, and other equipment. Three-fourths of such fam ilies are homeowners with mortgages they contracted for 7 years earlier. Benchmark l i v i n g cost estimates for larger f a m i l i e s or those with older children will be higher, and estimates for smaller or younger families or re tired couples will be lower, than those for the type of 4-person family used in the City Worker1s Family Budget. In short, there is no single answer to the question "How much does it cost to live? ", since family size, age, and type have a significant effect on spending patterns, manner of living, and family needs. The other major consideration in developing family budgets is the stand ard of living for which cost estimates are made. "Standards of living" refer to the goals we set for ourselves as consumers of goods and services and as users of leisure time. The l i v i n g standard represented by the current City Workerfs Family Budget is described as moderate. It provides for the maintenance of health and social well-being, the nurture of children, and participation in commu nity activities. This generalized con cept of a moderate standard has been translated into a list of commodities and services which can be priced. (See appendix A. ) The content of the new budget for a moderate standard is based on the manner of living and consumer choices in the 1960’ s. Two kinds of data were used to derive the list of goods and services included in the budget. First, nutritional and health standards, as de termined by scientists and technicians, were used for the food-at-home and the h o u s i n g components. The selection among the various kinds of food and housing a r r a n g e m e n t s meeting the standards was based on actual choices made by families as revealed by sur veys of consumer expenditures. Sec ond, where scientific standards have not been formulated, analyses of the data reported in the Bureau’ s Survey of Consumer Expenditures and related consumption studies were used to de termine the s p e c i f i c items, and the quantitatives and qualities thereof, to be included in the budget. These analytical procedures result in basing some parts of the budget upon the collective judgment of consumers as to the kinds and amounts of consumption required, rather than upon scientific standards. In such a n a l y s e s , some e x e r c i s e of the budget-maker’ s own judgment is involved; however, in this budget, such judgment has been confined to selection of the basic data and de termination of the procedures to be fo l lowed in deriving the items and quanti ties making up these parts of the budget. The specific decisions that were made with respect to each component of the new City Worker's Family Budget are documented in this bulletin. Both of these earlier budgets were for a family of the same size, age, and type as that in the new budget. Simi larly, the living standard in all 3 stud ies p r o v i d e s for the maintenance of health and social well-being, the nurture of children, and participation in com munity activities. For the most part, the procedures used to translate this generalized concept of the living stand ard into a list of goods and services were also the same, but the kinds and quantities of items c o m p r i s i n g the standard differ, because the budget re flect the conditions of living in 3 dif ferent decades. Changes in educational levels, cultural developments growing out of travel and migration, and growth in purchasing power affect the level of living of American families and their ideas about what constitutes a moderate living standard. The moderate living standard does not show how an "average” family ac tually spends its money, nor does it show how a family s h o u l d spend its money. Individual families may spend more on one item and less on others than the amounts indicated in the budget. Furthermore, many families can and do spend less than the total amount specified in this budget without feeling deprived and without impairing t h e i r health or their ability to contribute con structively to our society. In general, h o w e v e r , the representative list of goods and services c o m p r i s i n g the standard reflects the collective judg ment of families as to what is nec essary and desirable to meet the con ventional and social as well as the phys ical needs of families of the budget type in the present decade. Technological advances also influ ence the composition of the standard. New types of consumer goods and serv ices are developed, mass production increases their availability, and mass communication and advertising stimu late the d e m a n d for them. As real income rise, certain aspects of living, once considered attainable only by a few, come within the reach of many and are accepted as part of the Amer ican way of life. In a dynamic society, therefore, the r e l a t i v e position of a moderate living standard on a scale of all living standards may remain fixed, but the description of what constitutes that standard will be ever-changing. The new City Worker's F a m i l y Budget is the third study published by BLSwhich translates a generalized con cept of a moderate standard of living into a list of commodities and services that can be priced. The original City Worker's Family Budget was issused in 1947. The quantities and qualities of goods and services i n c l u d e d in that budget were based on the manner of living and standards prevailing in the early 1940's. The pricing of the orig inal budget in 34 large cities was dis continued after October 1951 because the budget was outmoded. In I960, the Bureau issued The In terim City Worker's Family Budget. It was based on a new list of goods and s e r v i c e s representing "modest-butadequate" living in a c c o r d a n c e with standards prevailing in the 1950’s. Be cause the basic data used in the analysis related to the early 1950's, and because of the limited scope of this revision, it was considered "interim, " pending a more complete review of the procedures and the availability of data from the Bureau's Survey of Consumer Expendi tures in 1960—61. The interim budget was priced only once, in autumn 1959, in 20 large cities. The present study differs from the earlier budgets in two major respects. These differences have a f f e c t e d the level of the 1966 costs and comparative living cost indexes, particularly in re lation to the costs and indexes of the 1959 interim budget. 1. For the first time, the budget has been priced in a sample of medium sized and small cities. Thus, it is possible to estimate the average U. S. urban budget cost and to compare met ropolitan and nonmetropolitan a r e a costs. (See appendix B. ) vi higher standard for the 4-person family and for the retired couple. The lower standard budget will represent a mini mum of adequacy. Substantial down ward adjustments will be made in the content and/or manner of living of the moderate standard, where this is pos sible without compromising the family's physical health or self-respect as m em bers of their community. 2. Costs of maintaining an owned home have been included in the mod erate standard. Shelter costs in the earlier budgets were limited to rental housing. Use of rental housing only was appropriate for l a r g e cities in terms of the 1940 modest standard of the original budget, but it was recog nized as a limitation in the 1959 interim budget in terms of the standard of the 1950's. The a d d i t i o n of homeowner costs provides, for the first time, com parative budget costs for renter and owner families and intercity indexes of homeowner m a i n t e n a n c e costs for equivalent housing. In contrast with the moderate budg ets, the lower-standard budgets will not conform in certain respects to prevail ing customs and buying practices— that is, to the collective judgments of fami lies of these types concerning what is necessary for a satisfactory standard of living. The lower standard budgets are expected to be more appropriate than the moderate budgets for use in establishing goals for public assistance and income maintenance programs in the current decade. The effects of these and other changes on the moderate standard are discussed in detail in this bulletin. A list of the Bureau's p r e v i o u s budgets and related references, is pro vided in appendix C, including the Re port of the Advisory C o m m i t t e e on Standard Budget Research, June 19&3. This r e p o r t summarizes the recom mendations of a special committee of experts, representing users of standard budgets in State and local welfare ad ministration, academic research, labor unions, and b u s i n e s s organizations. The committee advised the Bureau on the direction that its research on stand ard budgets should take, and its recom mendations formed guidelines for the Bureau in the development of the cur rent budget. The higher standard budget will re flect a more c o m f o r t a b l e level and manner of living sometimes known as the "American standard of living. " It will be useful in determining the ability of self-supporting families to pay for fee services, or their eligibility for scholarships, e tc ., and in certain gen eral economic analysis. In the future, estimates of the cost of the three standard budgets for the 4-person family and for a retired couple will be made as of the spring of the year and published periodically for the same metropolitan areas and regional classes of smaller cities as those in cluded in the present study. Subsequent bulletins in the current series will report r e s u l t s of other phases of the standard budget research programs. Bulletin 1570-2 will describe the Revised Equivalence Scale for estimat ing budget costs for families of differ ent size, age, and type. This bulletin was p r e p a r e d by Jean C. Brackett under the supervision of Helen H. Lamale, Chief of the Divi sion of Living Conditions Studies and the general direction of Arnold E. Chase, A s s i s t a n t Commissioner. Elizabeth Ruiz supervised the research for all budget c o m p o n e n t s except food and medical care, for which Mary H. Hawes was responsible. Other staff members whose work contributed substantially to the project were Miriam A. Solomon, Roseann C. Cogan, Alice B. Curry, and M. Louise McCraw. Bulletin 1570-3 will report the au tumn 1966 Budget Pricing Procedures, Specifications, and Average P rices. Bulletin 1570-4 will give the autumn 1966 costs for a Retired Couple's Budget for a moderate standard of living. Subsequently, there will be bulletins on the spring 1957 costs for the mod erate standard, and for a lower and a vii City Worker’s Family Budget for a Moderate Standard of Living, Autumn 1966 Costs in Urban Areas The annual cost of living at a moder ate standard for a family of four per sons (husband 38, wife not employed outside the home, boy 13, and girl 8) averaged $ 9, 191 in autumn of 1966 in urban areas of the United States. The cost averaged $9, 376 in metropolitan areas and $8, 366 in smaller cities. 1 About 80 percent of the total cost of the budget is allocated to family consump tion items— food, housing, transpor tation, clothing, personal care, medical care, and other items used in family living. Such costs averaged $ 7 ,3 2 9 , about $795 higher in metropolitan areas than in smaller cities. In a d d i t i o n to consumption items, the total budget includes a l l o w a n c e s for gifts and contributions, basic life i n s u r a n c e , p e r s o n a l income and social security taxes, and occupational expenses. D is tributions of costs, by m a j o r com ponents of the budget, are shown in the tabulation below. B u d g e t costs were a b o u t $800 higher for homeowner than for renter families. 2 However, this figure in cludes an a v e r a g e of about $450 in 1 Table 1 shows annual costs of the budget for urban United States, metropolitan and nonmetropolitan areas, 39 individual metropolitan areas, and 4 nonmetro politan regions. (See p. 9 .) ^ Since the majority of families of the budget type are homeowners, their costs constitute 75 percent, and costs for renter families 25 percent, of the weighted aver age cost of shelter for urban United States and each individual area. Distribution of costs by major components, autumn 1966 Component _________ Total cost of budget____________ _____ Cost of family consumption_______ Total urban Total urban Metropolitan areas Nonmetropolitan areas Total cost------------------------------------ $9, 191 $9, 376 $ 8 ,3 6 6 100.0 100.0 100.0 Total fam ily consumption--------------F o o d -------------------------------------------Housing*-------------------------------------Transportation----------------------------Clothing and personal c a r e ------Medical ca re -----------------------------Other family consumption--------- 7 9 .7 2 3 .3 24. 1 8 .9 7 9 .9 2 4 .0 5. 1 7 .8 7 9 .7 2 3 .2 2 4 .4 8 .7 10. 5 5. 1 7 .8 Other costs---------------------------------------Gifts and contributions-------------Personal life insurance--------------- 4 .5 4 .5 4 .7 2 .8 2 .8 2 .8 1 .7 1 .7 1 .9 Occupational exp en ses------------------ .9 .9 1 .0 Social security and disability p ay m en ts-------------------------------------- 3. 1 3. 1 3 .3 1 1 .9 11. 1 Percent distribution------------------------------ Personal taxes 1 -------------------------------- 10.6 11.8 2 2.6 $ 7 ,3 2 9 $ 7 ,4 7 4 $ 6 , 681 1 0 0 .0 100.0 1 0 0 .0 2 9 .3 3 0 .2 29. 1 3 0 .6 1 0 .9 13. 2 6 .4 9 .8 3 0 .0 2 8.3 9 .7 11.1 10.8 1 3 .2 6 .4 9 .8 4 .9 7 .8 Metropolitan Nonmetropolitan areas areas 1 Weighted average cost for homeowner (75 percent) and renter (25 percent) families. 278-870 0 - 67-2 1 12.2 1 3 .5 6.2 9 .8 2 payments on m o r t g a g e principal, an element of "savings" not included in the budget for renter families. The addi tional income required to cover these payments also results in higher per sonal t a x e s for homeowner families, d e s p i t e the fact that their mortgage interest payments are tax deductible. Few families of the type represented by this budget claim contributions, inter est, and o t h e r eligible deductions in excess of the standard deduction. Total budget costs were highest for homeowner f a m i l i e s in metropolitan areas and lowest for renter families in smaller cities, averaging $9, 588 and $7, 946, respectively. (See the following tabulation. ) This difference reflects not only the variation in the costs and man ner of living associated with renting or owning a home but also the difference in transportation requirements and spend ing patterns for clothing, personal care, recreation, m e a l s away from home, etc. , between metropolitan areas and smaller cities. 3 ^ See appendix A for separate quantity lists for families residing in metropolitan and nonmetropolitan areas. These lists were developed for all budget com ponents that were derived by analysis of the choices of goods and services m a d e by consumers in successive income groups. Differences in total budget costs by type of area and tenure Nonmetropolitan areas Cost difference by type of area Urban United States Metropolitan areas Total budget c o s t ---------------- $9, 191 $9, 376 $ 8 ,3 6 6 $ 1 ,0 1 0 Homeowner fam ilies---------------------Renter fa m ilie s ------------------------------ 9, 390 8 ,5 9 4 9, 588 8, 739 8 ,5 0 6 7 ,9 4 6 1,082 793 Cost difference by tenure----- 796 849 560 XXX Tenure A Moderate Standard: Present and Past Defining the Standard "Standards of living" refer to the goals we set for ourselves as consum ers of goods and services and as users of leisure time and to our norms for conditions of living. Standard budgets measure the total costs of maintaining the levels and manners of living repre sented by these goals. "Level of living" is defined as a c t u a l consumption of goods and services; "manner of living" as the way or style of life (city or country, homeowner or renter, etc.)— in other w o r d s , how the goods and services are consumed. In a standard budget, the "goals of consumers" are translated into a list of goods and services which describe a specific standard that can be priced. To provide meaningful estimates of its costs, the budget s t a n d a r d must be related to a specific size and type of family, and specific assumptions must be made with respect to the family's manner of living. If these assumptions are reasonable and factually based, and if the list of goods and services has been determined by objective methods, then the standard budget provides an independently derived cost estimate for measuring income adequacy and eval uating the actual levels of living of fam ilies as revealed by consumer expendi tures and other consumption data. The 1966 budget continues to rep resent, as did the original and interim budgets, a moderate standard of living for an urban family of four, consisting of an employed husband, age 38, a h o u s e w i f e not employed outside the home, and two children— a girl age 8 and a boy age 13. The concept of this standard budget was described in the original budget as follows: 3 "The budget was designed to repre sent the estimated dollar cost required to maintain this family at a level of adequate liv in g -— to satisfy prevailing standards of what is n e c e s s a r y for health, efficiency, the nurture of chil dren, and for participation in commu nity activities. This is not a 'subsist ence* b u d g e t , nor is it a 'luxury* budget; it is an attempt to describe and measure a modest but adequate standard of living. " 4 Two k i n d s of data were used to arrive at the component parts of the budget: "One, those derived from labo ratory experiments or from scientific observation; the other, those showing the spending practices of representative samples of urban families of the same type as that for which the budget was to be constructed. *' Since budgetary re quirements vary with climate and other local conditions, the quantities and types of goods and services required to pro vide the moderate standard must be ad justed to describe an equivalent stand ard of living from place to place. In defining the s t a n d a r d for the original b u d g e t , the Technical Advi sory Committee recognized that "such a budget is not an absolute and unchang ing thing. The prevailing judgment of the necessary will vary with the chang ing values of the community, with the advance of s c i e n t i f i c knowledge of human needs, with the productive power of the community, and therefore with what people commonly enjoy and see others enjoy. " 5 Income and Budget Costs The City Worker’ s Family Budget provides a measure of income adequacy for a self-supporting family of a specific size, age, composition, residence, and employment status. Thus, the total cost of the budget should be compared di rectly only with the total annual income of four-person families of similar type living in urban areas. The budget total should not be compared directly with general levels of industrial wages and wage rates or with average income of all urban families. Estimates of the costs of consumption for other family types can be derived from the revised scale of equivalent income or budget costs noted in the Introduction. These scale values cannot be used, however, to estimate total budget costs including taxes, life insurance, etc. , or costs for the components of consumption, such as housing or food. The level of living represented by the budget is not " m i n i m u m " in the sense in which that term is used in re lation to standards or goals for public assistance or welfare programs. On the other hand, the standard of living represented by the items and quantities included in the moderate budget is below that enjoyed by a majority of American families of this specific type. Most such families, comparing in detail the items and quantities with their own con sumption, may regard them as inade quate in some respects. In urban United States in the BLS survey for 1960—61, average income be fore taxes was $9, 095 for families of the general type specified for the budget (hereafter called a budget-type family). This was composed of husband and wife, and two children ages 6—17 years; it contained o n l y one full-time earner. Increases in median incomes from 1959 to 1965 (the latest data available), as reported in the Current Population Sur veys of the B u r e a u of the Census, ranged from 20 percent for all urban families of two persons or more, to 27 percent for urban families with two children. These trend data applied to the 1960—6 1 average income for budgettype families suggest that their 1966 average income before taxes amounted to at least $ 11,000. A l t h o u g h this method of estimating 1966 income of budget-type families is not precise, it provides a reasonable approximation. 