The full text on this page is automatically extracted from the file linked above and may contain errors and inconsistencies.
business
•
revIew
february 1968
FEDERAL RESERVE
BANK OF DALLAS
This publication was digitized and made available by the Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas' Historical Library (FedHistory@dal.frb.org)
-
contents
the cautious consumer
3
industrial production
in texas continues strong
9
district highlights
14
...
th@ cautious consum@r
The consumer's role in 1968 is generally expected to take on greater importance than it
has had in the very recent past. From 1963
through 1967, the share of gross national product accounted for by personal consumption
spending dropped slightly each year, moving
from 63.5 percent in 1963 to 62.6 percent in
1967. (The consumption share of GNP fluctuat d .
e rrregularly from 1956 through 1962, aver .
aglllg about 64 percent.) If the consumption
percentage had remained at the 1963 level of
~3.5 percent (of the 1967 GNP of $785 .1 bil?~), consumer spending would have been $7
bIllion larger in 1967. As the consumption
~~are of GNP dropped slightly, a larger share
. GNP was accounted for by investment spendlUg from 1964 through 1966 and by government spending in 1966 and 1967.
~he boom in business investment spending
Which marked the years 1964-66 (with the in~reases in business fixed investment ranging
rom .12.5 percent to 16.4 percent) subsided
matenally in 1967, when business fixed investment rose only 2.9 percent. Projections of business
.
bas capl' ta1 spendlllg
plans for 1968, partly
C ed on a survey by the U.S. Department of
c~nun~r~e and the Securities and Exchange
f mmisslon,l foresee a 5- to 7-percent increase
. Or the year, a much smaller rate of gain than
lU 1964-66. Moreover, although state and local
government spending will undoubtedly continue
upward , nat'lonal defense spending is not exi~~ted to add as much in 1968 as in 1966 and
7. Bence, the consumer emerges as an even
'III the economy III
. 1968.
more impol't ant f
actor
The
.
.
do' conjectures about what consumers may
III 1968 take on added interest in view of
--
1 The .
.
surve
Investment figures In the Commerce-SEC
tOtal;.are not exactly comparable with the investment
mc luded in the GNP.
their unusual behavior in 1967. The saving ratio
(personal saving as a percentage of disposable
income) was at 7.1 percent in 1967, the highest
level since 1953. The reasons for consumers'
greatly increased thriftiness in 1967 are not
clear. A survey of consumer sentiment in November 1967 by the University of Michigan
Survey Research Center discloses that consumers are in· a mood of uncertainty, although they
are not pessimistic. The survey points out that
two factors contributing to this mood are the
fear of further inflationary price increases and
uncertainty about the war in Viet-Nam. Other
commentators have mentioned as unsettling
influences the prospect of higher taxes and
the recent prominence of the U.S. balance-ofpayments problem. There is also a possibility
that the lack of any exciting new goods in the
conswner market has contributed to the high
saving rate.
In tlle span of years shown in the accompanying chart (bottom panel), 1956, 1957, and
1958 appear as years of relatively high saving
percentages. These figures, ranging from 6.5
percent to 7.5 percent, were not approached
again until the fourth quarter of 1966. From
1959 through 1966, saving moved pretty much
within the range of 5 to 6 percent of disposable
income but dropped to as low as 4.5 percent in
the fourth quarter of 1960 - the lowest figure
reached in the 12 years reviewed. In 1966, consumers saved 5.9 percent of their disposable income; in 1967, 7.1 percent. If the consumers
had been no thriftier than in the previous year,
they would have spent $6.6 billion more on
consumption goods and services in 1967 than
they did. Thus, it is clear that the proportion
of their incomes which has been saved by consumers has affected the course of total spending
in the past and can have a substantial effect in
the future.
business review/ february 1968
3
PERSONAL DISPOSABLE INCOME,
CONSUMPTION, AND SAVING
disposable income in the past 12 years haS
been its relative imperviousness to downturns
or periods of sluggishness in the general ecoll'
omy. During this period, as shown in the firsl
chart, there was a leveling off in disposable ill'
come in the fourth quarter of 1957, during aO
economic downturn , and in the third quarter 01
1959, when there was a major strike; but there
was only one decline in disposable income,
which occurred in the fourth quarter of 1960,
during another economic downturn. In the firsl
half of 1967, the rate of increase of disposable
income slowed.
BILLIONS OF DOLLARS
1957
1959
1961
1963
1965
1967
SOURCE : U,S. Dopartment of Commeroe ,
Some observers feel that the higher percentages of income saved toward the end of 1967
were connected with the automobile strike and
the resulting smaller supply of 1968 models.
(However, the saving rate in the fourth quarter of 1966 was already high and rose even
higher in the first quarter of 1967, when there
was no automobile strike.) During the last
major automobile strike in 1964, when automobile purchases fell sharply in the fourth quarter
of the year, there was an accompanying sharp
rise in the saving rate for that one quarter.
Nevertheless, a test of the hypothesis that the
percentage of disposable income spent on automobiles varies inversely with the saving rate or vice versa - yields the result that variations
in one measure account for less than 10 percent
of the variations in the other.
consumer spending and income
One of the most important variables in explaining changes in consumption spending is,
of course, income. A marked characteristic of
Similarly, total consumption expenditures de'
clined only in the fu'st quarter of 1958 and the
third quarter of 1960 and continued rising duro
ing the economic slowdown in the first half 01
1967. However, the rates of increase of boil
disposable income and total consumption et·
penditures in 1967 were lower than in the pre'
vious 3 years.
While there appears to be a high degree 01
correspondence between movements of dispos'
able income and of total consumption expendi'
tures, some of tmB agreement disappears whe r
movements of the three chief categories of coP'
sumption expenditures are examined separatel)',
Spending for durable goods is much more va ri'
able than disposable income or spending fo!
nondurable goods and services.
There was an acceleration in the increaSe!
in disposable income and in consumer spendi V!
for nondurables after 1963. The yearly rateS 0
increase in disposable income for 1964, 196)
and 1966 were noticeably above the rates 0
increase from 1957 through 1963. The same !
true for spending for nondurables and also
although less markedly, for services. (Servi CU
include an estimate of the rental value of owner
occupied houses.) From 1964 through 19 66
the economy approached full employment, a
measured by the percentage of the labor forO
which is unemployed. Thus, the years 1964-6
not only were characterized by a boom in buSI
1
ness spending for fixed investment but also
Were characterized by stepped-up rates of increase in disposable income and in consumer
spending for nondurables.
Consumer spending for durables, on the
~ther hand, displayed large percentage increases
rom 1962 through 1965 and, then, showed a
much smaller percentage increase in 1966. In
1967, there was a definite slowing down in the
rate of increase in spending for both durables
and nondurables.
. While consumers' disposable income has continued to make impressive regular gains in the
~ast 12 years, it is also necessary to consider
e related topic of the price level of consumer
gO?ds since, without relative price stability,
gam . .
Th s m IllCome are partially or wholly nullified.
. e past 2 years of this longest business expanSIon in the history of the U.S. economy - this
month marks its seventh year - have been ac~~mpanied by price increases noticeably higher
19~n the yearly increases from 1960 through
5. In those years, the price deflator (a meaSUre of changes in the price level) for total
conSumpf
12
Ion expenditures rose an average of
.' percent per year. In 1966 the con sumptIon deflat .
'
a .
or mcreased 2.6 percent over 1965
nd Illcreased 2.6 percent again in 1967.
Price increases were particularly
.
marked for
nondurables and services in 1966 The nondurables d fl
..
.
food . e ator, pushed by a large illcrease In
pnces, rose 3.5 percent in that year and
th e servic
pric . es defl ator rose 3.0 percent. The ' food
th e ~ncrease greatly moderated in 1967, and
e gam in the nondurables deflator for the year
Was
20
1967' percent. But, the services deflator for
/lator rase 3.5 percent. The durable goods deand i9~~er actuall~. dec~g slightly in 1965
1967
' began nsmg ill the third quarter of
and was up 1.4 percent for the year.
