The full text on this page is automatically extracted from the file linked above and may contain errors and inconsistencies.
In i s issue:
The Southeast in 1970: Off— But Ahead of U. S.
Industrial Growth: What Happened!
Banking: A Rerun in Reverse
The Consumer: A Reluctant Spender
Construction: Stunted Growth
Agriculture: A Year of Bountiful Production
District Business Conditions
T h e
S o u t h e a s t
O f f - B u t
A h e a d
in
o f
1 9 7 0 :
U .S .
The Southeast may not hold a corner on growth. But as regions go, it has
been a rapidly growing section of the country for several decades. In fact,
during the 1960's the Southeast had the fastest growth rate of personal
income in the nation.
In 1970, however, growth took a back seat to sluggishness. Production
and employment in the Sixth District states—Alabama, Florida, Georgia,
Louisiana, Mississippi, and Tennessee—were virtually flat. Unemployment rose
almost steadily, and growth in personal income slowed—largely because of
weakness in the manufacturing sector. Factory payrolls, for instance, increased
only about 4 percent, and even this gain was more illusory than real.
When one considers the rise in prices, the typical factory worker received
about 2 percent less in wages than he did in 1969.
Why business activity in the Southeast was off last year is no mystery.
The Southeastern and national economies are closely related. Thus, business
trends in the Southeast never stray far from those in other parts of the
country for very long. A recent U.S. Commerce Department study underscores
this dominating influence of national developments on regional trends
generally and on the Southeast specifically. This study traced 83 percent of
the Southeast's growth in personal income to national income developments.
Therefore, with business activity in the rest of the country lagging in 1970,
a moderation in the region's business tempo was not unexpected. Such
national economic events as the General Motors strike and cutbacks in
defense and aerospace contributed to the sluggishness.
Last year's economic slowdown, however, affected the Sixth District less
than the nation as a whole. As other articles in this R e v ie w reveal, employment
and production held up better in the region; and so did construction and
agriculture. When compared with the nation, the District's economic
performance was also less hesitant in two other areas: The unemployment
rate for the Southeast was less than in the rest of the country, and the percent
rise in personal income during the first half of 1970, and probably during
the second half, was slightly higher than nationally.
The region's slightly better-than-national showing is traceable,
in part, to its lesser dependence on such hard-hit industries in the
nation as primary and fabricated metals. The region's economy held up
better for still two other reasons. First, such sources of income as
R e v i e w , Vol.
LVI, N o .
u p o n r eq ue st to t he R e s e a r c h
Atlanta, G e o r g i a 3 03 03 .
M o n t h l y
1. F r e e s u b s c r i p t i o n a n d a d d i t i o n a l c o p i e s a v a i l a b l e
D e p a r t m e n t , Federal R e s e r v e B a n k of Atlanta,
M O N T H L Y R E V IE W
In
t h e
t i o n
p a s t ,
in
t h e
t e r m s
r e g i o n
o f
i n c o m
h a s
e
o u t d i s t a n c e d
t h e
n a
M
g r o w t h .
o r e
t h e
Billion $
r e c e n t l y ,
t h e
S o u t h e a s t
s ti ll
o u t p e r f o r m e d
n a t i o n .
Billion $
%
Personal
Chg., A n n . R a t e
Income
District
-10
government and transfer payments (including
social security benefits), which increased
substantially nationwide last year, are more
important to the District than to the rest of the
nation. Second, the District benefited from its
greater dependence on certain sectors of
manufacturing, such as citrus processing, that
performed well.
Despite these relatively favorable developments,
there were exceptions, and some parts of the
region—especially those heavily dependent on
space and defense—experienced sizable layoffs
and a weak business picture in general. Bearing
this point out, bank debits, a measure of
checkbook spending, declined in 12 of 73 reporting
centers last year.1
One lesson that 1970 taught was that even a
fast-growing region cannot escape nationwide
adjustments and recessionary forces; it can
B e c a u s e
t h e
o f
c l o s e
S o u t h e a s t
in
t i e s
w i t h
1 9 7 0
t h e
d i d
n a t i o n a l
e c o n o m
y ,
e s c a p e
e c o n o m
i c
n o t
1957-59=100
S l o w d o w n .
Sixth
District
-300
Bank
s '
S ';
250
Debits
200
_
i
i
1968
1969
L a t e s t plotting: N o v e m b e r
1 D a ta
a r e
m o n t h s
b a s e d
f r o m
a
o n
y e a r
p e r c e n t a g e s
1970
fo r
th e
first
e l e v e n
experience them only to a lesser degree. Thus,
Southerners, as in some years past, found that
they could not count on economic growth to
continue without interruption.
Like other Americans, Southerners have
learned that growth, no matter how desirable,
cannot be an end in itself. More attention has
been given to the quality of life than ever before,
and in the future, it is almost certain to receive
more emphasis.
Finally, the Southeast has had to share such
national problems as inflation and, as its number
of metropolitan areas has grown, the economic
and social problems of urbanization and the cities.
While many of these nationwide problems are
unlikely to disappear overnight, a strong case can
be made for expecting some improvement in the
Southeastern economy during early 1971. There
were, indeed, signs—just before the GM strike
began—that this region's economy had already
rounded the corner, although unemployment
continued high and the industrial sector weak.
The change in monetary policy last year from
restriction to moderate stimulation, the recovery
in residential construction, expansion in government
spending, and current makeup of GM strike
losses are widely counted on to strengthen
prospects nationally. If realized, these same forces
should also contribute to the recovery of the
Southeastern economy, which—if past trends are
any indication—again stands a good chance of
outperforming the country as a whole.
HARRY BRANDT
a g o .
FE D ER A L R ES E R V E BAN K O F A TLA N TA
3
In d u s t r ia l
W
h a t
G r o w
t h :
H a p p e n e d !
Based on past standards, one would expect the region's industrial sector to
outdistance the nation in terms of growth. This past year, however, has raised
a new question for the analysts to grapple with, “Relative to the United
States, how well does the region's industrial sector perform when national
growth is sluggish or nonexistent?"
Though 1969 gave some indication that the region's industrial base might
keep growing as the nation's growth was slowing, 1970 has made it quite
clear that the region cannot isolate itself from national influences. Defense and
aerospace cutbacks, which are partly responsible for the nation's economic
doldrums, also affected the region and were reflected in the weak performance
of its manufacturing sector. Regionally, Cape Kennedy, New Orleans,
and Huntsville (Alabama), areas of heavily concentrated defense and aerospace
activity, were hit hardest by the cutbacks. However, in 1970, the region's
slump was broadly based, both geographically and industrially. Transportation
equipment firms, chemical plants, ordnance, and electrical equipment
producers were affected throughout the Southeast during the last year.
In turn, the sluggishness caused by these initial cutbacks and the consequent
dropoff in purchasing power brought on weakness in other sectors of
the District's economy, just as it did nationally.
Despite this downtrend, a review of the various measures of economic
activity indicates that the District held up relatively better than the nation in
1970. Nonfarm employment, manufacturing production, and unemployment
rates, though far below 1969 performance standards, all compared favorably
with national figures. In particular, since December 1969 the District's
unemployment rate remained at a consistently lower level than in the U. S.
District's Manufacturing Sector—
Strength in Weakness
A closer look at employment changes indicates that the District's area of
comparative advantage was in the manufacturing sector. In fact, from an
historical point of view, this same sector maintained an advantage over
the nation in the 1960-61 period of economic sluggishness.
M O N T H L Y R E V IE W
Although
growth
as
the
District's
m easured
by
nonmanufacturing
e m p l o y m e n t
p o s i t i v e d u r i n g 1 9 7 0 , it w a s
established
in
the
the
large
a m o u n t
Sixties."
of
the
major
This
industry,
strike
c om pe ns at ed
for the
G o v e r n m e n t
a nd
in
T he
region's
Knoxville,
greater
throughout
favorably
Even
the
with
though
b e c o m e
year.
the
the
m o r e
better than
basically
However,
nation's
i n d u s t r i e s
n a t i o n a l
D i s t r i c t ' s
their national
important
as
expected,
it still c o m p a r e d
manufacturing
sector.
manufacturing
the
sustained
has
-2
Dist.
us l
II
^
J
■
I
■
nHChemicals
Food L_M Apparel I
Textiles
is a
Lumber,
Wood, Furn.
employers,
terms)
t wo
nationally.
than
defense
s e e m
those
industry
because
slow
of
States
-10
has
been
sluggish
had
apparel
and
of
certain
and
into
threw
the
District's
employer,
food
e m p l o y m e n t
of
industry
a
second-largest
processing,
-22
the
foreign
hard
COMPOSITION OF MANUFACTURING EMPLOYMENT*
hit
Meanwhile,
the
styles a d v e r s e l y a f f e c t e d
T he
smaller
these
in G e o r g i a , t h e
particularly
s o m e
and
during
g r e a t e r i m p a c t , felt
demands.
of
- 1 8
losses
outside
cutbacks
to h a v e
acceptance
n e w
w o m e n ' s
apparel
"midi
plants
_L um ber, Wood, Furn.
. .
Chemicals
Food
downturn."
Trans. Equip
manufacturing
actually
Annarpi
the
s h o w e d
g a i n s in 1 9 7 0 . T h e s t r o n g p e r f o r m a n c e
Florida's citrus f o o d
industry, b u o y e d
by
the
r Other
p r e v i o u s year's large citrus c r o p a n d b y p r o m o t i o n a l
campaigns,
the
played
an
important
District o u t d i s t a n c e
processing. T h e
w o o d ,
broad
furniture
manufacturing
c r o w
the
about,
role
nation
and
fixtures
employment.
industries
helping
very
Apparel
Chemicals
in D i s t r i c t
Although
w as
held
District
u p the lumber,
category— a
fourth
employment-wise,
these
in
in f o o d
industries that m a k e
classification— r a n k e d
performance
-6
advantage.
felt b y
t h e b r u n t o f t h e losses. H o w e v e r ,
textile
-2
Trans.
Equip.
e m p l o y m e n t
(in p e r c e n t a g e
competition
J
This w a s
District's
the year; h o w e v e r , t he se losses w e r e m u c h
industries
Dec. ’6 9 -O ct. ’70
first-and-third-most-
manufacturing
District, w h e r e
a d
—0
contraction
counterparts.
for
District's
textiles, b o t h
p e r
o f i n d u s t r i e s t h a t all p e r f o r m e d
responsible
the
a ll
m a n u f a c t u r i n g
% Chg.,
M id i M a d n e ss
Actually
t h a t
c o u n t e r p a r t s
the
diversified o v e r t he years, the re
large c o n c e n t r a t i o n
t h e
o f
t h e i r
EMPLOYMENT
Federal
in
sector,
of e c o n o m i c
District's
f o r
the
than
of
e m p l o y m e n t
pangs
a c c o u n t s
t h a n
and
m o r e
growth
manufacturing
sharpest
c o n c e n t r a t i o n
b e t t e r
in s o m e
D i s t r i c t t h a n i n t h e U . S.
felt t h e
e d
v a n t a g e .
especially
activity
trade
l a r g e r
f o r m
less f a v o r a b l e p i c t u r e
cities— A t l a n t a ,
Birmingham.
