296
Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

  • Upload
    others

  • View
    1

  • Download
    0

Embed Size (px)

Citation preview

Page 1: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 2: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 3: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

Economic Report

of the President

Transmitted to the Congress

February 1983

TOGETHER WITH

THE ANNUAL REPORTOF THE

COUNCIL OF ECONOMIC ADVISERS

UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 1983

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing OfficeWashington, D.C. 20402

Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 4: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 5: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

CONTENTS

Page

ECONOMIC REPORT OF THE PRESIDENT 1

ANNUAL REPORT OF THE COUNCIL OF ECONOMIC AD-VISERS* 9

CHAPTER 1. FROM RECESSION TO RECOVERY AND GROWTH 17

CHAPTER 2. T H E DUAL PROBLEMS OF STRUCTURAL AND CYCLICAL

UNEMPLOYMENT 29

CHAPTER 3. T H E UNITED STATES IN THE WORLD ECONOMY:

STRAINS ON THE SYSTEM 51

CHAPTER 4. INCREASING CAPITAL FORMATION 77

CHAPTER 5. T H E BURDEN OF ECONOMIC REGULATION 96

CHAPTER 6. REVIEW OF 1982 AND THE ECONOMIC OUTLOOK 124

APPENDIX A. REPORT TO THE PRESIDENT ON THE ACTIVITIES OF

THE COUNCIL OF ECONOMIC ADVISERS DURING 1982 147

APPENDIX B. STATISTICAL TABLES RELATING TO INCOME, EM-

PLOYMENT, AND PRODUCTION , 157

*For a detailed table of contents of the Council's Report, see page IS.

(Ill)

Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 6: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 7: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

ECONOMIC REPORT

OF THE PRESIDENT

Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 8: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 9: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

ECONOMIC REPORT OF THE PRESIDENT

To the Congress of the United States:

Two years ago, I came to Washington with a deep personal com-mitment to change America's economic future. For more than adecade, the economy had suffered from low productivity growth anda rising rate of inflation. Government spending absorbed an increas-ing share of national income. A shortsighted view of economic prior-ities was destroying our prospects for long-term prosperity.

The economic program that I proposed shortly after I took officeemphasized economic growth and a return to price stability. My taxproposals were designed to encourage private initiative and to stimu-late saving and productive investment. I have supported and encour-aged the Federal Reserve Board in its pursuit of price stabilitythrough sound monetary policy. My Administration has slowed thegrowth of Federal regulation, strengthening the forces of competitionin a number of economic sectors. And I have worked with the Con-gress to enact legislation that has reversed or limited the growth ofgovernment programs that have become too large or outlasted theirusefulness.

Although the full effect of these changes in government policy willtake time to develop, some of the benefits have already become ap-parent. The rate of consumer price inflation between December 1981and December 1982 was only 3.9 percent, about one-third of the ratein the year before I took office. Interest rates are now lower thanwhen I took office, and have fallen rapidly during the last 6 months.

The Administration will propose many additional measures overthe next several years to strengthen economic incentives, reduce bur-densome regulations, increase capital formation, and raise our stand-ard of living. It is easy to lose sight of these long-term goals in ayear, like 1982, when the economy was in an extended recession. Iam deeply troubled by the current level of unemployment in theUnited States and by the suffering and anxiety that it entails for mil-lions of Americans. The unemployment that many of our citizens areexperiencing is a consequence of the disinflation that must necessar-ily follow the accelerating inflation of the last decade. Allowing theupward trend of inflation to continue would have risked even greaterincreases in unemployment in the future. In spite of the present highunemployment rate and the accompanying hardships, it is essentialthat we maintain the gains against inflation that we have recently

Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 10: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

achieved at substantial cost. Continuing success in restraining infla-tion will provide a stronger foundation for economic recovery in1983 and beyond.

Reducing Unemployment

The Federal Government can play an important role in reducingunemployment. I believe, however, that the government should focusits attention on those groups that will continue to face high unem-ployment rates even after the recovery has begun. By helping themto develop their job-related skills, we will foster productive careers inthe private sector rather than dead-end jobs. This emphasis on train-ing and private sector employment is the focus of the Jobs TrainingPartnership Act that I supported and signed into law in 1982. I amproposing additional steps this year to strengthen Federal trainingand retraining programs and to help the structurally unemployedfind lasting jobs.

It is understandable that many well-meaning members of the Con-gress have responded to the current high unemployment rate by pro-posing various public works and employment programs. However, Iam convinced that such programs would only shift unemploymentfrom one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federalbudget deficit.

Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-tant, only a balanced and lasting recovery can achieve a substantialreduction in unemployment. There are now over four million moreunemployed people than there were at the peak of the last businesscycle. Nine million new workers are expected to join the labor forceby 1988. Only a healthy and growing economy can provide the morethan 13 million jobs needed to achieve a progressively lower level ofunemployment over the next 5 years.

The Prospects for Economic Recovery

There are now signs that an economic recovery will begin soon. ByDecember 1982 the index of leading economic indicators had risen in7 of the last 8 months. Housing starts have risen substantially overthe last year, and by December 1982 were 39 percent higher than 12months earlier. Inventory levels have fallen sharply, so that increasedsales should translate quickly into increased production and employ-ment. Both long-term and short-term interest rates have fallen sub-stantially. The Administration's economic forecast predicts that thegross national product will begin to rise in the first quarter of 1983and will then rise more quickly as the year continues. Most privateforecasters also predict a recovery in 1983.

Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 11: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

Monetary policy will play a critical role in achieving a sound andsustainable economic recovery. If the monetary aggregates grow tooslowly, the economy will lack the level of financial resources neededfor continued economic growth. But if these aggregates are allowedto expand too rapidly, an increase in inflation and a short-lived re-covery will result. I recognize the difficulties that the Federal Reservehas faced and will continue to face in guiding the growth of themoney supply at a time when major regulatory changes have made itdifficult to rely on old guidelines. I expect that in 1983 the FederalReserve will expand the money supply at a moderate rate consistentwith both a sustained recovery and continued progress against infla-tion.

Investment and Economic Growth

An economic recovery beginning in 1983 should bring not only areduction in unemployment but also an increase in business invest-ment over the next several years. A higher level of investment is animportant ingredient in raising productivity and economic growth.The Accelerated Cost Recovery System that I proposed and that theCongress enacted in 1981 was designed to encourage a substantialexpansion of business investment above the relatively low levels ofthe 1970s. Since that time the adverse effects of the recession haveoutweighed the positive effects of the new tax rules. As the economyturns from recession to recovery, however, incentives to invest willbecome more powerful. But business investment may not grow rapid-ly unless measures proposed by the Administration to reduce poten-tially large Federal budget deficits are enacted.

Federal borrowing competes with private investment for availablesavings. If the government continues to borrow large amounts to fi-nance its deficit, the real interest rate will remain high and discour-age private investment. This process of "crowding out" will tend todepress private investment in the years ahead unless the budget defi-cit is progressively reduced.

Fiscal Year 1984 Budget Proposals

It is important to distinguish the cyclical part of the budget deficitfrom the structural part, which would remain even at the peak of thebusiness cycle. Approximately one-half of the 1983 budget deficit isdue to the depressed state of the economy. With earnings and profitsreduced, tax receipts have significantly decreased, and expenditureshave increased. As the economy recovers, the cyclical part of the defi-cit will shrink. But cyclical recovery alone will not bring the deficitdown to an acceptable size.

Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 12: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

In the budget I am now submitting to the Congress, I am propos-ing the dramatic steps needed to reduce Federal budget deficits infuture years. My budget proposals are designed to reduce the deficitby dealing directly with the rapid growth of the domestic spendingprograms (apart from interest payments) of the Federal Government.In 1970 these programs accounted for 10 percent of the gross na-tional product and 48 percent of Federal spending. By 1980 theseprograms had grown to 14 percent of gross national product and 63percent of the budget. I remain committed to the idea that we canreduce budget deficits without increasing the burden on the poor,without weakening our national defense, and without destroying eco-nomic incentives by counterproductive tax increases.

Rapid congressional enactment of the budget would provide clearand credible evidence that the Federal Government intends not toplace heavy burdens on the capital markets in future years. Such re-assurance should hasten the decline in interest rates, especially long-term interest rates on bonds and residential mortgages, and improveprospects for the recovery of the housing, automobile, and capital in-vestment sectors of the economy.

I recognize the special importance of protecting the social securityand medicare programs for aged retirees and their dependents.These programs now face very serious financial problems. The bi-partisan National Commission on Social Security Reform has recentlyrecommended a series of measures, which I have endorsed, to elimi-nate the cumulative deficiency of $150 billion to $200 billion project-ed for the social security system in the years 1983 through 1989. It iscritically important at this time to make changes in the social securityprograms that will protect their solvency and financial viability forthe years to come.

The Remaining Burden of Federal Economic Regulation

For many decades, the Federal Government has regulated the priceand entry conditions affecting several sectors of the American econo-my. Much of this regulation is no longer appropriate to the condi-tions of the contemporary economy. Over time, most of this regula-tion—by restraining competition and the development of new serv-ices and technologies—has not served the interests of either consum-ers or producers. Since deregulation of some markets began severalyears ago, the experience has been almost uniformly encouraging.My Administration has supported these step-by-step efforts to re-duce these regulations in markets that would otherwise be competi-tive. It is now time to consider broad measures to eliminate many ofthese economic regulations especially as they affect the natural gas,transportation, communications, and financial markets.

Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 13: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

Interest Rates and the U.S. Trade Deficit

The very high levels of real interest rates over the last several yearsare a principal cause of the sharp rise in the exchange value of thedollar relative to foreign currencies. This rise has reduced the abilityof American exporters to compete in foreign markets and increasedthe competitiveness of imports in the domestic market. Largely as aresult, the U.S. merchandise trade balance showed a substantial defi-cit in 1982.

Our current trade deficit is a reminder of the importance of inter-national trade to the American economy. The export share of U.S.gross national product has more than doubled over the last threedecades. American workers, businesses, and farmers suffer when for-eign governments prevent American products from entering theirmarkets, thus reducing U.S. export levels. While the United Statesmay be forced to respond to the trade distorting practices of foreigngovernments through the use of strategic measures, such practices donot warrant indiscriminate protectionist actions, such as domesticcontent rules for automobiles sold in the United States. Widespreadprotectionist policies would hurt American consumers by raisingprices of the products they buy, and by removing some of the pres-sures for cost control and quality improvement that result from inter-national competition. Moreover, protectionism at home could hurtthe workers, farmers, and firms in the United States that producegoods and services for export, since it would almost inevitably leadto increased protectionism by governments abroad. I am committedto a policy of preventing the enactment of protectionist measures inthe United States, and I will continue working to persuade the othernations of the world to eliminate trade distorting practices thatthreaten the viability of the international trading system upon whichworld prosperity depends.

Trade in goods and services is only one aspect of our economicrelations with the rest of the world. The international flow of capitalinto the United States and from the United States to other countriesis also of great importance. The United States should play a primaryrole in preserving the vitality of the international capital market.Severe strains on that market developed in 1982 as several nationsfound it difficult to service their overseas debt obligations. In 1982,the Federal Government worked closely with debtor and creditor na-tions and the major international lending agencies to prevent a dis-ruption in the functioning of world capital markets. Now, with the co-operation of a wide variety of creditors, countries with especiallysevere debt-servicing difficulties are establishing economic and finan-cial programs that will permit them to meet their international obli-gations.

Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 14: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

The Years Ahead

We are now at a critical juncture for the American economy. Therecession has led to strong pressures from some members of theCongress and from others to abandon our commitment to a policythat is aimed at long-term economic growth, capital accumulation,and price stability. There are many who urge new governmentspending programs and forcing the Federal Reserve to raise mone-tary growth rates to levels that would rekindle inflation.

I am convinced that such policies would prove detrimental to thelong-run interests of the American people. Our economy, despite therecession, is extraordinarily resilient and is now on the road to ahealthy recovery. It is essential in the year ahead that the Administra-tion and the Congress work together, take a long-term perspective,and pursue economic policies that lead to sustained economic growthand to greater prosperity for all Americans.

(j ^ CTVAJULAA^ \ C J L ^ M J ^ K ^

February 2, 1983

Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 15: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

THE ANNUAL REPORT

OF THE

COUNCIL OF ECONOMIC ADVISERS

Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 16: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 17: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL

COUNCIL OF ECONOMIC ADVISERS,

Washington, D.C., January 31, 1983.MR. PRESIDENT:

The Council of Economic Advisers herewith submits its 1983Annual Report in accordance with the provisions of the EmploymentAct of 1946 as amended by the Full Employment and BalancedGrowth Act of 1978.

Sincerely,

N\ CutterMartin Feldstein

CHAIRMAN

William A. Niskanen

11

Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 18: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 19: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

CONTENTS

Page

CHAPTER 1. FROM RECESSION TO RECOVERY AND GROWTH 17

Legacies of the 1970s . 18Rising Unemployment 18Declining Productivity Growth 18Rising Inflation 19

The Recession 20The Decline in Velocity 21

The Economic Recovery 23Implementing a Stable Monetary Policy 23The Budget Deficit 26

CHAPTER 2. THE DUAL PROBLEMS OF STRUCTURAL AND CYCLICAL

UNEMPLOYMENT 29

The Recent Recession 29The Composition of Cyclical and Structural Unemploy-

ment 31Demographic Composition 31Reasons for Unemployment 33The Dynamics of Unemployment 35

Combating Cyclical Unemployment 37The Limits of Macroeconomic Policy 37Public Works Employment Programs 39

Combating Structural Unemployment 41The Problem of Youth Unemployment 42Policies to Reduce Youth Unemployment 44Long-Term Unemployment and Structural Change 45The Effects of Unemployment Compensation 47

Conclusions 49CHAPTER 3. THE UNITED STATES IN THE WORLD ECONOMY:

STRAINS ON THE SYSTEM 51

Long-Run Trends in U.S. Competitiveness: Perceptionsand Realities 52

Aggregate Performance of the United States andOther Developed Countries 52

The Changing Structure of the U.S. Balance of Pay-ments 53

The Issue of U.S. Trade with Japan 56

13

Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 20: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

Page

The Problem of Uncompetitive Sectors 58Challenges to U.S. Trade Policy 60

Exchange Rates and the Balance of Payments 61Causes of the Dollar's Strength 61An Undervalued Yen? 65Effects of a Strong Dollar on U.S. Trade 66Responses to the Strong Dollar 67

Macroeconomic Problems in Europe 70The International Debt Problem 72

Debt-Financed Growth in the 1970s 72Causes of the Liquidity Problem 73Implications of the Debt Problem 74

CHAPTER 4. INCREASING CAPITAL FORMATION 77The Historical Record 78An International Perspective 80The Importance of Capital Formation 82Measuring National Saving 85Budget Deficits and Saving 86Tax Rules and Personal Saving 87Financial Regulation and Private Saving 89The Role of International Capital Flows 90The Allocation of Capital 91Tax Policy and Investment 92Conclusions 95

CHAPTER 5. THE BURDEN OF ECONOMIC REGULATION 96A Brief History of Economic Regulation 96

The Traditional Rationale for Economic Regulation.... 98Problems of Economic Regulation 100Energy Policy 102

Steps Toward a Market-Oriented Oil Policy 102Natural Gas Pricing and Allocation 102Emergency Preparedness 106

Transportation and Communications 108Effects of Aviation Deregulation 109Effects of Partial Deregulation in Surface Transporta-

tion 110Further Deregulation of Surface Transportation 112Common Carrier Telecommunications 114Broadcasting 115

Deregulation of Financial Markets 115Depository Institutions 116Stock Exchanges 119Opportunities for Further Deregulation in the Finan-

cial Industry 121

14Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 21: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

Page

Conclusions 122CHAPTER 6. REVIEW OF 1982 AND THE ECONOMIC OUTLOOK 124

Overview of 1982 124Major Sectors of Aggregate Demand 126

Personal Consumption Expenditures 127Residential Investment 128Business Fixed Investment 129Inventory Investment 130The Farm Economy 130Foreign Trade 132Government Purchases of Goods and Services 132

Labor Market Developments 133Wages, Productivity, and Prices.. 134Credit Markets 136

Interest Rates 137Monetary Developments 139

Prospects for 1983 142Prospects and Policies Beyond 1983 143

APPENDIXES

A. Report to the President on the Activities of the Councilof Economic Advisers During 1982 147

B. Statistical Tables Relating to Income, Employment andProduction 157

List of Tables and ChartsTables

2-1. Median Family Income by Unemployment and FamilyStatus, 1981 30

2-2. Educational and Labor Market Activities of Youth Aged16 to 19, by Sex, October 1981 42

3-1. Structure of the U.S. Balance of Payments, as Percent ofGNP, 1960-80 55

3-2. Trade Balances by Commodity Group as Percent ofGDP, United States, Japan, and the European Eco-nomic Community, 1980 57

3-3. Trade Balances by Region as Percent of GDP, UnitedStates and Japan, 1980 58

3-4. U.S. Trade Balances by Sector as Percent of GDP,1972-79 58

3-5. Real Appreciation of the Dollar Against Major Curren-cies to August 1982 66

3-6. Economic Performance by Major Industrial Countries,1973-82 71

3-7. Employment and Unemployment in the European Eco-nomic Community, 1973-80 72

15Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 22: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

List of Tables and Charts—ContinuedTables

4-1. Alternative Measures of Capital Formation, 1951-82 794-2. Comparison of Capital Formation in Six OECD Coun-

tries, 1971-80 814-3. Net Saving as Percent of GNP, 1951-81 854-4. Investment Incentives under Different Tax Laws 936-1. Growth in Major Sectors of Real GNP, 1978-82 1276-2. Real Household Income, Consumption, Saving, and

Residential Investment, 1978-82 1286-3. Labor Market Developments, 1978-82 1336-4. Changes in Wages and Compensation, 1978-82 1346-5. Productivity, Costs, and Prices in the Nonfarm Business

Sector, 1978-82 1356-6. Price Changes, 1978-82 1366-7. Funds Raised by the Nonfinancial Sector of the Econo-

my, 1978-82 1366-8. Components of Ml and M2, 1978-82 1416-9. Economic Outlook for 1983 143

6-10. Projections of Economic Goals, 1983-88 144Charts

2-1. Distribution of Unemployment by Age and Sex 322-2. Distribution of Unemployment by Family Status 332-3. Distribution of Unemployment by Race 342-4. Distribution of Unemployment by Reason 352-5. Distribution of Unemployment by Duration 363-1. Structural Changes in the Current Account Balance 553-2. Composition of Trade, 1980 573-3. Real Exchange Rates of Major Currencies Against the

Dollar 633-4. International Real Short-Term Interest Rate Differen-

tials 644-1. Measures of Capital Formation 804-2. International Comparison of Investment and Productiv-

ity Growth, 1971-80 824-3. Three-Month Treasury Bill Rate and Regulation Q,

Maximum Rate on Savings Accounts 906-1. Interest Rates 1256-2. Index of Leading Indicators and Real GNP 1266-3. Debt Burden Ratio 1296-4. Real Inventory/Sales Ratio and Industrial Production 1316-5. Nominal and Real 3-Month Treasury Bill Yield 138

16

Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 23: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

CHAPTER 1

From Recession to Recovery andGrowth

THE MAJOR ECONOMIC ACHIEVEMENT OF 1982 was a dra-matic reduction of inflation to its lowest rate in a decade. The 4.6percent increase in the gross national product (GNP) implicit pricedeflator between the fourth quarters of 1981 and 1982 was less thanhalf the 10.2 percent rate of increase between the fourth quarters of1979 and 1980. This decline in inflation has moderated the earlierwidespread fears that inflation would accelerate. While some of thisimprovement in inflation was transitory, reflecting such special fac-tors as the appreciation of the exchange value of the dollar, the larg-est share was almost certainly due to a decline in the underlying rateof inflation. The reduced rate of inflation is a major step toward theAdministration's goals of full employment, healthy economic growth,and price stability.

The progress made in reducing inflation, however, was accompa-nied by a painful slowdown of the economy. Beginning in July 1981,the Nation suffered the second of two back-to-back recessions thatbrought the unemployment rate to 10.8 percent in December 1982.At that time, approximately 5 million more people were unemployedthan in January 1980, when the first of the two recessions began.

The increase in long-term unemployment poses a particularlysevere problem. In January 1980, about 550,000 people had beenunemployed for more than 6 months. In December 1982 there weremore than four times as many. Long-term unemployment is particu-larly serious in that it causes substantial financial hardship and is as-sociated with a loss of job skills that may reduce future income sig-nificantly.

Some temporary decline in real economic activity was probably un-avoidable in the process of reversing the upward trend of inflation.The United States entered the 1980s with a high rate of inflation andwith widespread public expectations that the rate would remain high,and perhaps increase. As high inflation persisted, it became embed-ded in the plans and contracts of firms and workers, and lowering itinvolved a painful process. The decline of real GNP since early 1981

17Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 24: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

was in large part the price the United States paid for failing to con-trol inflation in the late 1970s.

LEGACIES OF THE 1970s

In the 1960s, many economists believed that the Federal Govern-ment could keep unemployment down permanently by accepting ahigher rate of inflation. Steady rises in productivity and living stand-ards were taken for granted. During the 1970s these views proved tobe incorrect. By the closing years of the 1970s, both the unemploy-ment rate and the inflation rate were higher than they had been inthe 1960s, and the rate of productivity growth was lower.

Why did unemployment, productivity growth, and inflation allworsen in the 1970s? These developments occurred in part becauseof factors outside the government's control, such as changes in thesize and composition of the work force and rising world energyprices. But the economy also suffered from long-standing govern-ment policies that exacerbated inflation and distorted the incentivesto work, save, and invest.

RISING UNEMPLOYMENT

Total employment grew rapidly in the 1970s but so did the rate ofunemployment. The civilian labor force participation rate rose from60.4 percent of the population in 1970 to 63.8 percent in 1980. Theunemployment rate averaged 5.4 percent in the first half of the1970s, greater than the 4.8 percent average of the 1960s. The reces-sion of 1975 took the unemployment rate to a monthly high of 9.0percent. Unemployment then declined to a monthly low of 5.6 per-cent in 1979, only to begin rising again to a peak of 7.8 percent inJuly 1980.

In addition to cyclical fluctuations in the economy, a number ofstructural factors contributed to the rise in the unemployment rateover the decade. These included the changing demographic structureof the labor force, the increased number of workers dislocated bychanges in technology and international competitiveness, and thework registration requirements in a number of government welfareprograms.

A more detailed analysis of unemployment and the labor marketconsequences of macroeconomic policy is presented in Chapter 2.

DECLINING PRODUCTIVITY GROWTH

From 1960 to 1970, real output per hour in the private sector roseat an annual rate of 3.0 percent; from 1970 to 1980 it rose at a rateof only 1.4 percent. Labor productivity growth would probably have

18

Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 25: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

slowed somewhat in the 1970s regardless of the policies adopted.The sharp increases in the price of oil caused by supply disruptionsin 1974 and 1979 reduced productivity growth as firms substitutedcapital and labor for energy. Furthermore, as the post-World War IIbaby-boom generation entered the labor force and the percentage ofworking-age women seeking employment rose, the proportion of lessexperienced workers increased, further depressing productivity.

