The full text on this page is automatically extracted from the file linked above and may contain errors and inconsistencies.
Personal Income Resumes Growth
Personal income in the Sixth Federal Reserve District began increasing
early this year, following a period of relative stability associated with
the recent nationwide business recession. Although gains in the District
occurred somewhat ahead of those in the nation as a whole, the ex
tent of recovery in personal income has so far been very similar in both
areas. A look at monthly figures for the period 1950-61 proves that
changes in personal income for District states have generally paralleled
changes in national income. Among the District states of Alabama,
Florida, Georgia, Louisiana, Mississippi, and Tennessee, the patterns
of recovery this year have been generally comparable, whereas re
coveries from the previous two business recessions had shown some
what more variation.
These are some of the generalizations that can be drawn from a
new series of monthly estimates of personal income in District states.
From the figures, developed by the Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta
and shown in the first chart, analysts can study short-run income
changes, such as those occurring in business recessions lasting only
eight to ten months, that could not be studied on the basis of annual
data alone. Using the monthly estimates, analysts should also be able
to discern, rather accurately, current trends in income before more com
prehensive annual figures become available. The U. S. Department of
Commerce has long published annual figures for each state, and this
Bank’s new monthly estimates, presented in terms of seasonally ad
justed annual rates, are tied directly to them.
... . .
Personal Income „
;
United States and Sixth District States
Billions of Dollars
450
ti
listricf States |
Florida
Georgia
Tennessee
Louisiana
Alabama:-:!
Mississippi
Income Gains W idespread
H O W THE ESTIMATES ARE MADE
The monthly estimates of personal income discussed in the
accom panying article provide both a p relim inary m easure of
current income trends in District states an d a view of short-run
changes in income not discernible from an nu al d a ta . Sim ilar
in concept to national estimates p repared monthly by the U. S.
Departm ent of Com m erce, they provide a basis for com paring
District and national income changes.
The new monthly figures a re also sim ilar to an nu al estimates
of personal income long p repared for each state by the De
partment of Com m erce an d fully described in its publication,
Personal Incom e by States. These a n nu al state estimates serve as
so-called "bench m arks" for this Bank's monthly estimates.
Based on much more com prehensive information than is
a v a ila b le monthly, the estim ates of the Departm ent of Com
merce undoubtedly provide the most reliab le indication of
personal income received each y e a r. The monthly estimates
made by this Bank for the y e a rs 1950 through 1960 w ere,
therefore, adjusted upw ard or dow nw ard in such a w a y that
their a v e ra g e eq uals the respective an nu al estimates of the
Departm ent of Com m erce. This adjustm ent process w as fol
lowed by still another one to remove the effects of the normal
seasonal swings in personal income. The final result w as a
series of season ally adjusted monthly figures shown as an nu al
rates, that is, the a n nu al total that would result if income
w ere earn ed throughout the y e a r at the rate it w as earned
during a n y one month.
Methods of estimating monthly income v a ry , depending
upon the a v a ila b ility of suitable d a ta , the selections m ade
from a v a ila b le sources of information, and the w a y in which
the selected d a ta a re com bined to produce the desired result.
Different people using different methods w ill, of course, obtain
different results, an d no m athem atical m eans a re a v a ila b le to
test the correctness of these results. O n e test of this Bank's
estimates, given their relationship to the an nu al estimates of the
Departm ent of Com m erce, will be to see how well they serve as
a prelim inary indication of changes in the an nu al estimates,
which becom e a v a ila b le after a considerable time lag. O b se rv
ers can also d ra w upon their know ledge of other economic
developm ents to check monthly changes in personal income for
reasonableness.
This Bank arrives at its monthly estimates of total personal
income by a d d in g , for each state, se p arate estimates of 13
different components of income. W e estim ate w a g e an d sa la ry
paym ents on the basis of d a ta on employm ent an d a ve rag e
earning s in the following activities: m anufacturing; mining;
construction; governm ent; service; tra d e ; transportation, com
munications, and public utilities; an d finance, insurance, and
real estate. In a ll such instances, relia b le employm ent figures
a re a v a ila b le for each state. For the im portant m anufacturing
sector, state figures a re also a v a ila b le for a v e ra g e w eekly
earnings. For the other sectors, however, national changes are
used to estimate a v e ra g e earn ing s, which a re then combined
with state em ploym ent d a ta to determ ine changes in income
received.
Supplem enting these w ag e and sa la ry estimates, we make
sep arate estimates of agricultural income on the basis of farm
cash receipts published by the U. S. Departm ent of Agriculture.
Through this point, fa irly direct m easures have en ab le d us to
m ake estimates for those sectors accounting for about 70 per
cent of total personal income. Less direct but still relevant in
formation is then used to estimate nonfarm proprietors' incom e,
property incom e, an d transfer paym ents.
Currently, the a v a ila b le b asic d a ta will permit us to present
estimates with about a two-month lag. Thus, with the p ub lica
tion of this issue of the Review , we a re a b le to present figures
for August 1961 in the tab le on p ag e 6. Historical data is
a v a ila b le upon request.
On the basis of estimates through the first eight months
of 1961, we can say with reasonable confidence that in
dividuals living in District states will receive about 3.0
percent more income this year than they did last. This
will about match the national rise from 1960 to 1961, as
is shown by the comparison presented in the second chart.