O n e
o f strike activity
District's c o n s t r u c t i o n
w as
far b e l o w t h e s t a n d a r d s
"Soaring
contributing factor to 1970's
w as
A
growth
up
their
nothing
to
better than
Trans. Equip.
Lumber. Wood, Furn.
Food
Textiles
nationally. T h i s c a n b e partially att ri bu te d to t h e
District's
s o m e w h a t
residential
stronger
performance
in
construction.
f Other
G M Strike
T he
d o w n
strike
against Gener al
Motors,
which
shut
a u t o a s s e m b l y p l a n t s in m i d - S e p t e m b e r , a l s o
t o o k p a r t o f its t o l l o n
the Southeast. H o w e v e r , only
FE D ER A L R ESER V E BANK O F ATLA N TA
U.S.
*As of Sept. ’70
5
the Atlanta area, w h e r e
A
r e v i e w
a c t i v i t y
b e t t e r
o f
t h e
i n d i c a t e s
t h a n
t h e
v a r i o u s
t h a t
n a t i o n
m e a s u r e s
t h e
in
D i s t r i c t
o f
h a s
e c o n o m
i c
h e l d
u p
on
w as
Percent
with
in
aluminum,
catering a n d
a
nation
the
and
stevedoring
w as
the
Although
Unemployment Rate
Despite a f ew
than
as
G M
w e n t
D or av il le plants,
textiles,
s h o c k to the e c o n o m y
in
8,750 workers
and
significantly affected.
layoffs
1 9 7 0 .
s o m e
strike at t h e L a k e w o o d
secondary
rubber,
along
services, t he
m u c h
total
less in t h e
region
whole.
strike
tended
to
distort
c o n d i t i o n s in t h e t r a n s p o r t a t i o n e q u i p m e n t i n d u s t r y ,
it d i d n o t h i d e o n e
fact:
this i n d u s t r y w o u l d
e m p l o y m e n t
Even
have
had
losses of a n y
w i t h o u t t h e strike,
the
largest
manufacturing
s egment
d u r i n g 1 9 7 0 , n o t o n l y in t h e r e g i o n b u t n a t i o n a l l y
as well. T h i s e m p l o y e r — t h e District's fifth-largest—
reported
reductions
Alabama,
Millions
and
in w o r k
Louisiana
forces
in F l o r i d a ,
attributable to dec re as es
in a e r o s p a c e e x p e n d i t u r e s . G e o r g i a a n d
Tennessee
a l s o e x p e r i e n c e d s h a r p n o s e d i v e s in e m p l o y m e n t .
Nonfarm Employment
-7 2
In G e o r g i a p r o b l e m s at L o c k h e e d
drop
sluggishness
in
e mployment.
In T e n n e s s e e , a p l a n t c l o s i n g , strikes,
and
o v e r the year)
automobile
s l o w d o w n s
in
farm
h a d their i m p a c t . O n
is j u s t n o w
destroyer
In
to
i mp le me nt
manufacturing
the
effects
to
Ingall's.
transportation
industry— the
important
e m p l o y e r — sustained
drop-offs
in t h e
particularly
hard
District t h a n
agricultural
chemicals
fared
In 1 9 7 0 , u n e m p l o y m e n t
states.
However,
District, w i t h
and
throughout
year.
to a d v a n c e s
These
the
highest
Florida a n d
w e r e able to maintain n o n f a r m
the
larger p ortions
better.
posting the
Florida the lowest. O n l y
during
the
defense
r a t e s i n c r e a s e d i n all s i x
rates v a r i e d
Louisiana
There
hit b y
cutbacks. O t h e r areas that p r o d u c e
of
the
sixth-most
in t h e n a t i o n , e s p e c i a l l y in T e n n e s s e e .
w a s
of the
equipment,
District's
manufacturing
sharper e m p l o y m e n t
industry
with
affected
t h e b ri gh te r side, Mississippi
starting to feel
contrast
coupled
sales
contract a w a r d e d
chemical
Manufacturing Employment
(near 30-percent
e m p l o y m e n t
rate
Mississippi
e m p l o y m e n t
gains w e r e
gains
attributed
in n o n m a n u f a c t u r i n g j o b s a n d
m o r e
t h a n c o m p e n s a t e d f o r t h e d e c l i n e s in m a n u f a c t u r i n g
t h a t o c c u r r e d i n all s i x D i s t r i c t s t a t e s .
T h u s , t h e District's e c o n o m y , w h i l e f e e l i n g
Nonmanufacturing Employment
effects
in
a
of
1970,
the
w a s
s o m e w h a t
T he
national
able
their
national
W h a t
does
this i m p l y
a nd
the
the
or
year
the
in
nation.
Although
industrial
growth
w a s
manufacturing
rapidly a n d
long-run growth
u na nswered
for 1 9 7 1 ?
nation's
deviation
not
recovers m o r e
6
n e w
than
counterparts.
their l o n g - r u n
Southeast's
W h e t h e r
i
1970
the
d ow nt ur n
l a r g e s t m a n u f a c t u r i n g e m p l o y e r s all o u t p e r
strayed f r o m
I
greet the
better disposition
f or me d
region's
l
1969
to
e c o n o m i c
paths
m u c h
in
the
sectors
the
in 1 9 7 0 ,
smaller.
region
b e g i n s t o f o l l o w this
path o n c e again remains 1971's
question.
WILLIAM D. TOAL
M O N T H L Y R E V IE W
B a n k in g :
A
R e r u n
in
R e v e r s e
In 1970, many of the same factors that affected the operations of banks
nationally also had a strong influence on banks in the Southeast. The overall
economic climate, credit conditions, and monetary policy were the overriding
influences on banks during this last year. Furthermore, those factors affecting
banks in 1970 turned out to be almost completely opposite in their
direction in comparison with those same factors a year ago.
1970 Brings Reversed Banking Conditions
Casting back to the year before—1969—, a restrictive monetary policy,
rising demands for credit, and a generally strong economy dominated banking
and became more binding as the year wore on. But, in 1970, these conditions
were largely reversed; therefore, pressures on banks eased considerably.
The demand for bank loans decreased; monetary policy turned moderately
expansive; and these changes occurred in the context of reduced economic
activity.
Other changes point out the differences between the last two years.
When the Federal Reserve System raised the discount rate in December 1968,
it, in effect, signaled the intent to pursue a restrictive monetary policy.
The Board of Governors increased the reserve requirement on demand deposits
and allowed a further increase of one-half percent in the discount rate in
April. Other market rates rose throughout the year because of increasing
credit demands. Many banks raised their prime rates three times in 1969. On
the other hand, declining short-term interest rates marked 1970. Banks lowered
the prime rate five times during the year, following reduced demands for bank
loans, reductions in other short-term rates, and increased fund availability.
The Federal Reserve Banks reduced the discount rate once in November
and again in December, bringing it more in line with other market rates;
the Board lowered the reserve requirement on time deposits in September.
Time Deposits Spark Deposit Growth
The strong deposit inflows in 1970 point toward the less-restrictive monetary
conditions prevailing at District banks, sharply contrasting with the hesitant
growth and, in the end, deposit losses during 1969. In early 1970, nearly
FE D ER A L R ESER V E BANK O F ATLA N TA
7
DISTRICT MEMBER BANKS
DEPOSITS
%
LOANS
Chg.
INVESTMENTS
--1 5
1970
+
1969
Other
Demand
Other
Time
— 15
U.S.
Govt.
o n e - f o u r t h o f t h e District m e m b e r
banks
deposit
totals
year
Deposit
losses w e r e
larger b a n k s
In
part,
b el o w
and
increased
ability
to
of
a
concentrated
at b a n k s
last y e a r s u p p l i e d
their
those
at t h e
District's
o p e n
market
the
Board
m a x i m u m
of
and
deposits.
Rates
on
all
consumers
rates.
Governors'
By
time and
responded
their t i m e
in
the
two-year maturity time
a
c a m e
increase
in
- 10
“
the
b a n k s are
deposits
held
newly
- 5
rose,
favorably to the
consumers
deposits
-1 5
savings deposits.
interest-bearing
year-end,
C h g . , N o v . ’6 9 - ’7 0
e nhanced
However,
interest rates that m e m b e r
a l l o w e d to p a y o n
%
operations
m a j o r i n f l u e n c e in t h e d e p o s i t e x p a n s i o n
from
MEMBER BANK DEPOSITS
in Flo ri da .
reserves to b a n k s
expand
reported
ago.
and
higher
nearly
offered
half of
one-
d eposits that p a y
Ala. Fla.
and
Ga.
La? Missf’Tenn^Dist.
* S i x t h District p o r t i o n o n l y
rates o f
5V 2
p e r c e n t a n d 5 3A p e r c e n t , r e s p e c t i v e l y .
F o r s o m e o f t h e " m o n e y m a r k e t " b a n k s in t h e
D i s t r i c t ; l a r g e r cities, t h e r e l a x a t i o n in i n t e r e s t
rate
regulations
financial
and
the
decline
instruments have
once
again
funds
by
successfully
c o m p e t e
relaxation
rates that r a n g e d b e t w e e n
of 30-59 days a n d
days
and
halted a n d
but
in
rates
7
1/2
through
allowed
for
CD's.
on
state
and
local
In J u n e ,
unable
w a k e
to
CD's.
of
governmental
m a n y
large
finance
funds
then
feared
suspended
T he
of m o r e
than 7 V
2
8
back
t h o s e h a r d - p r e s s e d b u s i n e s s f i r m s that, u p
until
w er e
Since
were
paper
30-
quickly offered
relying
on
paper
June,
the
businesses
and
total
v o l u m e
channeled
financing
from
to
the
market.
larger
for m o s t
CD's,
Atlanta
of the
banks
w ere
District's i n c r e a s e
attracting
funds
individuals.
In
September,
the
larger
represented
the
substitution
of
develop
the
to
part
mainly
August
of
this
of
in
from
and
C D
these
i n s t r u m e n t s for c o m m e r c i a l
Board
the
requirements
gain
" m o n e y
p a p e r that the
latter's c o m m e r c i a l
for
the
to p a y
million.
at
the
This
outstanding
larger
District
v o l u m e
last
w as
banks
m o r e
February— the
paper
first t i m e .