The acco
.
spend'
mpanymg chart shows consumer
ices . mg for durables, nondurables, and servlU both current and 1958 dollars (current-
dollar totals are divided by the relevant deflator,
with 1958 taken as the base year). The deflated, or constant-dollar, totals represent "real"
purchases of the three categories of consumer
goods and indicate variations, after the effects
of price changes are removed, in the physical
volume of goods bought.
An outstanding feature of the chart is the
wide, and widening, divergence since 1958 between current dollars and 1958 dollars in the
case of consumer expenditures for services,
showing that prices of services have been the
most rapidly rising of all three categories of
consumer goods in this period. The divergence
widened further in 1966 and 1967 as the increase in service prices accelerated.
The stability of durable goods prices from
1958 until very recently is shown by the fact
that the current-dollar and constant-dollar totals
have scarcely differed. The sluggishness in durable goods purchases in late 1966 and in 1967,
after the long rise beginning in 1961, is quite
PERSONAL CONSUMPTION EXPENDITURES
IN CURRENT AND 1958 DOLLARS
BILLION'S OF DOLLARS
(Season all v adiostlld quarul'ly data at annual ratu \
220
200
180
160
140
120
100
8~
60
40
SOURCE: U.S. Department 01 Commarea.
business review/february 1968
5
evident. For nondurable goods, there is the very
noticeable acceleration in increased spending
after 1963, in both current-dollar and constantdollar totals. The two curves diverged sharply
in 1966 as nondurables prices rose at a much
faster rate than in the previous 7 years. In the
third quarter of 1967, current-dollar expendi tures on both durable and nondurable goods
increased slightly, but the physical volume of
purchases actually declined somewhat.
The significance of these varying price movements among the three principal categories of
consumer expenditures may be seen in the
changing consumption patterns in the past 12
years. In current dollars, consumers spent abou t
the same percentage of disposable income on
durable goods in 1967 as in 1956 but, in constant dollars, were spending a larger percentage
of income on durables in 1967 than 12 years
ago. Nondurables spending as a share of disposable income has declined in both current
and constant dollars since 1956. Service expenditures noticeably increased their share of
income in current dollars from 1956 through
1967 but, in constant dollars, increased their
share much less.
Thus, consumers have had relative bargains
in durable goods, price increases for which
have been negligible from 1960 until very recently, and they spent a greater share of income on such goods. In the case of services,
for which there have been relatively high annual increases in prices, consumers allotted
approximately the same share of income in
1967 as in 1956.
Since disposable income and total consumption spending have declined or leveled out very
infrequently during recent years, the probability
that both will increase further in 1968 is very
great. Among some of the special factors which
help to make an advance in total disposable
income this year a virtual certainty are the recent pattern of negotiated wage increases, the
pay raises for Federal workers voted by Con-
6
gress in 1967, the additional social security
benefits also voted by Congress, and the rise in
the legal minimum wage this month to $1.60
per hour.
consumer spending and borrowing
While disposable income may be the chief
determinant of how much is spent by consum'
ers, there is another factor which, for the ap'
proximately 15 percent of consumer spendiOg
allotted to durables, is also very important..-'
changes in consumer borrowing. In a recent
study for the National Bureau of Economic
Research , F. Thomas Juster found that the very
marked cyclical fluctuations in consumer speod'
ing on durables, especially automobiles, "have
not been closely associated with either inco)l1e
level or income change during the last few dec'
ades." He subsequently states that "most of
the cyclical behavior of consumer outlays for
equipment and structures can be attributed to
the fact that these outlays are not closely tieD
to income but are ordinarily financed by mean~
of credit."2
As shown in the accompanying chart, the
movements of consumer spending on autom o'
biles and parts and of automobile instalment
credit extended have paralleled each other quite
closely over the past 12 years. (The two seriel
are not exactly comparable because tlle credit
series includes credit extended for both nell
and used cars and the automobile expenditu!el
series covers new cars only.) Expenditures o~
new automobiles and parts have accounted for
about 45 percent of total consumer durabW
purchases in recent years, and automobile
credit accounts for about 36 percent of totBI
instalment credit extensions. Therefore, fiuctu O'
tions in automobile purchases and credit hea"il~
influence total durables expenditures and to lO
instalment credit extensions,
2
Household
Capital
Formation
and
Fina/le;"P
1897-]962 (New York: Columbia University pre)
for National Bureau of Economic Research, 196 6
p. 92.
The cyclical variability of automobile purchases and credit extended is evidenced by the
declines in the recessions of both 1957-58 and
1960-61 and by the decreases in automobile
spending and credit extended in the last quarter o~ 1966 and the first quarter of 1967. The
bars.1ll the chart, giving the net change in automobIle credit outstanding (extensions minus repayments), show the declines in automobile
debt outstanding during the two recessions and
the very small increases in automobile instalment debt in 1967 - the smallest quarterly increases since 1961. The net increase in total
consumer instalment debt in 1967 was also the
smallest in 6 years, and the ratio of total instalment debt to disposable income declined in
1967 - the first yearly decline since 1961.
The fact that the increase in consumer instalment debt in 1967 was the smallest in 6 years
may be viewed as another positive factor in the
outlook for consumer spending in 1968. Not
only will disposable income very probably be
increasing in 1968, but consumers will also be
in a more favorable position to incur debt because of the light increase in their debt last year.
AUTOMOBILE EXPENDITURES AND INSTALMENT CREDIT
BILLION S OF DO LLAR S
(Soaso nally adj us l ed q Uar t er ly da t a a t an nu a l ra t es)
32
30
CONSUMER EXPENDITURES FOR AUTOMOBILES AND PARTS
28
26
NET CHANGE IN AUTOMOBILE INSTALMENT
CREDIT OUTSTANDING
24
22
20
+1
18
16
-1
14
-2
1957
1959
196 1
1,96 3
1965
1967
a - Par tl y eS tim ate d .
SOUR CES · Boa
.
rd of Gover nors, Federa l Reserve Sys t om .
U.S. Depar tm ent of Co mmerce .
bu.siness review/ febru.ary 1968
7
In addition, and partly because of the reduced
rate of new borrowing last year, consumers are
in a highly liquid financial position . They added
more to their liquid assets (demand deposits
and currency, savings accounts, and U.S. Government securities) in the first three quarters of
1967 than in the fun year 1966.
ances, and furniture. Respondents are asked to
indicate the chances of their buying houseS,
automobiles, and other durables by selecting
from a continuous scale of probabilities rang'
ing from 100 ("absolutely certain") through
zero (" absolutely no chance"). The data come
from a sample of about 11,500 households. 4
new consumer survey
The most recent survey results, published in
December 1967, show that consumers expect
to buy new automobiles at an annual rate of
7.4 million units in the first half of 1968 compared with the same number bought in the first
half of 1967. (This figure does not represent
total sales of new passenger cars, because it
excludes sales to business firms.) Consumers
expect to spend at an annual rate of $14.2 billion on furniture, television sets, and major
appliances in the first half of 1968, compared
with $14.0 billion spent in the first half of 1967.
These results indicate very moderate increases
in consumer spending for automobiles and
major household durables in the first half of
the current year.
Since consumer spending has such an important impact upon economic activity, surveys of
consumer intentions to buy have been widely
used in attempts to predict consumer demand
for durable goods. The first systematic consumer survey was sponsored by the Federal Reserve Board of Governors in 1945; and from
1946 through 1959, the study was conducted
by the Survey Research Center of the University of Michigan. The Center has continued its
survey, focusing on consumer attitudes.
In January 1959, the U.S. Bureau of the
Census began a quarter.ly survey of consunoer
buying intentions for the Board of Governors.