The slowdown in productivity growth was, however, exacerbatedby a decline in rates of capital formation. Net investment in fixedbusiness capital fell from 3.5 percent of GNP in the 1960s to 3.0 per-cent in the 1970s, and the rate of growth of capital per worker felleven more sharply, from 3.2 percent per year in the 1960s to only1.3 percent in the 1970s. The interaction of the tax system with infla-tion played an important role in reducing the rate of capital forma-tion.

Another cause of slow productivity growth was an increase in gov-ernment regulation. In some sectors of the economy, Federal regula-tions directly reduced labor productivity; in others, they diverted cap-ital investment away from the improvement of productivity into thesatisfaction of regulatory requirements. Some of these regulationsserved useful purposes, but some imposed economic costs that ex-ceeded their economic benefits.

The tax changes proposed by the Administration and enacted bythe Congress in 1981 and 1982 were designed to lead to fastergrowth and higher productivity by stimulating saving, investment,and individual effort. In addition, the Administration's policy of re-ducing government regulation is intended to enhance the efficiencyof individual markets and thereby increase total production.

RISING INFLATION

Of all the economic problems that this Administration inheritedwhen it came to office in 1981, the most urgent was the problem ofrising prices. Double-digit inflation had created serious economic dis-tortions. An equally serious concern was that the trend rate of infla-tion was rising over time.

From 1960 to 1970, the GNP deflator rose at an average rate of3.0 percent per year. Between 1970 and 1973, the average rate of in-flation by this measure was 5.3 percent. Then, aggravated by thesharp jump in world oil prices and other special factors, inflationreached 10.2 percent during 1974, but by 1976 it was down to 4.7percent. In the next 4 years, which included the second oil priceshock in 1979, inflation increased continually until it reached 10.2percent again in 1980.

19

Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 26: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

Over short periods of time a variety of factors influence the rate ofinflation. One important factor in the 1970s was supply-determinedchanges in commodity prices resulting from fluctuations in harvestsand disruptions in the supply of foreign oil. Another important factorwas the increasing level of expected inflation. Once the expectationof continuing inflation has become firmly entrenched, prices andwages may continue to rise even in the face of declining demand, andthe cost of reducing inflation may increase.

These factors, however, only affect the rate of inflation for a limit-ed time. The popular axiom that attributes inflation to "too muchmoney chasing too few goods" reflects a basic truth: it is difficult toimagine a sustained inflation that is not supported by excessivemoney growth. Over long periods of time, an additional percentagepoint in the rate of growth of the money stock will tend to producean additional percentage point of growth of nominal GNP, that is,GNP measured at current prices. If the rate of real GNP growth doesnot change, the entire increase in nominal GNP growth will take theform of increased inflation. Although the relations between moneygrowth, nominal GNP growth, and inflation are considerably morevariable over shorter periods than they are in the long run, theimpact of money growth on nominal income and inflation remainspowerful even in the short run.

THE RECESSION

The substantial decline in the rate of growth of the Ml measure ofmoney that occurred between the end of 1980 and the end of 1981was a principal contributor to the decline in nominal income growthin 1982, a decline compounded by a marked change in the velocity ofmoney. Part of the slowdown in nominal GNP growth took the formof lower inflation, and part of it took the form of a decline in realeconomic activity.

The adverse short-run effect of a slowdown in nominal GNP onreal economic activity is a basic feature of our economy that reflectsthe stickiness of wages and prices in most markets. If prices andwages were perfectly flexible, reduced nominal GNP growth wouldtranslate immediately and painlessly into reduced inflation. However,not all wages and prices are flexible. When expectations of future in-flation are deeply embedded, prices and wages may continue to risefor some time despite excess supplies of goods and labor. A changein inflationary expectations, together with the direct pressures exert-ed by excess supplies, eventually causes prices and wages to adjust tonew market-clearing levels. But until that occurs a slowdown in nomi-

20

Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 27: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

nal GNP growth is reflected in a slowing of real growth as well as ina slowing of inflation.

The severity of the recession in 1982 reflected a combination ofcircumstances which caused a very sharp decline in nominal GNPgrowth between 1981 and 1982. Between the fourth quarter of 1980and the fourth quarter of 1981, nominal GNP grew at a rate of 9.6percent; in contrast, nominal GNP rose only 3.3 percent last year.About one-third of the 6.3 percentage point drop in nominal GNPgrowth between 1981 and 1982 was reflected in a 1.9 percentagepoint decline in the real GNP growth rate—from an increase of 0.7percent in 1981 to a decline of 1.2 percent in 1982. The reduction ininflation accounted for the remaining two-thirds of the drop in nomi-nal GNP.

Although some slowdown in nominal GNP growth and in inflationin 1982 was a predictable effect of tighter monetary policies, the verysharp decline actually experienced did not reflect a decrease in thegrowth of the monetary aggregates. Rather the exceptional severityof the slowdown in nominal GNP growth can be traced to a combina-tion of factors that led to an unusually sharp decline in the velocityof money, that is, in the ratio of GNP to the money stock.

THE DECLINE IN VELOCITY

The 1982 decline in the velocity of money—as measured by the ve-locity of either the Ml or M2 monetary aggregates—was historicallyatypical. Between 1961 and 1981, Ml velocity rose at an averageannual rate of 3.2 percent, while the velocity of M2 remained essen-tially constant, rising at an average annual rate of 0.2 percent. Incontrast, in 1982 the velocity of Ml fell 4.9 percent and M2 velocityfell 6.0 percent on a fourth quarter to fourth quarter basis. By eithermeasure, the growth of nominal GNP was well below the rate thatwould have prevailed if the Ml or M2 measures of velocity hadgrown at their average historic rates. These velocity declines were thelargest since 1959, the earliest year for which the Federal Reservehas published data on the monetary aggregates under the definitionscurrently in use.

If these velocity shifts had not occurred, the rise in nominal GNPin 1982 would have been between 10 and 12 percent. While it is un-certain how this hypothetical change would have been distributed be-tween real activity and inflation, it is likely that real GNP would haveincreased enough to have ended the recession sometime before thefinal quarter of 1982.

Although the cause of the large velocity shift that occurred in 1982is not fully understood, it is likely that major changes in asset de-mands of individuals and businesses played an important role. More

21

Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 28: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

precisely, an increase in the demand for Ml or M2 at any incomelevel decreases the corresponding velocity of money. Such shifts mayoccur because of regulatory changes that provide new financial op-portunities—like the introduction of nationwide interest-bearing ne-gotiable order of withdrawal (NOW) accounts—or because ofchanges in asset preferences—like the increased demand for moneymarket mutual funds instead of long-term securities.

The uncertain cause of the recent decline in velocity is characteris-tic of the problems that the Federal Reserve has encountered in ap-plying the new monetary control procedures that it adopted in Octo-ber 1979. Changes in banking regulations and the development ofnew financial instruments by the private sector have compelled theFederal Reserve to make frequent revisions to the definitions of themonetary aggregates and reassessments of their economic impacts. In1980 a complete revision of the definitions of the monetary aggre-gates was introduced. In the next year, a "shift adjusted" Ml-B wasdefined in an effort to adjust for shifts from savings deposits toNOW accounts. Most recently, in 1982 and early 1983, definitionalchanges in Ml and M2 were required to deal with the advent of thenew money market deposit account—which was added to M2—andthe new super NOW account—which was added to Ml.

The Federal Reserve was aware throughout 1981 and 1982 that therelationship between the monetary aggregates and economic activitywas in a state of flux, and that future velocity trends were uncertain.While sustained but unanticipated shifts in velocity growth can beidentified in hindsight, it is nearly impossible to know at the timethey occur whether unusual quarter-to-quarter changes in velocitywill continue or reverse themselves. The presumption, on the basisof past experience, is that most velocity changes are temporary.Thus, increasing the rate of money growth in response to temporarydeclines in velocity runs the risk of providing excessive liquidity andincreasing inflation, while a failure to recognize a continuing shift inliquidity preference or velocity runs the risk of providing inadequateliquidity and reducing real GNP. Given the circumstances of 1982,the somewhat greater growth in the monetary aggregates than initial-ly intended by the Federal Reserve appeared to be an appropriateway to balance those risks.

ECONOMIC RECOVERY

The Administration believes that the American economy will soonrecover from the recession that began in July 1981. The forecast pre-sented in Chapter 6 projects that economic recovery will begin in1983, marking the start of a long period of sustained growth with low

22

Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 29: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

inflation. More specifically, the Administration forecasts that realGNP will rise 3.1 percent from the fourth quarter of 1982 to thefourth quarter of 1983, and that nominal GNP will rise 8.8 percent.Realization of the economic forecast and steady noninflationarygrowth in subsequent years will depend upon the implementation ofappropriate monetary and fiscal policies.

IMPLEMENTING A STABLE MONETARY POLICY

The Administration has repeatedly indicated that the fundamentalguiding principle of monetary policy in an inflationary economyshould be a gradual reduction in the rate of growth of the moneystock until the rate is consistent with price stability. This principle isconsistent with the general approach enunciated in recent years bythe independent Federal Reserve.

The basic challenge for monetary policy at present is to balancethe principle of stable money growth with the need to take accountof changing asset preferences that may alter the velocity of money.While maintaining the approach of setting specified target ranges formoney growth, the Federal Reserve will also need to use its judg-ment to adjust money growth rates and the corresponding targets toreflect lasting changes in asset demands.

The extent to which a policy of predetermined money growth ratesis appropriate depends on the stability and predictability of the veloc-ity of money. Strictly speaking, inflexible monetary growth rates areappropriate only if the trend in income velocity is constant or haspurely random disturbances. The advisability of a strict policy ruledepends on the degree of predictability of velocity disturbances. Themore predictable velocity disturbances are, the more they can beoffset by countervailing shifts in the money stock. The less predict-able they are, the more likely it is that any attempt at countervailingshifts in the money stock will add to the overall volatility of nominalGNP.

The task of making appropriate adjustments to the monetary tar-gets is enormously difficult. An excessive increase in the money stockwill cause a period of increased inflation while an insufficient in-crease in the money stock will not provide adequate liquidity for theneeds of an expanding economy. Eventually such deviations are self-correcting, but only after a period of accelerating inflation or weakeconomic performance.

One possible way to avoid such periods is to use the obseryed be-havior of nominal GNP to guide a gradual recalibration of the mone-tary growth targets, recognizing that there are uncertain lags betweenmoney stock changes and the resulting changes in nominal GNP.Basing the recalibration of monetary targets on nominal GNP is con-

23Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 30: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

sistent with the basic principle of pursuing a stable monetary policy.Indeed, it is the relatively stable long-run relationship between themonetary aggregates and nominal GNP that justifies the Federal Re-serve's policy of setting targets for the growth of Ml and M2. Thisimplies that caution in revising these targets is appropriate. The prin-ciple of targeting money growth rates is not an end in itself but onlya means of achieving control of nominal GNP.

Disadvantages of Interest Rate Targeting

From World War II until the mid-1970s the Federal Reserve, likemost central banks, conducted monetary policy by focusing on inter-est rates and money market conditions. Over the 1970s, increasingemphasis was given to targeting monetary aggregates. More recently,under new procedures first adopted in October 1979, the FederalReserve has given greater emphasis to keeping the growth of themonetary aggregates within pre-announced target ranges, eventhough it was recognized that this could result in greater variations ininterest rates.

Since 1979 both long-term and short-term interest rates haveproven more variable than in the past. Many critics attribute thischange to the increased emphasis on monetary targets and the levelof bank reserves as the operational basis for monetary policy. Al-though some have argued that the Federal Reserve should dropmonetary targeting in favor of targeting interest rates, the Adminis-tration believes strongly that targeting interest rates, either nominalor real, would prove to be a serious error.

The nominal rate of interest is a very unreliable indicator of thethrust of monetary policy. The financial variable important to bor-rowers and lenders is not the nominal interest rate but a real interestrate determined by subtracting the rate of inflation from the nominalinterest rate. Borrowers and lenders take into account the fact thatthe dollars repaid when a loan matures do not have the same pur-chasing power as the dollars originally borrowed. When inflation isexpected, lenders insist that the nominal rate of interest include apremium to compensate them for the declining purchasing power ofthe dollar, and borrowers are willing to pay such a premium.

Although the real interest rate is more closely linked to borrowingand lending decisions than the nominal interest rate, the real interestrate is also not an appropriate target for monetary policy. There areseveral basic reasons for rejecting the policy of real interest rate tar-geting.

First, real interest rate targeting might well lead to an inflationarymonetary policy. Any given real interest rate is compatible with awide range of inflation rates. For example, a real interest rate of 2percent could occur with a 5 percent nominal rate and a 3 percent

24

Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 31: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

inflation rate, or with a 12 percent nominal rate and a 10 percent in-flation rate. Thus, achieving a real interest rate target would provideno assurance of price stability.

Second, the real interest rate that governs economic behavior isthe difference between the nominal interest rate and the expected rateof inflation. Since expectations of inflation are not observable, themonetary authorities cannot as a practical matter measure or targetthe expected real interest rate.

A third reason why real interest rate targeting is not feasible is thatthe relevant interest rate is not merely the real rate but the real net-of-tax interest rate. Because net-of-tax rates of interest vary amongindividuals and businesses in different tax positions, there is no wayfor the monetary authorities to determine the relevant average realnet-of-tax interest rate in financial markets. Compounding the prob-lem further, different rates of inflation can result in very differentnet-of-tax real interest rates corresponding to the same pretax realinterest rate, even for a particular taxpayer. For example, a taxpayerwith a marginal tax rate of 40 percent earns a real net-of-tax returnof 1 percent if he receives a nominal rate of 10 percent and there is 5percent inflation; that same taxpayer earns a real net-of-tax return of— 2 percent if he receives the same real return of 5 percent but thereis zero inflation. Similarly, the real interest rate and the real net-of-tax interest rate can easily move in opposite directions when the in-flation rate changes.

There is a final and even more fundamental reason for rejectingreal interest rate targeting. Even if the expected real interest ratewere measurable, there would remain the virtually impossible task ofdetermining what level of that interest rate is actually compatiblewith noninflationary growth. The problem of identifying the equilib-rium interest rate is made even more difficult by the interaction oftax rules and inflation.Monetary Rules and Discretion

There is no simple solution to the problem of guiding monetarypolicy in a time of rapid institutional change. Interest rate targeting,as shown above, is not a desirable approach. Instead, the monetaryauthorities should be guided by the principle of keeping moneygrowth within a prespecified target range while adjusting those tar-gets when a careful consideration of the evidence indicates that sus-tained shifts in asset demands have occurred.

The combination of monetary rules and discretion must be appliedwith great care and judgment. The observance of rules must notbecome a doctrinaire attachment to arbitrary standards, and the exer-cise of discretion must not degenerate into unprincipled fine tuning.Instead, the monetary rules must be understood as a way of achiev-

25Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 32: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

ing an appropriate long-run path for the economy. The exercise ofdiscretion in recalibrating monetary targets must be subject to thediscipline that such revisions are ultimately compatible with the de-sired long-run path of nominal GNP. With rules and discretion bal-anced in this way, monetary policy can support a sound recovery thatleads to sustained and noninflationary growth.

THE BUDGET DEFICIT

The Federal budget deficit has become a major problem for theAmerican economy. Without the savings proposed by the Administra-tion in its budget plan for the years 1984 through 1988, the UnitedStates is forecasted to experience a series of deficits that would con-sume more than 6 percent of GNP in each of the next 6 years. Al-though budget deficits have been a nearly constant feature of our Na-tion's economic life for the past two decades, the prospective budgetdeficits that would result if no legislative actions were taken toreduce them would be far larger than those previously experiencedin the postwar period. The economic effects of such deficits arebeyond our previous experience.

The fiscal 1983 deficit is partially a result of the recession. Any re-cession reduces tax collections and increases outlays for unemploy-ment benefits, retirement benefits, and certain other activities. A rea-sonable approximation is that the change in economic output associ-ated with a percentage point change in the unemployment rate wouldraise the fiscal 1983 deficit by about $25 billion. The Administrationforecasts that the unemployment rate for fiscal 1983 will average 10.7percent. If the unemployment rate were 6.5 percent instead, thebudget deficit would be about half the $208 billion now forecast forfiscal 1983. The cyclical component represents a similarly large shareof the fiscal 1984 deficit.

Economic recovery and growth in the years ahead will reduce thecyclical component of the deficit. The Administration's forecast pro-jects a decline in the unemployment rate by 4 percentage points be-tween fiscal 1983 and fiscal 1988, leaving only a negligible cyclicalcomponent in the fiscal 1988 budget. Unless the Administration'sproposals are enacted, a current services budget deficit of $300 bil-lion is forecasted to materialize.

To see the origin of these large deficits, it is useful to compare thecomponents of the 1988 current services budget with the same com-ponents for 1970. Between those years, taxes decline very slightly asa percentage of GNP, from 19.9 percent in 1970 to 18.9 percent in1988. The defense share of GNP remains unchanged at 8.1 percentof GNP in both years. By contrast, nondefense activities excluding in-terest rise from 10.6 percent of GNP in 1970 to 13.6 percent in

26Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 33: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

1988, an increase of about one-fourth. In addition, the accumulationof previous deficits raise the net interest component of the budgetdeficit from 1.5 percent of GNP to 3.4 percent of GNP.

Deficits and Long-Term Growth

A succession of large budget deficits is likely to reduce substantial-ly the rate of capital formation. The government's borrowing to fi-nance such deficits would compete directly with borrowing by privatebusinesses and households. With a limited amount of savings availa-ble for borrowing, high budget deficits would cause interest rates torise until private demand for funds was reduced to the amount thatremained after the government's borrowing needs were satisfied.

The magnitude of the potential crowding out of private investmentis immense. During the past two decades, the net saving of house-holds and businesses totaled only about 7 percent of GNP. Prospec-tive deficits of more than 6 percent of GNP would represent virtuallyall of current net saving. Even though existing saving would be aug-mented by borrowing from abroad and by some increase in the pri-vate saving rate, the reduced rate of capital formation would be verysubstantial.

A lower rate of capital formation would have adverse consequencesbecause the accumulation of capital is a key determinant of future in-creases in productivity and economic growth and therefore of higherreal wages and standards of living. Further reductions in the rate ofcapital formation would be particularly unfortunate because, as Chap-ter 4 discusses in detail, the U.S. rate of capital formation has beenundesirably low for several decades. In the years since 1960, net pri-vate investment has averaged only 6 percent of GNP, significantlyless than the rate in most major industrial countries. Moreover, sincehalf of this 6 percent has gone into housing, only about 3 percent ofGNP has been available for productivity-increasing investments inplant and equipment. Deficits of the level implied by the currentservices budget could reduce the rate of net investment in plant andequipment enough to preclude any increase in the amount of capitalper worker. If this occurred, the process of increasing capital intensi-ty would cease to contribute to rising productivity and real wages.

Deficits and the Recovery

The adverse effects of large budget deficits are not limited to thedistant future. The deficits that would occur without the budget ac-tions proposed by the Administration could seriously affect thedegree to which various economic sectors share in the benefits of re-covery from the current recession. The crowding out of private in-vestment which would accompany large deficits could depress thelevel of output in the construction industries, the steel industry, the

27

Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 34: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

machinery and equipment industries, and industries that produceother durable goods.

In addition, large budget deficits raise the exchange value of thedollar relative to foreign currencies by attracting foreign capital tothe United States. This weakens the competitive position of U.S. ex-ports in the world economy and hurts those domestic industries thatcompete with imports from abroad. The nature and magnitude ofthis effect are discussed in Chapter 3 of this Report.

A "lopsided" recovery in which some sectors remained relativelydepressed might prove more fragile than a recovery which wasbroadly based. An increase in economic activity limited to some sec-tors and regions might result in greater upward pressure on pricesand wages at any given level of total output and employment thanwould be the case if there were balanced expansion among indus-tries. In addition, an unbalanced recovery would produce more infla-tion and less real growth, regardless of the rate of expansion ofnominal GNP.

The prospect of large budget deficits in the second half of thisdecade may also have an adverse effect on the prospects for recoveryin 1983. If the financial markets respond to expected future deficitsby keeping real long-term interest rates higher in 1983 than theywould otherwise be, the level of spending in 1983 on interest-sensi-tive purchases may remain depressed. Clear evidence of the willing-ness of the Administration and the Congress to reduce Federalbudget deficits substantially in the second half of the 1980s can playan important part in ensuring a healthy and balanced economic re-covery in the more immediate future.

28

Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 35: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

CHAPTER 2

The Dual Problems of Structural andCyclical Unemployment

UNEMPLOYMENT IS THE MOST SERIOUS ECONOMICPROBLEM now facing the United States. By December 1982 thenumber of unemployed had risen by more than 4 million since thebeginning of the recession in July 1981. The unemployment rate washigher in December 1982 than at any point since the Depression,with over 12 million persons counted as unemployed. Even after theeconomy recovers from the recent recession, it is likely that the un-employment rate will reach a plateau between 6 and 7 percent.

This chapter analyzes the two major types of unemployment: cycli-cal and structural. The high level of cyclical unemployment now pre-vailing in the United States is a major problem, but it should provetransitory. Only a healthy and sustained recovery from the recent re-cession can effectively diminish cyclical unemployment. Even afterfull recovery, however, a serious structural unemployment problemwill remain unless measures are taken to improve the functioning oflabor markets. Reducing structural unemployment will require attack-ing the special problems of young people and the long-term adultunemployed.

This chapter begins by describing the dimensions of the cyclicaland structural unemployment problems. It then examines the poten-tial of public employment programs and macroeconomic policies tolower cyclical unemployment. Finally, policies for reducing structuralunemployment are considered.

THE RECENT RECESSION

The unemployment rate in December 1982 stood at 10.8 percentof the civilian labor force. Since the recent period of economic slack thatbegan in January 1980, the unemployment rate has risen by 4.5 per-centage points. During the recent recession, which began in July1981, the unemployment rate rose by 3.6 percentage points.Historical experience suggests that the unemployment rate tends toincrease for several months after the level of production bottoms out

29Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 36: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

and it is possible that the unemployment rate will reach 11 percent atsome point during 1983.

Beyond those officially counted as unemployed, the recent reces-sion has prevented many Americans from working as much as theywould like. In December 1982 there were over two million personsinvoluntarily working part time. The Bureau of Labor Statistics alsoreported that there were over 1.8 million discouraged workers in De-cember. These are individuals who have given up looking for workbecause they believe they cannot find jobs.