At the e n d of 1970, the v o l u m e
ing
rates
subjected
reserve
to 89- da ys
these deposits,
the
then
b a n k s ' s u b s i d i a r i e s w e r e t h e n i s s ui ng . In S e p t e m b e r ,
in t h e
Board
Banks
short-term
market"
a l i q u i d i t y crisis c o u l d
percent on
from
companies
rate limitations o n
larger b a n k s
a
bodies.
roll o v e r t h e i r c o m m e r c i a l
CD's
responsible
large District b a n k s —
longer-term
of
funds
maturities
of the Penn-Central bankruptcy. T h e
Governors
and
v o l u m e
result that
commercial
maturities of
w as
the
then,
offer
primarily those outside Atlanta— attracted
substantial
with
rose sharply.
The
to
runoff of C D ' s
June,
other
short-term
banks
6V 4 p e r c e n t
percent on
over. T h e
on
that t h e y c o u l d
selling l a r g e - d e n o m i n a t i o n
initial J a n u a r y
280
m ea nt
of C D ' s outstand
totaled
than
low
$850
double
point
of
the
the
M O N T H L Y R E V IE W
runoff— a n d
greatly e x c e e d e d
r e a c h e d in l at e 1 9 6 8 w h e n
these
peak
MEMBER BANK LOANS
%
deposits.
T he
dramatic
greatly
turnabout
reduced
funds
for
banks'
the
reserve
sales b y
$400
the
about $200
reserve
of
progressed
w as
on
by
the
as
the
indicated
by
the
since
not
did
drop
of the
Banks
level
late 1 9 6 9 ,
not been
whereas
clearly s h o w
of
in
Federal
Ala. Fla. Ga.
a
discount
i n c r e a s e d availability o f a n d
outside
large
the
decline
activity
La* Miss*Tenn* Dist.
* S i x t h D i s tr ic t p o r t i o n o n l y
use
in t o w n s
larger
MEMBER BANK INVESTMENTS
in d i s c o u n t
activity until late t h e f o l l o w i n g s u m m e r .
reduced
Less
level o f b o r r o w i n g
l a r g e r District cities h a v e
banks
of
year
off to o n l y m i n i m u m
latter p a r t o f 1 9 7 0 .
borrowers
e nd
reserves w e r e
m i l l i o n in t h e final q u a r t e r
of 1 9 6 9 but d r o p p e d
in t h e
District
exceeded
at t h e d i s c o u n t w i n d o w
nearly $ 9 0
1969,
banks
R e s e r v e B a n k of Atlanta. T h e
averaged
“ 15
b or ro we d
t h a n their p u r ch as es .
the
also
late
funds
overnight
million m o r e
borrowing
In
C h g . , N o v . ’6 9 - ’7 0
inflows
use
However,
of these
pressure
to
Federal
million.
sales
in d e p o s i t
necessity
purposes.
purchases
1970,
the
the previous
b a n k s c o u l d still a t t r a c t
%
In part, t h e
reflects
C h g . , N o v . ’6 9 - ’7 0
-1 5
the
a d e c l i n e in t h e
relative c osts o f f u n d s o b t a i n e d f r o m o t h e r s o u r c e s .
Banks
have
w i n d o w
generally
regarded
as a s e c o n d a r y ,
for m e e t i n g
reserve
the
not a
discount
primary,
source
requirements.
Bank Credit Proves More Expansive
In 1 9 6 9 , t h e inability o f b a n k s
caused
a s e r i o u s strain o n
M an y,
to e x p a n d
deposits
t h e i r l e n d i n g ability.
particularly t he larger o ne s, w e r e f o r c e d to
sell o f f l a r g e a m o u n t s
in o r d e r t o m e e t
the
o f U . S. T r e a s u r y
rising d e m a n d s
Ala. Fla.
securities
Ga. La* Miss?Tenn?Dist.
* S i x t h D is t r i c t p o r t i o n o n l y
for b a n k
loans.
But an expansive m o n e t a r y policy b ro ug ht a
return
the
to deposit
District
began
inflows
banks'
to s h o w
c o m m i t m e n t s
up from
and
requests.
expansive
than
s l o w d o w n
by
lending
in 1 9 6 9 .
a
short-term
to
of m o r e
less
Business
loans
proved
a
b a n k c r e d i t in t h e
a ll
of
commercial
and
nearly
12-percent
of term
loans,
business
loan
As
they
banks
an
in 1 9 7 0 ,
advance
unusually
in p r e v i o u s
attempted
stopped
expansive
rebuild
U.
returns o n
municipal
to a d d
issues
to
their
and
obligations
a substantial v o l u m e
investment
despite
m o r e
expand
loans
credit
greater v o l u m e .
and
invest
than 6 percent
less t h a n
3
percent
in 1 9 7 0 ,
in 1 9 6 9 .
in
the
be
a
rest o f t h e
better
before.
country,
year
M a n y
for
of the
banks
1970
District
turned
banks
out
than
the
restrictive c o n d i t i o n s
changed,
and
pressures
steadily
of
liquidity,
m a n y
banks— an
inflow of deposits— supplied
reserves
to b a n k s , a l l o w i n g t h e m to r e d u c e their d e p e n d e n c e
u p o n
b orrowed
less e x p a n s i v e ,
liquidity.
funds.
and
Bank
banks
Because
of
lending
turned
these
banks
should
to
credit
d e m a n d s
m e e t
the
a m o r e
expansive
rebuilding
improved
Southeastern
feel f r o m
b e c a m e
to
n o w
be
they
conditions,
better able
are
e c o n o m y
likely
during
to
1971.
of tax-e xe mp t
portfolios.
FE D ER A L R ESER V E BAN K O F A TLA N TA
a
record-high
caused
to
in 1 9 7 0 ,
b e c a m e less b i n d i n g . T h e l i f e s t r e a m o f c o m m e r c i a l
v ol u m e
type
their
As
to
influencing
S. G o v e r n m e n t
securities. Faltering l o a n d e m a n d
banks
T he
position
c r e d i t — total
with
industrial
y e a r s , fell s l i g h t l y .
to
selling off
1969.
bank
year
in c o n t r a s t w i t h
in
M e m b e r
capital
categories of business loans p os te d smaller gains
or outright declines
a
1970—A Better Year for Banking
their
long-term
in
general
the attempts
portion
w ere
comfortably
c o m p a r e d
m u c h
the
m o r e
m e n t s — increased
w as
activity a n d
refinance
Almost
i n (1) l e n d i n g
reflection of b o t h
in e c o n o m i c
business
markets.
the cutback
banks
Results
conditions for evaluating
Total
noticeably weak,
less p r e s s u r e o n
capacity.
(2) i n t h e e s t a b l i s h m e n t
stringent t er ms a n d
loan
and
lending
District
JOHN M. GODFREY
9
T h e
A
C o n s u m
e r :
R e lu c t a n t
Throughout
m o s t of 1970, unsettled e c o n o m i c
as e l s e w h e r e ,
the
S p e n d e r
generated
consumer. As
a
a
m o o d
conditions
r e s u l t , t h e first y e a r o f t h i s d e c a d e
t h e overall p e r f o r m a n c e o f t h e " S o a r i n g Sixties" a n d
ground.
This w a s
in t h e S i x t h District,
of uncertainty that particularly affected
partly b e c a u s e
apprehensive
contrasted
sharply
with
n e v e r qui te g o t off t h e
c on sumers
responded
unc er ta in , c h a n g i n g e c o n o m i c c o n d i t i o n s b y k e e p i n g a tight rein o n
to
their p u r s e
strings.
A
s t e a d y d ie t o f rising u n e m p l o y m e n t
consumers,
as
demonstrated
department
s t o r e sales.
sales c o n t i n u e d
the
largest
Orleans,
wer e
T he
not
areas
spared
sluggishness
of
s a l e s in g e n e r a l . T h e
making
m on th s
such
the
in
District,
adverse
department
the
of Sou th er n
of
rate o f
Atlanta,
effects
of
District
increase
sales
w as
Miami,
c o n s u m e r
store
fell b e l o w
August,
mid-September,
sales. S o u t h e r n e r s
and
as furniture,
1969
the
anxiety
extended
and
previous
luxury
goods.
slowed
and
apparel
of
and
medical
ownership
i n c r e a s e s in t h e o v e r a l l
District c o n s u m e r s '
to 5.2
During
further, to 4.0 percent.
prices a n d
care
relatively
uneasiness. T h e Atlanta C o n s u m e r
percent.
rate o f c h a n g e
t w o
less f o r h i g h e r - p r i c e d
the s e c o n d
t h e U . S., r i s i n g f o o d
region
Motors
the
at a 6 - p e r c e n t a n n u a l
increase eased
retail
recovery appeared
General
reversed
also s p e n t
of
I n d e x d u r i n g t h e first q u a r t e r o f 1 9 7 0 c l i m b e d
h o m e
and
c a r s s o l d in t h e
levels. A l t h o u g h
sharply
televisions,
large a n d w e r e o n e s o u r c e of c o n s u m e r
quarter, the
Even
N e w
m o d e r a t i n g gradually, c o n s u m e r price increases r e m a i n e d
quarter, the
in
in 1 9 6 9 .
representative
of domestically p r o d u c e d
d u r i n g July a n d
of i m p r o v e d
Although
anxiety
activity.
n u m b e r
began
merchandise,
the
performance
dollar v o l u m e ,
in
the
d u r i n g t h e first h a l f o f 1 9 7 0
in t h e
nurtured
sagging
t o fal l d u r i n g t h e y e a r , a t r e n d t h a t a c t u a l l y b e g a n
lackluster sales
strike, w h i c h
the
Based on
metropolitan
experienced
by
w er e
sizable
largely
in
t h e third
In A t l a n t a , a s
increases
Price
rate, b u t
in t h e
responsible
for
in
costs
the
index.
reluctance
to s p e n d
freely w a s
reflected
in t h e
moderate
u s e o f i n s t a l m e n t c r e d i t . F o r t h e first t h r e e q u a r t e r s o f 1 9 7 0 , t h e e x p a n s i o n
in c o n s u m e r
i n s t a l m e n t credit at c o m m e r c i a l
banks
w as
o n l y slightly g r e a t e r
t h a n d u r i n g t h e s a m e p e r i o d in 1 9 6 9 . T h e r e w e r e s e v e r a l r e a s o n s f o r this:
Slu gg is h a u t o sales r e t a r d e d t he g r o w t h
of auto
loans, w h i c h
m a k e
up
a sizable
total o f n e w c o n s u m e r l o a n v o l u m e . A s p r e v i o u s l y m e n t i o n e d , t h e s l o w d o w n
M O N T H L Y R E V IE W
The performance of department store sales
weakened further during 1970.