4 Techncial Reference 10, p. 40, appendix C. 5 The City Worker’ s Family Budget, Monthly Labor Review, February 1948, p. 137. 4 The level of the moderate standard, therefore, is at least 16 and more likely 20 percent below the average level of living for f a m i l i e s of this type. A s i m i l a r analysis of the level of the interim budget in 1959 indicated that it was "about 15—20 percent below the es timated average 1959 income of budgettype families. " 6 Thus, the standard of the new budget is at approximately the same relative position on the current scale of consumption as were the stand ards of the original and interim budgets. The new budget continues to represent the necessary conventional and social as well as biological requirements of a self-supporting family. Comparison with Earlier Budgets The original budget was defined as, "modest but a d e q u a t e " in terms of standards prevailing in the years imme diately preceding and following World War II. For goods and services other than food and shelter, the quantities and pricing lists were derived primar ily from analyses of expenditure stud ies made in 1934—36 and 1941. The nutritional standard for food was based on the 1945 allowances recommended by the National Research Council, but the selection of foods to meet these standards was made from the 1941 and earlier food survey data. Specifications for healthful housing, formulated by the American Public Health Association in the mid—1940’ s , were used as guides in defining the s h e l t e r standard. This budget was priced in 34 large cities in March 1946, June 1947, and a u t u m n 1948, 1949, 1950, and 1951. Pricing was discontinued, because the modest standard of the 1940’ s was no longer appropriate for measuring budget costs in the 1950’ s. The modest standard of the interim budget for the food, shelter, and med ical care c o m p o n e n t s was based on standards and purchasing practices of the mid—1950 fs. For other goods and services, the budget q u a n t i t i e s and p r i c i n g lists were derived primarily from the Bureau's Survey of Consumer Expenditures in 1950. The i n t e r i m budget was priced only in Autumn 1959, in 20 large cities. The current budget is based on the standards of the 1960fs. The pricing date is a u t u m n 1966. T h e s e three studies provide the basis for approxi mating the change in the standard over the past two decades. For 18 of the 39 metropolitan areas in the current budget study, cost estimates are also available from the two previous studies. The estimates for 1951 and 1959 are for renter families only; those for 1966 are for renters and for renters and owners combined. Changes in Total Costs In the 18 cities priced in all three studies, the t o t a l cost of a moderate standard of living for the four-person family averaged about $4, 200 in 1951. In 1959 the total cost of the interim budget for the same 18 was $6, 100, or 45 percent higher than in 1951. The cost of the current moderate standard in the same cities in 1966 averaged $8,700 for renter families and $9,283 for rent er and owner families combined. These levels were 43 percent and 52 percent higher than in 1959. These increases in the level of total budget costs reflect increases in Federal, State, and local income taxes and social security taxes as well as the rise in prices and in the standard of living represented in these budgets. Personal income taxes, which ac counted for 7 percent of the total budget cost in 1951, made up 11 percent of the budget in 1959, and 12 percent of the combined renter-owner budget in 1966. Social s e c u r i t y taxes amounted to 1 percent of the 1951 budget, 2 percent in 1959, and 3 percent in 1966. The cost of family consumption items aver aged 87 percent of the total budget cost in 1951, 83 percent in 1959, 80 percent in 1966 reflecting the relatively larger increases in personal income and social security taxes than in the cost of the family consumption items. ^ Subsequent analysis indicated that both the esti mated average 1959 income of budget-type families and the level of the interim budget costs were understated. See discussion, p. 39 of Technical Reference 5, appendixC. 5 Changes in the Consumption Standard In 1951, the cost of family con sumption items in the modest standard for a family of f o u r averaged about $3, 750 in the 18 cities represented in the budgets for all three periods. By 1959, the cost of the interim budget was about $5,180, or 38 percent higher. The 1966 moderate standard for these cities averaged $7, 189 for commodities and services purchased by renter fam ilies, and $7, 655 for renter and owner families combined. These costs were 39 and 48 percent above the 1959 level, respectively, and about double that of 1951. The advance in costs reflects both the rise in the standard of living represented in the budgets and the in crease in prices over this period. A precise measure of the change in living costs attributable to changes in the standard or manner of living, as distinguished from that caused by in creased prices, is almost impossible to achieve, because many of the com modities and services constituting the standard for an earlier period cannot be priced in current markets. How ever, the Consumer Price Index can be used to provide a very rough approx imation of the effects of price change. The procedure followed was to update the costs of the earlier standards to 1966 by changes in the Consumer Price Index at the subgroup level for each of the 18 cities. Then, the differences between the costs of the 1966 standard in these cities and the updated estimates of the 1951 and 1959 standards were deflated by the change in the CPI over the appropriate period to adjust for the higher price l e v e l s prevailing at the later date. The residual differences in costs between the new and the previous budgets in these 18 cities can be attrib uted to the upgrading of the standard. The average difference has been used hereafter in this report as a reasonable approximation of the change in the mod erate standard for all urban U.S. budgettype families. About 15 of the total 39 percent in crease in the budget costs from 1959 to 1966 for renter families can be iden tified as resulting f r o m advances in prices, leaving about 24 percent to rep resent the upgrading of the standard. For owner and renter families com bined, the new standard reflects a 32 percent increase in the standard and manner of living after factoring out a 16 percent advance in prices. Compared with 1951, the new standard reflects approximately a 40 p e r c e n t rise in prices, plus increases in the standard amounting to about 50 p e r c e n t for renter families only and 60 percent for owner and r e n t e r families combined. Hence, over this 15-year period, the rise in the moderate standard (after ad justment for price changes) would aver age about 3. 5 to 4 percent a year. Over approximately the same pe riod (1950 to 1965), the increase in real after-tax income (also a d j u s t e d for price c h a n g e ) has been estimated at about 66 percent for families of the budget type, or approximately 4. 5 per cent a year. Average after-tax income for budget-type families was $4, 515 in 1950 and $7, 969 in 1960—61, based on the BLS Survey of Consumer Expendi tures for these dates. Current Pop ulation Surveys by the Bureau of the Census for 1959 and 1965 indicate an increase of 27 percent in median in comes of urban families with two chil dren. Applying this trend to the 1960—61 reported average results in an esti mated income of $10, 120 in 1965 for budget-type families. In 1950 dollars, the averages are $ 4 ,5 1 5 , $ 6 ,4 4 2 , and $7,497 in 1950, 1960-61 and 1965, re spectively. The estimated increase in real income between 1960—61 and 1965, amounting to 16 percent, is confirmed by the Department of Commerce, Office of B u s i n e s s Economics data on per capita personal income, per capita dis posable income, and per capita per sonal consumption expenditures. Therefore, almost all of the im provement in the real level of living of the average budget-type family has been reflected in the standard, which con tinues to represent the same relative position on the s c a l e of consumption over the two decades. 6 U p gradin g the F oo d Standard The cost of the food standard in the 1966 budget reflects both the choice of the specific Department of Agriculture (USDA) food plan used to meet the nu tritional standard and changes in the regional preference patterns since 1955. (Preference patterns are regional var iations in the choice of foods which pro vide the nutritional s t a n d a r d . ) The 1959 interim budget food standard was based on 1955 regional preference pat terns; the 1966 budget, on 1965 patterns. One of the major sources of up grading in the 1966 standard was in the food component, which was based on the USDA moderate-cost food plan. In the 1959 budget, food costs were calcu lated from an average of the low- and moderate-cost plans. The cost of food at home in the 1966 standard is about 12 percent higher than it would have been if an average of the low- and moderate-cost plans b a s e d on 1965 p r e f e r e n c e patterns had been used. Since food at home represents 25 per cent of the total cost of consumption in the 1966 budget, the use of the higher food standard accounts for about 3 of the 24 percent i n c r e a s e in the overall standard. Although families can achieve nu tritional adequacy from the low-cost food plan, it has been estimated that only 23 percent of those who spend amounts equivalent to the cost of this plan actually have nutritionally adequate diets. The foods included in the plan require a considerable amount of home preparation and skill in cooking. Many of the families existing on low-cost food budgets have neither the time nor the technical knowledge to produce inter esting, varied, and nutritionally ade quate meals at this cost level. The 1959 budget used 1955 data on regional variations in the choices of foods to determine the costs of the food standard. In the 1959 budget, foodat-home costs were lowest in Atlanta and Houston and highest in Boston and Pittsburgh, with a 24 percentage point spread among the 18 cities common to the interim and current budget studies.7 These differences resulted primarily from variation in food choices. When only price differences were allowed to affect the costs of the food plans, cities in the South were not among the least expensive. The new standard is based on 1965 data on regional v a r i a t i o n s in food choices. The change in food pref erence patterns over the decade has re sulted in relatively lower food costs, in all except the Southern cities, than would have been obtained if the 1955 preference patterns had been continued in the new budget. In Detroit and Pittsburgh, for ex ample, autumn 1966 moderate-plan food costs, based on the 1965 preference patterns, were 4 and 6 percent lower, respectively, than autumn 1966 costs of the 1955 preference patterns in these cities. In Houston and Atlanta, how ever, they were 2 and 4 percent higher. As a result, the range in food costs was reduced from 24 to 16 percentage points among these 18 cities. Between 1955 and 1965, regional differences in food patterns lessened. Thus, food buying habits in the South have moved closer to the patterns in other parts of the country. The new food standard also reflects the increase in the number of meals bought and eaten away from home by families of this type. The 1966 allow ance provides for 261 and 310 meals away from home in metropolitan areas and small cities, respectively, com pared with 212 in the 195 9 budget and 189 in the original budget. The number of times the family group might eat out in a restaurant increased from five visits a year (20 meals) to a visit ap proximately once a month (42 meals). 7 See Technical Reference 1, appendix C for complete explanation of the extent to which regional variations in food choices, as opposed to variations in prices, contributed to this overall difference in the cost of the food standard in the interim budget. A similar analysis is planned for the 1966 budget. a 7 Effect of Changes in Housing In the housing component of the new standard, rental costs were based on a narrower range of dwelling unit quality (i. e. , the average of the middle third of the distribution of autumn 1966 contract rents for units that met the budget criteria of adequacy) than was used for the 1959 budget, in which costs were based on average rents for all units meeting the adequacy criteria. As a result, the published costs for rental housing in Atlanta, C i n c i n n a t i , and Pittsburgh were lower in 1966 than the estimates published in 1959, despite the increase in fuel and utility costs over this period to the tenants who pay sep arately for them. The narrower quality range used for the 1966 budget provides a more precise basis for measuring the cost of the moderate standard, but the 1966 esti mates understate the change in rental housing costs in comparison with 1959. This has relatively little effect on the overall cost level of the new budget, however, since only 25 percent of the budget-type families were assumed to live in rental housing. The more signi ficant change in the new standard is the previously discussed inclusion of homeowner costs for three-fourths of the fam ilies. Increase in Auto Ownership Accompanying the c h a n g e in the housing pattern is a revision of the pro portions of automobile owners. In the 1959 budget, New York, Philadelphia, and Boston were specified as low (48 percent) ownership cities. In the new budget for these cities, and also for Chicago, auto ownership is specified for 80 percent of the families. 8 For other areas in the 1959 budget, 76 per cent of the f a m i l i e s were assumed to own cars, but auto ownership is specified for 95 to 100 percent of the families in these areas in 1966. These upward revisions in the proportions of auto owners were based on trend infor mation from the 1950 and 1960—61 Sur veys of Consumer Expenditures and from transportation surveys of the Bu reau of the Census. Increased owner ship and use of automobiles accom panied the trend to homeowner ship and the extension of suburbs in large met ropolitan areas to areas not served by public transportation. Better Health Care Since the m id -1 9 5 0 's, there has been a substantial extension of hospital and surgical insurance coverage under provisions of wage and salary contracts to families of the budget type. The medical care budget includes the fam ily's share of the premium for a group hospitalization plan and out-of-pocket expenses for other medical services and supplies. In accordance with the trend in prevailing practices, the new budget provides fewer visits to physi cians than the 195 9 budget. Quantities for both budgets were based on utili zation rates derived from U. S. Public Health Service data, which reported a decline in home and office visits, from 15. 7 to 13. 7 annually, for the age-sex groups in the budget-type family. The number of physician's visits to family members in the hospital i n c r e a s e d during this same period. There are two reasons for the change in the budg et costs for physician's visits, (1) the extension of insurance to include sur gical services in the new budget pro vides an alternative method of payment for physician's in-hospital services, and (2) the 1966 budget specifies some partial or complete payment of health insurance premiums by employers. 9 As a result, the cost of the family's direct payments for physician's visits was lower in the new than in the interim standard, despite the increase in physi cian's fees between 1959 and 1966. The new budget provides for a substantially higher standard for dental care than the previous budget, particularly for peri odic e x a m i n a t i o n s , straightening of teeth, gum treatment, and denture work. 8 For a detailed description, see p. 19. 9 For description, see p. 19. 8 Different Kinds of Clothing For all of the components derived by the quantity- or emenditure-income elasticity technique, 1(* the new budget allowances reflect changes in the stand ard of living which accompany changes in the level of real income. For exam ple, the quantity of the women's casual shoes tripled, reflecting an increasingly i n f o r m a l way of life and the wider choice of such shoes in stores today; but the quantity of dress shoes declined. The husband’ s clothing budget includes fewer topcoats, heavy wool suits, and dress shirts but more wool jackets, l i g h t w e i g h t suits, sports coats and slacks, and casual shoes— a reflection of the fact that men also are wearing less formal apparel. Improved heating of homes, automobiles, and places of work requires less protection from cold weather and a l s o contributes to the change of men's apparel. In personal c a r e , the quantities of haircuts declined for the boy but in creased for the man, woman, and girl. Individual preferences play a large part in the way families spend their money, however, and the allowances provided for these items are not suggested as a spending plan for an individual family. 10 This technique is described on p. 20. Intercity Differences The new budget provides a wide va riety of comparative living cost indexes, not only for total budget costs but for the major categories of consumer goods and services (table 2). For the first time in the Bureau’ s program of stand ard budget research, separate budget cost estimates and comparative indexes are provided f o r individual medium sized metropolitan areas and for broad regional groupings of nonmetropolitan areas. The average costs for the items which make up the budget in each area are shown in table 1. Also, for the first time, comparative housing cost data for renter and owner families are included separately. The intercity indexes reflect not only the difference among areas in price levels but also climatic or regional dif ferences in the quantities and types of items required to provide the specified standard of living, and differences in State and local taxes. They are com parative l i v i n g cost indexes and not comparative price indexes. the small southern cities to $11, 190 in Honolulu. (New York had the highest cost of the m a i n l a n d cities.) Since Honolulu costs were also significantly higher than those in the mainland cities for most categories of the budget, 11 the following discussion will be limited to the 42 mainland areas. Indexes of relative costs for the total budget (U.S. urban average cost= 100) ranged from 85 in smaller cities in the South to 111 in New York— a spread of 26 percentage points (table 2). The allowances for life insurance and occupational expenses were $160 and $80, r e s p e c t i v e l y , the same in all cities. The social security deduction, $277, was also the same, since in all cities the total budget e x c e e d e d the maximum level of earnings for with holding tax for Federal old-age and sur vivor’ s insurance, i. e. , $ 6 ,6 0 0 . P ro vision for gifts and c o n t r i b u t i o n s , estimated as 3. 