Change In Personal Income
United States and Sixth District States
1961 from 1960
The view of monthly trends permitted by the new esti
mates indicates, moreover, that the gain for the full year
could be even more favorable than is indicated by the
first eight months. Last year, growth in personal income
was halted in the second quarter by a nationwide business
recession. For the remainder of 1960, personal income
changed little. While personal income last year thus
reflected business developments in the late stages of
a typical period of expansion and in a period of re
cession, this year it has been reflecting business develop
ments in the early stages of what appears to be another
typical period of expansion. If the current expansion
continues to follow the pattern of recovery from reces
sion previously experienced, therefore, further gains in
income would appear likely. Matched against the plateau
of late 1960, such gains would augment the already
favorable year-to-year comparisons shown by figures for
the first eight months.
All District states have experienced gains in personal
income this year, although, as is typical of any large area
with diverse economic developments, the increases have
varied from state to state. On the basis of estimates for
the first eight months, Mississippi so far has shown the
largest increase over 1960, 4.1 percent. Florida is close
behind, with a gain of 3.8 percent, while personal income
in Tennessee has gained 3.0 percent. The other three Dis
trict states— Alabama, Georgia, and Louisiana—have
shown very similar increases of slightly more than 2 per
cent.
These increases may be surprising to observers who
have been following the seasonally adjusted indexes of
nonfarm employment each month on the statistical page
of this Review. During the first eight months of this year,
these indexes have shown that employment ran consistently
under the first eight months of year-earlier levels in all
District states except Mississippi and Florida and that in
these two states, year-to-year employment increases oc
curred, respectively, only after May and June 1961. This
seeming paradox is easily understood, however, when one
• 2 •
realizes that the index of economic activity represented by
the personal income estimates depends not only upon
trends in employment, but also upon trends in average
wage and salary earnings, and, even beyond that, on
changes in agricultural and property income and in trans
fer payments such as unemployment compensation. These
other determinants of personal income have exerted an up
ward influence in District states that more than offset the
downward influence of nonfarm employment.
While employment in the first eight months of this year
has averaged lower than in the comparable period of last
year, the trend in recent months has been upward in all
District states except Louisiana. This has been reflected
in the recently rising trends of the state personal income
estimates. Despite weakness in employment, even Louisi
ana has shown some recent gains in income, as the other
determinants of income have continued to exert an up
ward influence.
Income Stable in Recession
The monthly estimates of personal income also provide
us with a view of income behavior during the three
periods of business recession that have occurred since
1950. For the most part, the behavior has been remarkably
stable during recession. In fact, for the District states
as a group, the three recessions, shown on the monthly
chart by the shaded areas, have merely caused personal
income to level out temporarily on a generally upward
trend over the years.
The effect has varied among states, of course, depend
ing upon the strength of the long-run growth trend and
the relative importance of manufacturing activity, which
typically is affected most by business recession. In Florida,
where growth has been especially strong and manufactur
ing provides a relatively small part of total personal in
come, the three recessions caused, at most, only a slow
ing of the long-term upward trend of income. The most
recent recession caused a more pronounced leveling off
than the others, a development that is consistent with a
somewhat reduced rate of growth in about the past three
years. The effect of recession has clearly been more notice
able in Alabama, especially, and, to a lesser extent, in
Georgia and Tennessee, where growth in the past decade
has been less rapid than, in Florida and where manufac
turing provides a much larger part of personal income.
Several unusual fluctuations in Mississippi’s income
figures reflect developments in farming. Agriculture is a
particularly important source of personal income in that
state, accounting for about 12 percent of the total com
pared with an average of 5 percent for other District
states. Moreover, agricultural receipts may provide as
much as a fourth of total personal income during two or
three months of the fall harvest season. When agricultural
income follows its normal seasonal course, the seasonal ad
justment explained in an accompanying discussion satis
factorily smooths out the income curve within the year.
When an unusual shift in harvest time affects farm mar
ketings, however, monthly trends in total income may be
affected rather sharply where agriculture is important, as
was the case in late 1952. In that year, an early harvest
boosted farm incomes sooner than usual in Mississippi,
SEASONAL SW IN GS IN PERSONAL INCOME
Individuals living in District states receive more income in some
months of the y e a r than they do in others. M oreover, the re
sulting monthly variations in income within each state tend to
rep eat themselves every y e a r in rather well defined patterns.
Know ledge of such patterns of seasonal variation is useful to
businessmen and governm ental authorities who must plan for
relatively high business volume in some months an d low vol
ume in others. This knowledge is also important to those who
w ant to elim inate the effect of seasonal influences from eco
nomic indicators to see more cle arly w hat longer-run changes
are occurring. For this latter reason, the monthly estimates of
personal income discussed in the accom panying article have
been adjusted to elim inate seasonal influences. A more ex
tended discussion of the reasons for seasonal adjustments and
the g eneral method used by this Bank a p p e are d in the Review
for Septem ber 1960.