Y e a r to Y e a r %
Chg.
Consumers' reliance on instalment credit from
banks showed little net change from the reduced
1969 level.
Million $
- Net Change
-60
District
1968
1969
1970
b u t this w a s
growth,
n o t t h e case. District p e r s o n a l i n c o m e
though
slowing
during
p i c k e d u p a g a i n in t h e s e c o n d
consumers
Although slowing gradually during the year, the
cost of living increased in Atlanta about as much
as nationally.
Q tr ly .
%
Chg., A n n . R a t e
-10
it w a s
w er e
not
in
a
t h e first q u a r t e r ,
quarter. O b v i o u s l y ,
spending
m o o d .
Hence,
n o t sur pr is in g to d i s c o v e r that a relatively
large por ti on
of the average
besides being used
obligations, w a s
Increased
banks
put
into s o m e
inflows of time
and
savings
associations
influenced
by
availability
of
this
changes
credit
to
out.
form
of savings.
savings
Such
and
inflows
loan
are
in i n t e r e s t r a t e s a n d
market
Nevertheless,
they
reflection
c o n s u m e r
of
income,
deposits to c o m m e r c i a l
inflows
bear
consumer's
to p a y off past i n s t a l m e n t d e b t
wer e
the
instruments.
also, t o
anxiety.
s o m e
extent,
Additionally,
a
the
n a t i o n a l p e r s o n a l s a v i n g rate for t h e third q u a r t e r
w as
In
at t h e
highest
s ummary,
e co n o m i c
level
1970
in m o r e
w as
conditions— a
a
year
period
than
of
of
t w o
years.
changing
uncertainty
that w a s chara ct er iz ed b y a n e c o n o m i c s l o w d o w n .
A n d
consumers,
hearing
and
reading
m o r e
d iscouraging— rather than e n c o u r a g i n g — e c o n o m i c
n e w s
wer e
r e p a y i n g their debts, bolstering their
savings, a n d
holding
their
spending
d o w n
to
a
m i n i m u m .
W h a t
d e p e n d
in
the
limited
purchases
the
c on s u m e r
repay
goods.
their
debt
levels for m o s t
Increases
supported
of
high-ticket
increase
in
a
in
A n d
loans
consumers
obligations
of the
at
continued
relatively
i nc om e
their c o n s e r v a t i v e
and
saving
t a k e s in 1 9 7 1
will
or not consumers
behavior by
spending
less.
to
EMERSON ATKINSON
could
rate o f c o n s u m e r
FE D ER A L R ESER V E BANK O F ATLA N TA
reverse
m o r e
whether
high
year.
personal
higher
merchandise
for n o n a u t o m o t i v e
course the e c o n o m y
partly o n
have
spending,
11
C o n s t r u c t io n :
S t u n t e d
G r o w
t h
Construction activity in the Southeast continued to increase during 1970;
however, its rate of growth was less than half of that recorded in 1969.1
Although residential construction was unchanged from a year ago,
nonresidential construction expanded enough to push total construction
above 1969 levels. While this increase in total construction was smaller
than in 1969 or in 1968, it was sufficient to bring the region's rate of growth
in construction activity above the nation's for the third consecutive year.
A combination of higher construction costs, financing problems, changes
in national economic conditions, and special local factors influenced all
types of construction in the Southeast during 1970. But residential and
nonresidential construction do not always react in the same way to these
influences and, therefore, will be considered separately.
No Gains for Residential Construction
According to conventional wisdom, economic sluggishness frees resources
for use in residential construction, thereby promoting an increase in
residential construction activity. But in 1970, this was not the case. Although
the nation and the Southeast experienced less-intensive demand for
resources, increasing credit availability, and declining credit costs, the
region's residential construction activity showed very little growth.
A first-quarter surge put residential activity well ahead of 1969 levels;
however, this lead was overcome as declines from 1969 levels appeared
later in the year. The first-quarter surge was a continuation of a series of
substantial monthly increases in residential activity that began in mid-1969.
These increases resulted primarily from a large volume of activity in southern
Florida. When this activity declined after the first quarter of 1970, the
region's residential construction totals were reduced. The depressing effects
would have been even more severe if residential construction in Florida's
1 Construction activity is measured by the dollar value of construction contracts awarded.
This is an acceptable proxy for construction expenditures. Normal seasonal variations
are accounted for in the analysis of these data.
M O N T H L Y R E V IE W
and
Construction contract volume in both residential
and nonresidential sectors declined after reach
ing new highs early in 1970.
as
each
a
portion
of
the
of
total
District
building
states
p e r m i t s — in
except
Georgia.
A Balancing Act
Forces
that
residential
by
other
w o r k e d
to
inhibit
construction
forces that w o r k e d
activity d u r i n g 1 9 7 0 . O n
push
of
substantial
housing w as
low-cost
region's
were
balanced
t o i n c r e a s e this
the o n e hand, the u p w a r d
unsatisfied
d e m a n d
for
reinforced b y subsidy p r o g r a m s
residential c o n st ru ct io n. O n
hand, d o w n w a r d
fading
the
activity
pressure w a s
building
b o o m
in
for
the other
exerted b y the
southern
Florida
and
a d v e r s e e l e m e n t s , s u c h as rising b u i l d i n g c os t s a n d
restricted
credit
and
availability early
A
large
housing
backlog
w as
influence
behind
the
The
of
d e m a n d
important
construction
nation
its h o u s i n g .
for
expansionary
Southeast began
rest o f t h e
quality
c o m m i t m e n t
unsatisfied
most
residential
during 1970.
and
of
the
on
financing
in t h e y e a r .
activity
the 1960's well
in t h e a d e q u a c y
At
present,
m u c h
of
the area r e m a i n s b eh in d, a l t h o u g h the region's
relatively
rapid
recent years
construction.
Tampa-St.
Petersburg
Mississippi
over
had
not
area
and
maintained
in G e o r g i a
and
a substantial
W e a k n e s s
in
Continued
edge
rates o f m o r t g a g e
1970,
a
to h o u s i n g d e m a n d ,
of
activity
on
multi-unit
projects. W h i l e
the drop
in s u c h
activity w a s
southern
Florida,
permits
in
unit
low
population
in
in
residential
vacancy
foreclosures
in r e s i d e n t i a l c o n s t r u c t i o n a p p e a r e d
slowing
and
gains
rates
for
give e v i d e n c e
of
i n t e n s i v e u s e o f t h e e x i s t i n g h o u s i n g s t o c k . In
p ro no un ce d
five-or-more
p ro mp te d
both rented a n d o w n e r - o c c u p i e d housing a nd l ow
y e a r - e a r l i e r activity.
primarily
rise in i n c o m e
has
projects
fell— b o t h
most
for
absolutely
such
intensive
use
construction
and
in e c o n o m i c
activity.
Strong
land
housing
G o v e r n m e n t
costs
d e m a n d
subsidies
%
Chg.
f r o m P r e v . Yr. *
that sub si di ze
families
with
and
was
local
provided
incomes
declines
reinforced
or
housing.
by
M o s t
by programs
interest p a y m e n t s
low
impetus
on
mortgages
for o w n e r s
for
of
l o w - r e n t h o u s i n g . T h e s u b s i d y p r o g r a m s w e r e partly
responsible
for
proportion
-30
a strong
of low-cost
of these subsidies w e r e
Residential construction contract volume fell in
Florida, but increasing volume in Georgia and
Mississippi made up for most of this loss.
gave
in s p i t e o f g e n e r a l l y rising
major
of
last y e a r ' s
residential
metropolitan
m a x i m u m
increases
building
areas.
dollar price o n
Such
in
the
outside
programs
the
set
for subsidies. W i t h
land
in s m a l l t o w n s
rural are as , b e t t e r h o u s i n g
can
This
be
and
provided
encourages
within
this
a
h o u s i n g that qualifies
and
building
established
type
of
costs
price
construction
lower
limits.
outside
m a j o r cities.
These u pw a r d
forces m i g h t h a v e increased
residential c o n s t r u c t i o n
not
also
exerted
construction
affected
by
important
Financing
crucial
lenders
deposit
during
c o m m i t m e n t s
planned
period.
forced
w as
and
the
wer e
adversely
cash
first
flows
restricted d u r i n g
Consequently,
to cancel,
reduce,
the v o l u m e
of
to
quarter.
this
m a n y
o r string
residential c onstruction. S u c h
influenced
had
Residential
activity d u r i n g 1 9 7 0
planning
adversely
if d e p r e s s i n g f o r c e s
influence.
restricted
builders w e r e
out
an
actions
residential
c o n s t r u c t i o n activity for t h e entire y ear; a l t h o u g h
deposit a nd
FE D ER A L R ESER V E BAN K O F A TLA N TA
cash
flows
recovered
in late 1 9 7 0 .
13
Low savings inflows in late 7969 and early 1970
adversely influenced lending for residential con-
contracts
for
quently,
impressive
plants
considerably
Although
level,
the
by
of
markedly.
m a d e
a
up
activity
mix
1969,
national
effort
at
the
in
credit
of
of
activity o n
projects.
for
adversely
hospital
This
generating
coincides
p o w e r
with
electric
borrowing
Southern
Florida's
r e g i o n a l totals e v e n
has
declining
activity
accounted
helped
depress
further. S i n c e 1 9 6 5 ,
for m o r e
than
twenty
large
increases
each
of
the
responded
an
in
residential
last t h r e e
percent
to
rapidly
area.
in
But
each
in 1 9 7 0 ,
of
state a n d
power.
metropolitan
national
the
areas.
local
however,
a
stock
d e m a n d
1970.
had
governments
for
benefited
for luxury a n d
Moreover,
by
housing
in
b e g i n n i n g to
the
southern
to
reduce the
rate at w h i c h
a d d i n g to the stock of h o u s i n g
prior
activity a n d
during
and
other nonbuilding
Louisiana, a n d
electric
they w er e
have
been
and
pay.
that
residential
flows
costs a n d
the
In
for
facilities,
in A l a b a m a ,
have
level
to
large
are
assured
s o m e
on
national corporate
in
1970
restraint
of
this
also
increased;
investment
the
rate
of
diminished;
14
growth
and
in
the
commercial and
continues
investment
construction
m an uf ac tu ri ng capacity
the
investment
nonresidential
nonresidential
year progressed, u nu se d
local
since
v ol um es
lit tl e c o n t r i b u t i o n
the
O n
to
and
reduced,
fallen.