This survey, now reported on independently by
the Bureau of the Census, has recently been
renamed the "Survey of Consumer Buying Expectations." Major changes have been made in
the methods used in the survey, and the first
results were published in September 1967. The
new methods were developed jointly by the
National Bureau of Economic Research and the
Bureau of the Census. They are designed to
improve the predictive ability of the Census
Bureau survey by measuring the probability of
consumer purchases of durable goods, rather
than by simply recording such consumer responses as "definitely," "probably," "don't
know," and "no."3 The new survey obtains
probability judgments from consumers on future purchases of houses, automobiles, appli8 F. Thomas Juster, "Consumer Buying Intentions
and Purchase Probability: An Experiment in Survey
Design," Journal of the American Statistical Association, Vol. 61, No. 315 (September 1966), pp. 659660, 662.
8
Since the new consumer survey of the Census
Bureau is of very recent origin, further experience will be necessary in order to determine itS
value in predicting actual consumer expenditures. It has been seen that disposable income
is very likely to increase in 1968 and that coOsumers are highly liquid and in a favorable
position to incur more debt. All of these faCtors indicate further increases in consumer eJ(penditures for the year. However, much wiJl
depend on what proportion of their income coOsumers decide to save; the fact that a reductioJl
of even 1 percentage point in the recent high
saving ratio would mean several additional billions spent on consumer goods is indicative of
the key role which consumers are expected to
play in 1968.
JANE KENNEDY
l1
1 U.S. Bureau of the Census, Current PopulatiO
Reports, Consumer Buying Indicators, Series p.65,
No. 19, September 29, 1967, pp. 7, 12-14.
industrial p,·oduction
in texas
Continues strong
. Continuing the cyclical upswing which began
~n 1961, industrial output in Texas rose nearly
percent in the past year, following the 9~ercent increase in 1966. The rise of 9 percent
I~ ~.S. industrial production in 1966 equaled
t e lIlcrease for Texas; but in 1967, with U.S.
O~tput growing only fractionally from the pre~IOUS year's level, the State's industrial production ind'
.
ex III the third quarter of the year exC.eeded the national index for the first time
SInCe 1961.
19 Alt~ough total industrial output in Texas in
67 rose at a slightly slower rate than in the
pre~ious year, the production increases for the
m~].or categories _ manufacturing mining and
uhlir
'
,
. les - exceeded the gains for these cate.
gones in th N .
p'
e atlOn last year. An especially exanSIOnary stimulus was imparted to industrial
prodUction . .
.
. gaUls III Texas by defense-onented
. d
III Ustr'
I
tu . les. n the United States, total manufacd nng last year dipped fractionally from 1966,
O~ed to a decline of 0.7 percent in the output
urable manufactures. In contrast, durable
manufact · .
unng III Texas was the impelling force
b h'
tl~ Ind the year-to-year rise of 6.5 percent in
e production of manufactured goods in the
State.
The tna'lor thrust to the expanslOn
. of durable
anufact·
.
sub
urlllg III Texas in 1967 came from
stantial .
.
·
'Illcreases
III the output of electr lcal tna hiD
"oth
c ery, transportation equipment, and
Sect er durable goods." These three industrial
ors are p
'
.
th·.
re d
omlllantly
defense-onented
, and
elr vlg
inc
orous growth reflects, in large part the
rease in th e State ' s value and share of prime
'
ill
defense contract awards, which has enabled
Texas to expand production of military aircraft
and parts and of electrical instruments and
components at a more rapid rate than the
Nation.
The expansion of the electrical machinery
category mirrors the continued rapid growth of
the electronics industry, with much of the electronic equipment and components from the
industry going for military needs. An important
development in the State's electronic industry
has been the increased capability and capacity
in the manufacture of integrated circuits, which
are used in both civilian and military electrical
equipment. The reduced pace of consumer buying of television sets, radios, and similar electrical goods pmbably dampened the output of
the electrical equipment industry, requiring
some adjustments in production schedules and
inventories from the levels anticipated early in
the year.
The surge in the output of transportation
equipment represents the marked increase in
activity at Texas firms engaged in the construction of military aircraft, such as the Corsair II
light attack aircraft, the F-8H Crusader, the
F-ll1, and various types of helicopters. Also,
alteration of old aircraft has become important
in recent months. By the end of 1967, the transportation equipment industry had become the
largest source of employment in the State by
surpassing the food products industry, which
previously was the foremost source of employment. The output from automobile assembly
plants in the State was retarded by the slack-
business review/ february 1968
9
ened sales of new cars last year and was depressed by a strike during the fall. The marked
expansion in the output of "other" durablesparticularly ammunition, bomb casings, and
missiles- also contributed to the strength in
durable manufactures.
With the exception of stone, clay, and glass
products, the remaining durable goods sectors
had modest output gains in 1967; the gains,
however, were somewhat more buoyant than
those for the comparable sectors in the United
States. The output of nonelectrical machinery
showed only a modest gain, reflecting the slackening rate in the highly significant business investment area of the economy. Despite a further decline in drilling activity, the important
oil machinery industry benefited from hi gher
overseas shipments, as well as the utilization of
sophisticated and costly equipment in secondary
recovery operations and offshore drilling. pri·
mary metals output showed little growth last
year, as final markets were not particularly
vigorous.
The increase in 1967 in the output of noll'
durable goods in the State, although more tem'
perate than was the case for durable goods, was
moderately ahead of the expansion in the pro'
duction of nondurable goods in the United
States. Output of the three donunant nondurable
manufactures in Texas - food products, cheJl1'
icals, and petroleum - all rose moderatelY,
Responding to the demand arising from an in'
CHANGES IN INDUSTRIAL PRODUCTION IN TEXAS AND UNITED STATES
TOTAL PRODUCTION
"!~~~~~~ii~~~~~~
~
TOTAL MANUFACTURING
1966 FROM 1965
1967p FROM 1966
DURABLE MANU FACTURING
NONDURABLE MANU FACTURING
MINING
UTILITIES
-2
o
+2
+4
+6
+8
PERCENT CHAN GE
. p- Preliminary.
SOURCES, Board of Governors. Fo deral Reserve System .
Federal Reserve Ba nk of Da llas .
10
+1 0
+12
+14
creased population and a higher Level of income in the State, the output of processed food
expanded. The production of red meat and
P~ultry grew sharply, and the output of fluid
mtlk advanced modestly. Convenience foods
also shared in the general gain.
. The production of chemicals - particularly
Industrial chemicals, which are used throughout
the entire complex of industry - displayed
strength that was somewhat better than the incre ase for total nondurable manufacturing. Although advancing, production of chemicals
(many of which are utilized outside the State)
~as affected by the slowdown in the Nation's
Industrial activity last year. Petroleum refining
shOwed little strength during the early part of
19?7, as refiners attempted to bring their invent~l'Ies into better balance; but by summer, espeCI ~I~y under the impetus of the Middle East
cnsls , re fi'
nlng output strengthened. Even after
the. end of the crisis, petroleum refining remained strong for the rest of the year because
of the general improvement in oil demand.
th The mining industry in Texas, dominated by
e production of crude petroLeum, expanded
~t a pace about equal to that in 1966 but turned
~ a mU~h more vigorous performance than did
f e Nahon's mining industry in 1967. The
t~rce of the advance came from sharp gains in
e ~tate's output of crude oil and of natural
gas hquids. The increased production of natural
gas li .
qutds reflects a sustained strong growth
pattern'III t IlIS
' particular
.
.
mdustry.
Because the inventories of crude oil and
crude '1
th . 01 .products were generally higher than
T e Industry desired, the output of crude oil in
ex as Was
. th er stable dunng
. the early part 0 f
1967
'la.