2 percent of total family Variations in Total Costs The total annual cost of the budget in autumn 1966 ranged from $7, 855 in 11 A ll major categories except homeowner shelter, clothing, personal care, and medical care. 278-870 0 - 6 7 Table 1. Annual Costs of the City Worker’s Family Budget1 by Major Components, Urban United States, 39 Metropolitan Areas, and Nonmetropolitan Areas by Regions, Autumn 1966 Urban United States Item Total M etropolitan areas 2 Northeast N on m etro politan areas 3 Lan c a s te r , Pa. New Y o r k North eastern New J erse y P h ila delphia, Pa. —N. J. P itts burgh , P a. Portland, Maine Nonm etro politan areas 3 Boston, M ass. B uffalo, N. Y . $ 2 , 209 1 ,8 8 3 326 2, 378 1 ,7 6 5 2, 581 1,8 91 1 ,2 7 9 2 ,0 9 5 272 215 878 878 202 791 171 202 169 179 70 218 461 233 88 273 722 73 291 60 134 73 91 $ 2 , 377 2 ,0 1 5 362 2, 538 1 ,9 4 9 2 ,7 3 4 2 ,0 8 3 1 ,4 9 4 2, 279 260 195 909 909 204 783 175 186 171 170 80 224 481 203 109 285 774 73 340 60 129 76 96 $ 2 , 286 1,9 51 335 1 ,9 4 5 1,6 5 1 2 ,0 4 3 1 ,5 0 3 1 ,2 0 9 1 ,6 0 1 247 195 773 773 186 755 166 184 159 170 75 201 413 167 68 273 730 63 319 60 129 75 84 $ 2 , 380 1 ,9 9 6 384 2, 655 1 ,7 8 0 2 ,9 4 5 2, 181 1 ,3 0 7 2, 472 266 207 731 874 159 789 176 197 174 175 68 217 497 210 119 288 763 73 308 60 154 73 95 $ 2 , 289 1 ,9 5 7 332 2 ,1 3 0 1 ,5 3 4 2, 329 1 ,6 5 5 1 ,0 5 9 1 ,8 5 4 270 205 739 873 203 766 169 186 171 169 71 213 449 229 81 270 732 73 299 60 138 75 87 $ 2 , 225 1 ,8 8 7 338 1 ,9 6 6 1,5 6 1 2, 100 1 ,5 0 7 1 ,1 0 2 1,6 4 1 253 207 790 820 229 758 167 190 162 164 75 214 433 208 78 266 729 76 306 60 128 75 84 $ 2 , 264 1 ,9 7 0 294 2 ,1 9 7 1 ,6 5 9 2, 377 1 ,7 0 4 1 ,1 6 6 1 ,8 8 4 266 227 819 819 194 815 180 202 164 191 78 203 466 268 94 256 727 80 291 60 131 76 89 $ 2 ,1 7 9 1 ,9 0 4 275 2, 131 1,5 11 2, 338 1 ,6 5 3 1 ,0 3 3 1 ,8 6 0 256 222 820 820 H artford, Conn. Food at home ---------------------------------------Food away from h o m e -----------------------Housing: T o t a l-----------------------------------------------Renter fa m ilies ----------------------------------------Homeowner f a m i l i e s -------------------------------Shelter: Total 4 ----------------------------------Rental costs 5 ---------------------------------Hom eow ner costs 6 -----------------------Housefurnishings --------------------------------Household o p e r a tio n s-------------------------Transportation: T o t a l7 --------------------------------Autom obile o w n e r s ----------------------------------Nonowners of autom obiles --------------------Clothing -----------------------------------------------------------Husband ------------------------------------------------W ife -------------------------------------------------------B oy----------------------------------------------------------G i r l ---------------------------------------------------------Clothing m a teria ls and s e r v ic e s -----P erso n a l care ------------------------------------------------M edical care: T o t a l-------------------------------------Insurance 8 --------------------------------------------P h y sic ia n 's v isits ------------------------------Other m e d ic a l care ---------------------------Other fam ily consu m p tion ---------------------------R e ad in g--------------------------------------------------R e c re a tio n --------------------------------------------Education-----------------------------------------------Tobacco ------------------------------------------------A lcoh olic b everages --------------------------M iscellan eou s ex p e n se s--------------------- $ 2 , 143 1 ,8 2 4 319 2, 214 1 ,7 3 6 2, 374 1 ,7 3 3 1 ,2 5 5 1 ,8 9 3 265 216 815 860 151 756 174 187 168 154 72 214 468 219 89 284 719 65 306 55 134 72 87 $ 2 , 173 1 ,8 4 0 333 2 ,2 8 6 1 ,7 7 6 2 ,4 5 7 1 ,8 0 8 1 ,2 9 8 1 ,9 7 8 266 212 815 870 184 767 174 191 169 159 74 218 481 225 94 290 734 70 310 60 133 72 89 $ 2 ,0 0 5 1 ,7 5 4 251 1 ,8 9 4 1 ,5 5 7 2 ,0 0 6 1 ,4 0 2 1 ,0 6 5 1 ,5 1 4 258 234 813 813 709 179 169 164 132 66 194 411 191 69 259 654 41 291 35 139 69 79 $ 2 , 317 2 ,0 1 0 307 2, 732 1 ,8 7 5 3 ,0 1 8 2, 245 1 ,3 8 8 2, 531 260 227 812 964 206 756 174 191 153 169 69 210 471 259 91 269 746 73 297 60 143 78 95 Cost of fam ily consumption: T o ta l9 --------Renter fa m ilies ----------------------------------------Homeowner f a m i l i e s --------------------------------- 7 ,3 2 9 6, 850 7 ,4 8 8 7 ,4 7 4 6 ,9 6 4 7 ,6 4 3 6, 681 6, 343 6 ,7 9 3 8 ,0 4 5 7 ,1 8 8 8, 331 7 ,6 5 7 7 ,0 4 5 7 ,8 6 1 8 ,0 8 6 7 ,4 9 7 8 ,2 8 2 7 ,1 0 4 6 ,8 0 9 7, 202 8 ,0 3 1 7 , 157 8, 322 7 ,3 1 9 6 ,7 2 2 7 ,5 1 8 7 ,1 1 7 6, 712 7 ,2 5 1 7 ,4 9 1 6 ,9 5 3 7 ,6 7 0 7 ,1 6 6 6, 546 7 ,3 7 3 Other c o s t s ------------------------------------------------------Gifts and contributions-----------------------Life insurance ------------------------------------Occupational expenses ---------------------------------S ocial secu rity and disab ility payments — P erso n a l taxes: T o ta l9 --------------------------------Renter fam ilies ----------------------------------------Homeowner f a m i l i e s --------------------------------- 413 253 160 80 289 1 ,0 8 0 961 1 ,1 1 9 419 259 160 80 291 1 ,1 1 2 985 1 ,1 5 5 391 231 160 80 280 935 852 962 438 278 160 80 277 1 ,3 0 0 1 ,0 6 5 1, 379 425 265 160 80 293 1 ,2 6 9 1 ,1 01 1 ,3 2 6 440 280 160 80 277 1 ,1 1 7 992 1 ,1 5 9 406 246 160 80 277 1 ,0 2 3 958 1 ,0 4 5 438 278 160 80 295 1, 351 1 ,1 0 5 1 ,4 3 3 413 253 160 80 277 1 ,1 0 4 969 1 ,1 4 9 406 246 160 80 277 1 ,0 3 9 949 1 ,0 6 9 419 259 160 80 277 990 879 1 ,0 2 7 408 248 160 80 290 1,0 41 891 1,0 91 Cost of budget: T o ta l9 ---------------------------------Renter fa m ilies ----------------------------------------Homeowner f a m i l i e s -------------------------------- 9, 191 8, 594 9 ,3 9 0 9, 376 8 ,7 3 9 9 ,5 8 8 8, 366 7 ,9 4 6 8, 506 10 ,141 9 ,0 4 9 1 0 ,5 0 5 9 ,7 2 4 8 ,9 4 3 9 ,9 8 5 1 0 ,0 0 0 9 ,2 8 6 1 0 ,2 3 9 8, 890 8 , 530 9 ,0 1 0 1 0 ,1 9 5 9 ,0 7 5 1 0 ,5 6 8 9 , 193 8 ,4 6 2 9 ,4 3 7 8 ,9 1 9 8 ,4 2 4 9 ,0 8 4 9 ,2 5 7 8 ,6 0 8 9 ,4 7 3 8 ,9 8 5 8 ,2 1 4 9 ,2 4 2 - _ 7 30 175 173 176 140 65 193 440 226 79 264 672 42 304 35 142 64 85 See footnotes at end of table. CD Table 1. Annual Costs of the City Worker’s Family Budget1 by Major Components, Urban United States, 39 Metropolitan Areas, and Nonmetropolitan Areas by Regions, Autumn 1966— Continued O North Central Cedar Rapids , Iowa Cham p aignUrbana, 111. Chicago, 111- — Cincinnati, North - O h io -K y .western Ind. Ind. F o o d ------------------------------------------------------------------Food at home --------------------------------------Food away from h o m e -----------------------Housing: T o t a l-----------------------------------------------Renter fa m ilies ----------------------------------------Homeowner f a m i l i e s --------------------------------Shelter: T o t a l4 ----------------------------------Rental cost 5 ----------------------------------Homeowner costs 6 -----------------------H ousefurnishings --------------------------------Household o p e r a tio n s-------------------------Transportation: T o t a l7 --------------------------------Autom obile o w n e r s ----------------------------------Nonowners of autom obiles ---------------------Clothing -----------------------------------------------------------Husband ------------------------------------------------W ife -------------------------------------------------------B oy----------------------------------------------------------G i r l --------------------------------------------------------Clothing m a teria ls and s e r v ic e s -----P erson al care ------------------------------------------------M edical care: T o t a l-------------------------------------Insurance 8 --------------------------------------------P h y sic ia n 's v isits ------------------------------Other m e d ical care ---------------------------Other fam ily consu m p tion ---------------------------R e a d in g --------------------------------------------------R e c re a tio n --------------------------------------------Education ---------------------------------------------Tobacco ------------------------------------------------A lcoholic b e v e r a g e s---------------------------M iscellan e ou s e x p e n se s--------------------- $ 2 ,0 7 8 1 ,7 7 3 305 2, 337 1 ,9 4 1 2, 469 1 ,8 2 4 1 ,4 2 8 1 ,9 5 6 277 237 842 842 193 777 178 189 171 162 77 227 435 212 73 271 748 65 331 60 137 67 88 $ 2 ,1 1 3 1 ,8 1 2 302 2 ,4 8 0 2 ,2 1 8 2, 567 2 ,0 0 2 1 ,7 4 0 2 ,0 8 9 268 211 794 794 193 764 175 196 155 164 74 211 480 255 85 286 726 56 324 60 128 68 90 $ 2 ,1 5 3 1 ,8 3 5 318 2, 549 1,9 61 2 ,7 4 4 2 ,0 7 5 1 ,4 8 8 2, 271 258 215 770 913 201 770 183 189 164 156 77 229 484 255 86 289 729 71 307 60 133 67 91 $ 2 ,0 9 8 1 ,7 8 2 316 2, 170 1 ,6 1 6 2, 355 1,7 01 1 ,1 4 7 1 ,8 8 6 261 208 832 832 222 758 171 191 168 156 72 193 401 170 76 252 721 76 310 60 117 73 85 $ 2 ,0 9 1 1 ,7 51 340 2 ,4 6 6 1,7 31 2 ,7 1 3 1 ,9 8 8 1 ,2 5 2 2 ,2 3 4 256 222 822 854 209 781 174 194 172 165 76 215 429 257 86 233 719 76 309 60 117 68 89 Cost of fam ily consumption: T o ta l9---------Renter fa m ilies ----------------------------------------Hom eow ner f a m i l i e s --------------------------------- 7 ,4 4 6 7 ,0 5 0 7 ,5 7 7 7 ,5 6 8 7 ,3 0 6 7 ,6 5 5 7 ,6 8 5 7 ,0 9 8 7 ,8 8 1 7 ,1 7 3 6 ,6 1 9 7 ,3 5 7 Other costs ------------------------------------------------------Gifts and con tribu tion s----------------------L ife in su r a n c e -------------------------------------Occupational expenses ---------------------------------S ocial secu rity and d isab ility paym ents — P e r so n a l taxes: T o ta l9 --------------------------------Renter fa m ilies ----------------------------------------Homeowner f a m i l i e s --------------------------------- 418 258 160 80 277 1 ,2 0 1 1, 101 1 ,2 3 4 422 262 160 80 277 1 ,0 0 3 949 1,0 2 1 426 266 160 80 277 1 ,0 38 916 1 ,0 7 9 C ost of budget: T o ta l9 ---------------------------------Renter fa m ilies ----------------------------------------Homeow ner f a m i l i e s --------------------------------- 9 ,4 2 1 8 ,9 2 6 9 ,5 8 6 9 ,3 5 0 9 ,0 3 4 9 ,4 5 5 9 ,5 0 6 8, 797 9 ,7 4 3 Item See footnotes at end of table. Kansas City, M o .K a n s. M il waukee , W is. M inne apolis— St. Paul. Minn. $ 2 ,0 9 9 1 ,7 9 6 304 2, 336 1 ,8 1 9 2, 509 1 ,8 4 4 1 ,3 2 6 2 ,0 1 6 272 221 887 887 196 784 181 192 177 155 79 219 431 241 84 244 747 74 318 60 129 77 89 $ 2 ,1 3 9 1 ,8 2 7 313 2 ,0 8 3 1 ,7 3 8 2, 199 1 ,5 8 3 1 ,2 3 6 1 ,6 9 8 277 225 871 871 198 762 175 190 173 155 69 234 441 207 80 272 741 67 319 60 142 67 86 $ 2 ,0 6 4 1 ,7 2 8 336 2 ,5 0 8 1 ,7 8 7 2 ,7 4 8 2 ,0 3 9 1 ,3 1 8 2, 279 243 226 829 829 186 758 170 184 161 165 78 213 443 238 79 262 732 74 303 60 142 64 89 $ 2 , 058 1 ,7 6 4 294 2, 286 1 ,8 1 3 2, 444 1 ,8 2 8 1 ,3 5 4 1 ,9 8 5 248 211 834 834 199 759 175 187 160 157 81 226 446 291 76 244 720 71 293 60 136 73 87 $ 2 , 199 1 ,8 6 5 334 2 ,2 0 2 1 ,7 1 9 2, 363 1 ,7 0 9 1 ,2 2 6 1 ,8 7 0 265 228 839 872 225 760 170 189 165 162 74 222 443 217 85 264 710 67 30 3 60 131 62 87 $ 2 , 123 1 ,8 3 8 285 2 ,0 7 4 1 ,7 4 5 2, 183 1 ,5 8 6 1 ,2 5 7 1 ,6 9 5 270 218 848 848 191 747 175 186 164 151 71 208 445 248 85 253 745 66 330 60 135 69 85 $ 1 ,9 9 4 1 ,7 6 7 227 2 ,0 6 4 1,7 21 2, 179 1 ,5 6 5 1 ,2 2 2 1 ,6 8 0 260 239 790 790 731 193 174 155 137 71 199 398 204 66 245 642 40 289 35 129 68 81 7 ,0 5 7 6 ,5 0 2 7 ,2 4 3 7 ,5 0 3 6 ,9 8 5 7 ,6 7 6 7 ,2 7 2 6 ,9 2 6 7, 387 7 ,5 4 7 6 ,8 2 7 7 ,7 8 7 7, 329 6 ,8 5 6 7 ,4 8 7 7 ,3 7 6 6 ,8 9 4 7 ,5 3 7 7, 189 6 ,8 6 1 7 ,2 9 8 6, 819 6 ,4 7 5 6 ,9 3 3 410 250 160 80 277 972 868 1 ,0 0 7 404 244 160 80 277 1 ,2 6 2 1 ,0 9 8 1 ,3 1 6 419 259 160 80 277 1 ,1 1 4 992 1 ,1 5 5 412 252 160 80 277 1 ,1 4 8 1 ,0 0 8 1, 195 421 261 160 80 277 1 ,4 1 5 1 , 198 1 ,4 8 7 413 253 160 80 277 1, 395 1 ,2 4 7 1 ,4 4 4 415 255 160 80 277 1 ,0 9 2 979 1 ,1 3 0 409 249 160 80 277 1 ,0 9 7 1 ,0 1 5 1, 125 396 236 160 80 277 963 881 991 8 ,9 8 1 8, 388 9 , 178 9 ,0 8 0 8, 361 9 ,3 2 0 9 ,3 9 4 8 ,7 5 4 9 ,6 0 8 9 ,1 8 9 8 ,7 0 3 9 ,3 5 1 9 ,7 4 0 8 ,8 0 3 1 0 ,0 5 2 9 ,4 9 5 8 ,8 7 4 9 ,7 0 2 9 ,2 4 1 8 ,6 4 5 9 ,4 4 0 9 ,0 5 2 8 ,6 4 2 9, 189 8 ,5 3 5 8 ,1 0 9 8 ,6 7 7 D etroit, M ich. Green B ay, W is. $ 2 ,0 6 3 1 ,7 7 8 286 2 ,0 4 5 1 ,7 9 8 2 ,1 2 7 1 ,5 8 5 1 ,3 3 8 1 ,6 6 7 259 201 819 819 186 764 177 194 173 149 70 198 402 170 77 251 726 70 325 60 119 69 83 $ 2 , 149 1 ,7 9 6 353 2 ,0 7 6 1 ,5 8 8 2, 239 1 ,6 0 5 1 ,1 1 6 1 ,7 6 7 262 210 817 850 199 776 177 194 171 157 78 223 465 278 87 258 735 76 311 60 131 71 86 $ 1 ,9 9 7 1 ,7 2 2 276 2, 101 1 ,5 4 5 2, 286 1 ,6 3 0 1 ,0 7 4 1 ,8 1 5 260 211 826 826 172 765 177 198 159 151 80 198 427 199 69 272 744 70 328 60 138 64 84 7 ,5 2 5 6 ,7 8 9 7 ,7 7 1 7 ,0 1 6 6 ,7 6 9 7 ,0 9 8 7 ,2 4 1 6 ,7 5 3 7 ,4 0 4 408 248 160 80 277 1 ,0 3 8 912 1 ,0 8 0 420 260 160 80 277 994 842 1 ,0 4 4 40 3 243 160 80 277 935 883 953 8 ,9 7 6 8 ,2 9 5 9 ,2 0 3 9 ,2 9 7 8 ,4 0 9 9 ,5 9 3 C leve land, Ohio Dayton, Ohio 8 ,7 1 1 8 ,4 1 1 8 ,8 1 1 Indian apolis , Ind. St. Louis , W ichita, Kans. M o.-111. N on m etro politan areas 3 Table 1. Annual Costs of the City Worker’s Family Budget1 by Major Components, Urban United States, 39 Metropolitan Areas, and Nonmetropolitan Areas by Regions, Autumn 1966---- Continued South Item Washington, D. C . - M d . V a. Nonm etro politan a r e a s3 Atlanta, Ga. Austin, T ex. B altim ore, Md. Baton Rouge, La. D allas, Tex. Durham, N. C. Houston, Tex. N ash ville, Tenn. Orlando, F la. Food ---------- ---------------------------------------------------------Food at h o m e -----------------------------------------Food away fro m h o m e --------------------------Housing: Total ------------------------------------------------Renter fa m ilie s -------------------------------------------Hom eow ner fa m ilie s ---------------------------------Shelter: T o t a l4 -------------------------------------Rental costs 5 ------------------------------------H om eow ner costs 6 --------------------------Housefurnishings ----------------------------------Household operations --------------------------Tran sportation: T o t a l7----------------------------------A utom obile o w n e r s -------------------------------------Nonowners of autom obiles -----------------------Clothing --------------------------------------------------------------Husband ---------------------------------------------------Wife ............................................................ ........... B o y -----------------------------------------------------------G i r l -----------------------------------------------------------Clothing m a teria ls and se r v ic e s — — P erson al care ---------------------------------------------------M edical c a re: ^ otal --------------------------------------In su r a n c e ------------------------------------------------P h y sic ia n 's v isits ---------------------------------Other m edical care ------------------------------Other fam ily consu m ption ------------------------------R eading----------------------------------------------------R e c re a tio n -----------------------------------------------E d u c a tio n ------------------------------------------------Tobacco ---------------------------------------------------A lcoholic b everages ___________________ M iscellan e ou s e x p e n s e s ----------------------- $ 2 , 016 1,7 17 299 1,8 08 1,5 9 6 1,8 78 1,3 1 2 1, 100 1, 382 267 229 826 826 213 714 170 185 161 137 62 227 437 174 87 275 746 70 299 60 144 93 80 $ 1 ,9 9 5 1 ,7 0 0 295 1 ,6 7 6 1,4 6 2 1,7 4 8 1, 205 991 1,2 77 249 222 806 806 167 703 158 178 164 133 71 195 420 135 84 278 710 64 301 60 143 65 77 $ 2 , 026 1 ,7 0 2 324 1,9 97 1 ,8 5 9 2, 043 1,4 91 1, 353 1,5 3 7 262 244 810 842 204 722 173 181 168 137 63 211 450 222 87 267 7 09 70 297 60 127 72 82 $ 2 , 028 1 ,7 2 4 305 1 ,8 8 2 1 ,4 9 0 2, 013 1 ,4 31 1 ,0 3 8 1,5 6 1 258 194 896 896 189 686 161 176 154 130 65 221 426 172 89 263 723 70 302 60 139 71 81 $ 2 , 021 1 ,7 0 0 321 1 ,8 91 1 ,7 1 4 1 ,9 51 1 ,4 2 1 1 ,2 4 3 1 ,4 8 0 254 217 821 821 187 702 162 180 162 131 67 214 478 190 88 309 734 66 304 60 150 73 81 $ 1,9 61 1 ,6 87 275 2, 016 1 ,6 2 8 2, 145 1, 549 1, 161 1 ,6 7 8 267 200 804 804 162 715 169 181 165 133 68 207 444 213 89 263 690 66 314 60 97 72 81 $ 2 , 039 1 ,7 1 0 329 1 ,7 9 4 1 ,5 3 5 1 ,8 8 0 1 ,3 1 0 1 ,0 5 1 1, 397 263 221 860 860 199 686 157 176 161 128 64 216 466 166 89 306 733 69 306 60 149 68 81 $ 1 ,9 6 4 1 ,6 7 7 287 2, 021 1 ,6 0 4 2, 160 1, 529 1, 112 1 ,6 6 8 263 229 832 832 183 741 171 192 166 147 66 207 427 173 78 274 736 68 299 60 142 85 82 $ 1 ,9 8 8 1 ,6 8 7 302 1 ,9 61 1 ,6 9 6 2, 050 1,4 7 7 1, 212 1 ,5 6 6 269 215 827 827 198 696 165 178 155 131 68 199 433 165 94 269 716 68 300 60 134 73 81 $ 2 , 135 1 ,8 1 9 316 2, 325 1 ,8 41 2 ,4 8 7 1 ,8 3 3 1, 349 1 ,9 9 5 255 237 823 856 204 733 170 186 163 142 71 221 464 204 93 283 718 70 321 60 113 66 88 $ 1,9 2 5 1,6 7 5 250 1 ,6 7 6 1 ,4 5 2 1, 751 1, 188 964 1 ,2 6 3 254 234 810 810 _ C ost of fam ily consum ption: T o t a l9 -----------Renter fa m ilies -------------------------------------------H om eow ner f a m il ie s ----------------------------------- 6 ,7 7 4 6, 563 6, 845 6, 505 6, 291 6, 577 6, 924 6, 785 6, 970 6 ,8 6 3 6 ,4 7 0 6 ,9 9 4 6, 861 6, 683 6, 921 6 ,8 3 8 6 ,4 5 0 6, 967 6 , 794 6, 534 6 ,8 8 0 6, 928 6, 511 7, 067 6, 820 6, 555 6 ,9 0 8 7 ,4 1 9 6, 935 7, 581 6, 310 6, 086 6, 385 Other costs -------------------------------------------------------Gifts and contribu tions-------------------------Life insurance --------------------------------------Occupational expenses ------------------------------------Social secu rity and disability p a y m e n ts-----P erson al ta x es: T o t a l9 ---------------------------------Renter fa m ilie s -------------------------------------------Hom eow ner fa m ilies ---------------------------------- 394 234 160 80 277 908 856 925 385 225 160 80 277 780 736 795 399 239 160 80 277 1, 118 1 ,0 8 2 1, 130 397 237 160 80 277 920 831 950 397 237 160 80 277 856 819 868 396 236 160 80 277 1, 115 1, 005 1, 152 395 235 160 80 277 841 788 859 400 240 160 80 277 867 781 896 396 236 160 80 277 843 789 861 417 257 160 80 277 1, 188 1 ,0 61 1,2 31 378 218 160 80 277 810 757 827 Cost of budget: T o t a l9 ----------------------------------Renter fa m ilies -------------------------------------------Hom eow ner f a m ilie s ----------------------------------- 8 ,4 3 4 8, 170 8, 522 8 , 028 7, 769 8, 114 8, 798 8, 624 8 ,8 5 6 8, 538 8, 056 8 ,6 9 9 8 ,4 7 2 8, 257 8, 544 8, 707 8, 209 8, 873 8, 387 8, 074 8 ,4 9 1 8, 552 8, 049 8, 719 8 ,4 1 6 8, 097 8, 523 9, 381 8 ,7 7 0 9, 585 7 ,8 5 5 7, 578 7, 947 See footnotes at end of table. 671 169 162 156 123 60 187 394 169 65 256 648 40 282 35 143 73 75 Table 1. Annual Costs of the City W orker’s Family Budget1 by Major Components, Urban United States, 39 Metropolitan Areas, and Nonmetropolitan Areas by Regions, Autumn 1966— Continued 10 W est Item B ak ersfield , C alif. Denver, Colo. Honolulu, Hawaii Los A n g e le s Long Beach, Calif. San Diego, C alif. San F ran cisco— Oakland, C alif. Seattle— E verett, W ash. Nonmetro politan areas 1 34 2 F o o d __________________________________________ Food at home .. Food away from h o m e ______________ Housing: T o t a l______________________________ Renter fa m ilies _________________________ Homeowner f a m il ie s ___________________ S h elter: Total 1______________________ Rental costs 5_____________________ Homeowner costs 6_______________ H ousefurnishings____________________ Household o p e r a tio n s_______________ T ran sportation: Total 7____________________ Autom obile o w n e r s _____________________ Nonowners of autom obiles ____________ C lo th in g ______________________________________ H u sb an d _______________________________ W ife ___________________________________ B o y ____________________________________ G i r l ____________________________________ Clothing m a teria ls and s e r v ic e s ... P erson al care _______________________________ M edical c a re: T o t a l_______________________ Insurance 8____________________________ P h y sic ia n 's v isits ___________________ Other m e d ical care _________________ Other fam ily consu m p tion _________________ R ead ing________________________________ R e c re a tio n ____________________________ E d u c a tio n _____________________________ Tobacco _______________________________ A lcoholic b everages ________________ M iscellan eou s expenses ___________ $ 2 , 07 3 1,7 6 1 312 1, 916 1 ,5 2 5 2, 046 1 ,4 3 0 1, 039 1, 560 293 193 894 894 193 769 173 189 178 155 75 218 542 262 91 338 691 61 305 60 107 74 84 $ 2 , 111 1,7 9 7 314 2, 208 1,7 75 2, 352 1,7 09 1,2 76 1 ,8 5 3 267 2 32 860 860 204 787 183 191 180 156 77 220 476 247 84 286 701 64 297 60 125 69 87 $ 2 , 551 2, 216 335 2, 848 2, 376 3, 005 2, 256 1 ,7 8 4 2, 413 314 278 993 993 170 7 37 171 190 169 134 73 222 469 224 90 282 806 70 354 60 137 83 102 $ 2 , 100 1 ,7 39 361 2, 164 1 ,8 6 2 2, 265 1 ,6 9 8 1, 396 1 ,7 9 9 280 186 873 910 172 794 172 198 179 159 86 231 626 262 118 395 725 72 324 60 107 73 89 $ 2 ,0 3 2 1,6 8 6 346 2 ,2 1 1 1 ,7 1 5 2, 377 1 ,7 36 1 ,2 4 0 1, 902 289 186 900 900 238 766 164 191 180 158 72 215 579 262 100 367 702 73 301 60 107 73 88 $ 2 , 188 1 ,8 2 4 364 2 ,4 0 8 2, 092 2, 513 1 ,9 1 9 1 ,6 0 3 2, 024 286 203 896 936 148 819 177 201 180 168 93 253 550 207 110 351 745 72 333 60 114 73 93 $ 2 , 268 1 ,9 0 0 367 2, 314 1 ,9 9 3 2 ,4 2 0 1,8 1 1 1 ,4 9 1 1 ,9 1 8 266 2 36 923 923 205 827 183 195 188 173 89 236 495 203 96 312 758 69 304 60 157 76 93 $ 2 , 037 1 ,7 8 6 251 2, 023 1 ,6 9 8 2, 132 1 ,5 0 8 1, 182 1 ,6 1 6 274 242 847 847 782 193 178 192 142 77 209 441 205 72 281 669 46 307 35 134 64 83 C ost of fam ily consum ption: T o t a l9-------Renter fa m ilie s _________________________ Homeowner f a m il ie s ___________________ 7, 103 6 ,7 1 2 7, 233 7, 36 3 6 ,9 3 0 7, 507 8 ,6 2 6 8, 155 8, 783 7 ,5 1 4 7 ,2 1 2 7 ,6 1 5 7 ,4 0 5 6 ,9 0 9 7, 571 7, 860 7, 544 7, 965 7, 821 7, 501 7, 928 7, 008 6 ,6 8 3 7, 117 Other c o s t s __________________________________ Gifts and con tribu tion s_____________ Life in su r a n c e _______________________ Occupational expenses ------------------------------S ocial secu rity and disab ility payments — P erson al taxes: T o t a l9-----------------------------Renter fa m ilies -------------------------------------Hom eow ner f a m il ie s ------------------------------ 406 246 160 80 351 981 890 1 ,0 1 1 415 255 160 80 277 1, 100 990 1, 137 458 298 160 80 277 1 ,7 4 8 1 ,5 7 8 1 ,8 0 5 420 260 160 80 351 1, 080 1 ,0 1 0 1, 104 416 256 160 80 351 1, 054 938 1 ,0 9 2 432 272 160 80 351 1, 164 1 ,0 9 0 1, 188 430 270 160 80 277 1 ,0 5 7 991 1 ,0 7 9 402 242 160 80 277 1, 158 1,0 6 6 1, 188 C ost of budget: T o t a l9- ------------------------------Renter fa m ilies _________________________ Homeowner f a m il ie s ------------------------------ 8, 921 8 ,4 3 9 9, 082 9, 235 8 ,6 9 2 9, 416 11, 190 1 0 ,5 4 8 1 1 ,4 0 4 9 ,4 4 5 9, 072 9, 569 9, 307 8 ,6 9 4 9, 511 9, 886 9 ,4 9 6 1 0 ,0 1 7 9, 665 9 ,2 7 9 9, 794 8, 925 8, 508 9, 065 1 The fam ily con sists of an em ployed husband, aged 38, a wife not employed outside the hom e, an 8 -y e a r -o ld g ir l, and a 1 3 -y e a r -o ld boy. 2 For a detailed d escription , see the 1967 edition of the Standard Metropolitan Statistical A r e a s , prepared by the Bureau of the Budget. 