region
nation
i nc om e
additions
state
if p r e d i c t i o n s o f l it tl e g r o w t h
the
building
slow
likely
corporate
contract
If t h e
of
been
have
of
T he
rising
sector,
influence
have
in
remain
large deposit
1970.
capacity
already
L o w
in 1 9 7 1 .
ill
sector,
d e p r e s s i n g forces.
problems
rates
the
important
to f ol lo w
during
as potential
Financing
already
these
as a n
programs
customers
construction.
and
taken
possibility of c o n t i n u e d
interest
activity
subsidy
investment
as
at faster
nonresidential
well-founded,
But
on
progressed,
residential
lenders
generating
hand,
an
and
housing
governments
has
the
nonresidential
electric
other
g o t t he y e a r off to
construction.
put
hospital
push, while financing p ro bl em s
to
remain
the
In
d e m a n d
of
to
and
1970
not necessarily b e
1971.
reactions
growth
as
c o n t r a c t s in F l o r i d a , L o u i s i a n a , a n d T e n n e s s e e
nonresidential
Further
increased
a f l y i n g start. L a t e r , l a r g e e l e c t r i c g e n e r a t i n g p l a n t
b uo y e d
market
these
a squeeze
significantly m i t i g a t e d b y
cash
market
in t h a t a r e a .
construction
Tennessee
for
continue.
were
generating
to
from
costs
declined
declines should
m a d e
In J a n u a r y , a l a r g e v o l u m e o f c o n t r a c t a w a r d s
plants,
both
construction
unsatisfied
Some Increase for
Nonresidential Construction
manufacturing
Although
to give a n u p w a r d
unsatisfied d e m a n d
and
that
revenues.
d e m a n d
had
long-term
educational, a n d
operating
portent
depress
builders
Florida
than
buoyant
retirement h o m e s
1970,
fell
the area during
e c o n o m i c
in m e e t i n g
to
in t h e
expansion
c o m b i n e d
by
rates
levels
allowed
resulted
governmental,
units
High
Implications for 1971
major
links b e t w e e n
sluggish
significant p ro gr es s
three
Florida a n d
market
and
h o m e s
b e l o w
wer e
effects
in
construction
of rapid e c o n o m i c
to 1 9 7 0 ;
falling
Close
in s o u t h e r n
e c o n o m y
period
population
Florida's
m a n y
to
large
construction
lat e in t h e y e a r , w h e n
fell
builders
for s e c o n d
residential
southern
for h o u s i n g
while
rising
i n c r e a s e in d e m a n d
It h a s h a d
construction
years
rates
adverse
the
this a r e a
of t he region's residential c onstruction.
until
governments
residential
to
a
producers
of u nexpectedly
affected
in
level.
in t h e r e g i o n w e r e f o r c e d t o p o s t p o n e
construction
and
change
g o v e r n m e n t a l , educational, a n d hospital
Several
interest
this
g ov er nm en t
national
electric
i n its
facilities
of
electric
Southeast
d e m a n d
costs
of
the
their c ap ac it y a h e a d
growth
change
but
declined.
construction
in
been
construction
generating
building
changes
facilities
keep
in
buildings
parallels
Increased
than
and
educational
a small
larger p r o p o r t i o n
1970
construction
only
Electric
m u c h
in
levels h a d
nonresidential
changed
C o n s e
year-end.
there w a s
mix
fel l.
first-quarter gains o v e r
1969's nonresidential construction
cut
-5 0 0
manufacturing
the
during
can
patterns
in c o r p o r a t e
1971
are
to g r o w t h
be
in
expected
from
m an uf ac tu ri ng plant construction.
corporate
v o l u m e
of
BOYD F. KING
M O N T H L Y R E V IE W
A g r ic u lt u r e :
A
Y e a r
o f
B o u n t i f u l
P r o d u c t io n
District crop production soared in 1970, in spite of several setbacks. Early
summer drought and then torrential rainfall during the harvest season
threatened most crops. Leaf blight took its toll on District corn production.
During early spring and late fall, severe cold struck sharp blows to fruits
and vegetables.
Paralleling the growth in total crop output, livestock production also
increased, responding to 1969's high prices. Prices were declining rapidly,
however, as 1970 drew to a close.
Crops
Production of most of the District's crops increased by at least 10 percent
during 1970. Only corn, hit hard by leaf blight, and rice suffered production
declines. Rice production actually held up well in view of the 15-percent
acreage reduction in 1970. Louisiana producers managed to maintain
production at the 1969 level, in spite of the acreage cut.
The large increase in grain sorghum output appears particularly bright,
since the prospect for next year's corn production is dismal. Although total
production amounted to less than 10 percent of the corn crop, output more
than doubled in 1970 and even tripled in Mississippi. Grain sorghum has a
good future as a District feed grain crop. It will substitute for corn in the
rations of the District's growing livestock industry and reduce the region's
dependence on a disease-troubled crop.
Most crop farmers were doubly blessed by an increase in both production
and prices. Even the steep drop in corn output was somewhat offset by a
price increase. Florida orange growers were not so fortunate, however. Their
bumper crop, for which there is no guaranteed support price, cut prices
nearly in half.
Livestock
Soaring livestock prices of a year ago stimulated farmers to increase output
of hogs, broilers, and milk. Although the slaughter of cattle and calves
within the District was down, total production was probably up, since a
major share of the calf crop is moved outside the District for finishing and
is not accounted for in the District's slaughter statistics. For this reason,
F E D ER A L R ESERV E BANK O F ATLAN TA
15
Bountiful production and higher prices for most
commodities characterized 1970's agricultural
sector.
%
-4 0
r
Chg.,
Yr. A g o
0
40
f---- 1 r $ i
the increase
in D i s t r i c t h o g
understated.
H o g
w h o l e
increased
District
from
egg
dramatically during the
output
and
m o r e
than
any
and
the
t
"
*
I Production**
higher prices
e c o no mi c
i ^ H I I Price*
have, n o
sharply.
of livestock p r o d u c t i o n
in p r i c e .
the only producers
during
lit tl e
the
in t h e
increased output
year.
Such
bright
c i r c u m s t a n c e s for 1 97 0' s m i l k industry
doubt,
long-term
Sugarcane
d o w n
c hanged
greatest d r o p
livestock g r o u p that e x p e r i e n c e d
and
as a
last h a l f
broiler o u t p u t increased
other form
suffered
Dairy farmers w e r e
Oranges
prices
a year ago. H o w e v e r ,
in 1 9 7 0
is a l s o
nation
of 1970, c au si ng h o g prices to m o v e
100
Grain Sorghum
production
slaughter for the
been
slide
nationally a n d
in
responsible for s l o w i n g
milk
within
c o w
the
n u m b e r s
the
both
District.
P
Cash Receipts
Peanuts
P
In
spite of
prices
broiler a n d
Cotton
□
of these
were
the
increased
wer e
l e a d i n g s t a t e in f a r m
loss o f citrus i n c o m e .
had
g a i n s in c a s h
M o s t
Soybeans
1969
levels,
1969's
income,
Other
for the
level.
suffered
District
Florida,
an
District states
as 5 p e r c e n t
offsetting Florida's i n c o m e
and
for
receipts, reflecting
receipts of as m u c h
of these gains w e r e
sectors of G e o r g i a
receipts
of
lower
incomes
Essentially b e c a u s e
in c a s h f a r m
the
over
sharply
reduced
cash
slightly a h e a d
8-percent reduction
Tobacco
into
citrus p r o d u c e r s .
losses, f a r m
only
production,
translated
realized
A l a b a m a
losses.
in t h e c r o p
and
the
livestock
sector of Tennessee.
Credit
Broilers
Although
higher
throughout
m u c h
interest
rates
predominated
o f last y e a r , f a r m e r s '
use of
Milk
Hogs
Total income was up slightly, but crop receipts
lagged behind the year-ago level.
Billion $
3 - Crops*
Total
-6
Eggs
-4
Rice
0—
3 - Livestock*
Cattle & Calves
-2
Corn
* P r i c e C h a n g e f r o m first 1 0 m o n t h s o f 1 9 6 9 t h r u first
1 0 m o n t h s of 1 97 0.
;* C ro p C h a n g e s b a s e d on O c to b e r 1 9 70 e s t im a t e s .
16
1969 1970
1969 1970
* 1 0 m o s . tot al
M O N T H L Y R E V IE W
The use of farm credit increased, but lenders did
not share equally in the growth.
T h e F e d e ra l R e s e rv e S y stem p a id th e
U.S. T re a s u ry $ 3 ,4 9 3 ,0 0 0 ,0 0 0 d u r in g
1 9 7 0 . U n d e r a p o lic y a d o p t e d b y th e
B o a rd o f G o v e r n o rs a t t h e e n d o f 1 9 6 4 ,
th e F e d e ra l R e s e rv e B a n k s' n e t e a rn in g s
(a fte r s ta tu to r y d iv id e n d s to m e m b e r
b a n k s a n d a d d itio n s to su rp lu s ) a re
t u r n e d o v e r to t h e U.S. T re a s u ry as
in te r e s t o n F e d e ra l R e s e rv e n o te s . T h e
R e s e rv e B a n k s' n e t e a rn in g s in 1 9 7 0
a m o u n t e d to $ 3 ,5 6 7 m illio n ; d iv id e n d s ,
$41 m illio n ; a n d a d d itio n s to s u rp lu s ,
$33 m illio n .
Million $
0
500
1000
r=--------------- r—
1
Individuals
& Others
■
FLB
/ / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / ^ 1970*
PCA
Insurance
Cos.
Commercial f // // // / / y / / / / j
Banks***
Banks for
Cooperatives
*
FHA**
-
■
* D a t a for F L B , P C A , a n d c o m m e r c i a l b a n k s a r e a s of J u n e
3 0 o f e a c h y e a r . J a n u a r y 1 d a t a a r e s h o w n f o r all o t h e r
lenders.
* * D i r e c t f a r m l o a n s only.
* * * R e a l e s t a t e l o a n s only.
credit c o n t i n u e d
to g ro w,
from
farmer-owned
1969.
and
T he
individual
growth
lenders
b u t at a r e d u c e d
credit
shared
mos t
companies
experienced
loan
only
volume,
mild
rate
of
the
insurance
growth
whereas
the
in
Farmers
H o m e
A d m i n i s t r a t i o n d e c r e a s e d its d i r e c t l e n d i n g .
There
w a s
d e m a n d
l it tl e e v i d e n c e
declining
by
short-term
production
loans, s u c h
a noticeable
as t h o s e
credit associations.