, averagmg only a little more than 2 per~~~t oVer the comparable period in 1966. With
P advent of the Middle East conflict in the
ast year, Texas, along with other domestic oilPrOduci
th
. ng states, was calIed upon to help meet
e eXlgenc'
..
les ansmg from the disruption of the
n
ormal flow of crude petroleum to world mar-
kets. The oil industry in Texas responded with
a sharp step-up in the output of petroleum between June and July; however, by falI, a more
normal pattern of oil flow emerged, with a resulting curtailment of Texas oil output. Nevertheless, oil production in the State at the end
of 1967 was running substantialIy ahead of
1966, due to the stronger demand for refined
products.
The physical output of the earth minerals
(sulfur, salt, stone, and gravel), which is of
minor importance in the State when com pared
to oil and natural gas production, posted a very
moderate gain last year; in contrast, the level
of output for the earth mjneral industry in the
Nation felI behind the prior year. The State's
output of sand and gravel was retarded by the
reduced demand for clay, glass, and stone products in Texas, as well as the Nation, in 1967.
The consumption of concrete-the major product of the clay, glass, and stone products industry in Texas - was adversely affected by
the reduced level of construction, both of
housing and of streets and highways, during
1967.
On the other hand, the increased production
of sulfur, wh ich rose a little more than 4 percent over 1966 in response to a further advance
in demand, helped to sustain total activity in
the State's mineral industries. The greater utilization of sulfur, together with the limited
sources of supply, has resulted in a critical
shortage of this mineral. Demand, exceeding
supply even at a sharply higher price level, has
been met partly by a reduction of inventories
and partly by a system of quotas imposed upon
sulfur users by the producers.
The gain in total utilities output in Texas
accelerated in 1967 from the preceding year
and exceeded the national rise by a considerable amount. The pace of activity in this sector
was spearheaded by an extremely strong increase in electricity generation. Electricity generated by utility companies in Texas during
business review/february 1968
11
COMPARISON OF INDUSTRIAL PRODUCTION
IN TEXAS AND UNITED STATES
(Seasonally adjusted quarterly averages)
".,
TOTAL MANUFACTURING
RATIO SCALE
1957 - S9= IOO
TOTAL PRODUCTION
180
RATIO SCALE
19 5 7 - S9= 100
160
160
1966
1967
1967
1966
DURABLE MANUFACTURING
MINING
.
RATIO SCALE
1957 - S9 ~ IOO
140 I"R
-A
..T-IO- S
-C- A
- l'"'
E- - - - - - - - - - - - - -..
200
1957 - 59 " 100
120-~~4
1967
1966
1966
1967
UTILITIES
RATIO SCALE
1957- 511=100
NONDURABLE MANUFACTURING
200
RATIO SCALE
1957 - 59" 100
160
160 ~--~--~--~----~--~----------~
1966
1967
TEXAS __----____~
140 ~--~--~--~----~--~--~--~~
1966
1967
p - Preliminary.
NOTE. - Ratio charts focu s upon relative ch anges, rath e r th an absolute c ha nges in m agnitude. Equ a l di st a nc es on
v ertic a l sca le of a ny individu a l ch a rt r epresent th e sa m e p erc entage c hang e.
SOURCES: Board of Gove rnors, Federa l Reserve System.
Fed era l Reserve Ba nk of Da ll as.
12
tne
1967 rose about 12 percent over 1966, and
~ore of the electricity was sold to consumers
In the State and fractionally less was exported
to neighboring areas. The consumption of natural gas by electric utility companies expanded
proportionally with the generation of electricity.
T~e rapid pace of electric power consumption
~rrored the increased industrial and residentIal Use in the State in 1967.
19New and expanded plants constructed during
d 67 provide the capacity to enable Texas in. Ustry to enlarge production during 1968. The
~petus of increased requirements for military
f ar.d.ware has fostered both new and expanded
aCllities for the production of aircraft and
parts (a new facility to cost $4 million and an
expansion of capacity valued at $19 million
~ere ~nnounced in the latter part of 1967).
apaclty expansion for the output of electrical
~~tnponents and accessories was undertaken in
67.
th T~e food products industry - traditionally
Ie Stngle largest source of manufacturing em~ oY~ent in the State, at least until 1967as Increased its potential for processing meat
prhoducts and for canning curing and freezing
ot er f d
"
h
00 s. The important apparel industry
Cas r~cently acquired both new and expanded
apaclty, particularly for the manufacture of
Women'
half
s and misses' outerwear. In the latter
th of 1967, additional capacity valued at more
cl an ~14 million was announced for industrial
letnlcals M
.
in
. ore over, new mvestments amountn; to OVer $65 million have recently been al1leuunced in the historically significant petrom refining industry.
Texas, however, is not developing only in the
direction of the industries that are predominantly defense-oriented (aircraft, ordnance) or
resource-oriented (petrochemicals). The industry of the State also is branching out into
other directions, as evidenced by the new and
expanded capacity in industries involving a
wide variety of products, including drugs; soaps
and toiletries; metal; farm machinery, motor
vehicles, and equipment; ships and boats; medical instruments; photographic equipment and
supplies; and paper and paperboard containers .
The growth of the labor force also reflects
the vigor in the State's economy. For the Nation, the work force engaged in manufacturing
grew slightly less than 1 percent between 1966
and 1967, while, in Texas, the growth in manufacturing employment was nearly 4 percent.
Perhaps equally as important as the development of the manufacturing sector in the State
is the expansion of the labor force in nonmanufacturing activities, which comprises nearly
82 percent of total employment.
To a substantial extent, the growth and prosperity of the non manufacturing part of the
economy in a region the size of Texas are
predicated upon the strength and development
of the manufacturing sector. Paralleling the'
buoyancy displayed by the manufacturing sector in the State, the number of manufacturing
workers - spearheaded by substantial increases
in service and government employment - rose
a little more than 5 percent during 1967, which
is slightly greater than the growth of nonmanufacturing employment in the Nation.
C. HOWARD DAVIS
business review / february 1968
13
dist,-ict highlights
Nonagricultural wage and salary employment
in the five southwestern states increased slightly
over 1 percent in December to total 5,821,300.
This gain is better than expected for this time
of year. Employment in both manufacturing
and nonmanufacturing industries showed gains
on a seasonally adjusted basis. The gain in the
number of construction workers was considerably better than would be expected according
to the normal pattern. The increases in service
and government employment were slightly below seasonal expectations.
Total nonagricultural employment in the five
states in December was 3 percent more than in
the same month in the preceding year. The increases in both total manufacturing and total
nonmanufacturing employment were close to
tlle overall gain. Mining employment remained
substantially below the year-earlier level as a
result of tl1e continuation of tl1e strike in the
copper industries in Arizona and New Mexico.
The number of construction workers was off
slightly from December 1966, but employment
in tl1e finance, service, and govermnent categories (especially tl1e last two) was significantly
higher.
In December tl1e seasonally adjusted Texas
industrial production index, at 160.1 percent
of its 1957-59 base, barely edged ahead of the
preceding montll. The advance in total manufacturing, slightly in excess of 1 percent, was
offset by a reduction in mining production. The
month-to-month drop in mining activity was
due to a decrease in tl1e adjusted output of
crude petroleum, which more than neutralized
a substantial rise in tl1e production of metal,
stone, and earth minerals.
The production of durable goods in the State
in December moved modestly ahead of the prior
14
montl1 , and moderate gains were shown .in mostd
categories. The greatest strength was dlsplaye
by stone, clay, and glass products and by trans'
portation equipment, with the output strength
for the latter reflecting a resumption of produc'
tion in tlle automobile industry following the
settlement of a labor dispute. Output of lumber
and wood products was off appreciably frool
tl1e previous month. In tl1e nondurable goodS
sector, a moderately strong gain in the output
of leather and leather products helped to com;
pensate for the modest drop in the output ~
textile mill products and the reduced activity In
the printing and publishing industries. Th.e re~
maining nondurable goods categories eVlnce
only small changes in activity.