Unemployment is often linked to economic hardship. While manyof the unemployed receive unemployment insurance and live in fami-lies that have other members who work, many unemployed individ-uals and their families suffer economic distress. Table 2-1 presentsinformation on the incomes of families in which the husband, wife, orhead of household experienced unemployment during 1981. (Datafor 1982 are not yet available.) Three types of families are distin-guished: (1) families in which both husband and wife worked, (2)families in which only the husband or male head worked, and (3)families in which only the wife or female head worked. For all of thefamily types, unemployment experienced by husband, wife, or headof household significantly lowered median family income. For exam-ple, single-earner families in which the husband (or male head) wasnever unemployed had a median income in 1981 of $25,000. In con-trast, the median income of similar families in which the male headexperienced 1 to 26 weeks of unemployment was $16,500. Familiesin which the male head was unemployed for more than 26 weeks hada median family income of $10,200.

TABLE 2-1.—Median family income by unemployment and family status, 1981 (current dollars)

Family status

Unemployment status of husband, wife,or head of household

Personnever

unemployed

Personunemployed

less than26 weeks

Personunemployedmore than26 weeks

Husband and wife both work

Only husband or male head works..

Only wife or female head works

$31,600

25,000

18,900

$23,000

16,500

15,200

$17,900

10,200

11,200

Source.- Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics.

The financial losses of the unemployed are not the only costs of aprolonged economic decline. Considerable anxiety and emotionaldistress is experienced by those who have lost their jobs or who fearthat they might lose their jobs in an economy with a decliningnumber of employment opportunities. Protracted unemployment is

30

Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 37: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

frequently associated with poor heafyh, psychological problems, andgradual erosion of job-related skills.

THE COMPOSITION OF CYCLICAL AND STRUCTURALUNEMPLOYMENT

The unemployment problem can be divided into two components,cyclical and structural unemployment. The term cyclical unemploymentis used to refer to the unemployment associated with cyclical down-turns in aggregate economic activity. The incremental unemploymentassociated with the recent recession would fall into this category. Theterm structural unemployment is used to refer to the unemployment thatremains even after cyclical recoveries in aggregate economic activity.

In large part, structural unemployment is a natural concomitant ofa dynamic economy with constantly changing patterns of demand.Labor markets are in constant flux, with people entering and leavingthe labor force, losing or quitting old jobs, and looking for and ac-quiring new jobs. Some amount of structural unemployment is aninevitable aspect of a large modern industrial economy such as ours. Itis important to realize that although expansionary macroeconomicpolicies cannot reduce structural unemployment permanently, certainmicroeconomic policy interventions can affect the ease and speed ofthe process that matches workers with jobs.

Some insight into the differences between cyclical and structuralunemployment can be obtained by comparing the characteristics ofthe unemployed in 1982 and in a period of low cyclical unemploy-ment. Since the unemployment rate in 1978 was 6.1 percent, close tomost observers' estimates of full employment, data from that yearwill be used to illustrate the characteristics of structural unemploy-ment. The next two sections examine the composition of the unem-ployed population in 1978 and 1982 in terms of demographic com-position and reasons for unemployment. A third section analyzes thedynamics of unemployment.

DEMOGRAPHIC COMPOSITION

Chart 2-1 provides information on the demographic compositionof the unemployed population in 1978 and in 1982. The chart showsthat young people under age 24 account for a substantial fraction ofunemployment both when the economy is weak and when it isstrong. Persons under 24 accounted for 49 percent of total unem-ployment during 1978 and 41 percent of unemployment in 1982.The decline in the share of youth unemployment reflected the largeincrease in unemployment among adult males in cyclically sensitivesectors of the economy, such as manufacturing.

31Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 38: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

Chart 2 -1

Distribution of Unemployment by Age and Sex

ADULT MALES25 AND OVER

25.2% ADULT MALES25 AND OVER

34.5%

ADULT FEMALES,25 AND OVER

24.6%

1978 1982

NOTE.—DATA RELATE TO PERSONS 16 YEARS AND OVER.

SOURCE: DEPARTMENT OF LABOR.

A pattern that appears in Chart 2-2 is the cyclical sensitivity of un-employment among those who provide the primary financial supportfor a family. The share of unemployment among husbands, wives,and family heads in families without a working spouse rose from 20percent in 1978 to 24 percent in 1982. Because unemployment un-doubtedly imposes its greatest hardship when it hits a worker uponwhom others depend for their sole support, this increase is particu-larly distressing.

A continuing tragedy in both good and bad times is the very highrates of unemployment of blacks and other minorities. This group ac-counts for a share of unemployment that is greatly disproportionateto its share of the labor force. While blacks and other minoritiescomprised 13 percent of the labor force in 1982, they comprised ap-proximately 23 percent of the unemployed. Chart 2-3, shows that therecent recession raised the unemployment rate of blacks and otherminorities proportionally less than that of the rest of the population.

However, black and other minority unemployment rates increasedsharply during the recession and continue to greatly exceed those ofthe entire population. The unemployment rate for black and otherminority adult males was 16.2 percent in 1982, compared to 7.8 per-cent for white males. For black and other minority teenagers the un-employment rate was 43.9 percent, compared to 20.4 percent forwhite teenagers.

32Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 39: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

Chart 2-2

Distribution of Unemployment by Family StatusHUSBANDS,

SPOUSE WORKING7.8%

HUSBANDS.SPOUSE WORKING

11.5%

1978 1982

'HUSBANDS AND WIVES WHOSE SPOUSE DOES NOT WORK AND PERSONS WHO MAINTAINFAMILIES.

NOTE.^DATA RELATE TO PERSONS 16 YEARS AND OVER.

SOURCE: DEPARTMENT OF LABOR.

REASONS FOR UNEMPLOYMENT

Analyzing the problem of unemployment requires understandingthe process by which people become unemployed. The unemployedare often described in stereotyped terms as the victims of permanentlayoffs by firms that are either partially or fully shutting down. Evenduring the recent recession, however, this characterization applied toless than half of the unemployed.

As part of the monthly Current Population Survey, the unem-ployed are asked a number of questions designed to elicit the reasonsfor their unemployment. The answers to these questions permit abreakdown of the unemployed into five groups: (1) persons laid offwho can expect to return to the same job; (2) persons who have lostjobs to which they cannot expect to return; (3) persons who havequit their jobs; (4) reentrants who are returning to the labor forceafter a spell of neither working nor looking for work; and (5) newentrants who have never worked at a full-time job before but are nowseeking employment.

Chart 2-4 shows that the distribution of the unemployed amongthese categories is very sensitive to cyclical conditions. The share ofpersons who have lost their jobs, either temporarily or permanently,

33Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 40: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

Chart 2-3

Distribution of Unemployment by Race

1978 1982

NOTE.—DATA RELATE TO PERSONS 16 YEARS AND OVER.

SOURCE: DEPARTMENT OF LABOR.

is particularly sensitive, rising from 42 percent in 1978 to 59 percentin 1982. Over this period the number of job losers on temporarylayoff tripled and the number of permanent job losers more thandoubled. The decline in alternative employment opportunities result-ed in a decline in the share of unemployment traceable to workersleaving their jobs voluntarily during the recession—from 14 percentin 1978 to 8 percent in 1982. Finally, because the number of laborforce entrants and reentrants is relatively constant, their share intotal unemployment declined somewhat during the recession.

The data on reasons for unemployment indicate a major differencebetween cyclical and structural unemployment. Almost 90 percent ofthe increase in unemployment during cyclical downturns involves in-creases in job losses and layoffs, as firms respond to declines indemand for their products. On the other hand, almost 60 percent ofstructural unemployment is comprised of voluntary job leavers, laborforce entrants, and reentrants. The remainder are job losers. As de-scribed below, the very different causes of cyclical and structural un-employment suggest that different policy responses are appropriate.

34Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 41: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

Chart 2-4

Distribution of Unemployment By Reason

1978 1982

NOTE.—DATA RELATE TO PERSONS 16 YEARS AND OVER.

SOURCE: DEPARTMENT OF LABOR.

THE DYNAMICS OF UNEMPLOYMENT

An essential feature of the unemployment problem is its dynamiccharacter. The appropriate design of policies to reduce unemploy-ment depends on whether most of the unemployed are out of workfor a long time and must wait for an economic upturn to find jobs orwhether they are a group whose membership changes rapidly, evenduring recessions.

The principal source of information on the duration of unemploy-ment is the monthly Current Population Survey, which asks personswho report themselves as unemployed to report how long they havebeen unemployed. Chart 2-5 presents information on the duration ofunemployment in 1978 and 1982. The clearest difference betweencyclical and structural unemployment emerges in the incidence oflong-term unemployment. In 1982 the number of unemployed indi-viduals who reported that they had been out of work for 6 or moremonths was almost three times the corresponding number in 1978,when the economy was operating without significant cyclical unem-ployment.

While the incidence of long-term unemployment increases sharplyduring recessions, it is important to recognize that many of the un-

35

Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 42: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

Chart 2-5

Distribution of Unemployment by Duration

1978 1982

NOTE.—DATA RELATE TO PERSONS 16 YEARS AND OVER.

SOURCE: DEPARTMENT OF LABOR.

employed find jobs or withdraw from the labor force relatively quick-ly. Of all the persons who became unemployed in September 1982,over 45 percent were no longer unemployed by October, and over65 percent were no longer unemployed by November. However, evi-dence on the duration of unemployment is not purely indicative ofthe ease or difficulty with which persons find jobs since almost halfthe unemployed leave the labor force without finding jobs.

While most persons who become unemployed look for work onlybriefly, this group does not comprise a large part of the unemploy-ment problem. It is long-term unemployment that is of special con-cern. A recent study found that in 1978, more than 40 percent oftotal unemployment was due to the 15 percent of the unemployedpopulation who were out of work a total of 6 months or longerduring the year. This concentration of long-term unemploymentamong a relatively small group of the unemployed is particularly pro-nounced during cyclical downturns. Data on this subject are not yetavailable for 1982. During 1975, however, when the unemploymentrate was 8.5 percent, an estimated 52 percent of unemployment wasdue to the 22 percent of the unemployed population who were out ofwork more than 6 months.

36Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 43: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

These findings suggest several conclusions. First, even during re-cessions, most persons who become unemployed either find jobs orleave the labor force relatively quickly. Second, the unemploymentproblem is most serious for those who are unemployed for pro-longed stretches. Third, the incidence of long-term unemployment isvery sensitive to cyclical conditions, which suggests that it will dimin-ish as the economy recovers. Even after a recovery is well underway,however, a sizable fraction of total unemployment will involve pro-tracted joblessness. The needs of the long-term unemployed deservespecial recognition in the designing of policies to attack structuralunemployment.

COMBATING CYCLICAL UNEMPLOYMENT

High rates of cyclical unemployment, which the American economyis now experiencing, are largely a consequence of fluctuations in ag-gregate demand caused by macroeconomic policies and shocks to theeconomy. As described in Chapter 1, the historical experience of theUnited States and other countries suggests that disinflation is gener-ally associated with lost output and increased unemployment. Duringperiods of disinflation and recession, the measures available toreduce the pain of the transition from accelerating inflation to pricestability are limited. Greater fiscal or monetary stimulus might in-crease employment, but only at the risk of igniting inflation. Chapter1 describes the principles that the Administration feels govern soundmacroeconomic policies.

THE LIMITS OF MACROECONOMIC POLICY

The only way to reduce current high levels of cyclical unemploy-ment is for the United States to achieve a sound recovery from therecent recession. Avoiding future recurrences of high cyclical unem-ployment requires avoiding an expansion so rapid as to lead to rapid-ly increasing inflation. Historical experience suggests that the changein the rate of inflation depends both on the rate at which economicactivity is expanding and on the level of economic slack. If the slackin the economy declines too rapidly, or capacity utilization is held attoo high a level, inflation will tend to increase. The lower limit onunemployment below which inflation will tend to increase is referredto as the inflation threshold unemployment rate.

While it is not easy to pinpoint the inflation threshold unemploy-ment rate precisely, it probably lies between 6 and 7 percent. Econo-metric studies of historical data suggest that when unemployment isclose to 6 percent, the rate of inflation tends to accelerate. For exam-ple, during 1978 when the unemployment rate was 6.1 percent, infla-

37Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 44: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

tion as measured by percentage changes in the gross national prod-uct (GNP) deflator rose to 7.4 percent from 5.8 percent in 1977. Aneven larger increase occurred in 1979 when the unemployment rateaveraged 5.8 percent.

The Effect of Demographic Factors

There are a number of reasons to believe that the inflation thresh-old unemployment rate increased during the 1960s and 1970s. Manyeconomists believe that demographic factors may have contributed tothe increase. Persons with little labor market experience tend to havehigh rates of unemployment as they move from job to job in aneffort to obtain a desirable career position. In the last 15 years, thechildren of the baby boom have reached maturity thus raising sub-stantially the share of inexperienced workers in the labor force. Inaddition, women with little recent labor market experience have en-tered the labor force at an unprecedented rate during the last 15years. It has been estimated that if the labor force had the same de-mographic composition today as it had in 1958, the unemploymentrate would have been about three-quarters of a percentage pointlower in 1982. The share of young people in the labor force will de-cline sharply over the next decade due to a dramatic reduction in thebirth rate throughout the late 1960s and the 1970s. This providesgrounds for cautious optimism that the inflation threshold unemploy-ment rate will decline.

Social Insurance Programs

Other factors which have increased the inflation threshold unem-ployment rate in recent years are less likely to be reversed in thenext decade. These include the effects of social programs. While pro-viding important financial support to their recipients, these programsalso have both behavioral and reporting effects on the measured un-employment rate.

Behavioral effects of social insurance programs such as unemploy-ment insurance include the encouragement of firms to lay off work-ers and the inducement of persons to prolong their spells of unem-ployment. These effects are discussed in more detail below. Report-ing effects occur when programs induce persons to change reportingof their labor force status, without changing their behavior. For ex-ample, some experts believe that the Federal Supplemental Benefitsprogram instituted during the 1975 recession caused persons whootherwise would have withdrawn from the labor force to report thatthey were unemployed because of job search requirements. There issome evidence to suggest that the work registration requirements inthe food stamp and AFDC programs have had a similar effect.

38

Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 45: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

Wage Rigidity

A number of studies show that wages and prices are much morerigid now than prior to World War II, and that rigidity has increasedwithin the post-War period. Increased wage rigidity is likely to raisethe economy's inflation threshold level of unemployment, since lessflexible wages increase the inevitable unemployment associated withthe sectoral shocks which buffet the economy.

The reasons for this change are not well understood. A side effectof the provision of a "safety net" program is that employees maybecome more resistant to wage reductions, leading to increases inwage and price rigidity. To the extent that the two-earner family is aform of private "safety net" against the financial losses of unemploy-ment, the recent growth in the number of two-earner families mayalso have contributed to increasing wage rigidity in the United Statesover time.

Increasing Structural Change

A final factor that may have contributed to a rising inflation thresh-old unemployment rate is the increasing rapidity of structural changein the economy. This acceleration, which is in part caused by theeconomy's increasing sensitivity to events in the world economy, isevidenced by increasing dispersion across industries and localities inrates of unemployment. Because transfers of human and physical re-sources are costly and take time, increased unemployment is a con-comitant of structural change.

While the separate impacts of these factors—changing demograph-ic composition, larger social insurance programs, increased wage ri-gidity, and increased structural change—are difficult to quantify, it isreasonable to conclude that together they may have significantly in-creased the inflation threshold unemployment rate. Expansionary ma-croeconomic policies are unlikely to reverse the effects of thesechanges.

PUBLIC WORKS EMPLOYMENT PROGRAMS

Direct provision of public works jobs by the government is a politi-cally popular response to cyclical unemployment during recessions.Available evidence suggests, however, that public works programsadopted in past recessions proved counterproductive, and that the in-herent capability of public works programs to combat cyclical unem-ployment is limited.

The Timing of Public Works Expenditures

Public employment programs that produce useful goods or servicesgenerally take time to plan and implement. Therefore, such pro-grams often have their greatest effects on public employment long

39

Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 46: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

after an economic recovery has begun. For this reason, public em-ployment programs have sometimes exacerbated rather than mitigat-ed cyclical fluctuations in aggregate demand. A study of the Acceler-ated Public Works program enacted in September 1962 by the Con-gress to combat the high unemployment rate of the early 1960sfound that the number of jobs created by the program peaked inJune 1964, 37 months after the bottom of the recession. More recentexperience also confirms that lags in implementation are long. Arecent study by the Office of Management and Budget found that 90percent of the outlays for local public works projects designed tostimulate recovery from the 1974-75 recession occurred more than2J6 years after the trough of the recession. The lags in implementingpublic works programs result in their having destabilizing effects,since a large share of the resulting spending occurs during periods ofeconomic expansion.

The Effect of Federal Funding of Public Works on State Expenditures

Even when spending for these programs begins immediately afterthey are enacted, many public works projects do not yield a net in-crease in employment. Because of the long planning and implemen-tation lags, most of the projects available for immediate funding arethose that were planned before the recession began. Thus, Federalexpenditures on these projects often substitute for outlays that wouldhave taken place anyway.

A major effect of Federal public works expenditures may be toalter the timing of public works projects. The expectation of newpublic works programs may induce State and local governments todelay making outlays during the early stages of economic downturnsin the hope that they will receive Federal funds for projects they have"on the shelf/' The importance of this possibility is suggested by ex-periences with the Local Public Works Capital Development and In-vestment Act of 1976 and the Public Works Employment Act of1977, programs intended to spur recovery from the 1975 recession.Three characteristics of these programs may have created incentivesfor local governments to delay their own discretionary spending untilthey could see whether the Federal Government would pay theirentire bill: (1) projects were financed fully by the Federal Govern-ment; (2) grants were limited to quick-starting projects; and (3) therewas considerable uncertainty and lengthy delays in the process ofawarding money to State and local governments. One study foundthat State and local public works expenditures fell substantially inmid-1976 and decreased further between 1976 and 1977. It suggest-ed that this may have occurred because States and local governmentsdelayed projects in anticipation of funds becoming available underthe 1976 and 1977 public works programs. The study also suggested

40Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 47: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

that these measures may have caused the postponement of as muchas $22 billion in total government spending.

Crowding Out of Private Sector Employment

Another reason for discounting the efficacy of public works meas-ures is their adverse side effects on private employment. If publicworks outlays are financed by additional taxes, the income andspending of consumers are reduced, decreasing the number of jobsin the private economy. Alternatively, insofar as public works outlaysare financed by borrowing from the public, interest rates are raised,crowding out some forms of private spending and reducing privateemployment. The higher interest rates resulting from increased Fed-eral borrowing also discourage capital investments that help createfuture employment.

Benefits to Workers

An additional reason to discount the efficacy of accelerated publicworks projects is their limited value to participants. Most jobs incountercyclical public works projects are of extremely short durationand are unlikely to provide participants with lasting job skills. Underthe Public Works Impact Program, initiated in fiscal year 1972, theaverage duration of employment amounted to only 4.1 weeks. Almost60 percent of all employees worked 2 weeks or less. Data for thelocal public works programs initiated in 1976 and 1977 and de-scribed above, indicate that the average job lasted only 3.5 weeks.

Although public works programs are motivated by a desire to pro-vide jobs for the unemployed, very few jobs are actually filled by un-employed workers. Under the Public Works Impact Program, only 27percent of all jobs were filled by the previously unemployed. Underthe more recent public works programs of 1976 and 1977, it hasbeen estimated that only 12 percent of all jobs were filled by previ-ously unemployed workers.

COMBATING STRUCTURAL UNEMPLOYMENT

The preceding analysis suggests that it would be imprudent to usemacroeconomic policies to reduce the unemployment rate below itsinflation threshold level of 6 to 7 percent. Such an effort would in-crease inflation, and ultimately prove counterproductive as increasedinflation was followed by recession. This does not mean that unem-ployment rates in the 6 to 7 percent range are either inevitable ordesirable. The inflation threshold level of unemployment can be re-duced by policies that consider the special problems of two groups ofworkers: (1) young people, and (2) adults experiencing long-term un-employment. It can also be reduced by reforms of the unemployment

41

Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 48: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

insurance system, which, while providing valuable insurance, may in-crease the incidence of unemployment.

THE PROBLEM OF YOUTH UNEMPLOYMENT

At times of low cyclical unemployment, about half the unemployedare young people between the ages of 16 and 24. Close to one-fourthof all the unemployed are teenagers aged 16 to 19. While unemploy-ment clearly imposes hardships on youths, it has very different eco-nomic impacts than it does for adults. Many unemployed youths arein school and looking for part-time work. Most of this group, andmany other young people who have left school, are not economicallyindependent, but rather live at home and rely on their parents forfinancial support. Many other young people experience only brief pe-riods of unemployment as they move from one job to the next.

Table 2-2 provides information on the labor market activities ofyoung men and women aged 16 to 19 in October 1981, when theteenage unemployment rate was 24.1 percent. Data for 1982 are notyet available. As the table reveals, only 5 percent of all teenagerswere out of school and measured as unemployed (because they werelooking for work). A striking feature of the youth labor market is thelarge fraction of young people who are out of school but are neitherworking nor looking for work. Over 30 percent of female and 14 per-cent of male out-of-school teenagers were not in the labor force. Thefactors underlying this labor force withdrawal by young people arenot well understood. In some cases, young people may withdrawfrom the labor force because they are discouraged about their pros-pects for finding suitable employment. In other cases, labor forcewithdrawal may reflect a desire for leisure.

The observations about the dynamic character of unemploymentmade elsewhere in this chapter are especially true of young people.

TABLE 2-2.—Educational and labor market activities of youth aged 16 to 19, by sex, October 1981

Item Number(thousands)

Percent ofsubgroup

Percent ofpopulation

Number(thousands)

Percent ofsubgroup

Percent ofpopulation

Males Females

Total population

Enrolled in school..,

EmployedUnemployedNot in labor forceUnemployment rate (percent)..

Not enrolled in schoolEmployedUnemployedNot in labor forceUnemployment rate (percent)..

8,036

5,683

2,024424

3,23517.3

2,3531,585

434334

21.5

100.0

35.67.5

56.9

100.067.418.414.2

100.0

70.7

25.25.3

40.3

29.319.75.44.2

8,059

5,526

1,829429

3,26819.0

2,5331,340

417776

23.7

100.0

33.17.8

59.1

100.052.916.530.6

31.416.65.29.6

100.0

68.6

22.75.3

40.6

Source: Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics.

42Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 49: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

Most young people find jobs or leave the labor force fairly quickly. Itwas recently estimated that of those male teenagers who become un-employed in a given month only 42 percent remain unemployed inthe next month.

Youth unemployment is nevertheless a critical economic problem.A large part of the youth unemployment problem is traceable to thesmall group of teenagers who experience extensive unemployment.More than 52 percent of all unemployment experienced by teenagemales aged 16 to 19 in 1981 was due to the 4.4 percent of the maleteenage population of this group who were out of work for morethan 6 months during that year.

Evidence also suggests that certain teenagers who suffer extensiveunemployment earn lower wages later in life. The direction of causa-tion is very difficult to establish since persons with low skills maysimply fare poorly both early and late in life. However, the best evi-dence available suggests that poor labor market experiences early inlife cause reduced wages during adulthood. This suggests the impor-tance of developing policies to improve employment opportunitiesfor the long-term unemployed and to reduce job turnover.