Outlook
T he
extremely
favorable
prices
that
farmers
r e c e i v e d f o r m o s t c r o p s in 1 9 7 0 s h o u l d
stimulate
production during 1971. A creages of soy be an s a n d
feed
as
grains,
in p ar t i c u l a r , a r e
producers
with
respond
this e x p a n s i o n
credit, b o t h
to
will
c o m e
for p r o d u c t i o n
acreages
that
Livestock
producers
are
adjustment w h e n
will
expand
profits.
Along
additional
expenses
brought
heavy
likely t o
higher
into
supplies
use
and
of
for n e w
production.
experience
a
available
b e c o m i n g
expected
weather
price-cost
feed
m o r e
supplies.
plentiful,
With
interest
are
loan
funds
rates a re
to decline, t h e r e b y hel pi ng farmers
the
expected
continuation
CHANGE IN PAR STATUS
Effective January 7, 7977, checks drawn on all
banks in Tennessee may be cleared through the
Federal Reserve System at par. This is the result
of recent legislation in Tennessee.
DECEMBER 4, 1970
PLANTERS TRUST & SAVINGS BANK
Opelousas, Louisiana
Began to remit at par.
DECEMBER 15, 1970
HOMOSASSA SPRINGS BANK
Homosassa Springs, Florida
Opened for business as a nonmember. Officers:
George H. Brannen, chairman of the board and
president; George H. Brannen, II, vice president;
and Rayburn N. Joyner, cashier. Capital, $180,000;
surplus and other capital funds, $180,000.
year of
of m ea ts
b r o u g h t b a c k into b a l a n c e w i t h c o n s u m e r d e m a n d
and
A n n o u n c e m e n ts
total
for credit; h o w e v e r , t he re w a s
shift t o w a r d
offered
of
Ban k
agencies
in l o a n s o u t s t a n d i n g . B a n k s a n d
agricultural
ANNOUNCEMENT
of
to
the
squeeze.
DECEMBER 18, 1970
FARMERS AND MARINE BANK
Bayou La Batre, Alabama
Opened for business as a par-remitting nonmember.
Officers: Clarence M. Frenkel, Jr., president; and
Willie W. Dowling, vice president and cashier.
Capital, $250,000; surplus and other capital funds,
$250,000.
GENE D. SULLIVAN
FE D ER A L R ESER V E BAN K O F A TLA N TA
17
S ix t h D i s t r i c t S t a t i s t ic s
S e a so n ally A djusted
(All d a ta a re indexes, 1957-59 = 100, u n less in d icated otherw ise.)
Late st M o n th
1970
O ne
M on th
Ago
Tw o
M o n th s
Ago
O ne
Year
Ago
Two
M o n th s
Ago
One
Year
Ago
351
286
349r
198
362
154
327
180
174
181
128
90
181r
173r
182r
130
93
1 81
173
182
129
89
177
178
176
135
84
4.2
41 .6
3 .9
4 1 .2 r
3.7
4 0 .8
4 1 .3
408
292
312
402
286
309
401
288
302
378
263
294
258
129
251r
17 2
255
136
275
149
152
135
160
145
48
15 2
136
160r
141r
48
15 1
138
158
129
49
154
146
157
152
52
F L O R ID A
S IX T H D I S T R I C T
IN C O M E
IN C O M E A N D S P E N D IN G
N o v.
O ct.
O ct.
O ct.
262
167
124
175
N o v.
N o v.
260r
142
257
155
179
262
167
149
169
323
327
338
329
3 41
304
320
298
N o v.
N o v.
N o v.
N o v.
Nov.
Nov.
N o v.
Nov.
Nov.
Nov.
Nov.
N o v.
Nov.
Nov.
152
144
174
141
174
111
112
179
154
131
54
179
155r
130
53
152
14 5
174
141
175
118
106
124
1 27
113
192
154
128
55
152
150
176
143
182
116
106
126
1 31
152r
144r
175r
142r
174
118
106
1 23
13 1
N o v.
4 .8
4 .8 r
4.6
3.7
10 2
112
188
In s t a lm e n t C r e d it at B a n k s * (M il. $)
EM PLOYM ENT AND
P R O D U C T IO N
N o n fa rm E m p lo y m e n t t . . . .
...................
M a n u f a c tu rin g
A p p a re l
...............................
C h e m i c a l s ...........................
F a b r ic a t e d M e t a l s ...............
F o o d ......................................
Lbr., W o o d P rod ., F u r n . & Fix.
T e x t ile s
...........................
T r a n s p o r t a t io n E q u ip m e n t
U n e m p lo y m e n t R a te
(P e r c e n t of W o r k F o r c e J t . .
In s u r e d U n e m p lo y m e n t
(P e r c e n t o f C o v . E m p .) . . .
A v g . W e e k ly H rs. in M fg . (H rs.)
C o n s t r u c t io n C o n t r a c t s *
. . .
E le c t r ic P o w e r P r o d u c t io n *
C o t to n C o n s u m p t i o n * * . .
Paper
...........................
P r i n t in g a n d P u b l i s h i n g
N o n e le c t r ic a l M a c h i n e r y
E le c t r ic a l M a c h i n e r y . . .
T r a n s p o r t a t io n E q u ip m e n t
F IN A N C E A N D
O ne
M o n th
Ago
L a te st M o n th
1970
12 0
110
1 31
137
117
2 10
152
140
56
................... N o v.
M a n u f a c t u r i n g P a y r o l ls
F a rm C a s h R e c e i p t s ............................ O ct.
222
EM PLOYM ENT
N o n fa rm E m p lo y m e n t t
................... N o v.
M a n u f a c tu rin g
............................... N o v.
N o n m a n u f a c t u r i n g ........................... N o v .
C o n s t r u c t i o n ............................... N o v.
F a rm E m p l o y m e n t ............................... N o v.
U n e m p lo y m e n t R a te
(P e rc e n t o f W o r k F o r c e J t ............... N o v.
A v g . W e e k ly H rs. in M fg . (H rs.) . . . N o v.
2.8
F IN A N C E A N D B A N K IN G
M e m b e r B a n k L o a n s ........................... N o v.
M e m b e r B a n k D e p o s i t s ....................... N o v.
B a n k D e b i t s * * .......................................N o v.
G E O R G IA
IN C O M E
M a n u f a c t u r i n g P a y r o l ls
................... N o v .
F a rm C a s h R e c e i p t s ........................... O ct.
EM PLOYM ENT
N o v.
N o v.
N o v.
N o v.
Nov.
Se p t.
O ct.
•N o v.
Oct.
Oct.
Oct.
O ct.
O ct.
Oct.
Oct.
Oct.
O ct.
O ct.
Oct.
O ct.
Oct.
O ct.
O ct.
O ct.
O ct.
3.0
40 .3
217
230
207
168
3.1
40.1
201
233
174
165
3.3
4 0 .0
246
216
271
168
96
310
244
207
166
236
262
194
165
262
288
168
1 82
16 7
199
238
361
605
382
1.8
4 0 .8
20 0
216
1 87
16 1
10 1
10 1
10 2
311
246
209
169
235
266
196
1 67
269
290
169
184
170
311
245r
207 r
167
234r
260r
195
165
268
290r
168
184
169r
202
202
241
356
655
360
241
370
615r
378
N o v.
N o v.
362
299
360
300
358
302
335
282
N o v.
N o v.
N o v.
252
204
293
247
203
287
249
206
282
229
1 89
278
268
241
203
161
229
254
201
169
263
286
168
1 92
170
20 0
244
376
583
367
B A N K IN G
Loans*
D e p o sits *
N o n fa rm
E m p lo y m e n t t
................... N o v.
M a n u f a c tu rin g
............................... N o v.
N o n m a n u f a c t u r i n g ........................... N o v.
C o n s t r u c t i o n ............................... N o v .
F a rm E m p l o y m e n t ............................... N o v .
U n e m p lo y m e n t R a te
(P e r c e n t o f W o r k F o r c e J t ................N o v .
A v g . W e e k ly H rs. in M fg . (H rs.) . . . N o v.
4 .0
3 9 .0
4.1
3 9 .0
4 .0
3 9 .0
3.1
4 0 .5
357
252
358
246
355
247
344
236
322
229
187
222r
230
269
216
164
132
119
135
118
49
132r
119
135r
116
43
131
12 0
122
134
119
43
135
129
49
6.6
6 .6 r
4 1 .9 r
6.6
4 1 .8
5 .4
4 2 .0
221
295
195
213
296
198
209
270
179
207
297
131
290r
78
287
173
278
13 1
152
160
149
159
46
152
159
14 9
160
43
152
159
14 8
16 3
46
150
160
146
167
46
5.1
40 .0
5 .2 r
4 0 .Or
5.0
4 0 .4
4.6
4 0 .8
460
301
314
449
298
297
436
295
290
407
273
304
F IN A N C E A N D B A N K IN G
M e m b e r B a n k L o a n s ........................... N o v .
M e m b e r B a n k D e p o s i t s ....................... N o v .
B a n k D e b i t s * * .......................................N o v .
L O U IS IA N A
IN C O M E
M a n u f a c t u r i n g P a y r o l ls
................... N o v.
F a rm C a s h R e c e i p t s ....................... Oct.
EM PLOYM ENT
N o n fa rm
E m p l o y m e n t t ....................... N o v.
M a n u f a c tu rin g
............................... N o v.
N o n m a n u f a c t u rin g
....................... N o v.
C o n s t r u c t i o n ............................... N o v.
F a r m E m p l o y m e n t ............................... N o v .
U n e m p l o y m e n t R a te
(P e r c e n t o f W o r k F o r c e J t ............... N o v.
A vg . W e e k ly H rs. in M fg . (H rs.) . . . N o v.
F IN A N C E
AND
43 .1
116
133
B A N K IN G
M e m b e r B a n k L o a n s * ....................... N o v.
M e m b e r B a n k D e p o s i t s * ................... N o v.
B a n k D e b i t s * / * * ...................................N o v.
295
198
M IS S IS S IP P I
IN C O M E
IN C O M E
M a n u f a c t u r i n g P a y r o l l s ................... N o v.
v
F a r m C a s h R e c e i p t s ........................... O ct.
ct
EM PLOYM ENT
N o v.
N o n f a r m E m p l o y m e n t t ....................... Nov.
. N o v.
M a n u f a c tu rin g
...................
, Nov
N o n m a n u f a c t u rin g
. . . .
. N o v.
C o n s t r u c t i o n ...................
F a r m E m p l o y m e n t ............................... N o v
U n e m p l o y m e n t R a te
, Nov
(P e r c e n t of W o r k F o r c e J t ...............
. N o v.
A v g . W e e k ly H r s. in M fg . (H rs.)