The Texas industrial production index in
'j
December was nearly 6 percent greater than II
tl1e same montl1 in 1966. Most of tlle manu'
facturing categories experienced year-to-yea~
changes ranging from an increase of abou~
percent to a decrease of about 4 percent. There
was substantial strength, however, in the eleC'
trical machinery and transportation equip01eJlt
sectors, while the output of apparel and allied
products posted a pronounced decline. MiniJl8
.r
output was moderately over tlle year-ea~~e ,
level; and utility production, led by electnClt)
generation, showed a significant gain.
Daily average production of crude oil in tile
Eleventl1 District showed virtually no month'
to-month change in either November or DeceJll'
ber; however, output in November was a\Jnost
5 percent higher tllan a year earlier, and output
in December was about 3 percent ahead of tile
same month in 1966. Strong demand for heal'
ing oils, because of the unusually cold winter,
has been met by a high rate of crude oil output
s
and the use of inventories. In January the TeJ(a
al/owabl
M .
e was raised to 45.7 percen t of the
aXlmum
pared . Efficient Rate of production , as comWith a rate of 40.8 percent in both November d D
able I an
ecember; for February, the allowaU las been increased to 47.0 percent. The
fOI~;able for Louisiana, as well, has been raised
to ' ebruary. The decreasing crude oil inventh nes and reduced oil imports have prompted
e advances in allowables.
In the 3
.
.
and . -month penod between mid-October
she tn:ld-January, each of the major balance
e Items
.
We kI
except total mvestments rose at the
eYre
.
Th'
portmg banks in the Eleventh District.
.
e lUerease' I '
noti
moans adjusted was partICularly
ceable
'.
perf.
,prmCIpally because of the strong
Th o~m~nce of commercial and industrial loans.
e l'lse In b .
tb
usmess loans was in turn primarily
e result f
"
b ec b o a more than seasonal increase in
em er.
Betwee 0
n ctober 18, 1967, and January 17,
the ,loans adjusted expanded $175 million at
weekly r '
.
Dist .
eportmg commercIal banks in the
net· con
.
.
.
$160 '.. lmerclal and mdustrial loans rose
ago 1mIllion .. In the comparable period a year
busi n oans adjusted declined $20 million, while
mentseS~ loans rose $40 million. Total investmid-a owever, decreased $73 million between
nlarU ctober 1967 and mid-January 1968, priin b Ykas a result of the $70 million reduction
an h ldin
o
gs of Treasury bills.
On the li b'li
demand a I. ty side of the balance sheet, total
tithe
rose $119 million , and total
"I
anddepOSIts
.
lion. N S~vmgs. deposits expanded $83 milSUed . egohable time certificates of deposit isad Va 10 denominations of $100,000 or more
need $94 'lli
earlie
mlon. At the same time a year
r, total d
d
.
uliUio n
eman depOSits also rose $119
creased $and total time and savings deposits in103 million.
1968
beeel11b
.
.
autonl b'l er registrations of new passenger
olesi tl
.
n le major metropoljtan areas of
Dallas, Fort Worth, Houston, and San Antonio
decreased 2 percent from November. The figures for Fort Worth and Houston reflected
increases of 13 percent and 2 percent, respectively, but those for Dallas and San Antonio
were each down about 10 percent. A comparison with December 1966 shows that combined
registrations in the four areas fell 6 percent; a
21-percent gain in Fort Worth was the only
positive figure. For all of 1967, registrations in
Dallas and Houston were slightly berund their
respective 1966 totals, but those in Fort Worth
and San Antonio moved ahead somewhat.
Department store sales in the Eleventh District during 1967 were about 7 percent above
1966. Each of the major metropolitan areas for
which separate data are available posted a gain
for the past year. Sales during the 4 weeks
ended January 20, 1968, which include the last
week in December, were 6 percent ahead of the
corresponding period a year earlier.
As usual at trus time of year, agricultural
activity has been at a low ebb due to recurring
periods of cold, damp weather. The precipitation has been widespread and has generally been
welcome, particularly in northeastern and northwestern sections of the Eleventh District, where
surface and subsoil moisture has been quite
short. Only a relatively small acreage of crops
planted in 1967 remains unharvested; and most
activities have been concerned with preparing
fields for trus year's spring plantings, harvesting
winter vegetables, and caring for livestock.
Oats are making good growth, but wet fields
have limited grazing. Wheat in northwestern
sections is dormant. Livestock generally are in
good condition, and supplemental feeding has
risen seasonally. Prices received by Texas farmers and ranchers for all farm products during
1967 averaged 8 percent below a year earlier.
Prices for crops were 10 percent lower, and
those for livestock were down 4 percent.
bu&iness review/february 1968
15
The Planters Bank and Trust Company, Haynesville, Louisiana, a nonmember bank located in the territory served by the Head Office of the Federal
Reserve Bank of Dallas, was added to the Par List on January], 1968. The
officers are: J. G. Rankin, President; J. D. Acklin, Jr., Executive Vice Preside~t
and Trust Officer; T. K. Talley, Cashier; T. F. Callender, Assistant Vice PresIdent; T. W. Waller, Assistant Vice President; and D. H. Callender, Jr., Assistant Cashier.
16
STATISTICAl! SUPPLEMENT
to the
BUSINESS REVIEW
February 1968
FEDERAL RESERVE BANK
OF DALLAS
CONDITION STATISTICS OF WEEKLY REPORTING
COMMERCIAL BANKS
RESERVE POS ITIONS OF MEMBER BANKS
Eleventh Federal Reserve District
Eleventh Federal Reserve District
(Averages of dolly flgures. In thousands of dollars)
(In thousands of dollars)
Item
~
Jon.3l,
1968
Dec. 27,
1967
It em
Feb.l,
1967
4 weeks ended
Jan. 3, 1968
5 weeks ended
Dec. 6, 1967
d,1
4 weeks en
67
Jan.4~
700,387
648,625
51,762
693,379
7,008
3,678
3,330
679,846
631,339
48,507
675,100
4,746
33 1
4,415
653,539
602,150
51,389
646,96 6
6573
53)44
_47,171
683,094
518,925
164,169
650,078
33,016
1,308
31,708
666,219
506,758
159,461
636,449
29,770
998
28,772
654,24 1
497,400
156,841
620,790
33,45 1
2 161
31;290
1,383,481
1,167,550
215,93 1
1,343,457
40,024
4,986
35,038
1,346,065
1,138,097
207,968
1,3 11,549
34,5 16
1,329
33,187
RESERVE CITY 8ANKS
ASSETS
Net loans and disco unts .......................
Vofualion resorvos ..... ..... .. ... ... . ........
Gross loon s and discounts ..... . .. ......... ....
Comm erci al and Industrial loans • ••. •• ..•..•..
Agricultural loons, excluding CCC
certificates of interest ................••••
Loans to brokers and deal ers for
purchasing or carrying:
U.S. Government securities .. . ......... ....
Oth er securities .........................
5,370,301
107,562
5,477,863
5,449,427
92.452
5,541,879
96,907
97,172
87,853
8,034
47,169
502
70,421
16,002
67,480
949
327,275
1,252
327,310
1,280
314,867
------2,667,946
2,662,987
5,039,976
98,770
5,138,746
2,482,042
Other loan s for purcha sing or carrying:
U.S. Governm ent sec urities ........... .....
Oth er sec uriti es • •... ••..•. . . ..•.• •..• . .•
loans to nonbank Anancial Institutions:
Sal es Anance, person al Anance, factors,
and other business credit compani es .... ..•
Other .... ... ...... .... .. ........... .. .
Real estat e loans .•........ . ...............
loans to domestic commercial banks.•••.......
loons to foreign bonks ..•....... •. ..... •• . •
Consumer instalment loons•• ........•........
Loons to foreign governm ents, ofAcial
institutions, central bonks, international
institutions .••... .... ................•...
Other loan s .• ..... ... .. ................. .
Total investments ......... • ..... . ...•...•... .
Total U.S. Govern ment securities •.... ... ..••..
Treasury bills ................•..........
Treasury certiflcates of ind ebtedness ........