3 P la c es with population of 2 ,5 0 0 to 5 0 ,0 0 0 . 4 The average costs of sh elter w ere weighted by the following proportions: 25 percent for fam ilies living in rented dw ellings, 75 percent for fam ilies living in owned h om es. 5 A verage contract rent plus the cost of required amounts of heating fuel, gas, elec tric ity , w ater, specified equipment, and insurance on household contents. 6 In terest and principal payments plus ta x es; insurance on house and contents; w ater, refuse d isposa l, heating fuel, ga s, ele c tr ic ity , and sp ecified equipment; and home repair and maintenance c o sts. 7 The average costs of automobile ow ners and nonowners were weighted by the following proportions of fa m ilie s: B oston, Chicago, New Y ork , and Philadelphia, 80 percent for autom obile ow n ers, 20 p ercen t for nonow ners; B altim ore, C leveland, Detroit, Los A n geles, Pittsburgh, San F r a n cisc o , St. L ou is, and Washington, D. C. , with 1 .4 m illion of population or m ore in I9 60 , 95 percent for autom obile owners and 5 percent for nonowners; all other areas, 100 percent for automobile ow ners. 8 The average costs of h ospitalization and su rgical insurance (as a part of total m edical care) were weighted by the following proportions: 30 percent for fam ilies paying full cost of in suran ce; 26 percent for fa m ilies paying half c o st; 44 percent for fam ilies covered by noncontributory insurance plans (paid for by em ployer). 9 The total rep resen ts the weighted average costs of renter fam ilies (25 percent) and owner fam ilies (75 percent). N O T E : See appendix A for item s may not equal totals. and quantities included in each component, and appendix B for thepopulation weights for each city. B ecause of rounding, sums of individual item s Table 2. Indexes of Comparative Living Costs Based on the City Worker’s Family Budget,1 Autumn 1966 ___________ _____________ A r ea Urban United S ta t e s -------------------------------------------------M etropolitan areas 7-------------------------------------------Nonm etropolitan areas 8-------------------------------------N ortheast: B oston, M a s s ------------------------------------------------B uffalo, N . Y -------------------------------------------------H artford, C on n ---------------------------------------------L a n ca ste r, P a ----------------------------------------------New York—N ortheastern New J e r s e y ------Philadelphia, P a .—N. J -------------------------------P ittsburgh, Pa ---------------------------------------------P ortland, Maine ------------------------------------------N onm etropolitan areas 8------------------------------North C entral: Cedar Rapids, Io w a -------------------------------------Champaign—Urbana, 111 ------------------------------C hicago, 111.—Northw estern Indiana--------Cincinnati, Ohio—K y .—Ind --------------------------C leveland, O h io --------------------------------------------Dayton, C h io -----'--------------------------------------------D etroit, M ic h ------------------------------------------------Green B ay, W i s --------------------------------------------Indianapolis, In d ------------------------------------------Kansas C ity, M o .—K ans------------------------------M ilw aukee, W i s --------------------------------------------M inneapolis—St. P aul, M in n ---------------------St. L ou is, M o .—Ill --------------------------------------W ichita, K a n s------------------------------------------------N onm etropolitan areas 8------------------------------South: A tlanta, G a ----------------------------------------------------A ustin, Tex ---------------------------------------------------B a ltim o re, Md ---------------------------------------------Baton Rouge, L a ------------------------------------------D allas , T e x ---------------------------------------------------Durham , N. C ------------------------------------------------Houston, Tex ------------------------------------------------N ash ville , T e n n --------------------------------------------O rlan d o, F l a -------------------------------------------------Washington, D . C . —M d .—V a -----------------------Nonm etropolitan areas 8------------------------------W est: B ak ersfield , C a lif ---------------------------------------D enver, Colo ------------------------------------------------Honolulu, H aw aii------------------------------------------Los A ngeles—Long B each, C a lif ---------------San D iego, C a l i f ------------------------------------------San Fran cis co-O ak lan d , C a l i f -----------------Seattle—E verett, Wash -------------------------------N onm etropolitan areas 8------------------------------- (U. S. Urban A verage Cost = 100)______________________________________________________ Cost of fam ily consumption Housing (sh e lter , housefurnishing, household operations) T ra n sp o rShelter tation 5 Total Renter Homeowner Combined2 costs 3 costs 4 Total budget Total Food 100 102 91 100 102 91 100 101 94 100 103 86 100 104 81 100 103 85 100 104 80 110 106 109 97 111 100 97 101 98 110 104 110 97 110 100 97 102 98 108 103 111 107 111 107 104 106 102 123 107 115 88 120 96 89 99 96 130 109 120 87 126 96 87 98 95 111 102 119 96 104 84 88 93 83 103 102 103 98 101 95 98 99 102 100 106 103 101 98 93 102 103 105 98 103 96 99 96 102 99 103 100 101 98 93 97 99 100 98 98 96 100 93 98 100 96 96 103 99 93 106 112 115 98 111 92 94 95 106 94 113 103 99 94 76 105 116 120 98 115 92 93 94 106 91 118 105 99 92 90 92 87 96 93 92 95 91 93 92 102 85 92 89 94 94 94 93 93 95 93 101 86 94 93 95 95 94 92 95 92 93 100 90 82 76 90 85 85 91 81 91 89 105 76 97 100 122 103 101 108 105 97 97 100 118 103 101 107 107 96 97 99 119 98 95 102 106 95 87 100 129 98 100 109 104 91 Clothing and person al care M edical care 6 100 100 100 100 102 93 100 103 88 100 102 91 134 111 120 85 131 98 87 100 98 100 108 112 95 90 91 97 101 101 100 104 104 99 104 101 100 105 95 101 99 103 88 106 96 93 100 94 104 100 108 102 106 102 102 101 93 114 139 119 91 100 107 89 86 106 99 105 108 98 100 97 103 110 120 100 118 88 93 96 107 90 120 105 99 90 89 103 97 95 102 101 101 100 101 109 107 102 102 103 104 97 104 101 103 98 103 99 103 99 103 103 100 102 101 98 96 93 103 103 86 92 86 99 91 92 94 95 95 95 95 85 104 101 102 100 100 101 102 103 104 103 102 100 99 104 89 76 70 86 83 82 89 76 88 85 106 69 88 79 108 83 99 93 84 89 97 108 77 73 68 81 83 78 89 74 88 83 105 67 101 99 99 110 101 99 106 102 102 101 99 97 93 96 94 94 95 93 98 92 98 88 93 90 96 91 102 95 100 91 93 99 84 104 99 98 101 102 96 102 102 100 100 90 83 99 130 98 100 111 105 87 83 102 142 111 99 128 119 94 82 98 128 95 101 107 101 85 110 106 122 107 110 110 113 104 102 104 99 106 101 111 110 102 116 102 100 134 124 118 106 94 96 97 112 101 98 104 105 93 Other fam ily consumption 1 2 The fam ily con sists of an employed husband, aged 38, a wife not employed outside the hom e, an 8 -y e a r -o ld g ir l, and a 1 3 -y e a r -o ld boy. The average costs of shelter were weighted by the following proportions: 25 percent for fam ilies living in rented d w ellin gs, 75 percent for fam ilies living in owned hom es. A verage contract rent plus the cost of required amounts of heating fuel, gas, elec tric ity , w ater, specified equipment, and insurance on household contents. Interest and p rincipal payments plus taxes; insurance on house and contents; w ater, refuse d isp osa l, heating fuel, gas, elec tric ity , and specified equipment;and home repair and m aintenance c o sts. 5 The average costs of automobile owners and nonowners w ere weighted by the following proportions of fa m ilie s: B oston, Chicago, New Y ork, and Philadelphia, 80 percent for auto m obile ow n ers, 20 percent for nonowners; B altim ore, Cleveland, D etroit, Los A n g e le s, P ittsburgh, San F ra n cisc o , St. L ou is, and Washington, D. C. , with 1 .4 m illion of population or m ore ^in I9 6 0 , 95 percent for automobile owners and 5 percent for nonowners; a ll other a rea s, 100 percent for automobile ow ners. The average costs of hospitalization and surgical insurance (as a part of total m edical care) were weighted by the following proportions: 30 percent for fam ilies paying full cost of insurance; 26 percent for fam ilies paying half cost; 44 percent for fam ilies covered by noncontributory insurance plans (paid for by em ployer). J F or a detailed d escription , see the 1967 edition of the Standard Metropolitan Statistical A r e a s , prepared by the Bureau of the Budget. P laces with population of 2 ,5 0 0 to 5 0 ,0 0 0 . " N O T E : See appendix A for item s and quantities included in each component, and appendix B for the population weights for each city. not equal totals. B ecause of rounding, sum s of individual item s may 14 consumption less miscellaneous expen ses, varies from city to city, as do the allowances for Federal, State, and local income and personal taxes, which de pend on the level of the total budget and the provisions of the specific State and local laws. Personal taxes ranged from $780 in Austin to $1, 415 in Milwaukee, or from 10 to 15 percent of the total cost of the budget. Variations in Consumption Costs The total cost of family consumption ranged by 24 percentage points around the U.S. urban average of $7,329. Met ropolitan areas as widely dispersed as Philadelphia, Minneapolis—St. Paul, and Denver equaled the U.S. urban average. The 17 metropolitan areas that ranged above the average in costs of family consumption all w e r e located in the North or West, except for Washing ton D. C. The five areas which ex ceeded the average by more than 5 per cent were Hartford, Boston, New YorkNortheastern New Jersey, San Fran cisco—Oakland, and Seattle. Below-average family consumption costs were represented by the smaller cities throughout the country, and all metropolitan a r e a s (except Washing ton, D. C. ) in the South. Such northern metropolitan areas as Detroit, Kansas City, Cincinnati, and Pittsburgh, also fell within this category. The new budgets, like those which have preceded them, show that wide dif ferentials in housing costs are the most important factor causing variations in total family consumption costs among areas. Differentials in food costs are next in importance. The three highest cost areas, Hartford, New York-North eastern New Jersey, and Boston, had housing costs which ranged 15 to 23 percent above the average, and food costs 8 to 11 percent above the average. Housing costs were higher than average for all but 3 of the 17 areas which ranged above the average in total con sumption costs. Food costs were higher than average for nine of the same areas. On the other hand, housing costs ranged downward from the average for all of the s m a l l e r (nonmetropolitan) cities throughout the country; for all metropolitan areas in the South, except Washington, D. C. ; and for about onethird of the metropolitan areas in the North and West. The same pattern was evident in food costs, except that they were above average in all cities of the Northeast. Transportation costs aver aged the same in small cities as in metropolitan a r e a s on a countrywide basis. Differentials in costs other than for housing, food, and transportation did not follow a consistent regional pat tern. Medical care showed the widest differentials, except for shelter. F ood The U. S. urban a v e r a g e an nual cost of food12 for the budget-type family was $2,1 4 3 . Total annual food costs were highest in the New York area, where they averaged $2,380. In smaller cities in the South, a nutritionally com parable d i e t could be purchased for $1,925. The diffe rence in cost, amount ing to $455, reflects not only variation in prices but also regional food prefer ence patterns used to calculate the cost of the nutritional standard for cities within regions. A special analysis of the food budget data will be made later to determine what part of these cost differentials was due to price and what part to regional preference patterns. Budget food costs were almost $200 higher, on the average, in cities in the Northeast than in the North Central and the West, and hosts in the last two re gions were about $100 above costs for a nutritionally comparable food plan in the South. Variations in food costs with in each region, which reflect price dif ferences only,were nonetheless sizable. In the North Central region they ranged from $1, 994 in small cities to $2, 199 in the St. Louis area. The annual cost of food in Washington, D. C. , where the U.S. preference pattern was used in the calculation, was $2 ,1 3 5 . 12 See p. 17 for a detailed description of sources and methods used to derive budget quantities for food. 15 Housing The U.S. urban average outlay for maintaining an owned home amounted to $1, 893, or half again as much as the average cost ( $1, 255) for equivalent rental housing. Shelter costs for homeo w n e r s , however, include r e g u l a r monthly p a y m e n t s on the mortgage p r i n c i p a l , in addition to i n t e r e s t charges, insurance, taxes, repair and replacement expenses, fuel, and utili ties. When principal payments are ex cluded, homeowner costs were 15 per cent a b o v e rental h o u s i n g costs (including fuel, utilities, and insurance where these are not part of the contract rent). The differential was largest in metropolitan areas with over 1 million population, where owner costs (includ ing principal payments) averaged 57 percent above renter costs. In smaller metropolitan and nonmetropolitan areas , owner-renter cost differentials were 38 and 42 percent, respectively. The budget allowance for the housing com ponent covers shelter, household opera tion costs, and an amount for replace ment of hous efurnishings, assuming the family had average inventories of these items at the beginning of the year. 13 Shelter costs for owners (75 per cent) and renters (25 percent) combined, averaged $1, 733 for urban U . S . , but varied from $ 2, 245 in Boston to $1, 188 in the smaller cities of the South. Com pared with the U. S. urban a v e r a g e ($1, 255) equal to 100, shelter costs for renter families were 139 in Champaign— Urbana, 111., and 77 in the s m a l l e r southern cities. The range in homeowner shelter costs was wider, from 134 in Boston to 67 in small cities in the South. Transportation 14 These costs are based on automo bile ownership and operation for all fam ilies, e x c e p t in Boston, Chicago, New York, and Philadelphia where 1 in 5 families was assumed to use public transportation exclusively. A l s o , in Baltimore, C l e v e l a n d , Detroit, Los A n g e l e s , Pittsburgh, San Francisco, St. Louis, and Washington, D. C. , the same assumption was made with re spect to 1 in 20 families. The varia tion in the pattern of automobile owner ship reflects the greater availability of public transportation in some areas than in others and, together with price dif ferences, is a factor in the intercity cost differential for this component. T r a n s p o r t a t i o n costs ranged from $923 in Seattle to $731 in New York. Seattle's costs were 13 percent above, and New York’ s costs 10 percent below, the U.S. urban average cost ($815). Clothing and Personal Care 15 Since these costs reflect both dif ferentials in prices and variation in the kinds and quantities of clothing required by the climate, they were lowest in the South. However, costs differed by al most $100 (10 percentage points) be tween Nashville, which had the highest of the southern metropolitan areas, and the small cities in the South. Clothing and personal care costs were highest in three large west coast cities— San Francisco, Seattle, and Los Angeles---mostly because prices averaged higher than elsewhere in the country. Medical Care 16 The medical care budget includes the family’ s share of the premium for a group hospitalization and surgical in surance plan and out-of-pocket expenses for other medical services and supplies. Costs were highest in the four Cali fornia cities and lowest in D a y t o n , Cincinnati, and small cities in the North Central and South. Compared with the U. S. urban average cost ($468) equal to 100, costs were 134 in Los Angeles and averaged downward by 50 percent age p o i n t s to 84 in nonmetropolitan areas of the South. Since the same medical care standard was used in all cities, the intercity differences in cost are the result of price differences. Stable Differentials C o m p a r a t i v e costs indexes for 1931, 1959, and 1966, with a few notable 13 For 14 For see p. 19. 15 For ^ For a detailed description, see p. 18. data sources and a detailed description, a detailed description, see p. 20. a detailed description, see p. 19. 16 exceptions, indicate considerable sta bility of intercity differentials. Among the 18 large cities included in all three studies, the range from high to low was 11 percentage points in 1951, and 20 points in both 1959 and 1966. Among all 34 large cities c o v e r e d in 1951, the range was 14 points; for the 20 large cities covered in 1959, 20 points; and for 38 metropolitan areas (excluding Honolulu) and four regional groupings of nonmetropolitan a r e a s covered in 1966, the range was 26 points. Inclu sion of smaller areas and homeowner maintenance costs in 1966 might have been expected to cause a wider range of variation than that actually observed. The 18 metropolitan areas covered in both the 1959 and the 1966 budgets were arrayed in three groups based on their relative standing in 1959 with re spect to total budget costs. Four of the six areas in the upper third of the distribution in 1959 remained in that b r a c k e t in 1966 (Chicago, Seattle, Boston, and San F r a n c i s c o ) . Los Angeles and St. Louis fell to the middle third in 1966. Among the middle third in 1959, two were in the same group in 1966 (Washington, D. C. , and Cleve land); Minneapolis moved into the top third; and the other three (Pittsburgh, Cincinnati, and Detroit) dropped to the lowest group. Of the six cities ranking lowest in 1959, the New York—NorthEastern New Jersey area jumped from 13th to 1st place, primarily because of the inclusion of homeowner costs and the expansion of geographical coverage to additional suburban a r e a s in both New York and New Jersey. Two cities (Kansas City and Philadelphia) moved into the m i d d l e bracket, and three (Baltimore, Atlanta, and Houston) re mained 16th, 17th, and 18th, respec tively, in the ranking. Data Sources and Estimating Methods The theoretical basis for the pro cedures used to d e v e l o p the budget quantities and pricing lists is summar ized in the following quotation from the report on the original budget: ” . . . In the actual experience of families there is a scale which ranks various consumption patterns in an a s cending order from mere subsistence to plenitude in every respect . . . This consumption s c a l e is established by society. It can be d i s c o v e r e d only through observation of the expressions of society*s ratings of the various ex isting levels of living. These ratings of the various levels of living are ex pressed in the judgments of scientists, such as medical and public health au thorities; and secondly, in the behav ior of individual consumers. Scientific judgments are based primarily on the studies of the relation between family consumption and individual and com munity health. The expressions of con sumer judgment appear in the choices made by consumers as economic bar riers are progressively removed. ” 17 In 1963, the Bureau's S t a n d a r d Budget Research Advisory Committee, in reviewing the procedures used in the original and interim budgets, affirmed "the previous decision to use standards of adequacy based on the judgment of scientists and experts to the extent that such standards are available, supple mented by the analysis of statistical data on consumer practices. " 18 Budget quantities and pricing spec ifications which describe the 1966 mod erate standard were derived in a variety of ways. For food-at-home and shelter, which constitute 48 percent of the total cost of family consumption, allowances were based on scientific findings or ex pert technical judgments concerning re quirements for p h y s i c a l health and social well-being. For transportation and medical c a r e , accounting for 18 percent of family consumption, the pre vailing practices of budget-type families 17 Technical Reference 10, p. 40, in appendix C. 1® Technical Reference 9, p. 40, in appendix C . 