230
1 14
232r
133
231
153
2 20
1 32
133
131
53
132r
1 33
131r
lO O r
49
131
1 33
131
103
52
134
13 7
133
1 25
60
5.3
4 0.4
5.1
4 0 .4r
5.1
40.1
3 .9
4 0 .9
332
233
258
327
230
246
32 3
231
240
300
215
239
10 0
118
F IN A N C E A N D B A N K IN G
Bank
D e b it s*
18
M a n u f a c t u r i n g P a y r o l ls
................... N o v.
F a r m C a s h R e c e i p t s ........................... O ct.
EM PLOYM ENT
N o n fa rm
E m p l o y m e n t t ....................... N o v.
M a n u f a c tu rin g
............................... N o v.
N o n m a n u f a c t u r i n g ........................... N o v.
C o n s t r u c t i o n ............................... N o v.
F a r m E m p l o y m e n t ............................... N o v.
U n e m p lo y m e n t R a te
(P e r c e n t of W o r k F o r c e J t ................N o v.
Avg. W e e k ly H rs. in M fg . (H rs.) . . . N o v.
F IN A N C E
. N o v.
. N o v.
. N o v.
AND
B A N K IN G
M e m b e r B a n k L o a n s * ....................... N o v.
M e m b e r B a n k D e p o s i t s * ................... N o v.
B a n k D e b i t s * , '* * ................................... N o v.
M O N T H L Y R E V IE W
Late st M o n th
1970
O ne
M o n th
Ago
Tw o
M o n th s
Ago
O ne
Year
Ago
TEN N ESSEE
IN C O M E
M a n u f a c t u r i n g P a y r o l ls
................... N o v.
F a r m C a s h R e c e i p t s ........................... Oct.
249r
116
247
122
247
159
245
121
N o n m a n u f a c t u r i n g ...........................N o v.
C o n s t r u c t i o n ...............................N o v.
F a r m E m p l o y m e n t ...............................N o v.
U n e m p l o y m e n t R a te
( P e rc e n t o f W o r k F o r c e J t ............... No v.
A v g . W e e k ly H o u r s in M fg . (H rs.) . . N o v.
F IN A N C E A N D
EM PLO YM ENT
N o n f a r m E m p l o y m e n t t ....................... No v.
M a n u f a c tu rin g
...............................N o v.
148
152
148
153r
14 8
15 3
• F o r S i x t h D is t r ic t a r e a o n ly ; o t h e r t o t a ls fo r e n t ire s ix s t a t e s
Two
M o n th s
Ago
O ne
Year
Ago
147
15 7
53
146r
154
57
145
149
60
145
162
56
4 .9
3 9.5
5 .2 r
3 9 .7 r
4.8
3 9 .4
3.7
4 0 .4
347
230
277
355
226
284
354
230
285
317
206
278
B A N K IN G
M e m b e r B a n k L o a n s * ....................... No v.
M e m b e r B a n k D e p o s i t s * ................... N o v.
B a n k D e b i t s * / * * .................................. N o v.
149
156
O ne
M o n th
Ago
Late st M on th
1970
• D a ily a v e r a g e b a s i s
t P r e li m i n a r y d a t a
r-R e v is e d
I.A. N o t a v a ila b le
S o u r c e s : M a n u f a c t u r i n g p r o d u c t io n e s t im a t e d b y t h i s B a n k ; n o n fa r m , m fg . a n d n o n m f g . e m p., m fg. p a y r o lls a n d h o u rs, a n d u n e m p ., U .S . D ept, o f L a b o r a n d c o o p e r a t in g
st a t e a g e n c ie s ; c o t to n c o n s u m p t io n , U .S . B u r e a u of C e n s u s ; c o n s t r u c t io n c o n t ra c ts , F. W . D o d g e Div., M c G r a w - H ill In f o r m a t io n S y s t e m s Co.; p etrol, p rod .. U .S . B u r e a u of
M in e s ; in d u s t r ia l u s e o f e le c. po w e r, F e d . P o w e r C o m m .; fa rm c a s h r e c e ip t s a n d f a r m em p ., U .S .D .A . O t h e r i n d e x e s b a s e d o n d a t a c o lle c te d b y t h i s B a n k . A ll in d e x e s
c a lc u la t e d b y t h i s B a n k .
D e b it s t o D e m a n d D e p o s it A c c o u n t s
Insured C om m ercial B anks in th e Sixth D istrict
( In T h o u s a n d s o f D o l l a r s )
P e rc e n t C h a n g e
Nov.
1970
O ct.
1970
Nov.
1969
P e rc e n t C h a n g e
Year
to
Nov.
d a te
1970
1 1 m o s.
F ro m
1970
O ct.
N o v . fro m
1970 1969 1969
S T A N D A R D M E T R O P O L IT A N
S T A T IS T IC A L A R E A S t
B irm in g h a m
. . . .
...............
G adsden
H u n t s v i l le
. . . .
M o b i l e ...................
M o n tgo m e ry
T u s c a lo o s a
.
.
.
. . . .
Nov.
1970
G a in e s v il le
2 ,0 8 7 ,0 5 2
1 ,7 0 2 ,2 5 3
-
1
+22
+
7
70 ,4 8 8
7 4 ,2 0 7
6 6 ,1 2 3
-
5
+
+
6
8
7
2 1 6 ,4 0 1
2 2 6 ,0 1 2
1 9 1 ,3 4 3
-
4
+13
5 9 2 ,9 2 3
6 1 1 ,1 7 7
5 9 2 ,4 8 8
-
3
+
407 ,2 5 6
4 4 0 ,1 2 5
3 4 9 ,2 1 6
-
7
+17
+
7
1 3 0 ,1 7 6
1 2 2 ,3 5 5
1 1 9 ,1 6 2
+
6
+
9
+
4
0
+
+13
M o n ro e C o u n ty
.
.
1 ,0 9 6 ,6 1 4
1 ,1 4 9 ,3 2 4
9 7 9 ,7 0 8
-
5
+ 12
+
9
J a c k s o n v i ll e
.
.
2 ,0 6 8 ,1 1 2
1 ,9 5 2 ,5 1 3
1 ,7 6 9 ,7 5 2
+
+ 17
+
6
M i a m i ...................
3 ,6 6 5 ,8 5 7
3 ,7 1 5 ,6 0 5
3 ,3 8 4 ,5 7 5
-
6
1
9
8 0 3 ,6 7 1
7 9 6 ,2 3 4
6 6 7 ,9 9 6
+1
+
O r l a n d o ...............
8
+20
P e n s a c o la
2 6 4 ,4 9 8
2 8 0 ,8 4 1
2 1 3 ,4 5 5
-
6
+24
+ 13
. . . .
T a ll a h a s s e e
.
.
Beach
.
+14
.
2 2 1 ,5 5 5
2 1 6 ,0 4 7
1 8 8 ,1 3 4
+
3
+18
+14
.
2 ,1 7 7 ,8 2 0
2 , 2 7 9 ,0 5 8
1 ,8 7 9 ,7 4 1
-
4
+16
+ 14
.
6 5 1 ,6 7 3
6 7 9 ,6 6 3
5 5 6 ,5 3 4
-
4
+ 17
+ 10
T a m p a — S t. Pete.
W . P a lm
+
A lb a n y
...............
1 2 6 ,9 0 3
1 3 2 ,6 1 1
1 0 4 ,8 8 7
-
4
+21
+ 15
A t la n t a
...............
7 ,5 8 9 , 8 2 9
8 ,0 4 3 ,2 6 3
6 ,7 8 4 ,0 0 7
-
6
+ 12
+ 14
A u g u s t a ...............
2 9 2 ,4 1 7
3 1 9 ,0 9 4
2 8 2 ,7 2 7
-
3
+
2 7 9 ,8 9 4
3 0 4 ,5 1 5
2 5 7 ,6 1 9
-
8
8
+
C o lu m b u s
+
9
+
4
3 3 8 ,7 5 7
3 4 9 ,2 0 4
3 1 1 ,0 3 3
-
3
+
9
+
5
3 5 8 ,2 6 1
3 4 3 ,0 8 0
2 9 3 ,2 3 5
+
4
+22
M acon
. . . .
...............
Savannah
B aton
. . . .
Rouge
.
.
.
797 ,3 2 8
4
St. A u g u s t in e
St.
7 5 4 ,2 5 0
7 3 5 ,1 9 8
+
6
1 7 4 ,9 8 6
1 4 5 ,5 9 5
+1
1 7 5 ,0 3 4
1 5 7 ,4 5 1
-
5
+ 8
+21
+ 6
+20
+ 6
1
N e w O r le a n s
.
.
.
2 ,6 6 8 , 2 9 2
2 ,8 1 2 ,7 4 5
2 ,3 4 8 ,9 8 5
-
5
+ 14
+
B i lo x i — G u lfp o r t
Jackson
.
.
...............
257 ,3 1 8
8 6 4 ,1 6 3
2 5 1 ,8 2 5
8 3 8 ,7 6 5
1 5 8 ,5 5 9
8 7 2 ,3 2 7
+
+
2
+62
3
-
1
D o th a n
+14
+19
2 0 ,9 5 9
2 1 ,3 6 6
2 1 ,3 3 5
-
5 1 8 ,9 4 7
3 9 6 ,8 1 6
-
1 6 8 ,9 8 7
1 7 4 ,8 0 6
-
2
-
1 ,2 2 9 ,2 0 3
1 ,0 3 8 ,6 6 2
-
7
+13
8 0 ,4 2 7
8 1 ,4 8 7
6 7 ,1 3 8
-
1
1 2 9 ,3 3 4
1 3 2 ,7 0 9
8 9 ,6 7 4
-
3
+44
+22
5 4 ,9 5 1
5 9 ,2 9 6
4 9 ,4 3 4
-
7
D a l t o n ...................
1 2 4 ,3 5 7
1 2 4 ,3 0 7
1 2 4 ,3 6 4
-
3
E l b e r t o n ...............
1 7 ,7 4 3
1 8 ,0 7 5
1 7 ,7 8 0
-
2
+ 11
- 0
- 0
+
9
8 9 ,0 8 2
9 7 ,8 7 4
7 7 ,2 8 7
-
9
+15
+16
H aven
Athens
.
.
...............
B r u n s w ic k
. . . .
G a in e s v ille
.
.
.
3 9 ,8 4 0
4 7 ,3 7 8
3 8 ,1 4 8
-1 6
La G ra n ge
2 3 ,2 7 6
2 5 ,1 8 1
1 8 ,0 3 3
-
. . . .
2 2 ,6 6 9
-
5
+42
8 8 ,2 7 3
-
6
+
2
+
5
V a l d o s t a ...............