The accom panying chart illustrates the seasonal swings for
which the personal income estimates a re currently being a d
justed. Differences among states in the degree of fluctuation
an d in the timing of seasonal peaks an d valleys reflect, of
course, differences in economic structure and the orientation
of activities. The most m arked difference is between Florida's
b ehavior an d that of the other five District states. Undoubtedly
reflecting the im portance during the winter of tourist-oriented
activities an d citrus and vegetab le m arketing, personal income
in Florida reaches its seasonal p eak in Decem ber an d Ja n u a ry ;
its low point comes in August. In the other states, however, per
sonal income climbs from a low in Feb ruary to p eaks in late
summer or fall. Mississippi, reflecting the greater im portance
of agriculture as a source of income, reach es an unusually
high p eak in O ctob er and Novem ber. As a result, income
varies there by about 32 percent from seasonal low to se a
sonal high. In the other five states the variation is much less,
ranging between 12 and 14 percent.
Sim ilar d a ta for 1950, the y e a r in which our monthly esti
mates begin, would show even greater seasonal swings in per
sonal income. Thus, the pattern of economic developm ent has
m oderated seasonal variations in personal income in District
states. C arefu l periodic review of the figures will be necessary
to assure that our seasonal adjustment process is keeping up
with the times.
Adjustment for seasonal swings involves dividing actual income by the
percentages shown. For example, Mississippi’s actual income is raised in
February by dividing by 89 and lowered in November by dividing
by 121.
• 3 •
causing first a sharp rise and then a temporary dip in the
total income figures shown on the monthly chart. Then,
in late 1957, rather heavy participation in the Federal
Government’s Soil Bank Program reduced farm cash
receipts from marketings, and this, too, was reflected in
a temporary dip in the total income figures. The effect
was also apparent, in much less degree, in Alabama,
Georgia, and Tennessee.
The stability of personal income is emphasized by com
paring (as is done in the third chart) its behavior to that
of other economic indicators during the past four years.
Business recessions, it will be recalled, occurred in the
last half of 1957 and early 1958 and again in about the
last seven months of 1960 and first two months of this
year. District personal income was, however, mainly
affected by a slowing of its longer-run upward growth, as
mentioned earlier, although a slight dip associated with ag
ricultural developments occurred in late 1957. Nonfarm
employment, in contrast, declined approximately 2 per
cent in both recessions. Manufacturing payrolls show the
greatest fluctuation, for they reflect activity in that sector
of the economy most affected by swings in business activi
ty. Not only does manufacturing employment tend to de
cline more in recession than other types of employment,
but the average work week is typically shortened as well.
Important as developments in manufacturing are, it is
apparent that the observer cannot regard them as typical
of changes occurring in other kinds of business activity.
These other activities provide proportions of personal in
come that vary from about 75 percent in Tennessee to
about 90 percent in Florida. Less influenced by business
swings, they thus provide an important stabilizing force.
Looking at changes in department store sales during
Personal Income and O ther Selected Indicators
Sixth District States, 1957-61
Percent
Percent
the past four years, you see that the effects of the busi
ness downturns are clearly delineated, but it is also
clear that sharp swings in sales at District department
stores are not dependent upon changes in personal income.
Factors other than income obviously have great importance
in affecting sales.
These comparisons merely suggest what observers of
the economic scene have long known: We need a great
deal of information in order to follow developments in
our complex economy. With this in mind, the monthly
estimates of personal income in Sixth District states may
prove to be a valuable supplement to previously available
statistical indicators in analyzing developments in District
economic activity.
P h i l i p M. W e b s t e r
Tennessee Business: Looking Better
If you were to ask Tennesseans how business is these days
you undoubtedly would receive a wide range of answers,
for individual circumstances vary considerably in a state
having as many diverse activities as Tennessee has. Inter
viewing individuals would be an extremely interesting way
to determine the economic state of the State, but it would
be awfully time-consuming. The chances are too that most
Tennesseans would tell us about what we could find from
a close look at the figures summarizing the state’s econom
ic behavior: Business looks better than earlier this year,
there’s still room for improvement, and there’s no room
for complacency.
Most Indicators Show Gains
Tennessee, nearly all economic indicators show, has been
sharing in the general business recovery from the nation
wide recession that lasted from about May 1960 through
February of this year. The most comprehensive indicator,
personal income received by Tennesseans, resumed its up
ward movement in January, two months ahead of the
comparable national figure, but the overall gain of nearly
4 percent through August of this year was not much dif
ferent from that in the country as a whole. During the
months of recession, income in Tennessee had held steady
because reduced earnings in some sectors were offset by
higher income in others. This stability in recession was a
characteristic of personal income in Tennessee during the
past decade, as revealed by new estimates prepared by
this Bank and discussed in another article of this Review.
Over the years, income changes have been quite similar
to those occurring in the nation, reminding Tennesseans
once again that their economic behavior mirrors to a
large extent developments on the national scene.
This year’s improvement in personal income reflects,
in considerable degree, the gains in the top four indicators
in the accompanying chart. After stabilizing in the first
quarter of this year, total nonfarm employment increased
from March through August. Initially, the rise was attrib
utable to greater employment in Tennessee’s manufactur
ing activities, but gains also occurred somewhat later in
nonmanufacturing employment. Manufacturing payrolls
rose even more sharply than employment because the ris
ing number of workers put in longer hours each week.
Farmers, too, have enjoyed some recent improvement in
their cash receipts.