Training, Unemployment, and the Minimum Wage

A major problem in the youth labor market is the dearth of*'career-oriented" employment opportunities. While people who par-ticipate in post-secondary schooling are generally subsidized by thepublic sector, public support of equivalent magnitude has not beenavailable for the post-high school training of youth who choose toenter the labor force after high school.

Employers may find it very difficult to offer such training becauseof the constraints imposed by minimum wage legislation. These lawsdiscourage employers from hiring unskilled workers at very lowwages and compensating them further by providing training. Thismay help explain very high job turnover among youths as they moverapidly in and out of "dead-end" jobs. Another consequence of mini-mum wage laws is that they prevent some young people from acquir-ing the training that would permit them to find steady, well-payingemployment as adults. Statistical studies provide evidence that mini-mum wages significantly depress the accumulation of valuable skillsand .resulting growth in earnings among youths who are paid theminimum wage. There is also evidence that the negative effects ofthe minimum wage on employment and training are concentrated

43Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 50: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

disproportionately among youths with the fewest labor market skills.Thus, although the stated purpose of the minimum wage is to reducepoverty, experience suggests that it may actually decrease the lifetimeearnings of some of the poor and thereby increase income inequality.

POLICIES TO REDUCE YOUTH UNEMPLOYMENT

Almost all observers agree that mitigating the problems of instabil-ity and high unemployment in the youth labor market requires in-creasing the availability of career-oriented employment and training.This can be accomplished through public support of training, mini-mum wage reforms, and employment tax credits.

The Job Training Partnership Act

The Job Training Partnership Act (JTPA) of 1982 represents amajor Federal initiative to reduce structural unemployment amongyouth and adults. The JTPA departs from previous Federal employ-ment training programs by establishing a formal partnership betweenprivate industry, the public sector, and vocational training institutionsfor the purposes of planning, designing, and providing federally fi-nanced training. Federal resources are targeted to individuals identi-fied as most in need: economically disadvantaged youth, low-skilledand chronically unemployed adults, and skilled workers who have lostjobs in declining industries and regions. The problems faced by thelatter group are discussed more fully later in this chapter.

The JTPA is intended to fill an important niche in the national em-ployment and training system by serving individuals who are unableto make use of job training provided by more traditional institutions:high schools, vocational-technical schools, community colleges, uni-versities, and employers. Federally funded training programs such asJTPA provide a second chance to youth and adults experiencingtrouble in the labor market. The JTPA is administered at the Stateand local level. This allows training programs to be tailored to theparticular needs of workers and employers in local labor markets.

Minimum Wage Reforms

The Administration will propose a summertime differential mini-mum wage for young people under the age of 22. Between May 1and September 30 of each year the minimum wage for this groupwould be reduced to $2.50 from $3.35. This measure would encour-age firms to hire young people, just out of school, and give them theexperience needed to compete effectively in the labor market. It willalso encourage employers to provide youth who remain in schoolwith valuable work experience during the summer months.

The Targeted Jobs Tax Credit

An alternative policy avenue for encouraging employment andtraining of young people is to provide tax credits or wage subsidies

44Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 51: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

to employers who hire youths. Tax credits are currently provided tofirms that employ economically disadvantaged youths, aged 18 to 24,under the Targeted Jobs Tax Credit program. The credits are alsotargeted to welfare recipients, and economically disadvantaged Viet-nam veterans, cooperative education students, handicapped persons,and ex-convicts.

The tax credit lasts for up to 2 full years. In the first year it isequal to 50 percent of an individual's earnings, up to a maximumcredit of $3,000. In the second year it is equal to 25 percent of earn-ings, up to a maximum credit of $1,500. Participation in the programhas been limited since its inception in 1979. This is an apparent con-sequence of administrative problems encountered by the agencies re-sponsible for determining program eligibility (especially the Job Serv-ice), reluctance on the part of eligible recipients to use the tax creditas a self-marketing tool, and employers' reluctance to let governmentprograms influence hiring decisions.

Recent legislation added a second component to the tax credit pro-gram by providing a tax credit for summer employment targeted ateconomically disadvantaged youths aged 16 and 17. The tax creditfor this group is quite large, equaling 85 percent of wages, up to atotal summer income of $3,000. The summer Targeted Jobs TaxCredit program, in effect, allows employers to hire eligible youths,who are paid the minimum wage for a net cost to the firms of 50cents an hour. The program will be in place for the first time duringthe summer of 1983.

A virtue of measures which subsidize employment and on-the-jobtraining for youth is that they counteract the large bias toward formalschooling over on-the-job training inherent in current policies. Inpart because of large public subsidies to higher education during thelast two decades, the percentage of young people, aged 18 to 24, en-rolled in higher education rose very sharply from 26 percent in 1963to 41 percent in 1975. This shift toward increased formal schoolingwas accompanied by a decline in the relative wages of college gradu-ates and high school graduates. The ratio of the average annual in-comes of college graduates to that of high school graduates, aged 25and over, fell from 1.53 in 1968 to 1.38 in 1978.LONG-TERM UNEMPLOYMENT AND STRUCTURAL CHANGE

An especially visible and serious component of the unemploymentproblem is composed of adults suffering protracted unemployment.At present, most long-term unemployment is a consequence of therecession and the resulting reduction in the demand for labor. But asdiscussed earlier in the chapter, long-term unemployment will remaina significant problem even after the economy recovers.

45Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 52: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

Structural Change and Economic Adjustment

A large part of long-term unemployment among adults can betraced to structural changes in the economy. An increasingly impor-tant source of structural change is the growing interdependence ofthe U.S. economy with that of the rest of the world. The share ofexport and import-competing industries in GNP has increased overthe last several decades, and many industries have consequently feltthe cold winds of economic change. By December 1982 the unem-ployment rate had reached 23.2 percent in the motor vehicle industryand 29.2 percent in the primary metals industry. Other industries, in-cluding mining, construction, and lumber, have also contracted rap-idly, leaving behind a significant number of long-term unemployed.These figures reflect both changes resulting from foreign competi-tion and the sharp declines in the demand for manufactured goodscaused by the recent recession. The gradual decline of the dollar inforeign exchange markets to historically prevailing levels, a drop inreal interest rates, and general economic recovery would contributeto easing the problems of troubled industries, as explained in Chap-ter 3. However, most observers believe that foreign competition willpresent persistent problems in some domestic industries even in thelong run.

In a number of these industries, significant adjustments will needto take place. If foreign firms can continue to produce goods at lowercosts than U.S. firms, either domestic production will contract, forc-ing workers to leave the affected industries, or workers will have toaccept constant or even declining real wages. The former option isparticularly painful in industries like automobiles and steel, whereworkers have become accustomed to high standards of living. Be-cause wages in these industries are substantially greater than wagesin other manufacturing industries, workers find it difficult to locatesuitable alternative jobs.

Programs which inhibit the transition of workers from declining in-dustries to growing industries would raise the level of structural un-employment in the economy. Included in this group are programswhich would provide financial assistance to industries without provid-ing incentives for employee relocation or wage and price flexibility.In a dynamic economy subject to the pressures of domestic and for-eign competition, our economic health depends critically on the abili-ty of workers and firms to respond quickly to changing economicconditions.Policies to Alleviate Long-term Unemployment

The centerpiece of Federal policy to alleviate long-term unemploy-ment is Title III of the new Job Training Partnership Act discussedearlier in the chapter. Title III established State-administered pro-grams of employment and training assistance for dislocated workers,

46Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 53: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

defined broadly to include individuals who have become unemployedas a result of plant closures, laid-off workers who are unlikely toreturn to their previous industry or occupation, and individuals expe-riencing long-term unemployment in occupations with limited em-ployment opportunities. Matching grants are provided to States onthe basis of their unemployment conditions. Title III authorizesStates to establish a wide variety of employment and training activi-ties, including job search assistance, job training, relocation assist-ance, and employment counseling. Individuals receiving Title III as-sistance may also receive unemployment compensation, if they areeligible.

The Administration in its 1984 budget has introduced two new ap-proaches to the problem of reducing long-term unemployment. First,it has proposed that Federal unemployment laws be amended topermit States to use a portion of the unemployment insurance taxesthey collect to support retraining and job search assistance for theirunemployed workers. Second, the Administration has proposed thatthe Federal Supplemental Compensation program be replaced whenit expires with a new temporary program that provides incentives forwork as well as compensation for long-term unemployment. As an al-ternative to added weeks of unemployment compensation, this pro-gram would give recipients the option of receiving assistance in se-curing work through a system of tax credits to employers. This willgive employers a significant incentive to hire the long-term unem-ployed.

THE EFFECTS OF UNEMPLOYMENT COMPENSATION

For more than 40 years, unemployment compensation has givenvaluable support to millions of unemployed workers and has pro-vided an important source of security to millions more who are em-ployed. Along with these beneficial consequences, however, the pres-ent structure of the unemployment insurance system has altered theincentives faced by employers in hiring and firing decisions and theincentives of unemployed workers to accept new employment oppor-tunities. As a result, unemployment compensation seems to have in-creased the incidence and duration of unemployment.

The current system of unemployment compensation produces twodistinct but related adverse incentive effects. First, for those who areunemployed it reduces the cost of unemployment, providing an in-centive for longer durations of unemployment. Second, currentmethods of financing unemployment insurance increase the incidenceof unemployment by increasing the size of seasonal and cyclical fluc-uations in unemployment and by making temporary jobs morecommon.

47Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 54: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

Incentives to Prolong Unemployment

Payments to the unemployed clearly raise the level of householdexpenditures that can be maintained when one or more family mem-bers are not working. Such payments reduce the economic pressureto find work immediately, encouraging a longer period of job searchduring which the unemployed worker hopes to find a more attractivejob than might otherwise be found. For some workers unemploymentinsurance replaces more than 70 percent of after-tax wages duringperiods of unemployment. Economic research indicates that there isa positive relationship between duration of job search and the levelof unemployment benefits.

Workers who take longer to find jobs because of unemploymentcompensation are in no sense "loafing" or "cheating." An unem-ployed person who does not expect to be recalled by his previousemployer can expect, on average, to find a better job the longer andmore carefully he looks. Unemployment insurance, by reducing thecost of additional weeks without work, encourages unemployed work-ers to continue searching for better employment opportunities.

Incentives for More Unstable Employment

A second avenue through which the unemployment insurancesystem, as currently financed, tends to increase the economy's rate ofstructural unemployment is by increasing seasonal and cyclical fluctu-ations in the demand for labor and the relative number of short-lived, casual jobs.

The effect of unemployment compensation is to offset the marketforces that would otherwise decrease, at least somewhat, the amountof unstable employment in the economy. Insofar as unemploymentcompensation provides a subsidy to unstable employment practices,it reduces the wage differential required to attract workers to season-al, cyclical, and temporary jobs. And because employers pay a rela-tively small premium for unstable employment practices under cur-rent methods of financing unemployment insurance, they have littleincentive to reduce this instability.

The current subsidy to unstable employment patterns would be re-duced if unemployment insurance were financed through a morecompletely experience-rated employer tax that more accurately re-flected the expected level of unemployment benefits to a firm's laid-off workers in the future. The theory of experience rating is clear: ifan employer pays the full cost of the unemployment benefits that hisformer employees receive, he will not have an incentive to make ex-cessive use of unstable employment practices. Recent statistical re-search demonstrates that there is, in fact, a strong positive relation-

48

Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 55: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

ship between incomplete experience rating and employment instabil-ity.

Most States use experience rating to some extent, in that some em-ployers contribute to the State unemployment compensation fundpartially on the basis of the unemployment experience of their ownemployees. The degree of experience rating is highly imperfect,however, for two reasons.

First, a significant share of benefits paid are not directly charged tofirms, but rather, are spread across all the firms in a State. These in-clude benefits paid to job leavers, benefits to employees of firms nolonger doing business in a State, and allowances for dependents. Ex-tended benefits, which are available in high unemployment States toworkers who have exhausted their regular unemployment insurance,are also not directly charged to employers.

Second, employer contributions are limited by minimum and maxi-mum tax rates. Firms stuck at the maximum or minimum tax rateswill find that their tax rates do not change even if the unemploymentexperience of their workers is altered. As a consequence they face re-duced economic incentives to smooth employment fluctuations.

One measure of the extent of experience rating is the proportionof benefits received that are not effectively charged to theformer employer. A value of 100 percent represents perfect experi-ence rating. A recent study of nine States over the period 1971-1978found that on average, less than 60 percent of total benefits were ex-perience rated, by this definition. The degee of experience rating fellto 47.5 percent during the 1975 recession and reached a high of 62.6percent in 1978, a year with relatively low unemployment.

The problem of imperfect experience rating has been partially rem-edied by a provision of the Tax Equity and Fiscal ResponsibilityAct of 1982 which raised the federally proscribed lower bound onState maximum unemployment insurance tax rates from 2.7 percentto 5.4 percent of employers' taxable payroll. Because of this change,fewer firms are likely to face the maximum tax rate.

CONCLUSIONS

The dual problems of cyclical and structural unemployment areboth extremely serious. Increased unemployment during cyclicaldownturns, and the high levels of unemployment that prevail evenafter the economy recovers, impose large costs on the unemployedand the economy as a whole. Fortunately, both can be ameliorated byprudent public policy. Sound macroeconomic policies will avoid re-currences of the rising inflation of the 1970s and subsequent in-

49Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 56: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

creases in cyclical unemployment. Policies directed at young peopleand the long-term unemployed, and reform of the unemployment in-surance system, can significantly reduce the level of structural unem-ployment.

50

Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 57: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

CHAPTER 3

The United States in the WorldEconomy: Strains on the System

DURING THE 1970s the world's market economies became moreintegrated with each other than ever before. Exports and imports asa share of gross national product (GNP) reached record levels formost industrial countries, while international lending and direct for-eign investment grew even faster than world trade. This closer link-age of economies was mutually beneficial. It allowed producers ineach country to take greater advantage of their country's special re-sources and knowledge, and to take advantage of economies of scale.At the same time, it allowed each country to consume a wider varietyof products, at lower costs, than it could produce itself.

Underlying the growth in world trade and investment was a pro-gressive reduction of barriers to trade. The postwar period wasmarked by a series of agreements to liberalize trade: both multilater-al, like the Kennedy Round, and bilateral, like the Canada-U.S. autopact.

In spite of its huge benefits, however, this liberalized tradingsystem is now in serious danger. Within the United States, demandsfor protection against imports and for export subsidies have grownas a combination of structural changes, sectoral problems, and short-run macroeconomic developments has led to a perception that weare becoming uncompetitive in world markets. In Europe, a growingstructural unemployment problem, aggravated by the recession, hasincreased protectionist pressures. In the developing countries a fi-nancial crisis threatens the integration of capital markets and is push-ing many countries back toward the exchange controls and import re-strictions they had begun to dismantle.

These problems must not be allowed to disrupt world trade. If thesystem comes apart—if the world's nations allow themselves to becaught up in a spiral of retaliatory trade restrictions—a long timemay pass before the pieces are put back together.

This chapter reviews the strains on the international economicsystem and the policies by which the United States is attempting toovercome them. It is divided into four sections. The first section dis-cusses long-term changes in U.S. competitiveness. The correction of

51Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 58: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

widespread misconceptions about the competitive position of theUnited States is essential if we are to get through the difficult periodahead without making major policy mistakes. The second section ofthe chapter is devoted to financial developments and their effects ontrade, especially the appreciation of the dollar and its likely effects onthe U.S. trade balance. Two final sections examine macroeconomicand financial problems in Europe and the developing countries.

LONG-RUN TRENDS IN U.S. COMPETITIVENESS:PERCEPTIONS AND REALITIES

Concern over the international competitiveness of the UnitedStates is as high as it has ever been. It is argued with increasing fre-quency that U.S. business has steadily lost ground in the internation-al marketplace. This alleged poor performance is often attributedboth to failures of management in the United States and to the sup-port given to foreign businesses by their home governments. Feedingthe perception of declining competitiveness is the persistent U.S.deficit in merchandise trade, especially the imbalance in trade withJapan.

Changes in U.S. trade performance must, however, be put into thecontext of changes in the U.S. role in the world economy. This widerapproach reveals that much of the concern about long-run competi-tiveness is based on misperceptions. Although the recent apprecia-tion of the dollar has created a temporary loss of competitiveness,the United States has not experienced a persistent loss of ability tosell its products on international markets; in fact, in the 1970s theUnited States held its own in terms of output, exports, and employ-ment. Changes in the relationship of the United States to the worldeconomy, however, have made the United States look less competi-tive by some traditional measures.

AGGREGATE PERFORMANCE OF THE UNITED STATES AND OTHERDEVELOPED COUNTRIES

Discussion of U.S. competitiveness often gives the misleading im-pression that the United States has consistently performed poorly rel-ative to other industrial countries. The U.S. share of world trade andworld GNP did in fact decline throughout the 1950s and 1960s, re-flecting the recovery of the rest of the world from World War II, to-gether with the narrowing of the huge and unsustainable U.S. tech-nological lead. In the 1970s, however, this long decline leveled off.

• From 1973 to 1980, real gross domestic product (GDP) in theUnited States grew at an annual rate of 2.3 percent, compared

52

Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 59: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

with 2.6 percent in the other Organization for Economic Coop-eration and Development (OECD) countries.

• From 1973 to 1980 the U.S. share of OECD exports remainednearly constant, declining from 17.6 to 17.2 percent.

• Over the same period, employment in the United States grew at2.1 percent a year, compared with only 0.5 percent in the rest ofthe OECD countries.

The United States, in part as a side effect of its relatively rapidgrowth in employment, did do poorly by comparison in one respect,productivity growth. Output per worker grew at only 0.2 percent inthe United States, compared with 2.2 percent a year in the rest of theOECD countries. Productivity is, of course, crucial to living stand-ards; ultimately, the level of consumption per capita depends on thelevel of output per worker. But there is no necessary relation be-tween productivity and competition in international markets. Slowgrowth in productivity only hampers a country's international com-petitiveness if it is not offset by correspondingly slow growth in realwages. If U.S. workers, for example, were to receive real wage in-creases equal to those granted in other countries while their produc-tivity failed to increase at a comparable rate, U.S. industry would finditself increasingly uncompetitive. The fact is, however, that this didnot occur, as the comparative experience of the United States andthe European Economic Community illustrates. From 1973 to 1980output per manufacturing worker in the European Economic Com-munity rose at an annual rate of 2.7 percent, but real compensationrose at an annual rate of 4.1 percent. By contrast, output per workerin the United States rose 1.1 percent annually, while real compensa-tion rose only 1.8 percent annually. In fact, until the recent rise inthe dollar's exchange rate, it was workers in the European EconomicCommunity, rather than those in the United States, who were prob-ably pricing themselves out of the world market in spite of their rela-tively good productivity performance.

The overall performance of the United States, then, does not sug-gest a long-term problem of competitiveness. The shift from persist-ent trade surplus to persistent deficit which occurred over the lastdecade is, however, often misinterpreted as a sign of an inability tocompete. In fact, changes in the structure of the U.S. balance of pay-ments are more the result of changes in the U.S. saving and invest-ment position than of slow productivity growth.

THE CHANGING STRUCTURE OF THE U.S. BALANCE OF PAYMENTS

In the 1950s and early 1960s the United States normally had atrade surplus and invested heavily in other countries. In the yearsafter 1973, however, the United States normally had a trade deficit,

53Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 60: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

and annual investment by foreigners in the United States began toapproach annual U.S. investment abroad. The shift in the U.S. tradebalance was closely connected with the shift in investment flows.

Taken as a whole, U.S. international transactions always balance.Any force tending to increase or decrease the balance in one catego-ry of transactions sets in motion a process leading to exactly offset-ting changes in balances in other categories. For example, an in-crease in foreign demand for U.S. exports tends directly to improvethe trade balance, but this improvement leads to a rise in the dollar'sexchange rate against foreign currencies. The exchange-rate appre-ciation in turn leads to increases in imports, a worsened balance onservices, and so on. Similarly, an increased desire by foreign resi-dents to invest in the United States is reflected in an increase in thecapital account but leads to an appreciation of the dollar and an off-setting decline in other parts of the balance of payments.

The shift in the U.S. trade balance from persistent surplus topersistent deficit was largely an offset to changes in the U.S. capitalaccount. In the 1950s and the first half of the 1960s, rates of returnon capital were lower and wage rates were higher in the UnitedStates than in other industrial countries. Since the United States suf-fered no war damage, its capital stock was intact, and the diffusion ofU.S. technology abroad created a demand for new capital investmentin the recipient countries. The result was that returns to investmentwere higher abroad than in the United States, and the United Stateswas a heavy net foreign investor. The counterpart to this foreign in-vestment was a persistent surplus on current transactions, includingmerchandise trade.

By the 1970s the other industrial countries had narrowed or elimi-nated these differences in capital and labor costs. The result was thatthe demand for new capital abroad was no longer a great deal largerthan it was in the United States. At the same time, the supply of sav-ings in the United States was restricted by a low national saving rate(the lowest among the major industrial countries). Thus the UnitedStates ceased to be a major net exporter of capital, and the currentaccount of the balance of payments moved from surplus to roughbalance. Meanwhile, the U.S. balance on items other than merchan-dise trade improved: the deficit in military transactions fell, the sur-plus in services rose, and, in particular, the accumulation of past for-eign investments began to yield increasing income. This meant that abalanced current account was associated with a deficit in merchandisetrade.

Table 3-1 and Chart 3-1 show how the structure of the U.S. cur-rent account has changed, measuring its components as percentagesofGNP.

54Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 61: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

TABLE 3-1 .—Structure ofthe U.S. balance of payments, as percent of GNP, 1960-80

Type of balance

Merchandise trade

Investment income

Military transactions

Travel and services

Remittances

Current account

Percent of GNP

1960-66

0.86

.74

.41

.04

- . 4 4

.70

1974-80

- 0 . 8 0

1.06

- . 0 3

.12

- . 3 0

.06

Change,percentage

points

- 1 . 6 6

.32

.38

.16

.15

- . 6 4

Source: Department of Commerce, Bureau of Economic Analysis.

Chart 3 -1

Structural Changes in the Current Account Balance

PERCENT OF GROSS NATIONAL PRODUCT

1.5

1.0

.5

- . 5

-1.0

-1.5

INVESTMENTINCOME

1962 1964 1966 1968 1970 1972 1974 1976 1978 1980 1982

NOTE.—DATA ARE 16-QUARTER WEIGHTED CENTERED MOVING AVERAGES.

SOURCE: DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE.

55Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 62: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

THE ISSUE OF U.S. TRADE WITH JAPAN

The perception of diminished U.S. competitiveness stems not onlyfrom the U.S. trade deficit but from an impression that U.S. tradeperformance compares poorly with that of other countries, especiallythat of Japan. Japan runs a huge surplus in its manufactures trade,while the United States runs only a small one, and Japan also has alarge surplus in its bilateral trade with the United States. These factsare often attributed to Japanese trade restrictions. Japan does main-tain restrictions which seriously hurt U.S. businesses. Trade restric-tions, however, do not in the long run improve the Japanese tradebalance; as discussed more fully below, they lead to offsetting in-creases in other imports or declines in exports. The main explanationof Japan's surplus in manufactures trade and in trade with the UnitedStates is that Japan, with few natural resources, incurs huge deficitsin its trade in primary products, especially oil, and with primary pro-ducers, especially the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries(OPEC). The surpluses in the rest of Japan's trade offset these defi-cits.

Table 3-2 and Chart 3-2 show the differences in the structure ofthe Japanese, European, and U.S. trade accounts. They show clearlyhow the huge Japanese surplus in manufactures offsets large deficitsin primary products.

Corresponding to the Japanese sectoral deficit in primary products,especially oil, is a regional deficit with OPEC. Japan makes up for itsdeficit with OPEC by running surpluses in its trade with other re-gions. The extent of this regional imbalance—and its contrast withthe U.S. position—is shown in Table 3-3. The point here is similarto that already made with respect to the overall U.S. trade balance:looking at Japanese-U.S. trade in isolation is misleading. The Japa-nese surplus in trade with the United States is largely a response tothe rise of OPEC.

Although Japanese trade policy does not play a central role incausing the bilateral trade imbalance with the United States, Japaneseimport restrictions remain a major source of friction. Japan maintainsa variety of nontariff barriers against imports. These include importquotas for a number of agricultural products and "red tape" barriersagainst manufactured goods, such as stringent inspection require-ments applied against imported goods but not against Japanese prod-ucts. These trade restrictions probably do not lead to a larger overallJapanese trade surplus. If they were removed, the yen would depreci-ate and increased Japanese imports in the currently protected sectorswould be offset by reduced deficits or increased surpluses elsewhere.Japanese trade restrictions do, however, distort the composition ofU.S. trade with Japan, imposing serious costs on some U.S. produc-

56

Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 63: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

TABLE 3-2.—Trade balances by commodity group as percent of GDP, United States, Japan, and the

European Economic Community, 1980

[Percent of GDP]

Commodity group UnitedStates

- 1 . 4 5

- 1 . 9 3

.40

.54

- 2 . 8 7

.48

- . 4 2

.90

Japan

- 0 . 9 9

- 1 0 . 1 1

- 1 . 2 6

- 2 . 1 5

- 6 . 7 1

9.12

3.09

6.02

EuropeanEconomic

Community

- 2 . 2 3

- 5 . 4 1

- . 4 1

- 1 . 2 3

- 3 . 7 7

3.18

.88

2.30

Total..

Primary products

Food, beverages, and tobacco

Crude materials excluding petroleum..

Mineral fuels

Manufactures

Machinery and transport equipment....

Other manufactured goods

Source: Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development.

Chart 3-2

Composition of Trade, 1980

PERCENT OF GROSS DOMESTIC PRODUCT

10| | TOTAL

PRIMARYGOODS

MANUFACTURES

V . ' . •'•' v>

. " .:

i—IH- 5

- 1 0

UNITED STATES EUROPEAN JAPANECONOMIC COMMUNITY

SOURCE: ORGANIZATION FOR ECONOMIC COOPERATION AND DEVELOPMENT.

57Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 64: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

ers. As the fastest growing and second largest market economy,Japan has a responsibility to help sustain the open trading system. Amajor trade liberalization by Japan would do much to relieve the po-litical strains on that system, while the failure of Japan to make morethan token concessions would intensify them.

TABLE 3-3.—Trade balances by region as percent of GDP, United States and Japan, 1980

[Percent of GDP]

UnitedStates Japan

Industrial countries

Oil-exporting countries..

Non-oil developing countries..,

0.23

= 1.45

.52

1.92

-3.20

1.46

Source: International Monetary Fund.

THE PROBLEM OF UNCOMPETITIVE SECTORS

Analysis of the overall U.S. trade deficit and the bilateral deficitwith Japan suggests that worries about U.S. competitiveness arebased in part on a misunderstanding of the situation. There is noquestion, however, that increased foreign competition has forcedsome sectors of the U.S. economy to contract.

This is partly a consequence of the fact that trade has becomemore important to the U.S. economy. Specialization by nations is thereason for international trade. If the United States is to expand itstrade, the U.S. economy must become more specialized. This meansthat some sectors will grow and others will shrink. During the 1970sthe United States developed increasing surpluses in areas in which italready enjoyed a comparative advantage and developed increasingdeficits in sectors in which it was at a disadvantage. Some illustrativenumbers are given in Table 3-4.

TABLE 3-4.—U.S. trade balances by sector as percent of GDP, 1972-79

[Percent of GDP]

Item 1972 1979

U.S. comparative advantage:

Research-intensive manufactures.,

Resource-intensive products, other than fuels..

Invisibles (services and investment income)....

U.S. comparative disadvantage:

Nonresearch-intensive manufactures..

Fuels

0.93

.06

.40

-1 .27

- . 2 7

1.63

.67

1.44

-1 .44

=2.41

Sources: International Monetary Fund, National Science Board, and Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development.

Specialization of this kind is desirable both for the United Statesand for its trading partners. Specialization and trade raise the effi-ciency of the world economy as a whole by allowing each country to

58Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 65: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

concentrate on doing what it does relatively well, and by allowing in-creased economies of scale. But greater specialization can leave thoseinvolved in the contracting sectors worse off, at least temporarily. At-tempts to prevent adjustment through trade barriers or subsidies,however, impose severe costs on unprotected sectors.

Some sectoral reallocation of resources, then, is a normal conse-quence of the increasing U.S. integration into the world economy.This is not the whole story, however. Some sectors of the U.S. econ-omy are confronted by a problem that is not simply the result ofmarket forces. Broadly speaking, these sectors fall into two groups.In one group are sectors where firms or their workers, accustomed tohaving substantial market power, now find that they have pricedthemselves out of the world market. In the other group are sectorswhich are hurt by foreign protectionism or export subsidies.

Market Power and Competitiveness

The "problem" of diminished market power in some sectors actu-ally derives from a desirable aspect of trade: the fact that trade in-creases competition. One of the major benefits of an increasinglyopen U.S. economy is that it reduces the problems of monopoly andmarket power, thus increasing efficiency and helping consumers. Butthe transition to more competitive markets can prove painful. Whenan industry accustomed to having domestic market power encountersinternational competition, it must accept a reduction in the premiumin prices and wages it previously commanded over other sectors ofthe economy. Both firms and workers may be reluctant to accept thisimplication of increased competition, and idle capacity and unem-ployment may result. Prices and wages in some U.S. heavy industriesare probably too high to be sustainable in an integrated world econo-my.

Policies of Foreign Governments

A different problem is posed when foreign governments engage inprotective or export promotion measures that harm U.S. producers.U.S. trade negotiators have emphasized four particular areas of con-cern:

1. Agriculture: Japan and the European Economic Community havehigh protective barriers against U.S. agricultural products. Further,the European Economic Community now engages in massive subsi-dized export of agricultural products to dispose of the surpluses cre-ated by its price-support program. These measures depress worldprices of agricultural products, imposing substantial costs on U.S.producers in a sector where the United States holds a clear compara-tive advantage.

59Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 66: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

2. High technology: In recent years, many countries have come toview the high-technology industries as vehicles for economic growthand have sought to promote them through a complex mix of poli-cies—outright subsidies, export credit subsidies, research subsidies,preferential procurement by State-owned enterprises, and so on. TheUnited States holds a comparative advantage in high-technologyproducts, and the U.S. export market share has remained roughlyconstant since 1973. Nevertheless, there is concern that in some spe-cific areas, especially aircraft, foreign subsidies are threatening theposition of U.S. producers.

3. Services: The United States has developed an increasingly strongnet export position in services. Services, however, have never beenrecognized as being under the rules of the international tradingsystem, and trade in services is limited by a maze of foreign govern-ment regulations.

4. Investment: Many countries impose "investment performance re-quirements'* on foreign investors in exchange for the right to investor to receive investment incentives. Many of those performance re-quirements are trade-related, requiring foreign companies to exportmore, reach a specified level of local content, or reduce imports.

CHALLENGES TO U.S. TRADE POLICY

The next few years are critical for the international trading system.Accumulating structural problems have combined with short-run ma-croeconomic stresses to produce a resurgence of protectionist pres-sures. The Administration's aim, nonetheless, is to preserve andextend the benefits of freer trade. To do this will require resistingprotectionist pressures at home while continuing to urge foreign gov-ernments to eliminate their more objectionable trade-distorting poli-cies.

Responding to Foreign Actions

The practices of foreign governments pose extremely difficultissues for U.S. trade policy. The United States customarily seeks toinduce other nations to move in the direction of freer trade. The di-lemma is how to do this without imposing costs on ourselves thatexceed the benefits from changes in other countries* policies.

Trade-distorting measures, whether they take the form of protec-tion against imports or the promotion of exports, hurt the countrywhich adopts them as well as other countries, even when they are aresponse to foreign trade-distorting practices. If foreign governmentslimit imports from the United States and we respond in kind, the ini-tial results will be further reductions in economic efficiency at homeand higher domestic prices. If foreign governments subsidize ex-ports, depressing world prices for U.S. products, a countersubsidy by

60Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 67: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

the United States will depress prices still further. The belief that de-partures from free trade are automatically called for if other coun-tries do not play by the rules is a fallacy.

Intervention in international trade by the U.S. Government, eventhough costly to the U.S. economy in the short run, may, however,be justified if it serves the strategic purpose of increasing the cost ofinterventionist policies by foreign governments. Thus, there is a po-tential role for carefully targeted measures, explicitly temporary,aimed at convincing other countries to reduce their trade distortions.

There are obvious risks in such a course of action. Instead of in-ducing other countries to move toward freer trade, U.S. pressuremight set off a cycle of retaliation which would leave everyone worseoff. There are also domestic political risks. Trade measures intendedto be temporary may end up permanent and institutionalized. Theneed to balance the strategic objective of reducing foreign trade bar-riers against the harm which might be caused by U.S. retaliatorymeasures explains the U.S policy of negotiating for freer trade whileholding open the possibility of more direct action as a last resort.

Responding to Problem Industries

The problems of industries which have recently lost their tradition-al market power also pose a serious policy dilemma. There is strongpressure to give these industries at least temporary relief from im-ports, in the hope that lower wage and price increases and improvedproductivity will eventually make them competitive again. On theother hand, protection reduces the incentives for both firms andworkers to make these changes. Furthermore, protectionist measures,however temporary they are supposed to be, tend to become perma-nent. The limitation of protection for these problem industries is acentral goal of U.S. economic policy.

EXCHANGE RATES AND THE BALANCE OF PAYMENTS

During 1982 the dollar rose against other major currencies to itshighest level since the beginning of floating exchange rates in 1973.The strength of the dollar provided some benefits to the U.S. econo-my by reducing import prices and thus accelerating progress againstinflation. On the other hand, the strong dollar caused severe prob-lems by decreasing the cost competitiveness of exported U.S. goods.

CAUSES OF THE DOLLAR'S STRENGTH

Exchange-rate movements are not well understood. Econometricmodels of exchange-rate determination proposed in the past decadehave not shown any consistent ability to track past exchange-ratemovements, let alone predict future changes. Nevertheless, careful

61Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 68: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

analysis can narrow the range of plausible explanations of the dol-lar's rise.

The recent appreciation of the dollar, unlike many earlier ex-change-rate movements, did not simply reflect contemporaneouschanges in relative price levels. The well-known theory of purchasingpower parity suggests that the rate of change in the exchange rateshould equal the difference between the foreign and domestic infla-tion rates. Over the very long run, or in situations of very large dif-ferences in inflation rates, the purchasing power parity theory hasproved to be a useful guide. But the theory has little or no power toexplain the recent rise of the dollar. Price increases over the past 2years in Germany and Japan, for instance, were lower than in theUnited States. Yet the dollar appreciated dramatically during thatperiod against both the mark and the yen. Stated differently, the riseof the dollar was not simply a nominal but also a real appreciation, asillustrated in Chart 3-3.

Large exchange-rate movements may also occur because of shiftsin world demand for a country's exports or changes in a country'sdemand for imports. An example of such an event was Great Brit-ain's discovery of oil in the North Sea, which has played at least somerole in the high level of Great Britain's real exchange rate relative toother European currencies.

No comparable event accounts for the appreciation of the dollar,although U.S. oil imports have declined sharply. The rise of thedollar was not initially accompanied by a deterioration of the tradebalance, a fact which might seem to suggest that there was an in-crease in demand for U.S. goods. The initial lack of deterioration,however, stemmed from lags in the effect of the exchange rate on thetrade balance rather than from a shift in either export or importdemand, and the U.S. trade deficit grew rapidly in the second half of1982.

What the rise of the dollar seems clearly to reflect is a rise not inthe demand for U.S. goods, but in the demand for U.S. assets. Thereasons for the increased attractiveness of investment in the UnitedStates are somewhat controversial, but the effects are not. In order tobuy U.S. assets, foreigners must first acquire dollars. The increaseddemand for dollars drives up the exchange rate.

One important factor in the increased demand for U.S. assets wasthat real interest rates in the United States were high relative to realinterest rates elsewhere. Real interest rates are not directly measur-able, since they equal the nominal rate minus expected inflation. Butsome rough measure is attainable by computing the nominal rateminus actual inflation. Chart 3-4 shows the differential in real interestrates, computed in this way between the United States and other

62Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 69: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

Chart 3-3

Real Exchange Rates Of Major CurrenciesAgainst The Dollar

1973-80=100

130

120

110

100

90

80

70

60

%\

\

-

-

-

1 i

t/

r

• / "7

I I I 1

\

1*

**

- *

1 1 1 i

JV

,1

v\ YEN

\ \

\ \ ,

l\MARK

*• *

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

S \\FRANC

i • . 1 . .

\\

...A*

• i i i i

-

7/

^ ̂ /. /-**• *i i i i

1980 1981 1982

NOTE.—CONSUMER PRICES USED AS DEFLATOR.

SOURCE: INTERNATIONAL MONETARY FUND.

industrial countries. The chart suggests that the real interest rate inthe United States was substantially higher than foreign rates in recentyears.

But events in the fall of 1982 cast some doubt on whether real in-terest rates alone can explain the dollar's strength. As U.S. short-term interest rates fell sharply, the differential between short-term in-terest rates in the United States and other countries was greatly re-duced. Yet the dollar continued to rise. The explanation for this maylie in the difference between short- and long-term rates. Most ex-change-rate models suggest that long-term real rates, and not short-term ones, are what affect the real exchange rate. A notable featureof the U.S. financial scene in the fall of 1982 was that long-term rates

63

Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 70: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

Chart 3-4

International Real Short-Term Interest RateDifferentials

PERCENTAGE POINTS

6

4 -

2 -

1975 1976 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982

NOTE.—DATA ARE U.S. RATE MINUS AVERAGE OF RATES FOR MAJOR INDUSTRIAL COUNTRIESWEIGHTED BY GNP, ADJUSTED FOR DIFFERENCES IN CONSUMER PRICE INFLATION.

SOURCE: INTERNATIONAL MONETARY FUND.

did not fall nearly as much as short-term rates. At the same time,long-run inflation expectations may have declined, so that it is un-clear how much long-term real interest rates actually fell.

Many observers believe that other factors besides real interest rateshelp explain the dollar's strength. In particular, the unsettled state ofthe world economy—particularly the problems in Europe and LatinAmerica described later in this chapter—may have created a desireon the part of investors for a safe haven for their funds. The UnitedStates, according to this argument, is still regarded as the most politi-cally and economically stable of the market economies and hasbecome a financial refuge in troubled times. While the importance ofthis factor is hard to assess, the worldwide search for financialsecurity may partially explain this country's rising capital account sur-plus and its growing current account deficit.

64Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 71: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

AN UNDERVALUED YEN?

The explanations of the strong dollar discussed so far leave out aview which has received considerable attention—that the strength ofthe dollar reflects deliberate undervaluation of their currencies byour competitors, especially Japan. This view is important enough inits implications for U.S. international economic policy to deserve sep-arate treatment.

Arguments that the yen is undervalued are of two types, which arebasically independent of one another. One argument is that the Japa-nese government has persistently kept the yen undervalued. Theother is that the Japanese have only recently engineered a decline inthe yen to gain competitive advantage. Neither of these views appearscorrect in light of the actual behavior of Japan's balance of paymentsand exchange rate.

If the first allegation—that the yen has been persistently underval-ued—was correct, Japan would run persistent current account sur-pluses in excess of what seems justified. We would also expect Japanto have experienced exceptionally rapid growth in its foreign ex-change reserves. Neither of these was the case:

• From the beginning of floating exchange rates in 1973 through1981, Japan had an average surplus in its current account of only0.15 percent of GNP. This was not much more than the U.S.figure for the same period (0.11 percent), considerably less thanthat of Germany (0.47 percent), and much less than the U.S. sur-plus of the early 1960s (0.70 percent).

• From the beginning of floating exchange rates in 1973 to thethird quarter of 1982, Japan's reserves minus gold grew at anannual rate of 4.8 percent, far less than the 9.7 percent rate ofreserve growth for all non-OPEC countries.

These facts contradict the view that the yen was persistently under-valued. There remains the possibility that the yen's weakness duringmuch of 1982 was excessive in some sense. A natural question iswhether, after adjustment for purchasing power parity, the yen fellmore against the dollar than other currencies. The answer to thisquestion depends on the base period used for comparison. For mostbase periods, however, the real depreciation of the yen against thedollar appears smaller than that of the French franc and the Germanmark. Table 3-5 shows an illustrative set of numbers. As the tableshows, only for a few base periods does the yen appear more "under-valued" than the other two currencies.

The actual behavior of the Japanese balance of payments and ex-change rate thus do not support the view that there is any special un-dervaluation of the yen—that is, they suggest that exchange-rate

65Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 72: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

TABLE S-5.—Real appreciation of the dollar against major currencies to August 1982

[Percent change from base year to August 1982 ' ]

19711972 . ...

19731974

19751976

19771978

19791980

1981

Base year French franc

-1 .011.8

27 921.4

39 529.6

29.443.0

50 851.6

21.1

German mark

-2 .19.5

31.431.0

33.728.8

35.950.1

53.844.2

11.3

Japanese yen

=-25.3= 13.1

2.06.4

7.310.9

24.3253.1

36.825.9

a22.9

1 Percent change in the price of the dollar In each currency, adjusted for differences in consumer price inflation.'Indicates a base year relative to which the August 1982 exchange rate of the yen looks lower than that of the other

currencies.Source: Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System.

movements over the last several years stemmed from a strong dollarrather than a weak yen. An examination of Japanese policy by theU.S. Treasury supports this conclusion. This study found that Japanhas attempted to isolate its domestic capital market from world capi-tal markets, but that this has tended to limit capital outflow ratherthan inflow, supporting rather than weakening the yen. Japanese cap-ital controls have been relaxed in recent years, a move which theUnited States supports even though the result will be a weaker yenand an increase in Japan's current account surplus. In the 1980s,Japan may well become more of a capital exporter than it was in the1970s, and thus have larger current account surpluses. These sur-pluses, if they materialize, will result from Japan's high domesticsaving rate, which gives Japan a natural role as an exporter of capitalto the rest of the world.

To show that there is no special yen issue is not to deny that asubstantial deterioration has occurred in the relative cost position ofU.S. firms. This deterioration was actually larger relative to otherindustrial countries, but since Japan is the United States' most impor-tant competitor, the depreciation of the yen worries U.S. firms more.There is no special yen issue, but the strong dollar does pose genu-ine problems.EFFECTS OF A STRONG DOLLAR ON U.S. TRADE

The rise of the dollar was associated with a large rise in the pro-duction costs of U.S. firms relative to those of foreign competitors.To take one measure, unit labor costs in U.S. manufacturing rose 32percent relative to those of a weighted average of other industrialcountries from their low point in the third quarter of 1980 to thesecond quarter of 1982. This rise in relative costs has at least tempo-

66Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 73: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

rarily reduced the international competitiveness of U.S. industry dra-matically. Other U.S. exporting and import-competing sectors, espe-cially agriculture, have also been squeezed.

Despite this deterioration in competitive position, it was only in thethird quarter of 1982 that the U.S. trade deficit began to show a sig-nificant increase. This delay was in line with previous experience ofthe effect of exchange rates on trade. The full effect of changes inexchange rates on the volume of exports and imports is felt onlyafter some time has passed, because some trade takes place undercontracts signed in advance and because customers do not alwayschange suppliers immediately when relative prices change. The short-term effect of a rise in the dollar is to reduce import prices, whichactually tends to improve the trade balance. Although the negative ef-fects eventually dominate, some econometric estimates suggest thatthe full negative effect is not felt for more than 2 years.

As the effects of the strong dollar are increasingly reflected in U.S.trade, the trade deficit will widen. Economic developments elsewherein the world will also contribute to a widening trade deficit. The re-cession in other industrial countries will depress the demand for U.S.exports, and financial constraints in developing countries will leadthem to import less. Both developments will have negative conse-quences for U.S. exports. Record trade and current account deficitsin 1983 will almost surely result.

Whether the trade and current account deficits persist will largelydepend on U.S. macroeconomic policies, particularly on the fiscalside. If large budget deficits are allowed to continue to depress theU.S. national saving rate, real interest rates may rise again, sustainingor even increasing the high real exchange rate of the dollar. In thiscase the trade deficit could remain high for several years.

A large and sustained trade deficit would result in an economic re-covery which would be "lopsided" in the sense that exporting andimport-competing sectors would not share in the gains. Should thisoccur, government, business, and labor officials must bear in mindthat even though protectionist foreign trade practices distort thecomposition of world trade and reduce economic efficiency both inthe United States and abroad, large trade deficits are not the resultof unfair foreign competition. Large projected U.S. trade deficits area result of macroeconomic forces, particularly large budget deficits.The main sources of the U.S. trade deficit are to be found not inParis or in Tokyo, but in Washington.

RESPONSES TO THE STRONG DOLLAR

The temporary adverse effects of a strong dollar create pressure todo something for the exporting and import-competing sectors. Three

67

Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 74: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

kinds of policies might be used: microeconomic intervention in theform of protection or export subsidies, direct intervention in the for-eign exchange market, and changes in monetary and fiscal policy.

Protection and Export Promotion

The negative effect of the strong dollar on the competitiveness ofmany U.S. firms has fueled pressures for an interventionist tradepolicy. These pressures must be resisted. Protecting import-compet-ing industries or subsidizing exports is not just a harmful long-runpolicy. With a floating exchange rate, such policies would fail to im-prove the trade balance or create employment even in the short run.

The exchange rate always moves to clear the market. An increasein exports or a reduction in imports would lead to an increaseddemand for or reduced supply of dollars on the world market, raisingthe exchange rate. This would lead to a further loss of competitive-ness in the sectors not protected or promoted. An export subsidy foragricultural products would worsen the situation of the auto industry,an import quota on steel would hurt the competitiveness of the air-craft industry, and so on. Although these indirect effects may seem ofdoubtful importance in the real world, they are not. That govern-ments cannot simultaneously protect everyone is a basic principle ofinternational trade.