17 were used as a guide indeveloping budg et allowances. Quantities for the re maining third of the consumption total were based on analytical studies of the Bureau's 1960—61 Survey of Consumer Expenditures. 19 These studies deter mined by objective p r o c e d u r e s the choices of goods and services made by consumers in successive i n c o m e classes. were taken from the USDA 1965 House h o l d Food Consumption S t u d y . The pattern for the region in which the city is located was used in the budget for all c i t i e s except Washington, D. C. , where the U. S. pattern was used. The U. S. weights were used for Washington because its population comes from all parts of the United States and cannot be considered typically southern. The c o m p l e t e list of items and quantities per year is shown in appen dix A. Pricing procedures and spec ifications for the majority of items in the budget will be described in Bulle tin 157 0—3. A few items, which are purchased infrequently or represent an insignificant proportion of the total budg et, were not priced. Values for these items were estimated as described in appendix A. Procedures for estimating food, s h e l t e r , and health insurance costs are described in the text. Ex planatory notes on the tables describe variations in the basic budget quantities as required for use in individual cities. The following is a general description of the major sources of data and methods of estimating quantities for the major components of the moderate budget. The u ni t costs w i t h i n the food groups in the mode rate - cost food plan were estimated by applying a set of weights to the prices of the individual food items included in each major food group. The weighting factors take into consideration the regional patterns for individual items. The spring 1965 level of prices in each region was determined from the average prices paid for indi vidual items by urban families in the $ 5, 000—$ 5, 999 i n c o m e class in the USDA survey. Individual city average prices were estimated from the re gional survey averages by applying the s p r i n g 1965 city-to-region ratios of prices collected by BLS for the same or comparable items. The spring 1965 estimated average prices in each city were adjusted to October 1966 by a special c a l c u l a t i o n of item price changes. Prices used for food at home were those collected regularly for the Consumer Price Index from a repre sentative sample of food chain stores and independent stores of various types (e. g. , groceries and m e a t markets), stores at d i f f e r e n t levels of annual sales volume, and stores in different l o c a t i o n s within the city. Average prices for each food were obtained by averaging independent and chain store prices separately and then combining them with w e i g h t s representing the relative volume of food sales by all food stores of each type in the city. F ood The Food and Nutrition Board of the National Research Council has de veloped scientific standards for what constitutes adequate diets for various sex-age g r o u p s . The U. S. Depart ment of A g r i c u l t u r e has translated these standards into food plans at dif ferent cost levels. The food-at-home component of the budget was based on the "m oderate-cost" food plan consid ered suitable for the a v e r a g e U. S. family. 20 The plan contains 11 food categories which group foods according to similarity of nutritive value and uses in meals. T h e quantities suggested furnish the NRC's recommended allow ances for nutrients when average food selections within each group are used. Regional consumption patterns for specific foods within the food groups in the income class containing the m e dian i n c o m e ($5, 800) of the middle third of the income distribution were used in estimating costs. The data 19 For a description of this survey, see Handbook of Methods for Surveys and Studies (BLS Bulletin 1458, 1966), pp. 54—64. 20 Family Food Plans, 1964, CA 62—19, November 1964, Agriculture Research Service, United States D e partment of Agriculture. In this revision of the food plans the National Research Council's 1963 recommended dietary allowances, 1963 USDA nutritive values, and the USDA's most recent estimates of food consumption pat terns were used. 18 The Department of Agriculture food plans provide for 21 meals per person per week to be eaten at home or carried from home. In the budget for metro politan areas, the food-at-home com ponent was adjusted to provide 4, 107 meals a year at home and 261 meals away from home. In nonmetropolitan areas, these quantities were 4, 058 and 310, respectively, mainly reflecting the purchase of more s c h o o l lunches in small cities. The costs of lunches at work and other meals away from home were calculated by using luncheon and dinner prices collected for the Con sumer Price Index. School lunch costs were supplied by the public school sys tems in each budget area. Shelter Costs Standards for the shelter component of the budget were those established by the American Public Health Association and the U. S. Public Housing Adminis tration. They relate to sleeping space r e q u i r e m e n t s , essential household equipment (including plumbing), ade quate utilities and heat, structural con dition, and neighborhood location. For r e n t e r families, the shelter standard called for an unfurnished fiveroom unit (house or apartment) in sound condition and with a complete private bath, a fully equipped kitchen, hot and cold running water, electricity, central or other installed heating, access to public transportation, schools, grocery stores, play space for children, and location in residential neighborhoods free from hazards or nuisances. Rates for dwellings which met this standard were obtained f r o m tenants during the regular rent surveys for the Consumer Price Index between August 1966 and January 1967. The cost of the rental shelter standard was calcu lated from the average rent in the mid dle third of the distribution of autumn 1966 rents. S i n c e monthly contract rents in apartment structures usually include water, heat, light, c o o k i n g fuel, refrigerator, etc. , the cost for these items was added to the contract rent for dwellings whose tenants paid s e p a r a t e l y for them. Insurance on household contents and against injury to persons on the property, comparable with the coverage provided for homeowner families, also was included in rental housing costs. For homeowner families, the cost of maintaining the shelter standard was calculated for a five- or six-room , 1or lV2 -t>ath house that met the same dwelling unit and neighborhood specifi cations as described above for rental units. Cost included mortgage princi pal and interest payments, the assump tion being that the family purchased the home 7 years ago with a 15-year first mortgage which represented 75 percent of the purchase price. Terms of the mortgage and the ratio of mortgage to purchase price were based on practices of all urban families reporting the pur chase of homes of the budget type in the 1960—61 Survey of Consumer Expendi tures. Purchase price was determined separately for each metropolitan area (and within areas for the city proper and the suburbs) and for each small city. It represented the average price in the middle third of the distribution of market values for dwellings which met the housing standard in the BLS 1959“ 60 Comprehensive Housing Un i t Survey. The average U.S. urban purchase price for such dwellings was $14,480 in 1960—61. Principal and i n t e r e s t costs w e r e estimated separately for conventional mortgages and mortgages insured by the Federal Housing Admin istration or by the Veterans Adminis tration. T h e y were c o m b i n e d by weights representing th e distribution of type of mortgage reported by U.S. urban buyers in t h i s purchase-price class. In addition, the cost included appropriate taxes, reflecting varying assessment practices and rates in indi vidual cities. On insurance, the most economical comprehensive homeowner's policy was used which would provide in surance up to 80 percent of the 1960—61 market value of the house, in addition to some coverage on its contents and 19 for injury to persons on the property. An allowance for repairs and replace ment costs was included, based on an analysis of the 1960—61 Consumer Ex penditure Survey data for budget-type fam ilies. Costs of fuel and utilities also were included. The housing specifications required central heating equipment in cities where the average January tem perature is 40° F. or colder, except in five c i t i e s where o t h e r installed heating e q u i p m e n t was accepted as more typical of the manner of living. Central or other installed heating equip ment (base burner, pipeless furnace, or stove, with flue) was required for cities with warmer climates, except for Honolulu, and McAllen, Tex. , where average J a n u a r y temperatures were 72° and 61° , respectively. A space heater also was included for each of the s e c o n d group of c i t i e s except Honolulu. To adjust for climatic differences, fuel requirements f o r maintaining an indoor w i n t e r temperature of 70° F. were estimated. The basis for these estimates was the amount of fuel used to heat h o m e s of approximately the budget specification, as reported in a 1962 trade association s u r v e y of 62 cities (supplemented by data from in dividual utility companies). These data were related to annual degree days in these cities, as recorded by the U. S. Weather Bureau. In the BLS analysis, the quantities of fuel were expressed in s t a n d a r d B T U ' s converted, f o r pricing purposes, to the predominant type of heating fuel used in each city. Estimates of electricity and other utili ties for the appliances specified for the budget were obtained from utility com panies and associations. Transportation The s t a n d a r d for transportation reflects the high l e v e l of automobile o w n e r s h i p reported in the 1960—61 Survey of Consumer E x p e n d i t u r e s , for budget type families at all income levels. Only a small f r a c t i o n did not own an a u t o m o b i l e , and most commonly these families lived in the central cities of the l a r g e s t metro politan areas where public transporta tion is readily accessible. Automobile ownership was specified, therefore, for 80 percent of the budget f a m i l i e s in Boston, Chicago, New York, and Phila delphia; 95 percent of the families in other metropolitan areas with 1 .4 m il lion population or more in I960; and 100 percent of the families in all other metropolitan and nonmetropolitan areas. In the tables showing budget costs and indexes, the cost of transportation for nonowners was estimated and pub lished for all areas as a convenience to budget users. In areas in which 100 percent auto ownership was specified, the estimates for nonowners were not used in calculating the t o t a l cost of transportation for the budget. The standard provides for the pur chase of a used car e v e r y 4 years, based on the customary purchases of families of the budget-type. Data on home-to-work travel were o b t a i n e d from the 1963 Passenger Transporta tion Survey of the Bureau of the Census. These were used to adjust the average number of miles driven by automobile owners in New York, Boston, Phila delphia, and Chicago, since the pro portions of workers reporting use of a private automobile or c a r p o o l to get to work were lower in these than in other metropolitan a r e a s . A corre sponding increase in the allowance for p u b l i c transportation in t h e s e four areas also was made. Medical Care The m e d i c a l care allowance in cludes a family group insurance con tract (or contracts) obtained through the husband’ s place of employment. This was consistent with the prevailing prac tices of budget-type families, as re ported in the I960—61 Survey of Con sumer Expenditures and confirmed by data from the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare. It covered the cost of hospitalization and s u r g i c a l services. First q u a r t e r 1967 costs of a s t a n d a r d i z e d contract in the 20 areas priced for the budget were esti mated for the commercial carriers by the Health I n s u r a n c e Association of America. The contract provides full coverage for 70 days1 care in a room of two beds or more for each hospital confinement, all supplies and ancillary services normally provided, and surgi cal benefits. 21 Costs were also ob tained for Blue C r o s s - B l u e S h i e l d contracts m o s t nearly comparable to the commercial insurance provisions. Budget costs were based on the lower of the two p r e m i u m s (either for the commercial or the Blue C r o s s con tracts) in each area. A majority of families of the budget type do not bear the full cost of their health insurance, since part or all of the premium is paid by the employer. The cost of the plan selected for each area, therefore, was weighted by the following p r o p o r t i o n s of families: 30 percent paying the full cost of their insurance; 26 p e r c e n t paying half of the cost; and 44 percent making no con tributions (the entire cost being paid by the employer). Quantities of medical care services not covered by i n s u r a n c e — visits to physicians and dental care— were de rived from 1963-64 utilization data from the National Health Survey. Allowances for eye c a r e , prescription and non prescription drugs, and other m iscel laneous medical care were developed from the 1960-61 Consumer Expendi ture Survey data. Average fees and prices for medi cal services and supplies were those collected for the Consumer Price Index, supplemented by prices obtained spe cifically for budget use. Other Goods and Services Food at home, shelter, transporta tion, and medical care, as specified for the budget, account for two-thirds of family consumption. T he remaining third includes housefurnishings, house hold operation, clothing, personal care, education, reading, recreation, meals away from home, alcoholic beverages, and tobacco. For these components, budget allowances were developed by examining the quantities of, or expendi tures for, various items purchased at successive income levels by budget-type families found in the Bureaus 1960-61 Survey of Consumer Expenditures. The purpose of the analysis was to deter mine the income level at which the rate of increase in quantities purchased, or expenditures, begins to decline in rela tion to the rate of change in income, i. e. , the point of maximum elasticity. The average number and kinds of items purchased at these income levels are the quantities and qualities specified for the budget. Thus, t h e y represent a composite of individual choices. This technique uses the consumers1 collec tive judgment as to what is adequate and is b a s e d on the assumption that increasing elasticity indicates increas ing urgency of demand, and decreasing elasticity indicates decreasing urgency. The point of maximum elasticity has been described as the point on the in come scale where families stop buying "more and m o r e " and s t a r t buying either "better and better" or something else less essential to them. 22 For a majority of the items in the housefurnishings, c l o t h i n g , personal care, and recreation components, the quantities c o u l d be standardized for quality (by use of a c o n s t a n t price) across i n c o m e classes; for the re mainder of the components, only ex penditure-income elasticities could be calculated. The point of maximum elasticity for the majority of subgroups in the clothing component was located 21 See Wage and Related Benefits. Part II: Metro politan Areas, United States and Regional Summaries, 1964-65 (BLS Bulletin 1430-83, 1966), pp. 97 and 106; Walter W. Kolodrubetz, "Growth in Employer-Benefit Plans, 1950-65, " Social Security Bulletin, 1967, p. 18. 22 This technique was developed for the original City Worker's Family Budget and is described in detail in Technical Reference 10, appendix C . It was also used, with some refinements, in deriving quantities for The Interim City Worker's Family Budget in 1959 (T ech nical Reference 5). A mimeographed report providing a more detailed description of its use in the current budget will be available on request. 