With the rise in income, Tennesseans have increased
• 4 •
their spending to some extent. Department store sales
rose sharply in June and July and, after a setback in
August, recovered in September. Furniture store sales
have also shown an encouraging improvement in recent
months, after an extended downtrend. Sales tax data,
available only through August, have generally confirmed
the improvement in spending shown by the department
and furniture store sales figures.
When there is a pickup in economic activity, business
men eventually seek additional credit to finance expanding
operations. Lately bank loans have been increasing in
Tennessee. Through the first seven months of the year,
however, they showed some weakening tendency. This, of
course, was disturbing to those who had expected a quick
revival of bank lending to follow economic expansion.
ECONOMIC INDICATORS
Tennessee
H I ! l j » H M | m H j U H ! j l l N I | M » l l | I I I J t j i m t j l t i l l j 11111 |
1947-49*100
Seasonally Adjusted
126
121
N onfarm Em ployment
232
Room for Improvement
So far, we have deliberately focused attention on the
general trends shown this year by Tennessee’s various
economic indicators. Most observers would probably agree
that business has improved. Yet, a comparison of recently
attained levels with pre-recession highs would probably
also lead them to believe that there is room for still further
improvement.
This is most clear in the case of employment figures
for, despite the general improvement, total nonfarm em
ployment in September was still 1.6 percent under its
peak prior to the recession. For manufacturing employ
ment, the gap was 2.5 percent.
Retailers would welcome further improvement, at least
if the behavior of department store sales is any indica
tion. Despite the recent encouraging gains, sales at Ten
nessee department stores in September were still under the
high volumes reached in July and October of last year.
In this respect, the state’s retailers have a great deal of
company, for retail spending throughout the nation has
been notably sluggish. Observers have so far looked in
vain for signs that consumers are loosening their purse
strings sufficiently to give a major impetus to economic
expansion. Though national retail spending is higher now
than in the first two months of the year, it has shown
little upward push since March.
109
10!
Farm C a sh R eceip ts
157
Dept. Sto re S a le s
No Room for Complacency
On the basis of previous experience, we might expect
after only a few months of recovery to see considerable
room for improvement in economic activity. Moreover,
postwar experience tells us it would be most unusual if
economic expansion were cut short now at such an early
stage of recovery. Still, there is no room for complacency,
for it is not a foregone conclusion that there will be
further gains.
As if to remind us of that, September total nonfarm
employment figures, the latest available, showed a slight
drop after seasonal adjustment. A decline in nonmanu
facturing was more than enough to offset a slight rise in
manufacturing. Moreover, the rise in manufacturing was
sufficient only to approximately restore slight losses in
July and August, thus giving a picture of relatively stable
manufacturing employment since June. Then too, within
Mem ber Bank
D e p o s it s
m i it ii 1 1 t i n m «Ii t t i i II I i l l I m n l » h m I m i m I i m h I i h m I
1957
1958
1959
I9 6 0
• 5 *
1961
manufacturing, the improvement we did see in employ
ment through June had reflected, in large measure, gains
in apparel; other types of employment had not changed
appreciably. Employment gains in manufacturing, there
fore, were not as widespread as would have been desirable.
Although total employment has improved this year,
Tennessee is probably faced with an unemployment prob
lem similar to that of the nation, where, despite improved
business, unemployment has stubbornly remained higher
than is normally the case in a period of business expan
sion. The rate of insured unemployment hints at this dif
ficulty, for it has remained above year-earlier levels. It can
not, however, measure the full extent of the problem,
since it does not reflect unsuccessful job hunting by new
entrants into the labor force or by those who have ex
hausted their unemployment benefits. The labor force has
probably grown since the recession began in the second
quarter of last year and, as mentioned earlier, employ
ment has so far not regained the pre-recession high. More
over, the U. S. Department of Labor currently classifies
more than a dozen small labor market areas in Tennessee
as ones with so-called substantial and persistent labor
surplus.
Fortunately, Tennesseans themselves are well aware of
the need to provide more jobs, as is attested by their
vigorous efforts to attract industry to the state and to
develop existing industry more intensively. Their efforts
will be helped, of course, if Tennessee’s economy con
tinues to show improvement in coming months.
P hilip M. W eb ster
This is one of a series of articles in which economic de
velopments in each of the Sixth District states are dis
cussed. Developments in Alabama’s economy were an
alyzed in the September R eview , and a discussion of
Louisiana’s economy is scheduled for a forthcoming issue.
Bank Announcements
Two newly organized nonmember banks opened for business in
October and began to rem it at par for checks drawn on them
when received from the Federal Reserve Bank:
October 6: the First Ruskin Bank, Ruskin, Florida. Officers
are Paul B. Dickman, President; Ellsworth G. Simmons, Vice
President; and Frank D. Ward, Executive Vice President and
Cashier. Capital totals $230,000, and surplus and undivided
profits $115,000.
October 7: The Breaux Bridge Bank and Trust Company,
Breaux Bridge, Louisiana. Officers include R obert Angelle,
President; Sherald J. Bourg, Executive Vice President and
Cashier; A dlai J. Domingue, First Vice President; Thomas J.
Bernard, Vice President; and Warren K . Finley, Assistant
Cashier. Capital totals $200,000, and surplus and undivided
profits $100,000.