Instead of creating additional employment and output, the distor-tion of trade through protectionist policies or export promotionwould probably reduce them. Market-distorting policies reduce theefficiency of the economy. Thus, a turn to protectionism could createa "supply-side" shock that might have the same kind of stagflationaryeffects as an oil price increase. The effects would prove still worse if,as is likely, U.S. actions were to provoke foreign retaliation.

Although protectionism and export subsidies provide no answer tothe problems caused by a strong dollar, the pressure to use them isincreasing. Many of the exporting sectors, which make up the tradi-tional constituency for freer trade, appear to have become convincedby the strength of the dollar and the resulting loss of U.S. competi-tiveness that a more interventionist policy is needed.Exchange-Market Intervention

Since March 1981 the United States has abstained as much as pos-sible from direct intervention in the foreign exchange market. Thisunwillingness to intervene is based on doubts about whether ex-change-market intervention is effective or desirable. As long as theFederal Reserve continues to pursue a policy of targeting monetaryaggregates, any U.S. intervention on the foreign exchange marketmust be sterilized—that is, offset by other transactions on domestic fi-

68Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 75: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

nancial markets. These transactions are likely to wipe out most of theeffect of the initial exchange-market intervention.

The process of sterilization is straightforward. If the U.S. Govern-ment attempted to drive up the price of foreign exchange andweaken the dollar by buying foreign securities, the Federal Reservewould issue dollars to pay for the foreign assets. In order to preventthese dollars from increasing the U.S. money stock, however, theFederal Reserve would then have to withdraw an equal number ofdollars from the market by selling Treasury bills. The only net resultwould be that the world's supply of dollar-denominated assets wouldincrease, while its supply of assets denominated in other currencieswould fall.

The increase in the level of dollar-denominated assets would prob-ably have little effect on the exchange rate because of the sheer sizeof world financial markets. The world market in dollar-denominatedsecurities includes not only the dollar assets actually owned abroad—foreign deposits in U.S. banks, foreign holdings of Treasury bills,Eurodollar deposits, and the like—but also all those dollar assetswhich are potentially tradeable. Thus, the total pool of international-ly mobile dollar assets is probably in the trillions of dollars. Thismakes it questionable whether even very large interventions in theexchange market can have much effect on the exchange rate.

Macroeconomic Policies

Although the government cannot significantly affect exchange ratesthrough direct intervention, monetary and fiscal policies do indirectlyaffect the exchange rate. A feasible strategy for bringing the dollardown would involve looser monetary policies and tighter fiscal poli-cies. Both of these changes would tend to lower real interest rates (atleast in the short run), making capital movement into the UnitedStates less attractive and thus driving down the value of the dollar.

Despite its unfortunate effects on the U.S. balance of trade, howev-er, monetary restraint is the prime weapon in the fight against infla-tion. Disinflation, as we have learned, unfortunately involves substan-tial costs. Under fixed exchange rates the heaviest costs of monetarycontraction and disinflation fell on the interest-sensitive sectors ofthe economy, such as construction and consumer durables. Withfloating exchange rates, however, much of the burden also falls onexporting and import-competing sectors, which are injured by therise in the value of the dollar.

A tighter fiscal policy would also lower real interest rates and leadto a lower dollar. Under fixed exchange rates, budget deficits crowd-ed out domestic investment. With a floating exchange rate theycrowd out exporting and import-competing products as well. A re-

69Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 76: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

duction in deficits would lead—with some lag—to an improvement inthe trade balance as well as higher investment.

The strength of the dollar has put considerable strain on the re-solve of the United States to remain committed to free trade. Thisstrain is not unique to the international sector. The recession andhigh interest rates have also put a strain on the resolve to let othertypes of markets, from housing to labor markets, operate freely. Ifthere is special reason for concern about the international side, it isbecause of the danger that mistakes in U.S. policy could set off aspiral of retaliation among all the major trading nations.

The competitiveness of U.S. business as a whole—as opposed tothat of particular sectors—and the balance of payments are mac-roeconomic phenomena. Microeconomic interventions cannot curemacroeconomic problems; they can only make one sector better offby hurting other sectors even more. The most effective strategy theUnited States can pursue for its exporting and import-competing sec-tors is to get its overall economic house in order—above all, bybringing budget deficits and real interest rates under control.

MACROECONOMIC PROBLEMS IN EUROPE

More than 90 percent of the output of the industrial countries, andmore than 70 percent of the output of the world's market economies,is produced by the United States, Japan, and the European EconomicCommunity. Table 3-6 shows some comparative figures for thethree. The most striking feature of the table is the favorable perform-ance of Japan by all measures. The United States and the EuropeanEconomic Community look rather similar in their less favorable per-formances. They experienced nearly the same growth rates before1979, have suffered nearly equal decelerations of growth since then,and had roughly the same unemployment rate in 1981. The U.S. in-flation rate was lower than that in Europe, but the United States alsoshowed lower productivity growth.

Behind the similarity of U.S. and European experience, however,lies a major difference. The U.S. economy, whatever its other difficul-ties, has provided employment opportunities for a rapidly growinglabor force. The current high unemployment rate is a cyclical prob-lem, not the result of a persistent failure of employment to expand.In Europe, by contrast, employment was virtually stationary over thelast decade, and unemployment has risen in every year since 1973.This is a worrisome aspect of the European situation.

For a given rate of unemployment, the strains on society are prob-ably greater if employment is stagnant than if it is growing. Growingemployment means that more new jobs are always opening up, offer-

70Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 77: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

TABLE 3-6.—Economic performance by major industrial countries, 1973-82

[Percent]

Item edes

2.3

.2

-.2

6.8

7.6

Four largeEuropean

countries'

2.2

2.2

.1

10.2

7.4

Japan

3.7

3.0

2.3

2.4

2.3

Growth rate in:

Real gross domestic product (GDP), 1973-80..

Real GOP per employed person, 1973-80

Real GDP, 1980:l-1981:IV

Level:

Consumer price inflation, year ending 1982:11..

Unemployment rate, 1981

'France, Germany, Italy, and United Kingdom.Sources: International Monetary Fund and Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development.

ing job losers a chance for reemployment and new entrants to thelabor market a chance to get their first job. If employment is station-ary, workers who have lost their jobs may stay unemployed for a longtime, and young people may never find jobs. The results of near-zeroemployment growth are painfully visible in Europe, where long-termunemployment (more than 6 months) is several times higher than inthe United States, and where the share of youth unemployment inthe total pool of unemployed has risen steadily since 1973.

How did the problem arise? The causes of structural unemploy-ment are always controversial, but a key element in the Europeanemployment problem was probably rapid increases in real labor costsin the first half of the 1970s in the face of declining productivitygrowth and rising oil prices. These increases in labor costs—whichstemmed at least in part from increases in social insurance pay-ments—squeezed profitability. Firms closed their marginal plants andinvested in increasingly capital-intensive techniques, which helped tosustain the rate of productivity growth but also led to employmentstagnation.

The unemployment problem in Europe is not caused solely by ex-cessive labor costs. The periods of rapid increase in European unem-ployment, in 1973-76 and since 1979, came during business cyclecontractions (Table 3-7). The most recent rise in unemployment isprobably mostly due to restrictive monetary and fiscal policies adopt-ed by the European countries following the oil price shock of 1979.These policies were adopted out of concern that the rise in importprices resulting from that shock—and, later, the further rise inimport prices resulting from the appreciation of the dollar—wouldlead to an uncontrollable inflationary spiral. Thus, recent develop-ments in the European economy are to some extent similar in charac-ter to those in the United States, which have also resulted largely

71Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 78: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

from disinflationary policies. The European situation is more serious,however, because the current recession comes on top of a steadilygrowing structural unemployment problem.

TABLE 3-7.—Employment and unemployment in the European Economic Community, 1973-80

[Percent]

19731974

19751976

19771978

19791980

Year Increase inemployment

1.1.1

- 1 . 1- . 1

.4

.6

.8

.2

Unemploymentrate

2.83.0

424.9

5 25.3

5.35.7

Source: Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development.

The United States has a major stake in the success of the Europeancountries in dealing with their macroeconomic problems. The stake isnot simply due to the fact that the major European countries are alsoallies of the United States, nor is it simply due to the fact that rough-ly one-quarter of U.S. exports go to Western Europe. More than this,Europe is a key part of the world economy, with an aggregate GNPas large as that of the United States itself. If European countriesremain mired in economic stagnation and turn toward increased pro-tectionism as a consequence, little chance will remain of saving theopen trading system.

THE INTERNATIONAL DEBT PROBLEM

Different problems from those facing the United States and Europeafflict the economies of the developing nations. The problems ofthese economies have accumulated over the last several years and areproducts of both domestic policy mistakes and external develop-ments, such as oil price increases, the recession in industrial coun-tries, and high real interest rates. In the summer and fall of 1982 theproblems came to a head in the form of a sharp reduction in interna-tional lending to the developing countries.

DEBT-FINANCED GROWTH IN THE 1970s

Until recently, the growth of such middle income developing coun-tries as Brazil, South Korea, and Taiwan was widely viewed as one ofthe great success stories of the 1970s. Particularly notable was theirsuccess in expanding exports of manufactured goods. While thegrowth of these exports did give rise to some adjustment problems inindustrial countries, the successes of some middle income countries

72Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 79: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

were undoubtedly a highly favorable development for the UnitedStates. Such success provided a dramatic demonstration to othercountries of the potential of market-oriented economic policies.

An important aspect of growth in the developing world, however,was heavy borrowing from foreign sources. There is nothing inher-ently wrong in external borrowing to finance growth. Some of thedeveloped countries, including the United States, relied heavily onforeign capital during earlier periods of industrialization. But somedeveloping nations borrowed too much, investing in projects ofdoubtful productivity. When overly optimistic expectations aboutexport earnings and interest rates turned out to have been wrong,these countries found themselves in serious financial difficulty.

From 1973 to 1981 the medium- and long-term external debt ofnon-oil developing countries rose at an annual rate of more than 20percent. Lenders might have viewed this rate of increase as morealarming than they did, were it not for several factors which appearedto indicate that the eventual repayment of the debt would not imposea severe burden on borrowing countries. These factors included:

• A rapid growth in the ability of these countries to service their debt Ex-ports of the non-oil developing countries grew at an annual rateof 18 percent.

• Very low real interest rates. From 1973 to 1979 Eurodollar rates inLondon, which set the basis for most international lending, aver-aged 8.5 percent, while U.S. wholesale prices rose at an annualrate of 9.8 percent. Even allowing for the fact that third-worldborrowers paid small spreads over the Euromarket rate, the realinterest rates they paid were still negative.

• Special factors which appeared to ensure rising export earnings in thefuture. The most important of these was oil reserves, which wereessentially treated as an asset against which countries couldsafely borrow.

CAUSES OF THE LIQUIDITY PROBLEM

Excessive borrowing by some developing countries made an even-tual financial problem inevitable. The proximate factor whichbrought the era of debt-financed growth to a halt was, however, asharp deterioration in the world economy. The rise in oil prices in1979 was a blow to many debtor countries, and further strains result-ed from disinflation in the United States and other industrial coun-tries. The factors which led to a loss of lender confidence in the de-veloping countries included:

• The effects of the world recession on export demand. The rapid exportgrowth of the 1970s came to an abrupt end in the early 1980s.Exports of the non-oil developing countries actually fell by 7.5

73Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 80: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

percent from the first half of 1981 to the first half of 1982. Ex-porters of primary products were hit particularly hard: real com-modity prices fell by 25 percent from the fourth quarter of 1980to the second quarter of 1982.

• High real interest rates. In 1981 and the first half of 1982, Euro-market interest rates averaged 16 percent, while wholesale pricesin the United States rose at an annual rate of only 4.5 percent.

• The appreciation of the dollar. Since most international debt is de-nominated in dollars, while commodity prices tend to follow aweighted average of industrial country currencies, the effect ofthe rise in the value of the dollar was a sudden increase in thesize of developing country debt relative to prospective exportearnings.

The result of these developments was that banks, which had beenwilling to lend large amounts to developing countries throughout the1970s, lost confidence that the loans would be promptly repaid. Thedebtor countries were highly vulnerable to such a loss of confidence.Much of their debt was of short maturity, so that a large fraction oftheir debt required refinancing each year. Argentina, Brazil, andMexico, for example, must make annual payments of principal andinterest which exceed their total exports of goods and services.During the 1970s these large financing needs did not pose a prob-lem, since countries were able to roll over their debt as it came due.In the summer and fall of 1982, however, banks became reluctant tomake new loans and roll over old ones, first to Mexico and then toother countries. The result was a quick exhaustion of the foreign ex-change reserves of the major debtors.

IMPLICATIONS OF THE DEBT PROBLEM

The debt situation of the developing countries poses two problemsfor the world economy. Although quite unlikely, failure to resolve thedebt situation in an orderly way could lead to major financial marketdisruptions. More likely—indeed, it has already happened to a con-siderable extent—is a situation of forced austerity in debtor coun-tries, with adverse effects on world trade and output.

Risks to Financial Markets

The threat of a financial disruption arises from the possibility thatdebtor countries will be unable to live within their new financial con-straints. The unwillingness of banks to lend as much as in the recentpast means that debtor countries will need to cut their imports orexpand their exports. In the case of the most heavily indebted coun-tries, this will almost certainly mean achieving substantial trade sur-pluses in spite of depressed demand for their exports. The concern

74Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 81: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

of lenders that some debtors will not be able to achieve the requiredadjustment is precisely what makes them reluctant to lend.

Fortunately, a serious financial disruption is unlikely. The debtorcountries and the banks which are their major creditors share astrong interest in an orderly resolution of the debt problem. For thedebtor countries, maintaining good financial standing is essential ifthey are to maintain access both to world capital markets and to theirexport markets. At the same time, banks realize that demanding toorapid a repayment from debtor countries could prove counterpro-ductive, and they are probably willing to provide enough financing sothat debtor countries can more easily handle the financial squeeze. Al-though banks find themselves in somewhat of a "prisoner's dilemma"situation, in which no one bank will want to lend if it believes thatthe loans will only go to repay other banks, this problem should notprove insoluble. The banking community should be able to work withthe International Monetary Fund (IMF) in negotiating agreementswhich balance an adequate degree of new lending to the debtorcountries with realistic economic adjustment plans. To aid in thisprocess, the Administration and representatives of other industrialnations recently agreed in principle to an enlargement of the IMF'sresources.

Perhaps the most important safeguard against a financial crisis isthe ability of the governments and central banks of the majorindustrial countries to provide a safety net for the international finan-cial system. Central banks act as lenders of last resort for commercialbanks, providing effective protection against banking panics. At thesame time, industrial country governments have demonstrated theirwillingness to help provide temporary financing for developing coun-tries in order to bridge the interval until agreements can be reachedwith the IMF. (The IMF recently concluded agreements with Mexico,Argentina, and Brazil.)Effects on World Trade

Although a serious disruption of the international financial systemis unlikely, for all of the reasons cited, serious problems still exist.Even under optimistic assumptions, those developing countries withhigh ratios of debt to exports will be forced to improve their tradebalances substantially in order to pay the interest on their debt.Much of this trade balance improvement will probably come throughreductions in imports, involving painful reductions in output and realwages in the debtor countries. This will also depress demand for theproducts of industrial countries—particularly the United States,which has especially close trading relations with some of the majorLatin American debtors. The debt problem of the developing coun-tries may worsen the U.S. trade balance by $10 to $20 billion and

75

Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 82: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

reduce U.S. GNP by one-half percentage point or more from thelevel it would otherwise reach.

The Outlook for Debtor Nations

The problems of the developing countries are not insoluble. Ifgrowth in the world economy resumes and real interest rates fall tohistorical levels, the debt burden of even the most heavily indebtedcountries will become much more manageable. Mexico and Brazil,among the most heavily indebted countries, both have debts wellbelow half their GNPs. At a historically typical real interest rate of 2percent, the real burden of debt service would fall to less than 1 per-cent of GNP—a fully manageable level in a growing economy.

The key to recovery from the debt problem, however, lies in in-creased exports from the debtor countries. Import restrictions by thedeveloping countries can only accomplish so much in improving theirtrade balances. Imports have already fallen considerably in high debtcountries in the last year, leaving limited room for further cuts. Asgrowth resumes among the debtor countries, they will tend to importmore, and will need to export more to pay for the imports. They willnot be able to do this if the industrial countries, including the UnitedStates, institute new protectionist measures. Yet as developing coun-tries attempt to increase their exports, strong political pressures willdevelop in the industrial countries to stop them. Leaders in theindustrial countries must realize that shutting out imports from thedeveloping world will not only incur the usual costs of protection—higher prices to consumers and jobs lost in unprotected sectors—butalso will threaten the basic stability of the world financial system.

76Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 83: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

CHAPTER 4

Increasing Capital Formation

ATTAINING AN ADEQUATE RATE OF CAPITAL FORMATIONin the United States is a crucial challenge for economic policy duringthe 1980s. Devoting a larger share of national output to investmentwould help restore rapid productivity growth and rising living stand-ards. During the past two decades, fiscal, monetary, and regulatorypolicies contributed to the low rate of net investment in plant andequipment; the share of gross national product (GNP) devoted tocapital formation was below the levels achieved by most other indus-trialized nations.

The Administration and the Congress have instituted a set of taxand regulatory policies designed to increase the share of output de-voted to capital formation. The noninflationary monetary policies fol-lowed by the Federal Reserve, with the Administration's support,should also contribute in the long run to increased capital formationand improved efficiency in the allocation of the capital stock. Thischapter examines the linkages between economic policy and capitalformation, and discusses the rationale for the Administration's initia-tives in this area.

Many forms of investment contribute to productivity growth. Re-search and development expenditures provide the basis for the tech-nological change that is a wellspring of productivity growth. Anothermajor source of productivity growth is investment in education andtraining that promotes the accumulation of valuable human capital.Public sector infrastructure investments may also have an importantrole to play. This chapter, however, focuses on nonresidential plantand equipment investment. Past public policies probably discriminat-ed most heavily against this form of investment. Plant and equipmentinvestment is also more amenable to quantitative analysis than otherforms of capital investment because of the difficulties involved inmeasuring intangible capital.

By late 1982, investment and capacity utilization rates in theUnited States had fallen to very low levels. Even after the recoveryfrom the recession begins, capacity utilization will increase onlygradually, and it will take time for new policies to increase the shareof national output devoted to saving and investment. Hence, levels of

77Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 84: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

investment may prove disappointing over the next several years de-spite the beneficial long-run impact of policies recently put in place.This should not cause us to lose sight of the importance of soundlong-run policy and the need to increase net capital formation in theyears and decades ahead.

THE HISTORICAL RECORD

Although gross private domestic investment, which includes resi-dential and inventory investment, accounted for 16.1 percent of GNPbetween 1971 and 1980, gross investment in structures and equip-ment averaged only 10.8 percent of GNP during this period. Of thisgross structure and equipment investment, more than two-thirds wasdevoted to replacing depreciated capital, leaving only 3.0 percent ofGNP for new structures and equipment.

It is useful to place the patterns of investment in the United Statesduring the last decade in historical and geographic perspective. Table4-1 displays the behavior of alternative measures of capital accumula-tion. The data show that the rate of net nonresidential fixed invest-ment as a fraction of GNP declined by 27.5 percent between the late1960s and the late 1970s. The share of output devoted to net nonre-sidential fixed investment in the late 1970s was slightly lower thanthe average rate during the entire 1950-80 period.

Some analysts, examining only the data on gross investment, haveconcluded that investment performance was satisfactory during the1970s. This procedure ignores the fact that depreciation as a share ofGNP was greater during this period than in the 1960s because of ageneral shift in net investment from long-lived assets, such as struc-tures, toward assets with shorter lives, and because of a higher ratioof capital to GNP. The appropriate focus in examining data on in-vestment is the total stock of capital. Therefore, net investment,which measures the change in the total capital stock, is the most ap-propriate indicator of the adequacy of capital formation.

An alternative way to evaluate changes in the level of capital for-mation is to examine trends in the capital-labor ratio. Measures ofcapital per hour and capital per worker, displayed in Table 4-1 andChart 4-1, both show a large decline in the growth rate of the capitalstock relative to the growth in the supply of labor. Capital per hourincreased at only a 0.9 percent annual rate between 1976 and 1980,compared to a 3.5 percent rate during the 1951-75 interval. Al-though this dramatic decline was in part due to the low rate of netinvestment during the late 1970s, it was primarily a consequence ofthe rapid growth of the labor force. To maintain the pre-1975growth in the capital-labor ratio, a sharp increase in the post-1975

78Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 85: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

rate of net investment was required, instead of the decline which ac-tually occurred.

TABLE 4-1.—Alternative measures of capital formation, 1951-82

[Percent]

Period

Net private domesticinvestment as percent of

GNP

Totalinvestment

Nonresiden-tial fixed

investment

Growth rate of net capitalstock '

Per worker2 Per hour 2

1951-551956-60

1961-65....1966-70....

1971-751976-80

1951-80

1981..19823

7.26.1

6.77.1

6.46.0

6.6

4.82.1

3.1

3.54.1

2.44.9

2.6.9

3.0

4.5(*)

'Real net private nonresidential fixed capital stock at year-end.2All persons in private business sector. Year-end obtained by averaging fourth quarter value with value for first quarter of

subsequent year.3 Preliminary.'Not available.Sources: Department of Commerce (Bureau of Economic Analysis), Department of Labor (Bureau of Labor Statistics), and

Council of Economic Advisers.

Properly measured, the decline in the growth rate of the capitalstock is understated by the net investment figures in Table 4-1. Theenergy price shocks of 1973 and 1979 hastened the obsolescence of avariety of past investments, which implies that actual depreciationwas greater than the official statistics suggest. One estimate placedthe premature obsolescence of capital during the late 1970s at anaverage of 0.5 percent of GNP per year. Other studies have obtainedmuch larger estimates using data on the market valuation of capital.In addition, it is important to recall that much of the investment ofthe 1970s took place in the energy-producing sector. The share ofGNP devoted to net fixed nonresidential investment outside theenergy sector averaged only 1.8 percent between 1975 and 1980.

Unfortunately, the combined effects of the recent economic reces-sion and large Federal budget deficits will hold down the rate of cap-ital formation, as currently forecasted, over the next several years.Between 1981 and 1985, net investment in plant and equipment mayprove disappointing even by the standard of the late 1970s. The cap-ital-labor ratio will grow only slowly and may even decline. While thelow forecasted rate of net investment over the next several years isdue primarily to cyclical conditions, it does not negate the impor-tance of developing permanent policies to encourage capital forma-tion. In light of the depth of the recent recession, it is reasonable toexpect that investment performance probably would have proven

79

Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 86: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

Chart 4 - 1

Measures of Capital Formation

PERCENT

INVESTMENT AS , ' *•PERCENT OF GNP1 ' *

I I I I I I I I I I I I

1950 1955 1960 1965 1970 1975 1980

1 NET PRIVATE NONRESIDENTIAL FIXED INVESTMENT AS PERCENT OF GNP; FIVE-YEARCENTERED MOVING AVERAGES.2 PERCENT CHANGE IN REAL NET PRIVATE NONRESIDENTIAL FIXED CAPITAL STOCK PERWORKER IN THE BUSINESS SECTOR; FIVE-YEAR CENTERED MOVING AVERAGES.