21 in the initial (after tax) income class ($ 3, 000—$ 4, 000) for this family type. (There were no budget-type families, with a full-time earner, whose 1960—61 after-tax income was below $ 3, 000. ) In the housefurnishings component, the characteristic pattern, in which quanti ties at first increase relatively more rapidly than income and then increase at a relatively slower rate than income, was found. The inflection, i. e. , the point of maximum elasticity, was most commonly in the $ 5, 000—$ 6, 000 class. For reading, recreation, personal c a r e , household operations, and to bacco, the inflection point o c c u r r e d most f r e q u e n t l y in the next highest c l a s s ($ 6, 000-$ 7, 500). Elasticities for food away from home and alcoholic beverages w e r e ever-increasing, and quantities for t h e s e components also were derived from the $ 6, 000—$ 7, 500 class. In the main, t h e r e f o r e , the budget allowances for these other goods and services reflect the collective judg ment of families in the income class containing the median 1960—61 after-tax income ($7,277). Other Costs The allowance for gifts and contri butions was based on an upward ad justment of the ratio estimate used in the interim b u d g e t ; this adjust ment reflected both the change in the level of living and the i n c r e a s e in prices b e t w e e n 1959 and 1966. The average outlay for life insurance in the interim budget was revised in a similar manner. Occupational expenses in the new budget represent the average outlay in the median income class for budgettype families, as reported in the I960— 61 Survey of Consumer Expenditures. Social security and Federal, State, and local income taxes were calculated from rates applicable in 1966, as required by the level of the total budget. Appends-----Contents Page Appendix A. Annual quantities of items provided in the components of the City W orker’ s Family Budget, autumn 1966 ------------------------------------------- 23 T ables: A - 1. Food budget quantities--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------A. Food at home ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------B. Food away from home ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------A - 2. Housing budget quantities---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------A. Shelter: Renter fa m ilie s -----------------------------------------------------------------------------B. Shelter: Homeowner families --------------------------------------------------------------------C. Housefurnishings ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------D. Household operations-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------A - 3. Transportation budget quantities --------------------------------------------------------------------------A . Automobile ow n ers---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------B. Nonowners of automobiles --------------------------------------------------------------------------A -4 . Clothing budget quantities -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------A. Husband-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------B. Boy -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------C. Wife ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------D. Girl ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------E. Clothing materials and services ----------------------------------------------------------------A - 5. Personal c a r e ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------A - 6. Medical care -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------A - 7 . Other family consumption -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------A. Reading m a te r ia ls -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------B. Recreation------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------C. Education -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------D. Tobacco ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------E. Alcoholic beverages--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------F. Miscellaneous expenses ------------------------------------------------------------------------------A - 8. Other costs --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------A . Gifts and contributions---------------------------------------------------------------------------------B. Life insurance-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------A - 9 • Occupational expenses and taxes --------------------------------------------------------------------------A . Occupational expenses----------------------------------------------------------------------------------B. Taxes -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 24 24 24 25 25 25 26 27 28 28 28 29 29 29 30 30 31 33 33 34 34 34 34 34 34 34 35 35 35 35 35 35 Appendix B. Appendix C. Index of population weights used in the City W orker's Family Budget--------Technical references ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 37 39 NOTE: The tables which follow list, for each component of the City W orker's Family Budget, the annual average quantities of items for which autumn 1966 prices were obtained or estimated to determine the annual costs of the budget. The quantities describe a modest living standard for a family of four— an employed husband, age 38, a wife not employed outside the home, and two children, a girl age 8 and a boy 13. The methods and sources used to derive the budget quantities are described in the text of this bulletin. The codes in the tables identify the specifications used in pricing the commodities and services for the budget. For some budget items for which no code is shown, only an estimated cost in 1966 for all cities is indicated. These estimates were obtained by: (1) Updating the cost of the item , as reported in the 1960—61 Survey of Consumer Expendi tures, to 1966 by change in the appropriate subgroup, group, or "a ll ite m s" Consumer Price Index; (2) updating the level of consumption, using data reported in trade journals, U .S. Department of Com m erce's industry reports, and other sources; or (3) calculating the current cost of the item as a ratio of the cost of other items based on comparable ratios reported in the 1960—61 CES. For further information on priced items see Bulletin 1570—3, Pricing Procedures, Specifications, and Average P ric e s, Autumn 1966 (to be published at a later date),"which covers all priced items in the budget, other than food and shelter, for urban United States and five metropolitan areas (Chicago, D allas, New York, San Francisco, and Washington, D .C .) . 23 Appendix A Table A-l. Food Budget Quantities A. Food at home 1 Metropolitan areas i Nonmetropolitan areas : Quantity Item Milk and milk products 4 ---Meat, poultry, and fis h -----E g g s -------------------------------------Dry beans, peas, and nuts -■ Grain products 5 ------------------Citrus fruit and tomatoes---P otatoes-------------------------------Other vegetables and fruits Fats and oil ------------------------Sugar and sweets ---------------A cce sso rie s: C offee-----------------------------Tea ---------------------------------Soft drinks Other 7 ------ —quartpound — dozenpound — do---— do---— do---— do---— do---— do------------- do-------------- do----- 72 ounces — B. Per week Per year Per week 19.00 17. 50 2. 25 . 88 12. 25 9 .00 8. 50 25. 00 2. 75 3. 38 929. 1 855. 8 110. 0 43. 0 599.0 440. 1 415. 6 1 ,2 2 2 .5 134. 5 165. 3 19-00 17. 50 2. 25 . 88 12. 25 9. 00 8. 50 25. 00 2. 75 3. 38 Per y e a r “ 917. 7 845. 2 108. 7 42. 5 591.7 434. 7 410. 6 1 ,2 0 7 .5 132. 8 163. 2 (6) (6) M n 1.96 $0. 27 1 .96 $0. 27 Food away from home Pricing code Metropolitan areas Nonmetropolitan areas Quantity per year Meals - — ---- — -------------------------------- ------ — -------- — Lunches at work -----------------------------------------------------Lunches at scho01 --------- ------— -------------------— — Othe r - OIlclLi\.D . ...... 261 82 137 42 $75. 34 5 4 -5 1 0 X ---------------------54 590v 5 4 -5 3 0 X ---------------------- 3 310 57 3 211 42 $42. 67 1 Quantities from the m oderate-cost food plan published by the U. S. Department of Agriculture. (See footnote 20, p. 17. ) 2 The quantity allowances in metropolitan areas provide 84 meals weekly, and 4,107 meals annually after adjustment for 261 meals away from home. 3 The quantity allowances in the nonmetropolitan areas provide 84 meals weekly, and from 4,139 to 4,267 meals annually because of variation in the number of school lunches in different cities. Quantities shown are for a non metropolitan U .S. average of 4,05 8 meals at home and 310 meals away from home. 4 Includes fluid whole milk and milk products; quantities are converted to units containing the same calcium content as milk, by using the following equivalents: 1 cup of milk equals 3U pound of cottage cheese (creamed), 1 pound of cream cheese, IV3 ounces of cheddar cheese, or 1 scant pint of ice cream. 5 Weight in terms of flour and cereal. IV2 pounds of bread or baked goods are counted as 1 pound of flour. 6 The coffee and tea quantities shown below are for both metropolitan and nonmetropolitan areas within a region and reflect regional preference patterns: Quantity per week (in pounds) Region Coffee Tea Northeast ----------------------------North C entral---------------------South-----------------------------------W e s t-------------------------------------- 0 .43 8 .5 62 . 370 .3 8 4 0 .04 8 .0 34 . 058 .028 7 Estimated cost in 1966 in all cities. Explanatory notes: The annual allowance for food at home used in the calculation of the City W orker's Family Budget is the estimated cost of the m oderate-cost food plan after adjustment for meals eaten away from home. The selection of specific foods which meet the nutritional standard and reflect regional preference patterns also affects the food budget cost. In estimating the unit cost of each of the major food groups for individual cities, regional preference patterns were taken into account for all cities except Washington, D. C. , where the U .S. pattern was used. (See explanation, p. 17.) Specifications for pricing individual food items are available upon request. 24 25 Table A-2. A. Housing Budget Quantities Shelter: Item R e n te r fam ilies1 Pricing code Quantity per year, all cities Contract rent: Unfurnished 5 -room dwelling unit containing — 21-010X specified installed equipment ---------------- month Heating fuel: Most common type heating fuel used in each c ity ---------------------------------------------------------------22-748 Water ------------------------------------------------------- cubic foot — Electricity: Lighting, refrigeration, and electrical 22-500X appliances ---------------------------------- kilowatt-hour — Power for heating equipment------------------------- do---G as:4 22-370X Cooking------------------------------------------------------- therm — 22-380X Hot water heating-------------------------------------------- do---22-390X Furnace pilot -------------------------------------------------do-----Refuse disposal: Trash and garbage removal — Equipment: 23-387 ----------------Refrigerator -------------------------23-399, 23-399A, 2 3-399C ---Range -------------------------------------23-970X -------------Insurance on household contents B. 12 ( 2 ) 14, 560 1,800 (3 ) 120 300 120 (5 ) . 06 . 06 1 . 00 Shelter: Homeowner families Quantity per year Pricing code Shelter (5- or 6 -room dwelling): Mortage interest, principal payment -------------------Property tax -----------------------------------------------------------Homeowner insurance prem ium ----------------------------Repairs and maintenance: Repairs contracted out: Painting and redecoration----------------------------Repair of roof -----------------------------------------------O ther--------------------------------------------------------------Repair materials: Painting and redecoration------------- gallons — O ther--------------------------------------------------------------Heating fuel: Most common type heating fuel used in each city ---------------------------------------------------------------Water -------------------------------------------------------- cubic foot — Electricity: Lighting, refrigeration, and electrical appliances ---------------------------------- kilowatt-hour — Power for heating equipment-----------------------do-----Gas :4 Cooking------------------------------------------------------- therm — Hot water heating------------------------------------------ do-----Furnace pilot -------------------------------------------------do-----Refuse disposal: Trash and garbage removal ----------------------------------Equipment: Refrigerator ________________________________________ Range _______________________________________________ See footnotes at end of table. 21-11 OX ----------------------------------21-120X ----------------------------------21-140X ----------------------------------- Metropolitan areas 1. 00 1.00 1.00 Nonmetropolitan areas 1. 00 1.00 1.00 21-527 ------------------------------------21-437 ------------------------------------- . 09 . 03 (6) . 14 . 05 (6) 21-181 ------------------------------------- 3 .82 (7) 2. 35 (7) (2) 14, 560 (2) 14, 560 1,800 (3) 1,800 (3) 22-748 -------------------------------------2 2 - 5 0 0 X ------------ ------------------ 22-370X ----------------------------------22-380X ----------------------------------22-390X ----------------------------------- 120 300 120 120 300 120 23-984FB -------------------------------- 1. 00 1. 00 23-387 _________________________ 23-399, 23-399A , 23-399C ___ . 06 . 06 . 06 . 06 26 Table A-2. Housing Budget Quantities--- Continued C. Housefurnishings Quantity per year Item Pricing code Household textiles: Bedding: Sheets --------------------Pillow cases --------Pillows -----------------Blankets and quilts Bedspreads-----------Tow els: B a th ----------------O ther---------------Window coverings: Curtains----------D rap eries-------O ther--------------------Floor coverings: R oom -size rug ----O ther--------------------F urniture: Living room: Living room suite --------Chair, fully upholstered T a b le ------------------------------S ofa--------------------------------O ther------------------------------Bedroom: Bedroom su ite-------------Bed -------------------------------Mattress and bedspring D resser and ch e st-------Dining room: Dining room suite --------------------Dining room table --------------------Dining room chairs -----------------Dinette s e t --------------------------------Porch and garden--------------------------O ther----------------------------------------------Electrical equipment and appliances: Vacuum cleaner----------------------------Washing machine --------------------------T o a ste r-------------------------------------------F ryer, food mixer, e t c ----------------Iro n -------------------------------------------------Sewing machine ----------------------------Air conditioner------------------------------Fan -------------------------------------------------Housewares, tableware, miscellaneous equipment: Heater, r o o m -s iz e -------------------Carpet sweeper -------------------------Dishes, s e t --------------------------------Other serving pieces ----------------Light bulbs --------------------------------L am p ------------------------------------------Miscellaneous equipment---------Other: Servicing, repairs, and rentals Lawn mower ------------------------------Tools, paint brush, e t c ------------- 1. 44 .81 . 16 . 27 . 40 1. 30 1. 08 . 13 . 64 . 34 23-050FB 1.23 1.41 (8 ) 23-085, 23-085A 23-091FB ----------- .8 3 . 25 (9 ) 23-335, 23-335A, 23-336, 23-377FB — . 06 23-132, 23-133, 23-133A 23-130X ---------------------------23-169FB ------------------------23-192 -----------------------------23-211, 23-211 A, 23-211B 23-200X -----------------------------23-204X , 2 3 -2 0 4 ---------------23-210X -----------------------------23-228, 23-230X 23-240X 23-220X 23-250X 23-228A ------------------------------------------------- 23-411 ------23-423 ------23-465 AUX 2 3 - 4 7 0 X ----23-471 AUX 23-460X ----23-440X ----23-450X ----- . 04 . 09 . 08 . 04 (“ ) . 03 . 03 . 02 . 02 . 36 . 36 . 01 . 01 . 01 . 01 . 04 . 05 . 03 . 30 (12) . 04 . 05 . 03 . 30 (12) . 07 . 15 . 03 . 07 . 15 . 03 . 06 17 . 06 . 04 .09 . 08 . 04 (U ) (13) 23-680X (9) (10) . 10 H -954 23-608 .9 0 . 13 (10) . 09 . 04 23-480X --------------------------23-591 -----------------------------23-531, 23-531C , 23-533 . 10 . 09 . 04 (13) . 06 . 02 . 02 . 04 . 09 (14) 15. 00 . 24 (15) . 04 . 09 (14) 15. 00 . 24 (15) (16) (16) . 04 $ 8 . 20 $ 8 . 20 4. 22 5. 08 . 04 Household Operations 13 ounces — H -802 --------------------------------------------------- 20 ounces — 15 ounces — 14 ounces — llz gallon — H -804 ---------------------------------------------------H-807 ---------------------------------------------------H -952FB ----------------------------------------------H -950FB ----------------------------------------------- See footnotes at end of table. Nonmetropolitan areas 23-001, 23-001A 23-008FB ----------23-013 ---------------23-022FB ----------23-031 ---------------- D. Laundry and cleaning supplies: Laundry soap: Soap flakes, ch ip s---------Detergent powder, granules -----------------------Detergent, liquid -----------Starch, spray ----------------------Bleach, liquid ---------------------- Metropolitan areas 56. 25. 3. 13. 70 28 98 46 74. 36 31.0 3 4. 65 16. 14 Table A-2. D. Housing Budget Quantities--- Continued Household Operations— Continued Quantity per year Pricing code Laundry and cleaning supplies— Continued Floor w ax------------------------------------- 27 ounces-Scouring powder ---------------------- 14 ounces -Scouring pad s-------------------------- box of 10 — Air deodorizer ------------------------ 7 ounces — O ther------------------------------------------------------------Paper supplies: Paper napkins -------------------------- box of 80 — Toilet tissue --------------------650-sheet roll — Paper towels, shelf, wax paper, foil, etc ----------------------------------------------------Services and miscellaneous supplies: Launderettes----------------------------------pound — Miscellaneous supplies -----------------------------Communications: Residential telephone service: Basic charge------------------------------------------Long distance----------------------------------------Postag< Stationery, greeting cards, etc Metropolitan areas Nonmetropolitan areas H -951FB H -953FB H-901 ----H-906 — - 3. 88 17. 41 5. 56 3. 76 (18) 5. 03 22. 59 7. 22 4. 70 (18) H -764 H-799 13. 97 95. 34 20. 82 95. 34 (19) (19) 34-754 • 139.30 139.30 22-624 12. 00 (21) $15. 56 $ 12. 93 12. 00 (21) 17 $18. 28 17 $ 10. 81 (Z °) (2 °) 1 Allowances specified for fuel, utilities, and equipment do not apply when the cost of these items is included in the monthly rent. 2 Heating fuel requirements vary with the length and severity of the cold season, type of structure, and type of heating equipment. The variation caused by climate is measured in standard British thermal units ( B .t.u . ) (convertible to equivalent quantities of fuel oil, gas, etc.) and the normal number of annual degree days in a given city, derived from annual data published by the U .S. Weather Bureau. (A degree day is a unit, based upon temperature difference and time, which measures the difference between the average temperature for the day and 65° F. when the mean temperature is less than 65° F. ; the number of degree days for any one day is equal to the number of Fahrenheit degrees difference between the average and 65° F. ) The average number of B .t .u .'s required in a given city may be computed as follows: Million of B .t. u. 's= -3 0 2 . 817962 -+* 110. 285800 times the logarithm of the normal number of annual degree days. The quantity of any type of heating fuel used in a given city can be determined by converting the required number of B .t .u .'s into quantities of the type of fuel used. In the determination of the total amount of fuel required, both the average B .t .u . content and an assumed efficiency factor must be taken into consideration for each specified fuel. 3 The k w .-h rs. of electricity required to operate gas or oil heating equipment vary according to the amount of fuel used. The average required number of kw .-hrs. assumed here is 0. 25 per therm of gas and 0. 44 per gallon of fuel oil. 4 In cities where either electricity or oil was the predominant fuel used for cooking and/or hot water heating, it was substituted for gas. The annual allowances for electricity are as follows: Cook ing, 1800 kw. -h rs. ; hot water heating, 5220 kw. -h rs. For oil, the annual requirement of hot water heating is 2 32 gallons. 5 Cost is included in the rent. 6 In metropolitan areas, cost is 120. 1 percent of cost of contracting for itemized repairs; in nonmetropolitan areas, 122.6 percent. 7 In metropolitan areas, cost is 6 4 .6 percent of cost of paint and redecorating m aterials; in nonmetropolitan areas, 128.3 percent. 8 In metropolitan areas, cost is 19. 5 percent of cost of bath towels; in nonmetropolitan areas, 24. 5 percent. 9 In metropolitan areas, cost is 63. 3 percent of total cost of itemized textiles; in nonmetropolitan areas, 13.9 percent. 'l0 Cost is 6 6.9 percent of cost of room -size rug in both metropolitan and nonmetropolitan areas. 11 Cost is 5. 0 percent of cost of itemized living room furniture in both metropolitan and nonmetropolitan areas. 12 Cost is 7. 2 percent of cost of itemized furniture. 13 An annual allowance of 0. 04 air conditioners is limited to cities with an average July-Aug. temperature of 85° and over, and a relative humidity of at least 85 percent; cities with an average July-Aug. temperature of 90° or over, regardless of relative humidity; and Los Angeles, with average July-Aug. temperatures close to 85° and relative humidity nearly 85 percent, as reported by U .S. Weather Bureau. 14 Cost is 9 6 .0 percent of cost of sets of dishes. 15 Cost is 9 .7 percent of total cost of furniture, equipment, and housewares. 16 Cost is 11.6 percent of total cost of furniture and equipment. 17 Estimated cost for all cities. 18 In metropolitan areas, cost is 20.7 percent of cost of itemized laundry and cleaning supplies; in non metropolitan areas, 22.0 percent. *9 Cost is 150.0 percent of cost of itemized paper products. 20 In metropolitan areas, cost is 2 1.6 percent of total cost of laundry, cleaning, and paper supplies; in nonmetropolitan areas, 1 7 .4 percent. 21 In metropolitan areas, cost is 20.9 percent of cost of basic telephone service; in nonmetropolitan areas, 43. 6 percent. 28 Table A-3. Transportation Budget Quantities1 Quantity per year Pricing code Item A. Private transportation: Replacement of automobile-----------------------------------Automobile operating expenses: Gasoline------------------------------------------------ gallon — Motor o il----------------------------------------------- quart — Lubrication---------------------------------------------------------A n tifreeze-------------------------------------------- gallon — T ires, tubeless -------------------------------------------------B a tte ry ---------------------------------------------------------------Repairs and parts: Motor tuneup-------------------------------------------------Front-end alignment-------------------------------------Brakes relin ed ---------------------------------------------Other rep airs------------------------------------------------Other operating expenses ---------------------------------Insurance: Public lia b ility ---------------------------------------------Comprehensive---------------------------------------------Registration fees: State---------------------------------------------------------------L ocal--------------------------------------------------------------In sp*3r>ti fo** Personal property tax --------------------------------------Operator's p erm it-----------------------------renewal — Tolls, parking, fines, etc ------------------------------Public transportation: Local: ,9r}innl rpfi rirlp A.11 nfb ^ r faT'f>s Hn O-Q'f city ....... __ B. Public transportation: Local: 5->rh <"><">1 All other fares Oy|f nf r"ify - .... - ......... _ _ _ _ Metropolitan areas Nonmetropolitan areas Automobile owners 4 1-030X -------------------- 0. 