On October 9, the Jacksonville National Bank, Jacksonville,
Florida, a newly organized m em ber bank, opened for business
and began to rem it at par. Officers are Rudolph Hardee, Presi
dent; J. L. Tison, Jr., Vice President and Cashier; Cooper M.
Cubbedge, Vice President; and Harry W. Odom, Assistant
Cashier. Capital totals $1,000,000, and surplus and other capital
funds $250,000.
The Citizens Bank of Frostproof, Frostproof, Florida, a
nonmember bank, began to rem it at par on October 16. Officers
include J. M axcy, President; L. M axcy and Richard J. Nash,
Vice Presidents; J. L. Tyson, Vice President and Cashier; and
H. I. Keck, Assistant Cashier. Capital totals $225,000, and sur
plus and undivided profits $227,340.
Personal Income in Sixth District States, August 1961
(Seasonally Adjusted Annual Rates, in Millions of Dollars)
August
July
State _______________________ 1961________ 1961
August
1960
A lab am a............................
4,980
Florida.................................. 10,475
Georgia.................................
6,535
Louisiana.............................
5,382
Mississippi............................
2,717
Tennessee.............................
5,734
Total
.
. . . 35,823
4,866
10,074
6,454
5,260
2,595
5,563
34,812
4,962
10,497
6,542
5,421
2,732
5,755
35,909
Debits to Individual Demand Deposit Accounts
(In Thousands of Dollars)
Percent Change
ALABAMA
Anniston . . . .
Birmingham . . .
Dothan
. . . .
Gadsden . . . .
Huntsville* . . .
Mobile
. . . .
Montgomery . . .
Selma*
. . . .
Tuscaloosa* . . .
Total Reporting Cities
Other Cit esf . . .
FLORIDA
Daytona Beach*
Fort Lauderdale*
Ga'nesville* . . .
Jacksonville . . .
Key West* . . .
Lakeland*
. . .
Year-to-date
9 Months
Sept. 1961 from
Aug.
Sept.
from
Sept.
1960
1960
1961
1960
Sept.
1961
Aug.
1961
42,346
835,346
38 538
33,507
72,206
275,672
160,851
28,281
59.077
1,545,824
727,121
44,519
869,418
35,665
36,119
71,774
316,323
179,343
24,692
58,034
1,635 887
746,577
43,465
848,543
37,213
37,388
67,640
279,220
155 882
29,964
52,862
1,552,177
747,617r
—5
—4
+ 8
—7
+ 1
— 13
— 10
+ 15
+2
—6
—3
—3
—2
+4
— 10
+7
—1
+3
—6
+12
—0
—3
+2
+1
+6
—6
+ 11
+2
+6
+1
+5
+ 2
+1
50,387
173,924
42,594
777,647
14,720
71.458
781,930
1,158,523
222,976
86,088
204,526
383,836
125,732
3,312,411
1,413,383
55,119
191,085
41,845
866,569
16,263
73,009
858,576
1,271,921
235,155
82.676
199,594
413,184
139,808
3,586,228
1,529,597
51,903
172 230
43 034
790,822
14,172
81,681
771,969
1,132.237
220 102
84168
192,363
389,702
110,880
3,283,294
1,420,715r
—9
—9
+ 2
— 10
—9
—2
—9
—9
—5
+4
+2
—7
— 10
—8
—8
—3
+ 1
—1
—2
+4
— 13
+1
+ 2
+1
+ 2
+6
—2
+ 13
+ 1
—1
—5
—2
+ 1
—0
+7
+1
+2
+2
—2
—3
—2
—0
+9
+1
+2
+3
—3
—8
—5
—2
—3
— 22
—2
—7
+2
—6
—3
+3
—5
—3
— 34
—7
—4
—2
+4
—4
—0
+ 15
+4
— 13
—3
—4
— 21
—3
+2
—2
— 10
—3
—7
—3
+1
—0
+6
+3
+0
+8
+5
—7
+2
+2
— 15
+1
+2
+1
—0
—5
+2
+2
+5
— 13
—9
—1
—2
— 12
— 11
—5
—1
—7
—1
+2
— 13
— 11
—3
—4
—5
+2
—4
—2
—2
—0
—0
—1
—9
—1
+2
—4
—4
—6
+2
+ 10
+1
+3
+ 1
+0
+2
+ 1
+3
—1
+6
+0
+5
—1
+0
—0
+7
+4
—1
+6
—9
—6
—3
—8
—8
—8
—7
—7
—8
—5
—8
+ 11
+4
—2
+8
+4
+7
+6
—1
—1
—1
—1
—2
+ 8
+3
—2
+3
+5
+7
+5
+5
+2
+ 1
+2
+ 0
—3
+2
+7
Greater Miami*
Orlando . . . .
Pensacola
. . .
St. Petersburg . .
Tampa....................
W. Palm-Palm Bch.*
Total Reporting Cities
Other Cit:esf . . .
GEORGIA
Albany
. . . .
52,273
50,981
53,153
Athens* . . . .
41,109
42 239
39 698
Atlanta . . . .
2,127,273
2,314,010
2,206,775
106,710
Augusta . . . .
112,351
107,063
26.698
27,264
Brunswick
. . .
23,149
Columbus
. . .
116,669
120,485
112,151
Elberton . . . .
8,270
10,571
9 484
48,192
49,521
Gainesville* . . .