SOURCES: DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE, DEPARTMENT OF LABOR, AND COUNCIL OF ECONOMICADVISERS.

worse if the Congress and the Administration had not enacted taxmeasures to spur capital formation. These laws, and the proposals in-corporated in the President's fiscal 1984 budget, are designed toraise the share of net investment to a high level by historical stand-ards in the late 1980s or before.

AN INTERNATIONAL PERSPECTIVE

Table 4-2 shows that the United States falls behind other majorindustrial nations in several key measures of net capital formation.The share of U.S. gross domestic product (GDP) devoted to net fixedinvestment during the last decade was only 34 percent of the compa-

80Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 87: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

rable share in Japan and 56 percent of the comparable share in WestGermany. No other major industrial nation devotes as small a frac-tion of total output to new investment as does the United States.

TABLE 4-2.—Comparison of capital formation in six OECD countries, 1971-80

[Percent]

Country

Investment as percent of GDP

Grossinvestment

Gross fixedinvestment

Net fixedinvestment

Growth rateof output

per hour inmanu-

facturing

France

Germany

Italy

Japan

United Kingdom..

United States

24.2

23.7

22.4

34.0

19.2

19.1

22.9

22.8

20.1

32.9

18.7

18.4

12.2

11.8

10.7

19.5

8.1

6.6

4.8

4.9

4.9

7.4

2.9

2.5

Source: Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development.

It is instructive to compare the growth rates of productivity fordifferent countries with their shares of output devoted to new invest-ment. Although productivity growth and investment rates are simul-taneously determined by a multitude of factors, it is striking that astrong positive relationship emerges. As shown in Chart 4-2, Japanhas both the highest investment share and the highest growth rate ofproductivity, while the United States has the worst investment per-formance and the lowest growth rate of productivity.

While the reasons for these large international differences in ratesof capital formation are not precisely understood, some evidencesuggests that the roots may lie in different public policies. AfterWorld War II, rebuilding of the capital stock was a primary goal ofeconomic policy in continental Europe and Japan. Governments inthose countries encouraged saving and investment and disregardedthe early Keynesian fear that oversaving could reduce aggregatedemand and depress real economic activity.

In contrast, officials in the United States feared a postwar relapseinto depression and avoided policies which would encourage saving.For example, some economists advocated sustained budget deficits asa means of absorbing excess private savings.

It is now clear—on the basis of four decades of economic experi-ence since the end of the Great Depression—that fears of secularstagnation caused by a high and rising saving rate are unwarranted.The much greater risk is that productivity growth in the UnitedStates will continue to stagnate at low levels, and that Americanworkers will have to accept a lower growth rate in their standard of

81Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 88: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

Chart 4-2

International Comparisonof Investment and Productivity Growth,

1971-80PERCENT OF GDP GROWTH RATE

20

15

10

NET FIXED INVESTMENTAS PERCENT OF GDP

(LEFT SCALE)

GROWTH RATE OFMANUFACTURINGOUTPUT PER HOUR

(RIGHT SCALE)

• • • : • • : - :

UNITEDSTATES

UNITEDKINGDOM

ITALY GERMANY FRANCE

SOURCE: ORGANIZATION FOR ECONOMIC COOPERATION AND DEVELOPMENT.

JAPAN

living than their foreign counterparts. Otherwise, American goodscould cease to be competitive on world markets.

THE IMPORTANCE OF CAPITAL FORMATION

The case for increasing the rate of capital formation ultimatelyrests on three justifications. First, increased capital formation can re-verse part of the productivity slowdown that the United States hassuffered during the last decade. Second, government policies havediscriminated in favor of consumption and against saving and invest-ment. Third, as a result of tax policies, the pretax return to capitalinvestment exceeds the after-tax return that any individuals are ableto capture privately, leading to an inappropriately low level of capitalformation.

82Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 89: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

During the 1970s, productivity growth in the United States deceler-ated rapidly. Between 1948 and 1967 the growth rate of productivity(as measured by output per hour in the private business economy)was 3.1 percent, compared to 2.3 percent between 1967 and 1973and only 0.8 percent between 1973 and 198 L

The consequences of reduced productivity growth for our standardof living over the long run are greater than those of any other cur-rent economic problem. In 1981 the American economy producedapproximately $12,780 worth of output per capita. Had productivitygrowth continued at the 1948-67 rate during the 14 years subse-quent to 1967, output per capita would have reached $16,128 in1981, 26 percent higher than the actual value. As a standard of com-parison, the recent recession reduced per capita output by only 4percent between the third quarter of 1981 and the fourth quarter of1982, less than one-fifth the reduction attributable to the productivityshortfall. As time passes, the consequences of reduced productivitygrowth are compounded. Increasing the productivity growth rate by2 percentage points annually would more than double our materialstandard of living by 2020, compared to the level it would reach oth-erwise.

The productivity slowdown is not reliably attributable to any singlecause or combination of causes. Various analysts have suggested thathigher energy prices, regulatory changes, reduced research and de-velopment spending, reduced opportunities for technical innovation,the changing composition of the labor force, and changing worker at-titudes, as well as reduced capital formation, are responsible for theproductivity slowdown. An accurate accounting of the sources of theslowdown is probably impossible in light of the multitude of compet-ing explanations and the statistical difficulties associated with distin-guishing between their relative effects precisely.

Many of the possible causes of the productivity slowdown are prob-ably not reversible through public policy. There is relatively little theFederal Government could have done to offset the negative effect ofsharp increases in oil prices or, for that matter, to influence changingcultural attitudes toward work. Changing the rate of capital forma-tion, however, is a principal way in which Federal economic policycan affect productivity growth.

Increasing the rate of capital formation will raise productivitygrowth in several ways. More rapid capital formation results, on aver-age, in workers having more equipment at their disposal. In addition,increases in investment reduce the average age of the capital stock,permitting physical assets to embody more recent technological inno-vations. Technological development and the level of capital forma-tion are intertwined, because the development of more efficient and

83Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 90: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

sophisticated capital goods occurs when the demand for new capitalgoods increases.

The legacy of past policies, which have artificially depressed savingand investment, provides a second reason for increasing the rate ofcapital formation. As described below, this discrimination againstcapital formation has taken many forms, including tax policy, mone-tary policy and recurring Federal budget deficits. Although thereexist instances of market failure, a market economy can generally beexpected to allocate resources in an efficient way. When public poli-cies systematically discriminate against one type of spending, howev-er, there is a strong presumption that too little of it will take place.

A related and final justification for increased capital formationcomes from a comparison of the total pretax return to investmentwith the return received by private investors. Estimates suggest thatthe total pretax return to investment in corporate capital, as meas-ured by its pretax marginal product, is about 11 percent. This meansthat $1.00 invested today yields society $1.11 next year, or alterna-tively a permanent yield of 11 cents. While the total pretax returnfluctuates from year to year with cyclical conditions, studies havetended to find that it has stayed within the range of 8 to 15 percentthroughout the postwar period.

In contrast, private investors have earned much smaller rates ofreturn over the last several decades, with many investors earningnegative real after-tax returns over much of that period. Even leavingaside the effects of personal taxes, the real return on short-term debtinstruments averaged less than 1 percent during the 1950-81 inter-val. While equity investments have yielded a higher average return,they carry with them a large amount of risk. The average real returnon common stock before personal taxes was 6 percent over the1950-81 period, but investors lost money in real terms in 12 of thoseyears and over periods as long as 17 years.

This large spread between the total and private returns to invest-ment is a consequence of the tax system, which extracts a portion ofthe total return to investment before it reaches private investors.Capital market returns are reduced because the corporate income taxreduces the return that corporations can pay out to investors. As aconsequence of this tax-induced divergence between the private andtotal return to investment, too little investment takes place. This sug-gests the desirability of measures both to reduce tax distortions andto increase incentives to save and invest.

84Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 91: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

MEASURING NATIONAL SAVING

Domestic saving is an important determinant of a nation's level ofinvestment. Economic output is either invested in capital assets,which help produce future output, or consumed privately or publicly.Only by forgoing consumption does it become possible for a nationto invest in a sustained way. While funds from abroad are available tofinance some investment, experience suggests that most matureeconomies have financed investment through domestic saving. In-creasing the rate of capital formation in the United States without in-creasing obligations to foreigners therefore probably requires in-creased national saving.

Table 4-3 provides information on net national saving as reportedin the national income and product accounts. On average, from 1951to 1981, the United States saved 6.7 percent of total output beyondthat necessary to replace depreciated capital. Private saving, compris-ing personal saving and corporate retained earnings, totaled 7.3 per-cent of GNP. Federal Government dissaving through budget deficitsaveraged 0.9 percent of GNP, while the sum of State and local gov-ernment surpluses averaged 0.3 percent of GNP.

TABLE 4-3.—Net saving as percent of GNP, 1951-81

[Percent]

Period

1951-551956-60

1961-651966-70

1971-751976-80

1981

1951-81

Total

6.76,9

7.47.5

6.45.8

5.0

6.7

Not adjusted for inflation

Federal

- 0 . 3.0

- . 4.6

- 1 . 8- 1 . 9

- 2 . 0

- . 9

State andlocal

- 0 . 1- . 2

.0

.1

.61.2

1.1

.3

Private >

7.27.1

7.88.0

7.66.5

5,9

7.3

Adjusted for inflation 3

Federal

0.91.1

.2

.6

- . 3

.0

.4

State andlocal

- 0 . 1- . 1

.2

.4

1.11.6

1.5

.6

Private

5.95.9

7.06.5

5.64.4

3.6

5.8

'Private saving less capital consumption allowances with capital consumption adjustment.2Adjusted by GNP implicit price deflator.

Sources: Department of Commerce (Bureau of Economic Analysis), Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, and Councilof Economic Advisers.

While the total saving rate can be measured unambiguously, thereare serious conceptual problems in measuring its various componentsduring an inflationary period. Inflation erodes the real value of thenational debt. Interest rates incorporate inflation premiums andthese premiums compensate lenders for the fact that they are repaidin cheaper dollars. Thus, they do not really represent income to bor-rowers or costs to lenders. This principle is recognized by the Finan-cial Accounting Standards Board and is often applied in the privatesector. Table 4-3 therefore also presents a breakdown between pri-

85Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 92: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

vate, Federal, and State and local government saving that is ad-justed for the effects of inflation.

BUDGET DEFICITS AND SAVING

Unacceptably large Federal budget deficits are likely in the nextseveral years unless legislative changes are made. These deficitscould significantly reduce investment during the economic recovery.Increased public consumption with no reduction in private consump-tion leaves fewer resources available for investment. When the Feder-al Government must compete with private borrowers for savings, realinterest rates are bid up, discouraging investment.

Federal dissaving would not represent a serious problem if it auto-matically called forth more private saving. While increased deficits donot induce an equal increase in private saving, they also do notcrowd out investment expenditure dollar for dollar. Increases in thereal rate of return caused by Federal deficits raise the yield savers re-ceive and may call forth some additional private saving. Higher realinterest rates also discourage spending on consumer durables, hous-ing, and construction by State and local governments. Finally, bycontributing to increases in real interest rates, budget deficits en-courage capital inflows from abroad. These factors imply that deficitsdo not completely crowd out private investment; rather, a reasonableestimate is that funds available for private investment are reduced byperhaps one-half to three-fourths of the budget deficit.

The possibility that Federal budget deficits crowd out private in-vestment takes on greater importance in light of the large deficitsthat will occur over the next 5 years unless actions are taken. Thefiscal 1982 budget deficit of $110.7 billion absorbed 3.65 percent ofGNP. Projections now suggest the 1983 deficit will equal $207.7 bil-lion or 6.5 percent of GNP. Unless significant actions are taken, defi-cits of this magnitude or larger may continue even as the economyrecovers from the recent recession. If such deficits materialize, theconsequences for capital formation could prove very serious unless adramatic increase in private saving also takes place. A budget deficitof 5 percent of GNP would likely reduce net investment by anamount equal to about one-half its historical level, relative to a bal-anced budget. With large deficits, significant improvements in laborproductivity and the quality and quantity of housing would be lesslikely in the years ahead.

86Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 93: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

TAX RULES AND PERSONAL SAVING

Many economists believe that tax rules in the United States en-courage consumer borrowing and discourage private saving. Duringthe 1970s the combination of tax rules and inflation produced a dra-matic decline in the private return to saving and a large reduction inthe cost of borrowing.

During the 1960s, nominal interest rates on 3-month Treasury billsaveraged 4.0 percent, and the consumer price inflation rate averaged2.3 percent. On a pretax basis, this left savers with an average realreturn of 1.7 percent. For a saver in the 30 percent marginal taxbracket, the real after-tax return was only 0.5 percent.

The return to saving fell significantly below this level during the1970s. While the average inflation rate rose to 7.1 percent, the aver-age interest rate increased to only 6.3 percent. This caused a declinein the real interest rate measured on a pretax basis and a larger de-cline in the average after-tax rate (for a person in the 30 percentbracket) from 0.5 percent to —2.7 percent.

The return to saving has fallen because of corporate taxes as wellas individual taxes. Corporate income taxes decrease the returns cor-porations can afford to pay to the holders of their securities. As de-scribed below, these tax burdens also increased substantially duringthe 1970s, In addition, corporate taxes reduce the amount of fundsthat corporations can retain for reinvestment.

At the same time that tax rules have reduced the return on savings,they have encouraged dissaving through borrowing. Because consum-er interest payments are tax deductible, taxpayers who itemize theirdeductions are encouraged to use credit to finance their purchases ofconsumer durables and other goods. As inflation increased duringthe 1970s, the real after-tax cost of borrowing declined and eventual-ly became negative. Indeed, in the first quarter of 1980 the real after-tax cost of borrowing for a taxpayer in the 30 percent bracket was—1.2 percent. The encouragement of borrowing to finance purchasesof durable goods probably reduced the aggregate saving rate sub-stantially during the 1970s.

The tax reforms supported by the President in 1981and enactedby the Congress were designed to increase saving. Reductions inmarginal tax rates raise the after-tax return to saving and the after-tax cost of borrowing. The Economic Recovery Tax Act of 1981 willreduce the marginal tax rate facing a median income family in 1984from 28 percent, which would have occurred under pre-1981 law, to22 percent. The act immediately reduced the marginal tax rate onhigh income taxpayers, who account for a large fraction of personalsaving, from 70 to 50 percent.

87Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 94: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

The Economic Recovery Tax Act of 1981 also contained severalother provisions directed specifically at encouraging private saving.The Individual Retirement Account (IRA) provisions in the tax codewere extended to cover the entire working population. Working indi-viduals are now permitted to make a yearly tax deductible contribu-tion of $2,000 to finance consumption during retirement. Taxes areonly paid when the funds plus accumulated interest are withdrawnfrom the IRA. Private estimates suggest a substantial response to thislegislation, with about $10 billion placed in IRAs during 1982. A cru-cial issue in evaluating the efficiency of IRAs is their effectiveness inraising saving incentives on the margin. Some critics have arguedthat IRAs do not provide an incremental incentive for saving becausecontributors can simply transfer funds from other sources without in-creasing total savings. While this occurs to some extent, it is certainlynot universal and will decrease in the future as contributors exhausttheir funds available from other sources. The fragmentary evidenceavailable from private sources suggests that more than half of all IRAcontributors contribute less than the maximum amount allowable, in-dicating that they do face increased saving incentives on the margin.

The 1981 tax legislation also provided for an interest exclusionstarting in 1985, allowing individuals to exclude 15 percent of theirnet interest income up to a limit of $3,000. This will also raise thereturn to savings and spur capital formation. Extending the exclusionto dividends as well as interest payments would reduce the tax biasfavoring debt over equity as a source of corporate finance.

The 1981 tax act also raised the return to saving by reducing thetop marginal rate on capital gains from 28 percent to 20 percent.This reform partially compensates for the serious distorting effect ofinflation on the measurement of capital gains. Because of inflation,an owner of an asset that experiences no real appreciation will never-theless become liable, at the time of sale, for taxes on the nominalappreciation of the asset. Complete elimination of this distortionwould require indexation for inflation in the measurement of capitalgains.

In recent years support has grown among economists and othertax experts for moving the tax system toward taxation of consump-tion and away from taxation of income. This change might entail ex-panding the existing exclusions of interest and dividend income andthose mechanisms, such as IRAs, which permit tax-deferred accumu-lation of savings. It might also involve limiting the deduction of in-terest expenses for consumer borrowing. Movement toward taxationof consumption is supported by some advocates on the grounds thattaxing individuals on what they take from the economy is "more fair"than taxing what they contribute to the economy. A tax system based

88Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 95: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

on consumption taxation might also prove easier to administer thanthe current system because it would eliminate many of the problemsinvolved in measuring certain types of capital income.

FINANCIAL REGULATION AND PRIVATE SAVING

An additional set of public policies that has probably discouragedprivate saving over the last several decades is the regulation of finan-cial institutions. As Chart 4-3 shows, small savers holding savings ac-counts subject to Regulation Q,have received below market rates ofinterest, and holders of checking accounts have received even lowerrates of interest. These low returns are largely consequences of regu-lations limiting the interest rates financial institutions may pay oncustomer deposits. As late as 1980, the spread between Treasury billrates and the yield on savings deposits subject to Regulation Q wasas great as 8 percent.

The adverse effects of financial regulations on personal savinghave probably lessened considerably in recent years, due to both pri-vate and public actions. In the private sector, the development andexplosive growth of money market funds has made it possible formost high and middle income savers to receive market rates of inter-est. Legislation adopted in 1982 with Administration support has al-lowed commercial banks and thrift institutions to offer financial in-struments with competitive interest rates to a wide range of deposi-tors.

The Administration has strongly supported removal of the manyunnecessary regulations that have impeded competition in the finan-cial services industry. As discussed in more detail in Chapter 5, theDepository Institutions Deregulation and Monetary Control Act of1980 and the Depository Institutions Act of 1982 have played impor-tant roles in beginning this process of deregulation. Banks and thriftinstitutions can now offer insured accounts that are competitive withmoney market funds in terms of both the interest rates they pay andthe services they provide, thereby increasing incentives for saving.

A related development has occurred in the Federal Government'spolicies regarding U.S. Savings Bonds. Savings bonds have historical-ly paid low rates of return. In 1980, 10-year Treasury bonds paid11.5 percent, while Series EE Savings Bonds paid an annual yield ofonly 7 percent from issue to maturity 11 years later. Because of legis-lation recently proposed by the President and passed by the Con-gress, the return on savings bonds is now based on market rates. Be-tween November 1, 1982, and April 30, 1983, for example, U.S. Sav-ings Bonds will earn 11.09 percent if they are held at least 5 years.Apart from making saving more attractive to savings bond purchas-

89

Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 96: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

Chart 4-3

Three-Month Treasury Bill Rate andRegulation Q Maximum Rate on Savings Accounts

PERCENT PER YEAR

16

14

12

10

MAXIMUM RATE ONSAVINGS ACCOUNTS

\

1950 1955 1960 1965 1970

SOURCE: BOARD OF GOVERNORS OF THE FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM.

1975 1 9 8 0

ers> the new rates on Series EE bonds are desirable on equitygrounds because small savers can now obtain yields close to those re-ceived by their higher income counterparts.

THE ROLE OF INTERNATIONAL CAPITAL FLOWS

It is likely that budget deficits, tax policies, and ceilings on bankinterest rates have contributed to the lower net saving rates whichthe United States has experienced in recent years. In theory, howev-er, this low level of saving need not have strictly limited the level offunds available for investment. Funds from abroad can also financeinvestment in the United States. The link between domestic invest-ment and domestic saving is not absolute.

90Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 97: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

Nevertheless, a number of economic studies cast doubt on theproposition that the United States could offset low domestic savingrates through sustained borrowing from abroad. These studies havefound a consistently high correlation between rates of domestic in-vestment and domestic saving in the major industrialized countries.While the reasons for these results are not well understood, they mayreflect the high information costs and serious monitoring difficultiesassociated with holding foreign investments. Whatever the exactreason for the historically high correlation between domestic savingand investment, it suggests that increasing the rate of investment inthe United States significantly will probably require policy measureswhich increase domestic saving.

Insofar as savings from abroad are available for investment in theUnited States, it is not clear that they provide a desirable substitutefor domestic saving. Throughout most of the postwar period, theUnited States was a net exporter of capital. However, the UnitedStates has recently experienced a large surplus in its capital accountand incurred a large offsetting deficit in its current account. This hasentailed large merchandise trade deficits, with deleterious impacts onU.S. export industries and those domestic industries which competewith imports.

THE ALLOCATION OF CAPITAL

With only a relatively small fraction of GNP available to finance in-vestment, and with large budget deficits looming over the next fewyears, the allocation of capital in the United States among alternativeuses takes on added importance. In addition to holding down therate of national saving, previous fiscal and monetary policies havetended to alter the allocation of capital investment, favoring housing,consumer durables, and State and local construction at the expenseof business investment. Inflation, caused by overly expansionarymonetary policies, and taxes interact to affect the incentives ondifferent kinds of investments. While a sound economic recovery willboost saving sufficiently to provide for increases in all forms of in-vestment, eliminating tax-induced distortions in the allocation of cap-ital would also aid in regaining a rapidly rising standard of living.

It is useful to examine how the tax structure has very different ef-fects on alternative forms of investment. The income from invest-ments by corporations is taxed at both the individual and the corpo-rate level. Corporate profits are taxed as they are earned. Whenthese profits are received by shareholders in the form of either divi-dends or capital gains, they are taxed again. By contrast, the implicitreturns from most other forms of investment remain untaxed. The

91Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 98: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

services to investors in owner-occupied housing and consumer dura-bles are largely untaxed.

The bias in our tax system against corporate capital investment wasexacerbated during the 1970s by the effects of inflation. Corpora-tions are permitted to take depreciation allowances based on historicrather than replacement costs for tax purposes. Thus, as the rate ofinflation increases, the real value of depreciation allowances de-creases, and the tax burden as a share of real profits rises. Anothersource of inflation-induced corporate tax increases is that inflationcauses "phantom" gains in the value of inventories, raising taxes forfirms using the first-in, first-out method of inventory valuation. Onestudy estimated that the tax law's use of historic costs rather than re-placement costs for depreciation purposes raised corporate tax pay-ments by $19.1 billion in 1977, and raised tax burdens for corpora-tions using first-in, first-out inventory accounting by $7.0 billion. Al-though these tax increases were partially offset because corporationsdeduct nominal rather than real interest payments in calculating theirtaxable income, the gains at the corporate level from the deductibilityof nominal interest are offset to some extent by losses from taxationof the inflation component of interest rates at the individual level.