243 41-065 _______________ 41-097 ---------------------41-355 _______________ 41-11 O X -------------------41-161 _______________ 4 1 -2 2 6 F B ----------------- (1 2) (2 ) 2. 00 (3 4 ) 1. 22 . 33 661. 20 26. 08 2. 00 (3 ) 1. 56 . 33 41-483 _______________ 41-675 ---------------------4 1 -6 4 3 F B ----------------- 1. 00 . 23 . 29 (?) (5 ) 1. 00 . 30 . 27 (?) (5 ) 41-807 _______________ 41-81 O X -------------------- 1. 00 . 50 1. 00 . 50 4 1-870 ---------------------4 1 -8 7 1 F B ___________ 41 - 88nTTR 1. 00 1.00 (6 ) (7 ) 2. 00 (8 ) 1. 00 1. 00 (6 ) (7 ) 2. 00 (8 ) (9 ) (101 ) 11 $9. 48 53. 00 56. 00 11 $ 2. 19 41-902 ---------------------- 4?_n in v 4?_n?nv 0. 296 Nonowners of automobiles d Hn __ _ 4 ? .m n x 4 ?-n ?n v ___ .... 148.00 442. 00 11 $60. 11 1 The mode of transportation within cities and metropolitan areas is related to location, size, and character istics of the community. The average costs of automobile owners and nonowners were weighted by the following proportions of fam ilies: For 4 cities (Boston, New York, Philadelphia, and Chicago), 80 percent for automobile own ers, 20 percent for nonowners; for 8 cities (Pittsburgh, Cleveland, Detroit, St. Louis, Baltimore, Washington, D.C. , San Francisco, and Los Angeles), 95 percent for automobile owners, 5 percent for nonowners; for 27 other m etro politan areas, and all nonmetropolitan areas, 100 percent for automobile owners. 2 The annual allowances for gasoline and motor oil vary by the extent that automobile owners drive to work. In New York, the allowance is 553.0 gallons of gasoline, 2 1.8 quarts of motor oil; in Boston, Philadelphia, and Chicago, 598.8 gallons of gasoline, 2 3.6 quarts of motor oil; in 35 other metropolitan areas, 644.6 gallons of gasoline, and 25. 4 quarts of motor oil. 3 The annual allowance is 1. 25 gallons for all cities with an average minimum temperature of 32° —15° during January. For cities with below 15° January minimum temperatures, the allowance is 2. 00. No antifreeze is provided for mild climate cities. 4 In metropolitan areas, cost is 56. 9 percent of cost of itemized repairs; in nonmetropolitan areas, 36.2 percent. 5 In metropolitan areas, cost is 4 .7 percent of cost of itemized operating expenses; in nonmetropolitan areas, 8 . 0 percent. 6 The number of inspections required by law in each city. 7 Cost required by law in each city. 8 In metropolitan areas, cost is 4. 6 percent of annual allowance for itemized operating expenses; in nonmetro politan areas, 1. 0 percent. 9 The annual allowance is 183 rides in Boston, New York, Philadelphia, and Chicago; 51 in all other m etro politan areas. 10 The annual allowance is 220 rides in Boston, New York, Philadelphia, and Chicago; 97 in all other m etro politan areas. 11 Estimated cost in 1966 for all cities. 29 Table A-4. Clothing Budget Quantities A. Husband Pricing code Outerwear: Topcoats*---------------------Jackets, sport coats* — Sw eaters----------------------Raincoats*--------------------Suits: Year-round weight* Tropical weight* ---Slacks: Dress ----------------------W o rk ------------------------Shorts, walking* --------Shirts: D r e s s ----------------------W o rk ------------------------Sports Other outerwear* — Underwear, nightwear: Undershorts, briefs . Undershirts -------------Other underwear* . P ajam as---------------Bathrobes-------------H osiery----------------------F ootwear: Shoes: S tr e e t--------------W o rk ---------------L oa fers------------Houseslippers Rubbers, galoshes, boots*. Other footwear*------------------Hats, gloves, accessories: Hats: Felt* --------------------------S tra w *------------------------Gloves: D ress* Work* Ties, handkerchiefs . Jewelry, watches----Other accessories* - 0. 13 .51 . 24 . 12 0. 08 .61 . 22 . 07 . 27 . 08 . 30 •09 31-086, 31-087 se rie s. 31-171 --------------------------31-080X ------------------------ 1. 22 2. 02 . 10 1. 33 2. 49 . 13 31-273, 31-273A — 31-222, 31-222A — 31-292 -------------------- 1. 49 1. 18 1.79 1. 57 1.42 2. 03 (*) 31-342FB . 31-324 ----- 4. 84 3. 89 (2) . 38 . 05 9 .96 4. 43 4. 17 (2) . 34 10. 14 1. 01 . 60 . 27 . 13 . 18 (3) . 72 . 64 . 28 . 15 . 19 (3) . 17 . 05 . 26 . 16 . 14 1. 77 $2. 93 ! $3. 62 (5 ) . 20 3. 54 4 $3. 96 4 $ 5„ 27 (5 ) 31-018 series 31-010X ______ 31-154 ________ 31-020X ______ 31-052, 3 1 -0 5 3 31-050X ------------ 3 1 -3 7 6 F B -----------31-37 O X --------------31-409, 31-409A -do— -do— -do— -do— _do— 33-002, 33-002A 33-046 ----------------33-01 O X --------------33-050X --------------3 3 -2 2 6 F B ------------ 3 1-427FB . 31-420X ... -p air— — do— 31-430X . 31-440X . B. Outerwear: Coats, all purpose* — Jackets, sports coats* Sw eaters*-------------------Raincoats -------------------Suits----------------------------Slacks--------------------------Dungarees Shorts------Bathing trunks --------Shirts: Dress ------------------S p o rt-------------------Other outerwear* — Underwear, nightwear: Undershorts ------------Undershirts -------------Pajamas Bathrobes--------Hosiery: Socks---------------Other hosiery* . Footwear: Shoes, street — Sneakers ---------H ouseslippers----------------------------Rubbers, galoshes, boots* -------Hats, gloves, accessories: Gloves* --------------------------------------Other accessories* . See footnotes at end of table. Quantity per year Metropolitan Nonmetropolitan ireas areas n - Boy 31-57 O X --------------------------------------------31-662 -----------------------------------------------31-714F B -------------------------------------------31-577________________________________ 31 - 660X— —— —— — — —— — — — 31-646F B ___ ________________________ . 31-732FB ..................................................... 31-640X ______________________________ 3 1 -6 5 0 X ----------- ------------------------------- 0. 26 . 98 . 78 . 09 . 26 3. 57 2. 23 . 25 . 45 0. 1. . . . 3. 2. . . 08 26 56 19 26 26 93 17 55 31-81 O X --------------------------------------------3 1 -8 1 7 F B ------------------------------------------- 1.72 4. 56 1. 53 4. 81 i1 ) i1 ) 31-832, 31-832A -----------------------------31-830X --------------------------------------------31-840X --------------------------------------------3 1 -8 5 0 X --------------------------------------------- 5. 25 4. 01 .61 . 12 4. 87 4. 03 . 50 - 31-883FB ------------------------------------------- 12. 24 (6 ) 10. 31 - pair. — do— do-d o— 3 3 -5 4 2 F B ------------------------------------------33-586 _______________________________ 33-550X --------------------------------------------33-560X --------------------------------------------- 2. 1. . . 75 36 19 23 2. 47 1. 04 . 11 . 22 -d o— 31-860X --------------------------------------------- . 78 (5 ) . 82 (S) 30 Table A-4. Clothing Budget Quantities--- Continued C. Wife Quantity per year Pricing code Item Outerwear: Coats: Heavyweight * -------------------------Lightweight ----------------------------Carcoats, jackets -----------------Sweaters --------------------------------------Suits----------------------------------------------D resses: Street --------------------------------------H o u se --------------------------------------Skirts, jumpers, culottes----------Blouses, shirts --------------------------Slacks-------------------------------------------Dungarees, blue j e a n s ---------------Shorts, pedal pushers* --------------Other outerwear*------------------------Underwear, nightwear: Slips, petticoats -------------------------Girdles ----------------------------------------B rassieres ----------------------------------Panties, b r ie fs ----------------------------Nightgowns ----------------------------------P ajam as---------------------------------------Robes, housecoats ---------------------Other underwear and nightwear* Hoisery: Stockings--------------------------------------___Anklets -----------------------------------------F ootwear: Shoes: Street --------------------------------------C a su al------------------------------------Houseslippers ------------------------Rubbers, galoshes, b o o ts * -------Other footwear* -------------------------Hats, gloves, accessories: Hats*---------------------------------------------G loves*----------------------------------------P urses, handbags ----------------------Jewelry, watches ----------------------Other accessories* --------------------- 32-001, 32-002 series 32-010X ----------------------32-105 ------------------------32- 118, 32- 118A ------32-120X ----------------------32-222, 32-223, 32-226, 3 2 - 2 2 6 A 32-248 ------------------------------------------------ See footnotes at end of table. 0 . 22 . 15 . 11 . 80 . 16 do---do---do---do---- 10 . 10 . . 73 32-287----------------32-378, 32-378B 32-391 ---------------32-313 ---------------3 2 -3 2 7 F B ----------3 2 -3 3 9 F B ----------32-340X ------------- 1. 36 . 57 2. 69 4. 65 .5 9 . 38 22 1. 57 . 46 2. 73 5. 05 . 55 . 35 . 25 (7 ) 32-405, 32-405A 12. 79 4 $0. 84 4 $0. 51 1. 36 1. 39 .4 3 . 14 1.41 1.48 . 38 . 11 (M pair - do- 0. 16 . 15 1. 56 . 60 4 $ 3. 31 1. 33 . 63 . 09 . 72 32-144, 32-144A 32-172 ---------------32-170X ------------32-180X ------------- 1. . 4 $3. 1. . . . Nonmetropolitan areas 67 56 55 67 83 06 87 33-271, 33-272 33-361 ------------33-406 ------------33-410X ----------- . (7) (3) 32-432FB 32-443 — 32-450X - D. Outerwear: Coats: Heavyweight* ---------Lightweight* ----------Raincoats* ------------------Jackets ------------------------Sweaters ----------------------Dresses -----------------------Skirts----------------------------Blouse --------------------------Tee shirts, polo shirts Slacks---------------------------Overalls, blue jeans — Shorts---------------------------P laysuits----------------------Other outerwear* ------- Metropolitan areas . 66 .6 3 ( M 1 1 . 10 (3) $4. 95 (5) . 56 .4 7 . 97 5. 35 (5 ) 0. 35 . 15 . 23 . 37 . 98 2. 69 . 85 1. 34 4 $ 1. 23 1. 30 . 28 1. 50 .6 9 (1 \ /) 0. 31 . 12 . 11 . 19 1. 27 3. 19 . 62 1. 16 4 $ 1. 22 1. 25 . 19 1. 24 . 38 f1 V /) 1 . 01 Girl 3 2 -5 5 4 F B ------------------------------------------32-550X --------------------------------------------32-579, 32-579A -----------------------------32-580X --------------------------------------------32-631FB ------------------------------------------32-744, 32-744A -----------------------------32-644, 32-644A -----------------------------3 2 -6 5 7 F B ------------------------------------------32-71 O X --------------------------------------------32-720X --------------------------------------------32-730X --------------------------------------------32-740X --------------------------------------------- 31 Table A -4. Clothing Budget Quantities— Continued D. Girl— Continued Quantity per year Pricing code Item Underwear, nightwear: Slips, petticoats------Panties , b r ie fs -------Undershirts--------------Pajam as, nightgownsBathrobes------------------Other underwear and nightwear* Hosiery: -p a ir— Anklets, socks------------------------------Other hosiery* ----------------------------Footwear: Shoes: -p a ir — Street ---------------------------------------C a s u a l--------------------------------------— do — Houses lippers— do — Boots, rubbers* — do — Other footwear* — Hats, gloves, accessories: H a ts *-------------------------------— pair— Gloves* -------------------Other accessories* E. Metropolitan areas Nonmetropolitan areas 2. 07 6. 73 l $ l . 11 1. 16 .1 6 (1 *7 ) 5 4 3 2 2. 13 7. 12 4 $0. 51 1 .0 4 . 08 (7 ) 32-891F B - 9. 33 (6 ) 8. 46 (6 ) 33-541 A , 3 3-54 1 B , 33-766 33-760X -------------------------------33-770X ------------------------------3 3-901F B ------------------------------ 2. 38 1.69 . 35 . 38 (3) 1. 86 1. 86 . 25 . 30 (3) . 61 . 80 . 45 . 66 3 2 -80 1 -----3 2-827F B 32-860X 3 2 -86 6 — 32-870X 32-880X (5 ) n 34 4">0V’ - . 34-438, 34-438A , 3 4 -4 4 9 A U X ----------34 460v ................... - — 34..AAqp-R 0. 58 8 . 69 . 25 . 10 /8\ i J /9 ) 0. 75 11. 37 3-1l" 70ft 3/1 70RA J 1UO, JT* ( \JO-TX ———---7*± A- 7f JX , JT" 'XA 7( 21 A A ......J 8 . 84 6. 12 (10) 15. 54 8. 26 (10) 1 .05 3. 25 .09 2. 63 Clothing materials and services M aterials: Wool, wool blends-------------------------------- yards— Cotton, cotton blends---------------------------------do— Rayon, acetate ---------------------------------------do — Nylon, orlon, dacron---------------------------------do— Other yard goods ------------------------------------------Notions (yarn, pins, e t c .) ----------------------------Services: Cleaning and pressing: Men's s u its ---------------------------------- garment— Women's d r e s s e s ------------------------------ do — Shoe repair: Men's and boys' half soles 3t a -UJ7T A3q f r JD and h e e ls -------------------------------------number— J Women's and girls' h eels--------------------- do— 24 AA7 24 AA7 A Shoe shines, polish, laces, etc ------------------Other clothing s e r v ic e s --------------------------------- — -k -1 — - -- M (n ) (“ ) (12) 1 Cost is a specified percentage of total cost of itemized outerwear, adjusted for intercity variations due to climatic differences. The percentages in metropolitan areas are husband, 5 .7 ; boy, 5 .2 ; wife, 1 9 .6 ; and girl, 27. 6. In nonmetropolitan areas the percentages are husband, 7. 4; boy, 4. 3; wife, 16. 7 and girl, 15. 0. 2 Cost is a specified percentage of total cost of itemized underwear, adjusted for intercity variations due to climatic differences. The percentage in metropolitan area is husband, 5 .8 . In nonmetropolitan areas the p er centages are husband, 1 5.4 ; wife, 4 .4 ; and girl, 3 .7 . 3 Cost is a specified percentage of total cost of itemized footwear, adjusted for intercity variations due to climatic differences. The percentages in metropolitan areas are husband, 1 .9 ; wife, 1 .4 ; and girl, 2 .0 . In non metropolitan areas the percentages are husband, 5 .7 ; and girl, 3. 3. 4 Estimated cost in 1966 for all cities. 5 Cost is a specified percentage of total cost of clothing, adjusted for intercity variations due to climatic differences. The percentages in metropolitan areas are husband, 0 .7 ; boy, 3 .8 ; wife, 1 .3 ; and girl, 3 .1 . In nonmetropolitan areas the percentages are husband, 0 . 9; boy, 5. 6 ; wife, 0. 9; and girl, 2. 2. * Cost is a specified percentage of cost of socks, adjusted for intercity variations, due to climatic differences. The percentages in metropolitan areas are boy, 2 .1 ; and girl, 8 .5 . In nonmetropolitan areas, the percentage is girl, 11.9. 7 Cost is a specified percentage of total cost of itemized underwear and nightwear, adjusted for intercity variations due to climatic differences. The percentages in metropolitan areas are wife, 2 .4 ; and girl, 3 .0 . In nonmetropolitan areas the percentage is wife, 4 .4 . 8 In metropolitan areas the cost is 8 .0 percent of cost of itemized yard goods; in nonmetropolitan areas, 3. 6 percent. 9 In metropolitan areas the cost is 114.9 percent of cost of all yard goods; in nonmetropolitan areas, 32. 5 percent. 10 In metropolitan areas the cost is 28. 3 percent of cost of itemized cleaning and pressing; in nonmetro politan areas, 9 .0 percent. 11 In metropolitan areas the cost is 35.5 percent of cost of shoe repairs; in nonmetropolitan areas, 74.9 percent. 12 In metropolitan areas the cost is 1 3.3 percent of cost of itemized clothing services; in nonmetropolitan areas, 1 3 .4 percent. * See explanatory note, p. 32. 32 Table A-4. Clothing Budget Quantities--- Continued Explanatory note: Quantities of starred items vary from city to city. The basic clothing budget is the U .S. average quantity, both for metropolitan areas and for nonmetropolitan areas. For each city or metropolitan area, the quantities of clothing articles specified in the following tabulation are adjusted upward or downward in accordance with local climatic conditions, on the basis of the normal number of annual degree days as published by the U .S. Weather Bureau. The tabulation shows the quantities of specified items of clothing required in metropolitan areas when the normal number of annual degree days average 0 and 8 ,3 9 2 ; and in nonmetropolitan areas when the average is 489 and 10,864. (For definition of degree days, see footnote 2, table A -Z . ) The quantities required for spe cific cities were determined by straight-line interpolation. Normal number annual degree days Item Metropolitan areas 8 , 392 0 Nonmetropolitan areas 10,864 489 Husband Topcoats -------------------------------------------------------------Jackets, sport co a ts------------------------------------------Raincoats -----------------------------------------------------------Suits: Year-round weight ---------------------------------------Tropical weight --------------------------------------------Shorts, walking -------------------------------------------------Other outerwear ------------------------------------------------Other underwear------------------------------------------------Footwear: Rubbers, galoshes, b o ots----------------------------Other footwear ----------------------------------------------Hats: F e lt-----------------------------------------------------------------Straw --------------------------------------------------------------Gloves: Dress -------------------------------------------------------------Other accessories ----------------------------------------------- 0 . 19 . 58 . 18 0 0. 42 . 05 . 29 . 05 .0 3 1 5. 1 28 . 8 . 24 . 11 . 19 1 10. 7 2.5 . 27 3 2. 7 . 20 0 . 27 3. 63 4 .8 0. 18 . 73 . 16 33 05 01 9 4 . 27 . 12 . 21 1 5. 5 2 4. 0 . 07 3 1. 6 . 33 3 8. 1 . 08 31 . 0 . 13 . 13 . 33 . 05 . 20 . 24 . 34 6. 46 4 1.0 . 07 1. 33 4 .8 . 10 1.45 . 61 1 6. 6 0 . 58 2. 30 49. 1 .0 6 1. 12 . 50 1 2. 1 0 0 0 4 3. 7 0 0 4. 5 . . . 1 12. 2 38. 0 0. 51 0 Boy All-purpose coats ----------------------------------------------Jackets, sport co a ts------------------------------------------Sweaters -------------------------------------------------------------Other outerwear-------------------------------------------------Rubbers, galoshes, b o ots---------------------------------Other accessories ----------------------------------------------- . 30 1 .06 . 84 1 4. 8 0 .4 6 1.80 4 3. 8 . . . 1 7. 5 2. 0 0 4 3. 22 88 71 7 4 4 Wife Coats, heavyweight ----------------Shorts , pedal p u sh ers--------------Other outerwear -----------------------Other underwear and nightwear Rubbers, galoshes, b o ots--------Other footwear -------------------------Hats -------------------------------------------Gloves ---------------------------------------Other accessories --------------------- . 33 . 41 21.6 6 1. 3 . 26 3. 5 .9 6 . 88 4 1.9 . 08 1 .42 1 21. 8 6 3. 3 0 3 2.1 . 30 . 32 4. 7 . 53 . 21 . 16 27. 1 6 2. 6 5 3. 3 . 88 3 2. 9 . 88 1.41 4 2. 9 . 14 . 08 . 31 1 26. 9 6 1. 8 0 0 3 3. 7 . 28 . 03 4 4. 9 . 33 . 03 19. 5 61.9 • 29 1 . 29 1 12. 5 65. 9 0 1.03 . 86 4 1.4 . 21 . 18 4 .8 0 Girl Coats: Heavyweight-------------------------Lightweight--------------------------Raincoats ----------------------------------Other outerwear -----------------------Other underwear and nightwear Other hosiery ----------------------------Boots, ru bbers-------------------------Other footwear -------------------------Hats -------------------------------------------Gloves ---------------------------------------Other accessories --------------------- 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 The 2 The 3 The 4 The 5 The 6 The nightwear. allowances allowances allowances allowances allowances allowances are stated as are stated as are stated as are stated as are stated as are stated , 58 . 21 0 19.7 6 2. 5 5 5. 0 1.08 39. 0 . 87 1. 64 4 3. 6 . 10 .0 5 . 19 1 17. 0 64. 9 5 23. 8 0 3 1.0 . 13 0 4 2. 