49,249
20,074
Gr'ffin* . . . .
18,602
19.405
16,168
15,800
LaGrange* . . .
20,418
Macon....................
121 833
130,061
126,226
Marietta*
. . .
32,823
33,719
32,028
21.314
Newnan . . . .
20 656
21,851
44,587
Rome*
. . . .
47,065
49,354
172,357
Savannah . . . .
178,491
176,976
33,298
Va'dosta . . . .
50,270
35,755
Total Reporting Cities
2,988,176
3,223,286
3,083,007
Other Cit esf . . .
967,194
1,003,955
956,138r
LOUISIANA
Alexandra* . . .
68,148
78,198
68,848
Baton Rouge . . .
244,307
268,072
263.409
Lafayette* . . .
64,673
65,579
65,296
76 378r
Lake Charles
. .
77,865
79,240
1,364.921
New Orleans . . .
1,195,111
1,372,675
l,846,606r
Total Reporting Cities
1,650,104
1,856 010
Other Cit esf . . .
527,447
554,727
545,257r
MISSISSIPPI
52,598
52,843
47,711
Biloxi-Gulfport*
38,097
Hattiesburg . . .
38,661
37,898
Jackson . . . .
312,828
345,205
304,787
Laurel* . . . .
27,923
28,199
27,546
Meridian . . . .
45,658
44,640
45,577
24,211
Natchez* . . . .
23,259
22,802
Vicksburg
. . .
21,236
21,032
22,073
Total Reporting Cities
521,599
555,832
507,353
Other Citiesf . .- .
285,935
280,271
289,187r
TENNESSEE
Bristol* . . . .
51,313
48,334
46,246
Chattanooga . . .
332 093
366,247
320,140
Johnson City* . .
41,736
44,281
42,637
86,850
89.867
Kingsport* . . .
80,078
Knoxv lie . . . .
249.338
239,527
270,785
Nashville . . . .
763,819
829,629
711,022
Total Reporting Cities
1,525,149
1,649,143
1,439,650
Other Cit esf . . .
595,479
557.895r
554,225
SIXTH DISTRICT
16,018,568 17,216,992 16,228,896r
Report:nq Cities
11,543,263 12,506.386 ll,712,087r
Other Citiesf
. .
4,475,305
4,710,606
4,516,809r
Total, 32 Cities
. .
9,904,781 10,779,626 10,115,865r
UNITED STATES
344 Cities . . . 246,614,000 255,549,000r240,772.000
* Not included in total for 32 cities that are part of the national debit series maintained
by the Board of Governors.
f Estimated.
r Revised.
• 6 •
Sixth District Indexes
Seasonally Adjusted (1947-49
I960
SIXTH DISTRICT
Nonfarm Employment . . . .
Manufacturing Employment
A p p arel..............................
C h em ica ls.........................
Fabricated Metals
. . .
F o o d ...................................
Lbr., Wood Prod., Fur. & Fix.
Paper...................................
Primary Metals
. . . .
T e x t.le s ..............................
Transportation Equipment .
Nonmanufacturing Employment
Manufacturing Payrolls
. . .
Cotton Consumption** . . . .
Electric Power Production** . .
Petrol. Prod, in Coastal
Louisiana & Mississippi** . .
Construction Contracts*
^ . .
Residential..............................
All O t h e r ..............................
Farm Cash R eceipts....................
Crops ........................................
Livestock
..............................
Department Store Sales*/** . .
Department Store Stocks*
. .
Furniture Store Sales*/**
. .
Member Bank Deposits* . . .
Member Bank Loans* . . . .
Bank D e b its* ..............................
Turnover of Demand Deposits*
In Leading C itie s ....................
Outside Leading Cities . . .
ALABAMA
Nonfarm Employment . . .
Manufacturing Employment
Manufacturng Payrolls . . .
Department Store Sales** . .
Furniture Store Sales
. . .
Member Bank Deposits . . .
Member Bank Loans . . . .
Farm Cash Receipts . . . .
.........................
Bank Debits
FLORIDA
Nonfarm Employment . . .
Manufacturing Employment
Manufacturing Payrolls . . .
Department Store Sales** . .
Furniture Store Sales . . .
Member Bank Deposits . . .
Member Bank Loans . . . .
Farm Cash Receipts . . . .
Bank Debits
.........................
GEORGIA
Nonfarm Employment . . .
Manufacturing Employment
Manufacturing Payrolls . . .
Department Store Sales** . .
Furniture Store Sales
. . .
Member Bank Deposits . . .
Member Bank Loans . . . .
Farm Cash Receipts . . . .
Bank Debits
.........................
LOUISIANA
Nonfarm Employment . . .
Manufacturing Employment
Manufacturing Payrolls . . .
Department Store Sales*/** .
Furniture Store Sales* . . .
Member Bank Deposits*
. .
Member Bank Loans*
. . .
Farm Cash Receipts . . . .
Bank D e b its * .........................
MISSISSIPPI
Nonfarm Employment . . .
Manufacturing Employment
Manufacturing Payrolls . . .
Department Store Sales*/** .
Furniture Store Sales* . . .
Member Bank Deposits*
. .
Member Bank Loans*
. . .
Farm Cash Receipts . . . .
Bank D e b its * .........................
TENNESSEE
Nonfarm Employment . . .