Treasury not es and U.S. Govern ment
bonds maturing:
Within 1 year .......... ........ ......
1 year to 5 years ..•...............•..
After 5 years ••••• ••. .•...• ••••• .••...
Obligations of states and political sub divisions:
Tax warrants and short· term not es and bill s ..
All other ................. . ... ... ...... .
Other bonds, corporate stocks, and se curiti es:
Participation certiflcates in Federal
ag ency loans •........••...........•..
177,226
275,466
509,319
190,692
4,631
547,436
180,405
287,674
512,011
232,308
5,151
544,325
168,101
242,425
464,789
214,200
4,172
511,924
0
624,813
0
620,361
0
563,611
2,513,779
2,510,572
2,227,116
114,645
0
1,183,165
93,077
0
1,095,909
54,816
15,209
194,367
673,201
212,223
193,861
677,828
218,399
165,519
600,880
259,485
4,468
1,098.083
19,278
1,098,444
7,358
948,424
---1,194,436
140,509
76,283
881,698
687,Q97
77,193
461,673
4,368
368,541
135,595
74,090
1,072,303
717,905
90,256
484,76 1
4,014
359,169
104,727
70,698
854,748
691,318
70,204
484,547
4,417
338,846
TOTAL ASSETS .. . ......... ........... .. 10,364,650
10,688,407
9,711 ,172
All other (including corporate stocks) ••..• • • •
Ca sh it ems in process of coll ection •. •. ....•.....
Reserves with Federal Reserv e Bank .. . .. .. ......
Currency and coin •... ....•..•...••..... • ....
Balances with banks in th e Unite d States••.•••..•
Balances with banks in foreign countries .••......
Oth er a ssets ....••.•••••.........••.•.......
Totol reserves held ............
With Federal Re serve Bonk ....
Currency and coin ... ....•.••
Require d reserves ...........••
Excess rese rve s•. .. •. .... .... ..
Borrowing s. ... ..........•. . ..
free reserves ..............•..
COUNTRY BANKS
Total rese rves held ............
With Federal Rese rve Bank ....
R Cu,rrency and coin .....•.....
eqUlre d reserves . . ........••.
Exce ss reserves .•........ . ... .
Borrowings •..................
Free reserves •......•....•....
ALL MEMBER 8ANKS
Toto I reserves held .. • ..... .•..
With Federal Res er ve Bank ....
Currency and coin ..... . .....
Requir ed re serves ... . .........
Excess rese rves . . .......•... ..
Borrowings .......•....... . •..
Free reserves •........ .•.... .•
1,307,7~~
1,099,5
208,2 30
1 ,267,75~
40,02
55,90 5
_15~
CONDITION O F THE FEDERAL RESERVE BANK O F DALLAS
(In thousands of dollars)
====================================~~
b 1
Item
Jan.3l,
1968
Dec. 27,
1967
8,871,283
9,177,101
8,359,402
5,392,374
3,615,349
350,475
216,562
1,103,961
5,763,935
3,960,295
268,752
163,855
1,249,887
5,042,675
3,324,866
335,186
108,345
1,168,342
3,501
20,938
81,588
3,478,909
3,795
26,993
90,358
3,413,166
3,741
22,493
79,702
3,316,727
U.S. Governm ent (Including postal savings) •••
8ank. in the United States .................
1,085,503
1,769,550
592,775
10,407
17,174
1,132,448
1,686,401
558,733
11,698
20,246
Foreign:
Governm ents, offlcial Institutions, central
banks, International institutions•••.. ....
Commercial banks •••...• . . ............
1,107,835
1,542,440
640,960
8,789
15,173
2,800
700
2,800
840
800
730
397,5 16
202,998
364,884
246,145
Total demand deposits .....................
Individuals, partnership s, and corporations ...•
States and political subdivisions ............
U.S. Government .•...•..•...............
80nks In the Unite d States ..... .. ... .......
Foreign,
Governments, offlcial Institutions, central
banks, international institutions .•.......
Commercial banks ..•.........•........
Certlfled and offlc ers' checks, etc ...........
Total time and savings deposits .•.. ..... . . ...
Individuals, partnerships, and corporations:
Savings deposits ..•... . ..... ..... .....
Other tim e d eposits•. ..... .. •... .. . ....
Stat es and political subdivisions ....••...•..
Bills payable, rediscounts, ond other
liabilities for borrowed money . ... •. .........
Other liabilities . ............... . ............
CAPITAL ACCOUNTS . . . ....... ...... .... ... .
----
320,2 17
180,736
892,853
900,277
850,817
TOTAL LlA81LITIES AND CAPITAL ACCOUNTS 10,364,650
10,688,407
9,711,172
----
Di. counts for member banks . • • • • • . • . . • • . • • •
41,036
7,300
Oth er discounts and advances. . . . . . . • . . . . • .
0
0
U.S. Govern ment securities. • .. • • . • . . • • • . • • .
Tota l corning a sset................ . .......
2009600
"
2,050,636
2001 288
"
2,008,588
Member bank reserve deposits. . ............
Fed oral Rese rve notes In actual c·'rculat·' on.....
1,148,634
1,158,512
1 389203
1 434 193
45l
"
CONDITION STATISTICS OF ALL MEMBER BANKS
Dec. 27,
1967
Nov. 29,
1967
loan s and discounts ............ . ........
U.S. Government obligations• .. ..••. . . . ...
Oth er securiti es ••.................•....
Reserves with Fed eral Rese rve Bank .. . . . . .•
Ca sh in vault . .... ... ...........• . .....
Balanc es with banks in the United State s...•
Balances with banks in foreign countriese" ..
Ca sh it ems in process of collection •.•.. .•..
Other asse tse •• . ......•.. .. .. .. . . ...•..
9,518
2,549
2,662
1,159
243
1,255
6
1,208
475
9,188
2,578
2,666
1,129
244
1,120
11
925
380
TOTAL ASSETse .. ...................
19,075
18,241
Demand de posits of banks •.•.....••....•
Other de mand depo sits ..................
Tim e d epo sits .•........ . ......•....•...
1,560
8,666
6,583
1,379
8,084
6,548
Total deposits • •.•..•. ••• ..•••• . ••. • •
Borrowings ..... . ...•...... • ...... . .•..
Oth er Iiabillti es e •...•.. . ............. . .
Total capital acconnts e .........•.•...•• .
16,809
386
336
1,544
16,0 11
429
261
1,540
TOTAL LIABILITIES AND CAPITAL
ACCOUNTSe •••••• ••• ••..•••.•..• •
19,075
18,241
Item
ASSETS
LlA81LITIES AND CAPITAL ACCOUNTS
Estimated.
8
1,750,731
1,75 119
'230
1,107'365
1 24 2,
'~
"
----------------------------------
e-
2
V
T--ot-a-I-g-O-Id- ce-r-tl-flc-o-t-e-r-e-se-,ve-s-.-. -. .-.-.-.-.-.-. .-.-.-.-.--380~,-9-7-8---4-3-1--,l-5-1---515,023
LlA81L1T1ES
Total deposits •• ••• •..••••.•••..••..•..•..••
Fe · ,
67
BANK DEBITS, END-OF-MONTH DEPOSITS, AND DEPOSIT TURNOVER
100 liar amounts in thousands, seasonally adju sted)
~~~~======================================================================
DE81TS TO DEMAND DEPOSIT ACCOUNTS'
DEMAND DEPOSITS'
Percent change
---
"RIZON". T
LOUISI"N~ . ueson •.. . . • • . ...••..•..... ..•.....• •..••
$
. Monroe
...•...••.••..•••..•.•...•.•.
NEW MEXIC
.•.....•..•••. . ..•• . • ..... .•.•
TEX "5, "bil 0 , Rosw ell ' . . ••• . . .. • .• ••.. •..•• ••• ..•• •
ene
Shrevep~;t'
~~~S~L;~r; :Lii':-:::::::::::::::::::::::::
~ronge: •.....•..••.•....