6 7 ,7 2 2
7 1 ,6 3 0
6 2 ,7 8 5
-
5
+
8
+
8
A b b e v ille
. . . .
1 2 ,3 5 8
1 3 ,3 8 5
1 1 ,9 8 2
-
8
+
3
+0
. . . .
1 5 7 ,5 8 9
1 7 3 ,4 1 9
1 5 0 ,9 4 5
-
9
+
4
-
5
11 ,0 4 6
8 ,0 3 0
8 ,7 4 7
+26
-
3
A le x a n d r ia
B u n k ie
...............
Ib e r ia
.
T h ib o d a u x
.
.
. . . .
H a t t ie s b u r g
. .
.
4 6 ,2 0 0
5 1 ,5 7 6
3 9 ,6 7 4
-1 0
+16
+
7
4 3 ,7 3 7
3 7 ,8 7 2
-
4
+ 11
+
5
1 3 ,4 5 2
1 3 ,7 8 4
1 3 ,0 0 5
-
2
+
-
3
2 6 ,6 3 8
2 4 ,6 4 4
2 3 ,2 1 2
+
8
7 6 ,2 2 6
8 6 ,2 0 4
5 3 ,0 3 4
-1 2
-
4
5 5 ,7 4 4
4 4 ,1 9 0
-1 4
+
9
+
9
7 4 ,1 7 0
8 1 ,1 2 6
9 4 ,5 2 8
-
9
4 1 ,9 6 1
4 1 ,5 8 7
4 1 ,6 1 7
+1 +
-
N a t c h e z ...............
-2 2
1
-
5
8 6 ,8 2 5
8 8 ,8 5 6
8 2 ,8 2 3
-
+
+
6
5 7 ,8 8 3
5 8 ,9 7 5
4 8 ,2 8 9
-
2 8 ,7 2 8
-
5
+20
+ 8
+15
3 2 ,4 8 8
1 0 0 ,1 5 8
9 9 ,0 4 9
8 4 ,9 0 2
+1
+18
+
6
9 3 ,3 3 5
1 0 1 ,9 3 9
9 5 ,6 4 2
-
8
-
2
+
7
+
5
.
.
...............
J o h n s o n C it y
K in g s p o r t
.
.
.
1 7 9 ,5 1 4
1 6 1 ,3 8 5
-
4
+
7
-
1
3 7 ,7 8 8 ,3 5 7
-
3
+ 11
+
9
4 ,5 0 6 ,7 8 5
-
+
7
-
2
2
+14
1 2 ,1 9 8 ,3 3 3
+ 12
+
9
-
5
+ 11
XTH
...............
3 6 ,3 9 9
3 5 ,0 3 4
3 3 ,7 1 8
+
4
+
8
-
3
Alabam a:):
5 ,1 2 7 ,9 6 6
5 ,2 5 4 ,9 8 1
88 ,5 7 4
1 0 0 ,0 3 3
8 0 ,8 1 8
+ 10
+
5
F l o r i d a } : ...............
1 3 ,6 3 2 ,1 9 9
1 3 ,9 1 9 ,5 9 6
+
-
2
G e o r g i a ^ ...............
1 1 ,2 3 2 ,0 5 3
1 1 ,8 8 9 ,7 4 3
1 0 ,0 9 0 ,3 7 1
-1 0
+
2
-1 2
.
.
1 2 9 ,9 6 6
1 3 7 ,5 9 5
1 1 1 ,0 2 7
•Includes only banks in the Sixth District portion of the state
FE D ER A L R ESER V E BAN K O F A TLA N TA
-
6
7
+ 17
+
5
fPartially estimated
T o ta l
. . . .
4
4 3 ,4 1 9 ,0 1 8
+0
D IS T R IC T ,
+
1 7 2 ,5 8 8
4
+ 12
5
4 1 ,9 1 5 ,4 0 4
. . . .
8
-
1 0 2 ,1 5 2
9
+44
+1
4 8 ,0 6 3
+
1 9 3 ,5 2 0
+15
L a u r e l ...................
6
1 0 4 ,7 3 6
3
M e r i d i a n ...............
9
2 0 8 ,5 1 5
+38
4 2 ,1 3 5
-
92 ,2 3 1
4
+24
3 3 ,9 0 5
9 6 ,4 8 8
-
2 0 6 ,2 3 2
+14
-
9 0 ,3 7 0
5 5 ,4 2 6
.
4
3 2 ,0 8 6
8 4 ,2 4 7
.
+
+29
R o m e ...................
5 6 ,6 0 9
.
8
+ 10
N e w n a n ...............
1 0 0 ,7 3 3
.
+0
G r i f f i n ...................
5 3 ,0 7 2
Ft. M y e r s —
N . Ft. M y e r s
7
3 0 ,9 4 3
+ 12
D a y to n a B e a c h
+
+14
. . . .
4
B re va rd C o u n ty
5
+ 11
+20
. . . .
-
-1 1
- 1
8
+15
1 6 5 ,5 0 2
9 1 ,3 9 0
. . . .
-
1 ,1 4 8 ,5 5 6
...............
B ra d e n to n
2
S a r a s o t a ...............
S e l m a ...................
B artow
-
+29
9
T a m p a ...................
B r is t o l
7 0 ,3 7 5
6
2
1
Y a z o o C it y
OTHER C EN T ERS
8 2 ,3 1 6
-
V ic k s b u r g
-
7 9 ,1 3 4
8 3 ,6 2 9
5
8
6
. . . .
1 0 0 ,8 7 5
4
-
A n n is to n
+
9 4 ,9 6 5
+
-
1 ,9 0 7 ,8 9 2
7 8 0 ,0 4 5
+ 11
+ 8
+31
+ 11
5 1 8 ,5 0 0
1 ,9 0 7 ,2 8 1
9 0 0 ,5 0 6
+ 12
5
+
+ 12
6 5 7 ,8 4 0
1 ,7 8 8 ,0 6 9
8 7 6 ,2 3 1
7
+18
1
+
6
3
6 0 7 ,6 8 7
. . . .
.
+
4
-
3 4 ,2 7 8
+ 17
-
. . . .
.
+31
-
1 4 0 ,9 2 8
4 2 ,6 8 5
2
2
K n o x v il le
.
5
1 0 0 ,6 6 7
1 5 8 ,8 3 1
4 4 ,9 1 8
P a sc a g o u la —
M o s s P o in t .
N a s h v i l le
C h attan oo ga
+
1 2 4 ,4 0 5
1 5 7 ,7 7 8
5 1 3 ,5 8 6
. . . .
1 7 6 ,1 0 5
1 1 8 ,9 4 0
.
.
. . . .
1 6 6 ,9 3 9
O ct.
1970
.
New
.
Nov.
1969
.
P la q u e m in e
.
O ct.
1970
.
H am m ond
.
. . . .
.
P e te rsb u rg
+1
L a k e C h a rle s
L a fa y e t te
.
O c a l a ...................
W in t e r
Ft. L a u d e r d a l e H o lly w o o d
.
.
. . . .
L a k e l a n d ...............
2 ,0 7 4 , 5 6 0
Year
to
d ate
1 1 m o s.
1970
N o v . fro m
1969 1969
Nov.
1970
Fro m
L o u isia n a t*
.
.
4 ,8 1 7 ,0 9 5
4 ,9 5 5 ,1 8 7
4 ,2 8 5 ,7 5 3
-
3
+ 11
+ 12
+
6
M ississ ip p i*
• ■ •
2 ,0 1 9 ,2 9 5
2 ,0 4 5 ,2 9 8
1 ,8 5 7 ,1 6 7
-
2
+
9
+
7
T e n n e sse e t*
. .
5 ,0 8 6 ,7 9 9
5 ,3 5 4 ,2 1 3
4 ,8 4 9 ,9 4 8
-
5
+
5
+
6
{Estimated
.
.
r-Revised
19
D is t r ic t B u s in e s s C o n d it io n s
C o n s tru c tio n C o n tra c ts
5-Mo. Moving
F a rm
6-M o.
40.7
C a s h R e c e ip ts
Moving Average
B e n k D e b i ts
204-=
I i--i i i",i I i i i i i I i
1967
1968
* S e a s . adj. figure; n o t a n i n d e x
L a t e s t plotting: N o v e m b e r — e x c e p t m f g . p r o d u c t i o n a n d f a r m
receipts, O c t o b e r
Latest available figures reveal that Southeastern economic activity continues to shuffle along. Although
the unemployment rate was unchanged in November, nonfarm employment decreased. Construction
contract awards rose only slightly. As the harvest of bumper crops neared completion, agricultural prices
held steady. The prime rate was cut again in response to weak loan demand and continued increases in
loanable funds. Restraint in consumer borrowing and spending continued.
November's unemployment rate remained steady
at 4.8 percent. However, nonfarm employment de
clined after two consecutive monthly gains. Non
manufacturing employment, especially in Florida's
construction and trade industries, accounted for
most of the loss. Though depressed by the effects
of the GM strike, manufacturing employment held
steady in November. Gains in manufacturing pay
rolls were largely attributed to an increase in
average weekly hours worked.
Construction contract awards rose slightly in
November. Buoyed by several public projects, non
residential contract volume was solely responsible
for this increase. Although residential contract
volume was virtually unchanged, a continuation of
large deposit inflows at savings and loan associa
tions—evidence of greater mortgage credit avail
ability—and small declines in mortgage credit costs
have brightened the outlook for this sector's activity
in the near future.
Agricultural prices in November were unchanged
from October but were 7 percent below the 1969
level. Neither crops nor livestock showed much
overall price movement. Pork prices continued to
NOTE:
slide, but milk and poultry prices offset this de
cline. Also, higher vegetable and oilseed prices
largely made up for price declines for citrus crops.
Improved weather for harvesting sharpened expec
tations of bumper yields. Latest estimates indicate
that 1970 will show a 10- to 20-percent increase
over 1969 in the level of output for most District
crops. In spite of lower than year-ago prices, farm
income remained slightly higher.
Bank lending picked up during mid-December;
however, the rise in bank loans was still weak in
comparison with previous year-end advances. A
general weakness in demand for all types of loans
brought further declines in interest rates, including
1970's fifth cut in the prime lending rate. The larger
banks have not been aggressively seeking to expand
CD's.
Consumers continued their scrooge-like behavior
during December, as evidenced by practically no
improvement in department store and auto sales
from year-ago levels. During November, consumers
concentrated more on paying off their instalment
debt at commercial banks than on acquiring new
obligations. As a result, total consumer credit out
standing declined.
Data on which statements are based have been adjusted whenever possible to eliminate seasonal influences.
20
MONTHLY REVIEW
January, 1971
@FedFRASER