Manufacturing Employment
Manufacturing Payrolls . . .
Department Store Sales*/** .
Furniture Store Sales* . . .
Member Bank Deposits*
. .
Member Bank Loans*
. . .
Farm Cash Receipts . . . .
Bank D e b its * .........................
IOO)
I
1961
AUG.
SEPT.
OCT.
NOV.
DEC.
JAN.
FEB.
MAR.
APR.
MAY
JUNE
JULY
AUG.
SEPT.
143
125
196
137
197
117
78
166
95
88
199
150
228
90
385
143
124
193
132
193
120
77
167
91
87
199
150
221
85
373
142
123
188
131
190
119
76
166
92
86
205
150
220
83
372
142
122
188
131
188
117
76
165
88
85
185
150
217
83
369
141
122
189
133
189
116
75
164
89
85
190
149
218
79
390
142
121
187
133
191
118
73
163
86
84
191
150
213
78
401
141
121
187
133
189
118
73
164
87
84
190
150
212
79
383
141
121
186
134
184
118
73
165
86
83
183
149
214
79
368
141
121
190
135
185
118
74
166
87
84
187
149
220
82
376
142
122
191
135
185
117
74
167
91
84
188
150
225
85
379
142
123
193
136
185
118
74
167
92
85
191
150
232
88
391
142
124
198
135
183
117
74
168
93
85
193
150
236
89
391
142
124r
196
135
187
117
74
168
94
85
184
150
232
89
396
143
123
194
131
186
118
74
165
92
85
190
151
232
88
n.a.
221
361
367
357
155
147
189
178
232
133
183
354
279
167
190
124
223
353
362
346
149
134
188
185
231r
139
185
353
284
158
175
120
232
337
364
316
167
157
186
189
231
138
188
353
265
152
159
113
233
322
305
336
156
131
201
179
235
133
188
352
283
153
162
111
250
286
300
276
132
94
199
187
233
134
189
359
282
151
163
119
239
307
286
324
134
97
191
177
224
127
189
351
287
162
176
125
237
313
326
303
145
123
191
181
221
130
192
355
279
156
168
116
241
323
341
309
136
104
205
178
221
134
189
353
293
155
167
122
244
344
361
330
126
99
189
183
229
135
191
354
268
146
164
111
253
361
392
337
136
113
192
175
225
129
191
357
288
165
183
127
252
374
416
340
141
117
191
185
227
130
189
355
287
154
175
119
243
386
398
377
125
97
175
194
227
135
193
353
275
162
179
129
244
394
402
387
150
139
187
179
239r
132
190
359
284
166
189
122
244
n.a.
n.a.
n.a.
n.a.
n.a.
n.a.
192
239p
143p
194
361
281
152
164
126
126
107
192
170
117
162
293
123
255
125
105
182
166
117
164
292
150
255
125
103
187
166
117
169
293
182
242
125
103
183
155
111
165
294
130
249
124
102
175
165
113
167
299
121
243
125
101
175
158
103
169
300
115
247
123
101
175
156
106
170
299
126
238
123
101
177
166
112
167
303
133
248
123
102
183
173
124
169
298
115
231
124
102
185
163
101
163
304
126
264
125
103
191
168
112
162
301
118
251
125
104
196
177
111
163
295
117
239
125
105
195r
171
117
163
302
113
253
125
104
197
175
114
167
303
n.a.
252
202
208
403
265
160
240
564
270
427
202
208
392
257r
171
241
560
248
418
201
207
399
261
164
246
561
212
405
201
207
384
268
158
248
551
196
420
201
208
384
276
158
250
560
232
413
200
206
368
264
154
247
550
266
414
200
207
374
264
155
252
556
264
396
200
209
373
287
161
247
556
197
413
200
209
392
269
156
248
550
227
377
202
211
406
263
151
250
559
244
421
203
213
414
277
155
247
555
257
428
203
215
443
290
162
253
553
211
396
204
214
432r
274
148
250
561
292
426
204
214
437
284
167
254
567
n.a.
420
135
123
220
159
129
164
286
215
257
135
121
213
168
136
166
288
160
273
135
121
211
172
133
170
286
204
249
134
118
205
158
131
169
291
120
257
134
119
205
164
130
170
289
148
256
134
117
199
157
123
169
285
144
263
134
116
200
155
120
173
292
152
254
133
116
203
166
124
172
292
171
266
134
117
205
155
132
172
290
149
244
134
118
215
166
133
175
292
144
266
134
118
217
166
133
173
291
147
269
134
119
223
175
136
176
289
127
266
134
119
218r
159
136
171
292
193
269
135
119
215
167
139
175
289
n.a.
267
130
95
181
151
157
159
334
91
230
129
94
173
147r
161
164
332
113
250
129
94
170
151
170
163
329
115
212
128
93
168
140
160
164
323
137
225
128
93
175
155
166
166
331
113
234
129
92
177
151
163
165
319
93
210
129
91
173
151
152
167
322
103
207
128
92
177
155
147
163
314
104
234
128
91
180
149
158
169
331
98
213
129
91
179
149
165
166
324
105
230
128
90
179
157
159
167
326
112
246
127
90
178
157
164
172
327
104
218
127
90
177r
152
159
169
331
112
230
127
89
175
148
190p
171
337
n.a.