Brow nsvill e.Harlin
Corpus Ch"
gen- an Benito •••...••..••....
~~~fJ;i"",;;
Midlond
:
orr-Edinburg • . • . ..... . •• ...• •• ..••..
f~~e~~~~~.
:::: :::::::::::::::::: ::::::::::
TexarkQn~oI T'
:
•• •••.. ' " ...••.•••• . ••• . •.•••.
Tot I
12 months,
1967
(Annual-rate
ba sis)
Standard metropolitan
statistical orea
~~iit~: ~~il; ~~~;tt~:n~~;):,; ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ;;~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
a -27 centers
~................... ..... . ..........
Annual roto
of turnover
Decem ber 1967 from
December
Novem b er
December
1967
1966
- 15
2
-6
-6
-4
0
7
-2
-12
-4
-7
0
-6
8
6
2
-9
-12
-6
2
-3
7
-4
2
0
2
2
4, 195,116
2,103,048
5,496,564
657,888
1,678,776
4,525,656
5,617,272
5,543,676
1,599,288
4,236,120
331,932
77,301,960
4,839,660
17,166,012
2,237,472
73,972,380
601,620
3,221,796
1,376,940
1,756,476
1,239,432
981,432
13,167,444
1,332,516
1,693,020
2,333,736
2,125,092
$24 1,332,324
0
1967 from
1966
11
8
9
1
-4
2
15
5
4
6
7
15
7
10
10
13
11
1
12
3
-2
3
6
20
4
8
-3
10
9
5
2
-12
6
24
1
11
12
3
17
-3
21
16
19
-4
5
8
8
-4
3
13
20
3
19
3
15
Decem b e r 31,
Dece mber
November
Decem ber
1967
1967
1967
1966
$ 169,257
77,973
245,026
36,674
98,211
139,268
210,085
224,984
74,443
200,531
28,649
1,897,730
215,955
569,922
105,152
2,161,685
33,776
146,493
97,131
126,106
61,573
63,298
549,549
62,964
90,315
113,535
112,702
25.0
27.2
23.6
18.6
17.6
32.9
26.4
25.3
21.4
21.4
11.7
42.6
23.5
31.3
22.2
34.6
17.7
21.4
14.8
14.2
20.1
15.8
24.3
21.3
19.4
20.8
19.0
29.4
26.3
26.2
20.5
18.6
32.7
24.3
25.7
24.5
22.5
12.7
44.6
26.0
29.8
21.4
33.7
19.6
23.4
16.5
13.9
20.4
15.2
25.3
21.5
19.9
20.7
18.6
23.8
27.7
24.8
18.5
20.7
31.8
24.5
25.8
25.1
20.7
11.8
39.3
25.3
28.3
21.4
32.7
19.6
21.1
17.1
14.1
21.5
17.0
23.6
19.2
19.2
18.3
19.2
$7,9 12,987
31.2
31.7
29.7
----
11
2 OPOsits of indl I
NCounty basi
v dUal s, partnerships, and corporation s and of states and political subdivisIons .
aTE _ F'"
.
Igures for 1966 have been rev ise d due to the use of new seasonal adlu stment factors.
ANNUAL BANK DEBITS AND ANNUAL RATE
OF TURNOVER OF DEMAND DEPOS ITS
GROSS DEMAND AND TIME DEPOSITS OF MEMBER BANKS
(Dollar amounts in thousands)
Eleventh Federal Reserve District
~~=:~(A~V~O~r~a9~.~s~O~I~d~a~lI~y~fl~g~U~re=s=.~ln==m~I~"i~o~n=s=o=l=do~I~la~r=S)==============
Demand deposits l
De bits to demand d epo sit accounts'
_GROSS DEMAND DePOSITS
Date
19 65, D
1966. Decemb. r..
1967; J; cember..
"u~~;i'"
•
~.Pt e ';b·"r .
ctober
•
~o"ernb~;.:
eCernber
-----=:.::..
Total
9,077
9.D98
9,195
9,178
9,426
9,511
9,582
9,841
Res erve
city banks
Country
banks
4,241
4,202
4,302
4,268
4,408
4,448
4,417
4,589
4,836
4,896
4,893
4,910
5,0 18
5,063
5,165
5,252
TIME DEPOSITS
Total
5,451
5,781
6,285
6,394
6,398
6,457
6,509
6,57 1
Reserve
city banks
2,610
2,575
2,670
2,742
2,743
2,753
2,744
2,762
Standard
metropolitan
statistical ar ea
Country
banks
2,84 1
3,206
3,615
3,652
3,655
3,704
3,765
3,809
ARIZONA
Tucson . ••.....•.....
$
LOUISIANA
Monroe ••. . .........
Shreveport ••••••••• •
NEW MEXICO
Rosw ell · ••.••• • • ..••
TEXAS
Abilene .. ...... . .. · .
Amarillo ..... . ... ·· .
Austin ...... .. .. ·· · .
Beaumont· Port Arthur ..
Brownsville· Harling enSan Benito ....•..•
Corpus Christl .•......
Corsicana ' ... . ......
DAILY AVERAGE PRODUCT ION OF CRUDE Oil
~
~~~======~(I~n~t~h~o~us~a~n~ds~a~l==ba~r~r.=I=S)=======================
Percent chang e from
D ecemb er
Area
ELEVEN
T.Xa TH DISTRICT • .
G· .... ·
......
ull Coo ·t···········.
West Tex~"" """"
Ea.t TeXa s( . ....•..•.
Panhandl: proper)• •••.
S Rell 01 Stai •..• • . ..•..
o
NOUlheaUern N°' ........ .
orthern lou' . ew MeXico ..
UTSIDE E "'ana ........
UNITED ST LEVENTH DISTRICT
ATES
~ .•••••..
P- P I
SOUR~~~~lnary •.
.
~~er~can
1967p
Nov ember
Dece mb er
November
Decemb er
1967p
1966
1967
1966
3,576.8
3,087.9
613 .3
1,428.2
139.2
93.8
813.4
318.5
170.4
5,411.9
8,988.7
3,480.0
3,007.0
563.5
1,401.2
132.3
95.4
814.6
321.0
152.0
5,031.0
8,511.0
0.1
.0
.0
.7
.4
.7
-1.5
.6
.6
.5
.3
2.9
2.7
8.8
2.7
5.6
-1.0
- 1.6
-.2
12.8
8.1
6.0
3,579.6
3,087.7
613.3
1,438.6
139.7
94.5
801.6
320.4
171.5
5,440.5
9,020.1
Petroleum In stitut e.
F' . ureau of Mines
.
ederal Re.erve 8ank' of Dalla.,
Dalla s .•••. ••• .•....
EI Paso ••• •.••••.•• ·
Fort Worth .... ... ...
Galves ton-Texas Cit y ..
Houston . • ...... ... .
Laredo .............
Lubbock • ..•..••••..
McAlien-PharrEdinburg ....... . ..
Midland . ••.••••••.•
Odessa . .. • . ........
San Ang elo .........
Son Antonio ..... ... .
Tex arkana (TexasArkansas) •........
Tyler .... . ... . .... ..
Waco . . ..... •... ...