2 percentages of total cost of itemized outerwear. percentages of total cost of itemized underwear. percentages of total cost of itemized footwear. percentages of total cost of itemized clothing. percentages of total cost of socks. as percentages of total cost of itemized underwear and 33 Table A-5. Personal Care Quantity per year Item Services: Husband: H a ircu t-------------------Wife: H a ircu t-------------------Permanent wave-----Shampoo and s e t ----Tinting and coloringBoy: H a ircu t--------------Girl: Haircut--------------Family: O th er------- -— Supplies: Toilet soap-------------------Toothpaste-------------------Shaving crea m -------------Cleansing tissue----------Shampoo-----------------------Face powder-----------------Home permanent kit----Sanitary supplies---------O ther----------------------------- Pricing code Metropolitan areas 52-697- 22. 7 25. 7 52-75352-82552-849- 3. 3 .9 4. 1 6. 9 1. 1 (M 15. 2 .4 12. 3 1. 5 (2 ) (2) 110 . 2 5 2 -0 0 1 ---------5 2 -0 2 5 ---------5 2 -07 3 ---------5 2 -62 5 ---------5 2 -1 93AUX— -------r e f il lbox of 12— 1. 9 (M 52-729FB 5 2 -7 3 0 X — — medium bar-----------------ounce— --------------- ou n cebox 200 double— --------------- ounce— Nonmetropolitan areas 64. 23. 27. 50. 3 $ 2. 143. 8 62. 6 8 2 4 9 12 11. 6 27. 0 31. 8 3 $ 1. 36 .4 13. 0 (4 ) .6 5 2 -5 2 9 ------52-649AU X 20. 7 (4) 1 In metropolitan areas, the cost is 3. 1 percent of total cost of itemized services for the wife; in nonmet ropolitan areas, 1.8 percent. 2 In metropolitan areas, the cost is 1 .4 percent of annual allowance for itemized personal services; in nonmetropolitan areas, 0 .2 percent. 3 Estimated cost in 1966 for all areas. 4 In metropolitan areas, the cost is 110.4 percent of annual allowance for itemized supplies; in nonmet ropolitan areas, 9 6.6 percent. Table A-6. Medical Care123456 Quantity per year Item Pricing code All cities Prepaid care: Hospital surgical insurance c ^ n t r ^ Medical care not covered by insurance: Physicians' visits: Uiiice visits — — —— — — _ — “ Hospital visits (nonsurgical) — — —— — —— — — —— — —— — —— — Other medical care ———*—— — ---- — — —— ------------------Dental care: F illin g s-----------------------------------------------------------------Ext ractions — — —— — — — — — ____ ___ — — Cleaning and cxaHiination"*”-- — — — ~ Other dental care ———— — — —— — —---- ----------- — -----Eye care: Examination for glasses — — — — — — — —— — — — — — —— — — —— — —— —— E yeglasses------------------------------------------------------------- 51 940v 1. 00 t; i og-? 51 901 51 8 jo 3 8FR — >i - o r ------- — —— — — —— — — — — — — — —— — — — —— .6 13. 1 1. 4 (2 \ 51 465 51 466 £A 1^*±0/1? A AOT TT 3 D ID ——————— —— ——— ————— — ——— ——————— — 51-518 5 1 5 1 9 - ...... 5 1 -5 1 8 i 5 1-51 9 , 51-520, 51-521FB — 3. 1. 5. v 55 07 01 ) . 44 . 70 (4 1 ) \ Drugs: Prescription— — ----------------------- — ------------------------- — Nonpres c ription: "V"i tam ms — — — ——— — — — — — — — —— —— — — — — — — — ——— — ——— 51 061 flirmirVi 51 151 51-001 - - 15. 9 -............................ ........ . 4 3 (h A ___ 1: j _______ Appliances and supplies -------------- - ---------- —------------------------- -------------- — (6)) 1 1 The budget includes group hospital and surgical insurance for all family m em bers. This insurance pro vides full coverage for 70 days' care in a room of 2 beds or more for each hospital confinement, all supplies and ancillary services which are normally provided, and surgical benefits. 2 Cost is 16. 5 percent of cost of physicians' office visits. 3 Cost is 91. 1 percent of total cost of itemized dental procedures. 4 Co st is 4. 6 percent of total cost of eyeglasses and examination. 5 Cost is 268. 0 percent of cost of vitamins. 6 Cost is 8. 5 percent of total cost of prescription and nonprescription drugs. 34 Table A-7. Other Family Consumption Quantity per year Item Pricing code A. Newspapers (subscription) — Books (not school)-----------------M agazines-------------------------------Other expenses----------------------- Metropolitan areas Nonmetropolitan areas Reading materials 53-806 through 5 3 -8 1 9 ------- 1 . 00 $ 18.75 $ 15. 10 (1 2) B. 1. 15 1 $ 7. 20 1 $ 8. 40 Recreation Radios, musical instruments, etc. : 53-03 3 , 53-033A , 5 3 - 0 3 4 5 3-00 1 , 5 3 -0 1 8 ------------------53-08 2 F B ----------------------------- Television s e t s -----------------------------------------------Phonographs----------------------------------------------------Musical instruments--------------------------------------Repairs, including parts--------------------------------Phonograph records---------------------------------------Admissions: Movies: A du lts---------------------------------------------------------Children-----------------------------------------------------Other ad m ission s-------------------------------------------Other recreation: Participant sp orts------------------------------------------Toys and play equipment ------------------------------Club dues, m em berships------------------------------Hobbies-----------------------------------------------------------Pets, pet supplies, and other recreation expenses--------------------------------------------------------- 53-56 5 F B -------------------------53-17 7 --------------------------------------------------------------53-612 5 3 -6 1 3 ---------------------------------- . . . v 1. 5. 41 12 10 ) (3 4 ) 21 26 1. 50 3. 59 9. 90 26. 50 1 $ 10. 16 5. 27 23. 78 1 $ 10. 06 \ ) v ) (4\ C. Cigarettes------------------------------------------------carton— Cigars---------------------------------------------------------- each— Pipe tobacco--------------------------------------------- ounce — P ip e and s m o k e r s s u p p lie s At home: Beer and ale----------------------------------72 ounces — Liquors (whiskey, e tc .)---------------V5 gallon— W ine---------------------------------------------- V5 gallon— Aws.y from h om e----------— — —— —— — ------F. 1 $29. 57 1 $32. 22 1 $60. 00 1 $35. 00 Tobacco 5 4-002, 5 4 -0 0 6 -----------------5 4 -07 7 ---------------------------------54-15 3 F B ----------------------------- E. /4\ 1 ) /4\ 4 V4 ) Education School and college: Books, supplies, tuition, fees, etc ------------D. . 22 . 03 . 10 40. 9 86. 6 20. 9 (5) 40. 9 86. 6 20. 9 (5) 26. 5 4. 7 5. 3 (6 ) 24. 7 3. 1 2. 2 (6) Alcoholic beverages 5 4 -30 9 ---------------------------------54-384, 54-399 -----------------5 4-429, 54-431 ------------------ Miscellaneous expenses Miscellaneous expenses: Lodging away from home, bank service charges, legal expenses, allow ances to children, music and dancing lessons for children, and other expenses that cannot be allocated elsewhere. . 2 percent of all other costs of family consumption. 1 Estimated cost in 1966 for all cities. 2 Cost is 2. 1 percent of total cost of itemized reading materials. 3 In metropolitan areas, cost is 20.1 percent of total cost of radios, television sets, and phonographs; in nonmetropolitan areas, 68.9 percent. 4 Cost is a specified percentage of total cost of radios, musical instruments, e tc ., and admissions. The percentages in metropolitan areas are as follows: Participant sports, 3 6 .8 ; toys and play equipment, 2 3 .1 ; club dues, 7 .1 ; hobbies, 2 1 .3 . In nonmetropolitan areas, the percentages are participant sports, 4 2 .8 ; toys and play equipment, 2 8 .4 ; club dues, 13.6 ; hobbies, 2 8 .5 . 5 Cost is 1.5 percent of annual allowance for itemized tobacco products. 6 In metropolitan areas, cost is 18.7 percent of total cost of itemized alcoholic beverages; in nonmetro politan areas, 3 4 .7 percent. 35 Table A-8. Other Costs Quantity per year all cities Item A. Gifts and contributions Gifts and contributions: Christmas, birthday, and other presents to persons outside the immediate family; and contributions to religious, welfare, medical, educational, and other organizations. B. Life insurance Life insurance policy: A policy to provide for the family during a period of adjustment in event of the death of the breadwinner. The premium should be determined for individual situations by taking into account any group insurance in effect, as well as the type of protection provided. Table A-9. Insurance is included in the e sti mated total cost of the budget at an average outlay of $ 160. Occupational Expenses and Taxes Quantity per year, all cities Item A. Occupational expenses Occupational expenses: Dues to unions, business and professional associations; licenses, tools, and special equipment other than clothing required for the job; non reimbursed costs for travel or for use of the fam ily's car for business. B. These item s, which are included in the estimated total cost of the budget as an average outlay of $ 80, should be determined for each in dividual situation. Taxes T axe s : Employee contributions for Federal old-age, survivors' , disability in surance, and Medicare (OASDHI); for temporary disability and un employment taxes where required by State law. Personal income taxes (Federal, State, and local); and capitation taxe s . 3. 5 percent of total cost of family consumption, less miscellaneous expenses. As required by the level of the total budget. Rates applicable in 1966 in each city; in metropolitan areas, the applicable rates in each urban part were used. Appendix B Table B-l. Index of Populations Weights Used in the City Worker’s Family Budget1 Population weights Area United States urban population -----------------Metropolitan areas 2 -----------------------------Nonmetropolitan areas 3 ------------------------- 100. 00 81. 70 18. 30 Northeast 4 ---------------------------------------------Boston, M a s s ------------------------------------Buffalo, N. Y --------------------------------------Hartford, Conn----------------------------------Lancaster, P a ----------------------------------New York—Northeastern New Jersey Philadelphia, Pa.—N. J----------------------Pittsburgh, Pa — ------------------------------Portland, M a in e -------------------------------Nonmetropolitan areas 3 -------------------- 30. 66 2. 54 2. 45 68 1. 76 13. 10 4. 35 1. 65 68 3. 45 North Central4 -.-------------------------------------Cedar Rapids, Iowa -------------------------Champaign—Urbana, 111--------------------Chicago, 111.—Northwestern Indiana Cincinnati, Ohio—Ky.—Ind-----------------Cleveland, Ohio---------------------------------Dayton, Ohio--------------------------------------Detroit, M ich-------------------------------------Green Bay, W is ---------------------------------Indianapolis, Ind-------------------------------Kansas City, Mo.—Kans -------------------Milwaukee, W is ---------------------------------Minneapolis—St. Paul, M in n ------------St. Louis, Mo.—Ill ----------------------------Wichita, Kans -----------------------------------Nonmetropolitan areas 3 ------------------ 28. 1. 2. 6. 1. 1. 3. 1. 1. 1. 3. Population weights United States urban population— Continued South 4 -----------------------------------------------------Atlanta, Ga ---------------------------------------Austin, T e x ---------------------------------------Baltimore, M d ----------------------------------Baton Rouge, La -------------------------Dallas, T e x ---------------------- ----------------Durham, N. C -------------------------------------Houston, T e x -------------------------------------Nashville, Tenn---------------------------------Orlando, F la --------------------------------------Washington, D. C.—Md.—V a --------------Nonmetropolitan areas 3 -------------------- 38 26 26 98 63 85 70 13 57 86 77 26 91 33 14 73 22. 72 1. 64 (5) 1. 1. 2. 1. . 1. 2. 1. 59 32 64 17 76 34 30 28 8 . 68 W e st4 ---------------------------------------------Bakersfield, Calif --------------------Denver, C o lo -----------------------------Los Angeles- Long Beach, Calif San Diego, C a lif------------------------San Francisco—Oakland, Calif — Seattle—Everett, W a sh --------------Nonmetropolitan areas 3 ------------ 17. 2. 1. 5. 2. 2. 1. 2. 75 26 31 20 37 26 99 36 Honolulu, Hawaii 6 -------------------------- .41 Anchorage, A laska6 ----------------------- . 08 1 The weight in each urban area is the total population of 4-person, husband-wife families having children aged 6 through 17 years, 1 full-tim e earner in the family; i. e. , the family type in the 1960—61 Survey of Consumer Expenditures most closely approximating the family for which the budget was constructed. For an explanation of the sample selection, see "Technical Note— the Revised City Sample for the Consumer Price Index, " Monthly Labor Review, October I960, pp. 1078—1083. (Also issued as BLS Reprint 2352. ) 2 For a detailed description, see the 1967 edition of the Standard Metropolitan Statistical A reas, prepared by the Bureau of the Budget. 3 Places having population of 2, 500 to 50, 000. 4 Regions as defined by the Bureau of the Census: Northeast-— Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, and Vermont; North Central— Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Michigan, Minnesota, M issouri, Nebraska, North Dakota, Ohio, South Dakota, and Wisconsin; South— Alabama, Arkansas, Delaware, District of Columbia, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maryland, M ississippi, N o rth C a r o lin a , O k la h o m a , South C a r o lin a , T en n essee, T exas, V i r g i n ia , and W est V i r g i n ia ; and W est A la s k a , Arizona, California, Colorado, Hawaii, Idaho, Montana, Nevada, New Mexico, Oregon, Utah, Washington, and Wyoming. 5 A population weight for Austin is not shown separately because the sample which represented this type of city worker family was not statistically significant. Therefore, the weight was imputed to other cities of the same size (50, 000—250, 000 population) in the South. 6 Honolulu and Anchorage were separate sampling strata in the BLS 1960—61 Consumer Expenditure Survey, and, therefore, are not included in the total weight for the West. Honolulu's weight is in the United States and metropolitan area totals; Anchorage's weight is in the United States and nonmetropolitan area totals. 37 Appendix C Technical References 1. Brackett, Jean C. , "Intercity Differences in Family Food Budget C o s t s ," Monthly Labor Review, October 1963, pp. 1189—1194. An analysis of the effects on food budget cost estimates of using for all cities a single set of weights representing urban U. S. food patterns, or different weights for each city reflecting the food preferences of the region in which the city is located. Also presents a discussion of the conceptual implications of varying the weights in a p lace-to-place comparison of family living costs. 2. Clorety, Joseph A . , "Consumption Statistics: Buying Habits Change, chapter X , 1959, pp. A Technical C om m en t," How American 217—242. Includes a section on "Standard Budgets as Indicators of P ro g re ss" (pp. 232—242). Also presents in summary form a representative cross-section of budgets compiled in this country during the 20th century, showing average dollar cost figures for the total and for the major components of each budget. 3. Lamale, Helen H. , "Changes in Concepts of Income Adequacy Over the Last Century," Journal of the American Economic Association, May 1958, pp. 291—299. An analysis of the relationship over time between actual levels of living in the United States and the goals or standards of living which have been accepted in different historical periods and for different purposes; and a discussion of the implications in this relationship for present-day concepts of income adequacy. 4. _______________________ "P overty: July 1965, pp. 822-827. The Word and the R eality", Monthly Labor Review, Discusses the role of standard budgets in providing an intelligible definition of poverty, for use in evaluating income adequacy for different family types and in differ ent geographical locations and for estimating the extent of poverty in the United States. 5. _____________________ and Stotz, Margaret S. , "The Interim City W orker's Family Budget," Monthly Labor Review, August I960, pp. 785—808. Estimates of the cost of a "m odest but adequate" standard of living for a husband, wife, and two children (living in rented housing), at autumn 1959 prices, in 20 large cities and their suburbs (Atlanta, Baltimore, Boston, Chicago, Cincinnati, Cleveland, Detroit, Houston, Kansas City, Los Angeles, Minneapolis, New York, Philadelphia, Pittsburgh, Portland, Oreg. , St. Louis, San Francisco, Scranton, Seattle, and W ash ington, D. C. ) Includes a detailed list of the goods and services considered necessary by four-person fam ilies to maintain the specified living standard as determined by levels of living actually achieved in the 1950’ s, and describes how this representative list was developed and priced. (See Reference No. 10 for description of original BLS City W orker's Family Budget.) 6. Orshansky, M ollie, "Budget for an Elderly Couple: Interim Revision by the Bureau of Labor S ta tistic s," Social Security Bulletin, December I960, pp. 26—36. A summary report on "The BLS Interim Budget for a Retired Couple". (See Reference No. 7. ) Includes a discussion of various conceptual problems encountered in developing normative living costs estimates for a retired couple, and some of the limitations of this particular budget for the multitude of purposes for which budgets for older persons and families are needed. 39 40 7. Stotz, Margaret S. , "The BLS Interim Budget for a Retired C ou p le," Monthly Labor Review, November I960, pp. 1141—1157. Estimates of the cost of a "m odest but adequate" standard of living for a man age 65 or over and his wife (living in rented housing), at autumn 1959 prices, in 20 large cities and their suburbs (cities are the same as those listed in Reference No. 5). Includes a detailed list of the goods and services considered necessary for retired couples to maintain the specified living standard as determined by levels of living actually achieved in the 1950's; and describes how this representative list was de veloped and priced. (See Reference No. 11 for description of original Budget for an Elderly Couple. ) 8. U. S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, "Estim ating Equivalent Incomes or Budget Costs by Family T y p e ," Monthly Labor Review, November I960, pp. 1197—1200. Describes a scale for measuring the relative after-tax income required by families of differing composition to maintain the same level of material w ell-being, or for estimating comparable costs of goods and services for families of different age, size, and type. (Scale values cannot be used to estimate relative costs of components of family budgets— food, housing, taxes, insurance, e tc .) 9# Report of the Advisory Committee on Standard Budget R esearch, June 1963, 26 pp. Members of the BLS Advisory Committee on Standard Budget Research: Professor Gwen Bym ers, Department of Household Economics and Management, Cornell University; Ithaca, N. Y. Dorothy M. Durand, Private consultant on the development and use of standard budgets; Scarsdale, N. Y. Gertrude Lotwin, Home Economics Consultant, State of New Jersey Division of W elfare; Trenton, N. J. Charles A. Pearce, Director, Division of Research and Statistics, Department of Labor, State of New York; New York, N. Y. Lazare Teper, Director, Research Department, International L adies' Garment W orkers' Union, A F L -C IO ; New York, N. Y. Gertrude S. W eiss, Chairman, Consultant; Washington, D. C. C. Ashley Wright, Economist, Standard Oil Company (N .J .); New York, N. Y. Contains recommendations of this committee of experts on the needs for various types of budgets, general concepts of the standards of living to be described by the budgets, and technical and other problems associated with estimating and publishing budget costs. Includes a selected bibliography on the major uses of standard budgets. 10. W orkers' Budgets in the United States: City Fam ilies and Single Persons, 1946 and 1947, (BLS Bulletin 927, 1948) 55 pp. Describes concepts, definitions, and techniques used City W orker's Family Budget for a four-person family, services priced, and 1946—47 cost estimates for 34 cities. survey of family budgets, and summary data on State budgets in developing the original detailed list of goods and Also contains an historical for single women workers. 11. U .S . Department of Health, Education, and W elfare, Social Security Administration, "A Budget for an Elderly C ou p le," Social Security Bulletin, February 1948, pp. 4—12. Contains estimates of the cost of a "m odest but adequate" standard of living for a couple age 65 or older, at March 1946 and June 1947 p rices, in eight large cities. (Concepts and techniques used to compile this budget were the same as those employed in developing the original BLS City W orker's Budget. See Reference No. 10.) U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE : 1967 O - 278-870