228
134
134
250
151
94
194
425
98
255
135
132
238
149
106
196
431
121
253
135
132
242
158
108
204
431
141
242
135
133
239
151
99
199
433
162
258
134
131
240
164
102
209
460
136
254
137
130
244
149
95
204
442
86
238
136
129
237
146
100
205
446
99
234
137
130
241
154
108
207
442
116
256
136
132
244
157
95
208
449
90
236
137
134
243
153
85
210
455
99
243
136
135
256
165
91
208
451
99
256
137
136
259
169
112
207
446
100
246
137
136
260r
156
116
205
458
102
258
138
136
262
160
119
208
460
n.a.
256
127
127
231
151
96
167
314
113
240
126
128
224
158r
98
166
311
106
238
126
126
221
164
99
171
313
122
224
125
124
218
156
100
169
314
143
247
124
123
217
157
94
170
328
86
236
124
123
215
147
85
170
315
96
248
124
123
216
154
95
176
319
99
243
124
123
216
151
98
176
310
99
255
124
123
222
147
100
175
311
101
233
125
124
224
141
91
174
315
96
258
126
125
230
152
84
175
312
101
255
126
125
227
157
90
179
313
100
256
126
124
234
146
89
176
320
109
254
126
125
232
157
102
179
323
n.a.
248
|
*For Sixth District area only. Other totals for entire six states.
n.a. Not Available.
p Preliminary.
r Revised.
**Daily average basis.
Sources: Nonfarm and mfg. emp. and payrolls, state depts. of labor; cotton consumption, U.S. Bureau of Census, construction contracts, F. W. Dodge Corp., petrol, prod., U.S. Bureau
of Mines; elec. power prod., Fed. Power Comm. Other indexes based on data collected by this Bank. All indexes calculated by this Bank.
• 7 •
D
I S
T
R
I C
T
B
U
S
I N
E
S
S
C
O
N
D
I T
I O
N
S
j 1 9 4 7 -4 9 *1 0 0
Seas, Adj.
Nonfarm Employment
T h e evidence for further economic recovery in the District is accumu
lating. Total nonfarm and farm employment rose slightly in September after
adjustments were made for seasonal changes. Personal income continued its
upward trend, but consumers still exerted considerable restraint in spending.
Although business and consumer lending at member banks lacked strength,
bank deposits rose to a peak level.
]/* \s'
Mfg. Employment
Electric Power Production
The increase in nonfarm em ploym ent in September w as the result
of small increases in nonmanufacturingi activities that more than off
set a decline in m anufacturing. Despite the small drop in manufacturing
employment, payrolls held steady as the work week lengthened slightly. Diverse
changes in total nonfarm employment occurred among District states, with in
creases in Florida, Georgia, and Mississippi outweighing decreases in Tennes
see and Louisiana. The decrease in Louisiana largely reflected a paper mill
strike. Alabama showed virtually no change. Although construction employ
ment dropped fractionally in September, a further rise in the latest threemonth average of construction contracts points to strength in construction
activity. Cotton consumption, a measure of cotton textile activity, declined
after having held at a sharply expanded volume for two months, but employ
ment in the District’s textile mills rose very slightly.
u*
Construction Contracts
3~mo. moving avg
Cotton Consumption
Farm employment gained significantly in most are a s of the District
in September. Farmers, taking advantage of the dry, sunny weather, harvested
corn, cotton, and other crops. Increased harvestings and higher prices for
some farm commodities pushed farm income considerably above recent levels.
U* IS'
I*
Farm Cash
Receipts
Total personal income in the District {Faltered slightly in August after
expanding in six of the seven previous months. The developments in
j.
employment, however, indicate that improvement probably occurred in
September.
is
v*
Bank Deb ts
Consumers m aintained their spending at previously improved levels.
Pept, Store Stocks
jj
Dept, Store Sales
Member Bank Loans
Total loans at banks in leading cities declined during October.
Member Bank Deposits
PERCENT OF REQUIRED RESERVES
Borrowings from
j ? F R . Bank
Department store sales, seasonally adjusted, rose sharply in September, but
according to preliminary figures remained unchanged in October. The final
figures for September showed gains were widespread, with most major cities
reporting sharp increases. Consumers were spending more at both furniture
and household appliance stores in September, particularly in Tennessee
and Mississippi. The latest figures on sales tax collections indicate further that
spending has been increasing. Bank debits, on the other hand, have failed to
reflect the improvement. Consumer instalment credit outstanding at commercial
banks did not change much in September, which suggests that buying on time
added little, on balance, to consumer spending. Finally, consumer savings in the
form of member bank time deposits and savings and loan shares increased
slightly more than usual.
v"
V*
Reserves
This drop largely reflected decreases in consumer and business loans. The
continued sluggishness in this latter category of loans mirrors the cautiousness
consumers are still exercising in their spending. Seasonally adjusted total loans
at all member banks, however, increased somewhat during September for the
second consecutive month, largely because of gains in interbank loans. Only
real estate loans have shown greater than seasonal strength over a substantial
period. Total member bank deposits, adjusted for seasonal changes, showed
upward trends during the third quarter in all District states except Georgia.
Banks have recently added to their investment holdings, largely in connection
with Treasury financing.
@FedFRASER