Wichita Fall, . • •. .• ••
4,351,336
1966
3,914,567
11
26.3
24.1
1,902,402
5,325,796
8
9
27.0
25.7
25.3
25.3
648,323
638,955
18.8
18.7
1,797,388
4,363,245
4,887,169
5,485,216
1,878,965
4,266,064
4,257,025
5,262,551
-4
2
15
4
18.9
31.5
24.2
24.8
20.3
30.9
22.8
25.1
1,356,181
3,994,063
359,675
72,621,226
5,221,061
15,417,552
2, 139,179
68,661,825
629,614
3,569,199
1,303,025
3,766, 141
336,393
63,396,639
4,866,956
13,960,444
1,936,879
60,979,348
567,142
3,556,131
4
6
7
15
7
10
10
13
11
0
21.0
21.1
12.5
41.3
25.8
29.6
22.3
33.3
19.2
24.4
22.8
21.0
11.9
38.4
24.5
28.0
21.8
31.4
18.8
23.7
1,316,852
1,631,621
1,234,455
928,546
12,340,852
1,176,211
1,576,478
1,262,932
903,860
11,614,114
12
3
-2
3
6
16.3
13.4
19.3
16.0
23.5
12.0
13.7
19.7
16.2
23.4
1,271,783
1,648,948
2,211,074
2,015,898
1,063,718
1,579,559
2,061,419
2,075,144
20
4
7
-3
21.5
19.6
20.0
18.1
19.5
19.0
19.7
18.4
11
30.5
28.9r
-----
Unadlu sted deposits of
1967
2,060,166
5,780,632
Total-27 centers ••.•.. $227,943,079
1
1966
1967
Annua l rate
of turnover
Percent
change
$
$205,428,858r
individuals , partnerships, and corporations and of stat.s
and political .ubdlvlslon ••
"County basis.
r - Revised.
3
INDUSTRIAL PRODUCTION
(Sea sonally ad(usted Indexes, 1957-59
VALUE OF CONSTRUCTION CONTRACTS
=100)
Docemb er
Nove mb er
1967p
1967
Area and type of ind ex
(In millions of do llars )
Octobe r
1967
1966
Are a and typ e
TEXAS
To tal industrial production . • . ...
M anufacturing • .. .... . • . .. .. ...
Durabl... .... . . . . . .... .... ..
Nondurable . .. . .. ... . .. . . .. . .
Mining . •• .. . . .. . .. . . . . ... . .••
Util iti es •. .. ..... ... .•• • .... . . .
UN ITED STATES
Tota l industrial p roduction . . . ...
Manufacturing .• . . . ..••.• .. • . . .
Durabl. .... . .. . .. . ........ _.
Nondurable . . .. . ......... .. . .
Mining •.. . . . . . . . . .. .. . . . ... . .
Utilities •. ... . .• .. ..•.•.• •• •.•.
p -
January- O e c e m~
Decemb er
160.8
181.3
208.1
163.4
120.3
207.3
159.7
179.2
203.8
162 .8
122 .4
207.3
158.9r
177.5
200.1
162.4
122.7r
208.0r
151.1 r
169.9r
190.3r
156.3r
11 6.7
188.3
162.0
164.0
168.0
158.0
124.0
188.0
159.0
161.0
164.0
157.0
124.0
188.0
157.0r
158.0
161.0r
155.0
121.0
188.0r
160.0r
162.0r
168.0r
154.0r
I 24.0r
179.0r
FIVE SOUTHWESTERN
STATES' • • •• . . • • • •. • •• • _
Re.ldential building • • . • _••
Nonresid e ntial building . . ..
Nonbullding construction •. .
UN ITED STATES •• •• • • •• • • • •
Re.ldential building • •• • • • •
Nonresi de ntial building . . . .
NonbulJdlng construction • • •
Decemb er
Novemb er
1967
1967
398
154
156
88
3,996
1,404
1,550
1,042
Octob er
1967
411
170
150
91
4,258
1,7 17
1,586
956
486
195
173
118
5,053
1,887
1,874
1,292
1967
1966
5,494
2,038
1,998
1,458
52,895
19,536
20, 139
13,220
5270
1;8 17
I 709
1> 44
50,150
17,827
19,393
12,930
~
~
1
Arizona , louisiana, N ew Mexico, O klahoma , and Texa s.
NOTE . - Detail. may not add to tota l. becau.e of roundin g.
SOURCE : F. W. Dodg e, McG raw· Hill , Inc.
Pre liminary .
r - Revised.
SOURCES: Board a f Governors of th e Federa l Reserve Syste m.
Fede ral Reserve 8ank of Dalla ••
BUILDI NG PERM ITS
-:;::::P
VALUATION (Dollar a mounts In thousa nd.' _____
Perce nt chang e ---'
Dec. 1967
NU MBER
from
1967
12 mo ••
1967
1967
281
6, 126
$ 1,286
35
195
87 1
3,983
34
51
28 1
77
98
372
1,2 21
329
458
68
1,336
41
55
53
32
30
61
955
24
196
57
Tota l-24 citio • •• 6,340
De c.
Area
12 mas.
1967
Dec.
12 monl h',
1967 fro ~
1 96~
Nov.
De c.
1967
1966
27,598
- 74
95
10
2,038
4,0 11
19,019
33,384
308
36
73
375
_ 4
19
587
1,50 8
4,455
1,655
886
4,800
21, 131
5,34 1
7,30 1
1,110
24,219
383
1,489
927
997
858
818
14,063
497
3,470
805
1,134
1,395
8,824
990
149
1,479
22,265
4,513
5,795
611
23,291
303
1,423
649
262
242
483
7,163
140
465
753
10,154
20,53 6
131,640
17,326
3,195
33,238
286,105
58,827
92,058
11,001
411,978
4,223
30,468
13,368
6, 16 1
5,820
9,942
11 5,359
4, 123
16,449
19,497
387
16
3 1 -53
-68
99
12
214
5 -29
- 37 -46
58
64
- 19
-9
-35
63
23
174
-32
40
155
2 16
4 - 75
11 9
30
46
8
- 90
404
17
102
- 52
7
-74 - 80
- 33 -15
86
148
-27
-4 1
67
17
- 14
-5
52
-2
24
-5
24
58
-5 1
_3
-45
21
6
33
-36
14
35
108,280
$89,664
ARIZONA
lucson . . .•. .. •
NO NAGRICU LTU RA L EMPLO YME NT
Five Southwestern Sto tes
Monroe ·West
Monro e • . •• •
Shre ve port • .. .
1
Pe rc e nt chang e
Dec. 1967 from
Numb e r of p erson s
Dece mb e r
Nove mb e r
De ce mb e r
Nov.
De c.
Type of e mployment
1967 p
1967
1966r
1967
1966
Total nonagricultural
wag e and salary workers . .
Manufacturing • . . . . . . . .. .
Nonmonufacturing .. . .. ..•
Mining ... .. . ... .• . • ..
Construction .... . .. .. . .
Transportation and
5,821,300
1,052,700
4,768,600
22 1,300
373,400
5,760,800
1,053,500
4,707,300
220,200
376,200
5,649,400
1,023,700
4,625,700
233,500
379,200
1.1
- .1
1.3
.5
- .8
3.0
2.8
3.1
-5.2
-1.5
438,000
1,400,000
281,500
860,400
1,194,000
436,900
1,341 ,000
28 1,000
859,600
1,192,400
427,400
1,360,400
272,200
818,900
1,134, 100
.3
4.4
.2
.1
.1
2.5
2.9
3.4
5.1
5.3
public utilities• • • . • • ••
Tra de • ••••. • ••• • • • • ••
Finance • . . .. . . •.. . ....
Service . .. . .. . .... . ...
Governm e nt •...... . .. .
1
Arizona , l ouisiana, N e w Mexico, O klahoma , and Texas.
p-
Pre limi nary.
r-
Rev ised.
SOURCE: State employment agencies .
4
$
LOUISIANA
TEXAS
Abilene .... .. .
Amarillo • • ••••
Austin . . . . ... .
Be aumont .. . . .
Brownsvill e •.. .
Corpus Christi . .
Da lla . ..... .. .
EI Pa so . .. .. ..
Fort Wa rth... .
Ga lveston .... .
Housto n . . .. . .
Lare do • •• . • • •
Lubbock ••• •• •
Midland • .• •• •
Od essa .... ..•
Port Arthur . ...
Sa n Angelo • • •
Sa n Antonio ...
Te xa rkana . . • .
Waco . . . . . . . .
Wichita Falls • •
---$1,38 1,469
-28
31
20
@FedFRASER