The effects of the interaction of taxes and inflation reached dra-matic proportions during the 1970s. Increased taxation led to largemarket revaluations of corporate and noncorporate capital assets.The "q ratio," which measures the market value of capital in thenonfinancial corporate sector relative to its reproduction cost, fellfrom 1.09 in 1970 to .67 in 1980. The price of single-family nonfarmdwellings relative to the price of consumption goods rose by 29 per-cent during the same period. During the last 2 years of falling infla-tion, however, the q ratio rose to about .80 in the fourth quarter of1982, and the relative price of single-family nonfarm dwellings fell by5.3 percent.

The supply of different types of capital goods ultimately dependson their relative prices. The observation that reductions in inflationare associated with changes in the relative prices of different capitalgoods suggests that the reductions in inflation are likely to cause areallocation of capital toward plant and equipment investment andaway from investments in consumer durables and housing. Theseshifts simply reflect the reduced magnitude of the biases caused byour current tax system in periods of inflation.

TAX POLICY AND INVESTMENT

In 1981 the Congress instituted the accelerated cost recoverysystem as part of the Economic Recovery Tax Act. This tax legisla-

92Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 99: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

tion permitted businesses to depreciate most purchases of equipmentaccording to an accelerated 5-year schedule. It also permitted busi-nesses to depreciate structures over 15 years using a 175 percent de-clining balance schedule. The Economic Recovery Tax Act preservedthe investment tax credit on equipment and called for further accel-erations in depreciation schedules in 1985 and 1986.

The 1982 Tax Equity and Fiscal Responsibility Act altered the pro-visions of the Economic Recovery Tax Act by instituting a half-basisadjustment for investment tax credits in calculating depreciation andby eliminating the. planned further accelerations in depreciationschedules. Table 4-4 shows the present value of the depreciation de-ductions and investment tax credits received by a corporation underthe old accelerated depreciation system, Economic Recovery Tax Act(ERTA) rules and Tax Equity and Fiscal Responsibility Act (TEFRA)rules. The present value is calculated for a variety of hypotheticalcombinations of discount and inflation rates.

TABLE 4-4.—Investment incentives 1 under different tax laws

[5-year property]

Real interest rate

1 percent

4 percent

7 percent.....

10 percent

Tax law

Pre-ERTA 2

ERTATEFRA

Pre-ERTA 2.ERTATEFRA

Pre-ERTA 2.ERTATEFRA

Pre-ERTA 2

ERTATEFRA

Inflation rate (percent)

4

.495

.516

.495

.462

.492

.472

.435

.471

.452

.412

.452

.435

6

.473

.500

.480

.444

.478

.459

.419

.458

.440

.397

.440

.423

8

.454

.486

.466

.427

.465

.446

.404

.446

.428

,384,429.412

10

.436

.472

.454

.412

.452

.435

.390

.434

.418

.372

.418

.402

'Present value of depreciation deductions and investment tax credits per dollar of Investment.2 Assumes depreciation over 9.5 years using double-declining balance switching to sum of years digits.Source: Council of Economic Advisers.

Three qualitative conclusions emerge from these calculations. First,current tax laws provide significantly more stimulus to most catego-ries of investment than did the pre-1981 law. Second, the reductionin inflation that has occurred during the past 2 years has also in-creased substantially the value of the depreciation allowances. Third,even with a relatively short 5-year cost recovery period, the value ofthe investment incentives remains quite sensitive to the anticipatedrate of inflation.

In considering the economic effects of tax policies on investment,it is crucial to distinguish between measures which apply only to newinvestment, such as accelerated depreciation and the investment taxcredit, and measures which reduce the tax burden on all kinds of

93

Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 100: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

capital income, such as corporate rate reductions. These two types ofinvestment incentives produce very different economic effects. Meas-ures which apply only to new investments affect only marginal invest-ment decisions; no tax benefit is conferred on the owners of existingcapital. Therefore, in the short term more investment is stimulatedper dollar of immediate revenue loss than would prove the case if thetax benefit were conferred on all capital. The tax legislation enactedin 1981 relied on tax incentives for new investments.

Incentives for new investment are viewed by some observers asbenefiting primarily large wealthholders, but the reality may bedifferent. Since measures like the accelerated cost recovery systemreduce the effective cost of purchasing new capital goods, they arelikely to reduce the value of the old capital goods with which theycompete. For example, a subsidy for the purchase of new cars willreduce the value of used cars. Likewise, reduced taxation of new in-vestment may temporarily reduce the level of stock market prices,which in part reflects the market's valuation of existing capital. Thus,investment incentives like those recently enacted, while raising therate of return on new investments, may actually hurt holders of exist-ing wealth. Workers should benefit as greater capital accumulationraises their productivity and wages. The effect on the distribution ofincome is ambiguous* and might even prove progressive.

Beginning with the enactment of the accelerated depreciation pro-visions in 1954, policy has tended to rely on investment incentivesthat stimulate new investment and do not benefit existing invest-ments. This continued reliance on measures that benefit new capitalat the expense of existing capital carries a subtle but real risk. As in-vestors come to anticipate this pattern of public policy, they may takeinto account expected future changes in tax laws as they make invest-ment decisions. This might have an unintended effect. Investors whoexpect capital losses are less likely to invest. Stated differently, if theeffective purchase price of new capital goods is expected to declinebecause of tax reforms, there will be a tendency to defer investments.This suggests that in designing future reforms it may be desirable toconsider reducing taxes on existing as well as new capital.

While current tax law provides significantly more stimulus to in-vestment than did earlier law, there is room for further reform. Thevalue of depreciation allowances is still dependent on the rate of in-flation, increasing the uncertainty of investment decisions. The accel-eration of depreciation allowances has substantially reduced theburden of the corporate income tax, but investment in plant andequipment is still discouraged by taxes on dividends and capitalgains.

94Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 101: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

A final problem under current tax law is the treatment of corporatelosses. Because of low profits due to cyclical conditions, or large de-preciation write-offs, many corporations do not have taxable incomein some years, reducing the efficacy of investment incentives duringthose periods.

CONCLUSIONS

The tax programs put in place in the last 2 years should play animportant role in increasing capital formation in the United States.Yet, much more can be done to ensure a rapidly growing standard ofliving in coming years. It is crucial that we take action to reduce largeFederal deficits and to further stimulate private saving and invest-ment.

In considering the issue of capital formation, policymakers shouldtake a long view. The reasons for increasing capital formation pri-marily involve long-run growth rather than current economic condi-tions. We should not allow the poor performance of investmentduring a period of recession and high deficits to blind us to the im-portance of policies that can help us achieve sustained and rapid eco-nomic growth in the years to come.

95Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 102: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

CHAPTER 5

The Burden of Economic RegulationFOR MANY DECADES, the Federal Government has regulated the

prices and the conditions for entry in certain sectors of the U.S.economy. This type of regulation, often called "economic regula-tion,*' was broadly applied to the transportation, communications,and financial sectors of the economy. Whatever historical purposeswere served by economic regulation, there is an increasing consensusthat much of this Federal regulation no longer serves the interests ofthe contemporary economy. Indeed, over the last several years a sub-stantial part of this economic regulation has been relaxed or elimi-nated.

A second form of regulation, "social regulation," is addressed tosituations where unregulated activity may pose significant threats topublic health, safety, or the environment. Although there is an in-creasing consensus that economic regulation should be substantiallyreduced, no such consensus exists concerning social regulation. Also,unlike economic regulation, the magnitude of social regulation hasgrown rapidly since the mid-1960s with the passage of extensive en-vironmental and safety legislation.

Economic regulation has diminished in recent years due to a vari-ety of deregulation measures. Substantial evidence is now availableconcerning the performance of industries that have experienced fullor partial deregulation. This chapter summarizes the history of Fed-eral economic regulation, its rationale, its impacts, and the effects ofrecent laws designed to ease economic regulation. The chapter alsoidentifies some opportunities for further deregulation. Special atten-tion is given to the economic regulation of energy, transportation,communications, and financial markets.

A BRIEF HISTORY OF ECONOMIC REGULATION

The first broad body of Federal economic regulation was estab-lished in 1887, when the Congress created the Interstate CommerceCommission (ICC) to resolve the increasing controversies betweenthe railroads and shippers. Most of the regulation of other sectors,except for energy, was established by the end of the 1930s and re-

96Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 103: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

fleeted efforts to deal with problems similar to those that led to thecreation of the ICC. The agencies created in the 1930s tended to op-erate in much the same way as the ICC, and the outcome was muchthe same.

Economic regulation often evolved from a dispute among several groups. Forexample, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) was cre-ated to resolve disputes among users of the broadcast spectrum. TheCivil Aeronautics Board (CAB) was created to resolve a disputeamong several Federal agencies concerning the administration of air-mail contracts.

Congress delegated direct resolution of these disputes to an independent agencywith very general authority. The typical "public convenience and necessi-ty" standard cited in the enabling legislation provides no direct guid-ance about how the regulatory agencies should resolve disputes. Theindependent commissions are essentially quasi-judicial institutionsthat have developed their own bodies of administrative law.

The initial regulations of the independent agencies often served the interests ofthe regulated industry. For example, some scholars contend that theICC, by initially reinforcing the railroad cartels, caused higher aver-age prices and reduced the variance of prices. For a long time, boththe CAB and the FCC restricted entry to the number of firms operat-ing at the time these commissions were created.

The initial regulation led to more regulation that served to protect the inter-ests of the initially regulated firms. For example , ICC regulat ion was ex-tended to trucks, buses, freight-forwarders, and barges, thus restrain-ing the developing competition to the railroads. FCC regulation wasextended to cable television, protecting broadcasters using the fre-quency spectrum.

Over the long run, many economic regulations have not served the interests ofeither producers or consumers. The development of excess capacity, rela-tively high wages, restraints on technological improvements and op-erating practices, and competition outside the regulated environmentled to the lower-than-average rates of return in many of the regulat-ed industries. Consumers have often been adversely affected byhigher prices and restrictions on service.

One other pattern of economic regulation was introduced in the1930s. A belief that the depression was caused by excessive competi-tion provided a rationale for many laws and regulations that directlyrestricted entry, output, and competition. The broadest such law, theNational Industrial Recovery Act, was declared unconstitutional;other similar legislation, such as the Agricultural Adjustment Act of1938, is still in force. One might argue that the several regulatorycommissions and laws approved in the 1930s achieved their intended

97

Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 104: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

effect of raising prices. A later generation questioned whether thiseffect was desirable.

THE TRADITIONAL RATIONALE FOR ECONOMIC REGULATION

The two traditional justifications for economic regulation havebeen to preserve the potential economic efficiencies associated withnatural monopoly in some industries and to eliminate the inefficien-cies thought to be associated with excessive competition in others.

Natural Monopoly

A natural monopoly exists when the entire relevant demand for agood or service can be satisfied at the least total cost by a single firm.At the local level it is probably wasteful to have duplicate distributionsystems to provide telephone, electric, gas, and water services.Among industries regulated at the Federal level, major gas pipelinesand high-voltage electric lines are often considered natural monopo-lies. Long-distance telephone transmission may also be a natural mo-nopoly in areas of low density. Railroads are a potential natural mo-nopoly only for that declining share of rail traffic for which the ship-per does not have an effective choice of carrier or mode of transport.

Such industries present a dilemma. Competition may result in un-necessarily high production costs through duplication of facilities, butan unregulated monopoly may not act in the public interest. Withoutregulation, a monopoly would probably set prices too high and pro-duce too little, with consumers willing to pay more for additionaloutput than the cost of supplying that output. A typical solution tothis dilemma is maximum price regulation. The primary objective ofprice regulation is to set the monopoly's price as close as possible toincremental cost while still assuring the monopoly a market rate ofreturn on its investment.

The growth of demand or the introduction of substitutes for aproduct can often transform a natural monopoly into what—in theabsence of regulation—could become an effectively competitive in-dustry. Oil pipelines, for example, are often assumed to be naturalmonopolies. However, these pipelines now face competition fromother pipelines and other modes of transportation. Regrettably, priceregulation often continues long after it is efficient, restricting theemergence of a competitive market. The history of the railroads pro-vides a compelling illustration. In many parts of the country rail lineswere few and far between in the 19th century. But as the market fortransportation services grew, and as technology developed, auto-mobiles, buses, and airplanes provided increasing competition forpassenger traffic, and trucks, barges, and pipelines provided increas-ing competition for freight. The natural monopoly justification for

98

Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 105: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

regulation was probably not applicable in most rail markets by themiddle of the 20th century.

Even in markets where elements of natural monopoly still exist,government intervention will not necessarily produce a more efficientuse of resources. Increasingly, analysts are coming to recognize that,just as there are market imperfections, there are also government im-perfections that must be considered in making public policy choices.The relevant tradeoffs are not between imperfect markets and flaw-less government regulation, but rather between markets with imper-fections and regulation which is imprecise and sometimes counter-productive.

Excessive Competition

The second traditional justification for economic regulation is thatunfettered markets result in excessive competition. This justification wasused for regulating railroads in the late 19th century and other in-dustries in the 1930s. A common element in early discussions of ex-cessive competition was that without regulation, unrestrained rivalryamong firms would result in losses for some or all of them and thatadequate production of an otherwise viable product would prove un-sustainable. This argument, which was often rather vague, failed tonote that business losses are not a sufficient basis for government in-tervention. Losses and business failures are a normal part of the op-eration of competitive markets; they act to eliminate inefficient firmsand to shift production to meet changes in consumer demands.

While the concept of excessive competition was not generally welldefined, it has now come to refer to at least four possible sources ofmarket imperfection: natural monopoly, cyclical demand with imper-fect capital markets, predatory pricing, and suboptimal product qual-ity.

As explained earlier, where natural monopoly conditions exist,competition among several firms can lead to higher costs because ofwasteful duplication.

A second interpretation of excessive competition is based on theargument that certain industries, particularly those with cyclicaldemand and heavy fixed investment, are prone to excessive pricefluctuations. According to this argument, firms are forced to closedown during recessions and then unnecessarily incur large start-upcosts during recovery because of alleged imperfections in capitalmarkets. These wasteful shutdown and start-up costs are avoidable, itis argued, if government regulation sets minimum prices or allowsfirms to do so.

A third definition of excessive competition focuses on the conceptof predatory pricing. Unregulated competition in some markets is al-leged to result in monopolization by a firm that engages in predatory

99

Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 106: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

pricing—setting prices below cost in order to drive out competitors.To succeed, a predator must outlast its rivals and barriers must existto prevent the entry of new competitors once the predator raisesprices. Regulation to prevent firms from charging excessively lowprices is intended to prevent such predatory practices and hence thehigher monopolistic prices that would prevail once the predator haseliminated its competitors. No consensus exists among economiststhat such predatory tactics are effective. Indeed, many economists be-lieve that apparently "predatory" behavior, if ever successful, is amanifestation of cost advantages or an enhanced ability to bear risk.

A fourth interpretation concerns the alleged tendency of certaincompetitive markets to produce goods or services of inadequate qual-ity, safety, or reliability if consumers are imperfectly informed aboutthose characteristics. For example, it has been argued that undercompetitive pressure banks might choose excessively risky invest-ments in order to offer their customers high rates of interest on de-posits. Similarly, some have claimed that airlines may skimp on safetyin a highly competitive market. Even if such claims were true, it doesnot follow that restricting competition will necessarily improve qual-ity or safety. Moreover, there are more direct ways of addressingthese potential market defects, such as Federal Aviation Administra-tion airplane safety inspections and Federal Deposit Insurance Cor-poration guarantees.

PROBLEMS OF ECONOMIC REGULATION

Most economists agree that the regulation of price and entry inmarkets that would otherwise be competitive is inefficient. Regulationof transportation, for example, has generally resulted in higherprices, higher production costs, and slower technological growth.Regulation of oil and gas prices has occasionally kept prices too low,causing shortages and inefficient choices among competing fuels.

Deregulation usually leads to a reduction in cost to the marginaluser, whether the discarded regulations established maximum orminimum prices. A price kept below the market price by regulationhas the effect of creating a system of nonprice rationing in which ex-cluded consumers are forced to pay higher prices for substitutes. Theelimination of maximum price ceilings may lead to higher averageprices but lower prices to the marginal consumer. Exceptions to thisconclusion are where natural monopoly conditions exist or whereregulations lead to some cross-subsidy among consumers.

In some cases, price regulation leads to an excessively high level ofsome service characteristic, because firms are prevented from com-peting on price. Because of price regulation of airlines by the Civil

100

Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 107: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

Aeronautics Board, for example, the airlines competed primarilythrough frequency of flights, which led to low load factors and con-siderable excess capacity.

Direct economic inefficiencies are not the only costs of rate andentry regulation in inherently competitive industries. Some additionalresources are used to lobby politicians and regulators for favorableregulatory actions. The greater the benefits to groups created by reg-ulation, the more such groups have an incentive to spend to blockderegulation. The magnitude of the benefits defended are often sub-stantial. Trucking firms have sold operating rights, initially grantedthem by the ICC, for over $20 million, and the broadcast rights ofindividual television stations have sold for substantially more.

The argument that full deregulation is the appropriate policy forindustries with competitive market structures applies strictly only inthe long run. To minimize the risk of adverse short-run conse-quences from deregulation, most deregulatory initiatives have calledfor either partial deregulation or a gradual transition to full deregula-tion. The Civil Aeronautics Board was not immediately abolished bythe Congress, and it retained some temporary domestic authoritythrough 1982. The Staggers Rail Act provided railroads with greaterprice flexibility but did not provide for eventual elimination of allprice and entry controls. The Natural Gas Policy Act provides foronly partial deregulation of natural gas prices.

It is not clear how much information about the long-run benefitsof deregulation can be obtained by observing the process of gradualor partial deregulation. For example, minimum price regulation maycause excess capacity in an industry. When deregulation occurs, somefirms in the industry may go bankrupt. This may lead some to con-sider deregulation a failure and to propose re-regulation. Once theexcess capacity is eliminated, however, the industry may operateprofitably without any regulation.

Economists can offer one important piece of advice on partial de-regulation: relaxing price restrictions without also relaxing entry re-strictions may cause problems, such as developed in the air freightmarket. Eliminating minimum price constraints while barring entrymay result in predation. Eliminating maxium price restrictions with-out allowing free entry may result in monopoly pricing.

Competitive economic forces, while powerful, are not the onlymeans available to consumers of products from deregulated indus-tries to defend themselves. Antitrust policies may also be used toprotect consumers against the abuses regulation is sometimesclaimed to prevent. The antitrust laws prohibit anticompetitive be-havior. Since regulated industries have often enjoyed broad exemp-tions from the antitrust laws, a review of the antitrust policies per-

101Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 108: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

taining to these industries should accompany the deregulation proc-ess. At the same time, however, it is important to avoid misusing theantitrust laws to maintain inappropriate types of regulation.

ENERGY POLICY

The pricing and allocation of energy resources was a frequentfocus of public policies over the last decade. Many of these policiesreduced the long-run supply of these important resources. In the lastfew years, several measures have been taken to remove the inefficien-cies and uncertainty caused by these policies.

STEPS TOWARD A MARKET-ORIENTED OIL POLICY

In January 1981, President Reagan ended the petroleum price andallocation controls that were previously scheduled to expire in Sep-tember 1981. Oil prices were first directly controlled as part of thegeneral system of wage and price guidelines imposed in 1971. Thedata on subsequent production, drilling, consumption, imports, andthe energy/gross national product (GNP) ratio suggest that oil pricederegulation has had many beneficial effects.

Despite the disincentives provided by the "windfall profits"(excise) tax on crude oil, the data suggest that decontrol has reversedthe steady decline in production (exclusive of Alaska) observedduring the period of price controls. As of October 1982, there wereseven consecutive monthly production increases over year-earlierlevels, a series of increases not observed in the United States for 10years. Reported oil well completions in 1982 were 49 percent higherthan in 1980, despite the recent decline in real oil prices.

Since full decontrol, U.S. consumption has decreased by almost 11percent. While part of this decline is due to the recession, a majorcause is the continuing adjustment to the price increases of the1970s. Since decontrol, the energy/GNP ratio has declined by over 5percent and imports (net of additions to the Strategic Petroleum Re-serve) have declined by about 34 percent. The elimination of the reg-ulatory framework for petroleum prices removed the artificial incen-tives to import crude oil and residual fuel oil. The weakening of oilprices has contributed to a stronger dollar and, thus, to lower priceson all imported products.

NATURAL GAS PRICING AND ALLOCATION

Following the 1954 Supreme Court decision in Phillips Petroleum Co.v. Wisconsin, the wellhead prices of natural gas sold in interstate com-merce were regulated by the Federal Power Commission (FPC). Sinceintrastate gas prices were not subject to regulation, a two-market

102

Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 109: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

system resulted. Price controls, when effective, led to shortages inthe interstate market both because the interstate pipelines could notcompete effectively against intrastate pipelines for gas supplies, andbecause artificially low prices encouraged consumers to demandmore natural gas than they would have otherwise.

Rising oil prices in the 1970s triggered occasional gas shortages ininterstate markets. Industrial use of gas was curtailed during periodsof shortages, and many potential users of gas, both at the industrialand residential level, were proscribed from using gas. The abnormal-ly cold winter of 1977 produced a severe interstate gas shortage, re-sulting in numerous factory shutdowns, thousands of layoffs, andother serious problems. It was evident by the mid-1970s that the ex-isting system of wellhead price controls produced serious inefficien-cies causing the underproduction of gas for the interstate market andthe misallocation of gas between the interstate and intrastate marketsand among different users within the interstate markets.

The Natural Gas Policy Act of 1978

The natural gas regulatory environment was changed substantiallyby passage of the Natural Gas Policy Act (NGPA) in 1978. This actwas intended to encourage production by deregulating the prices ofnewly discovered gas while restraining the growth of average gasprices through permanent controls on the price of older gas. TheFederal Energy Regulatory Commission replaced the Federal PowerCommission, and price controls were extended to gas sold in intra-state markets. Over twenty regulated categories of gas were created,each with its own initial ceiling price and rules for price escalationover time.

The NGPA provides for the phased deregulation of the wellheadprice of most gas discovered after 1977, which should account for 40to 60 percent of all gas in January 1985, while a smaller volume ofgas is scheduled for deregulation in July 1987. A small amount ofhigh-cost new gas was deregulated under the NGPA in 1979. Mostgas to be deregulated in 1985 or 1987 is fixed until those dates at aprice, in inflation-adjusted dollars, leading to the oil equivalent pricelevel existing in 1978. The NGPA also includes "incremental pricing"provisions intended to allocate high-priced gas to industrial users,thus preserving lower prices for other users. Along with the NGPA,the Congress passed the Powerplant and Industrial Fuel Use Act; thislaw authorizes nonprice rationing of gas to counter the problems in-herent in continued price controls.

As with many efforts to regulate prices, the NGPA has created nu-merous problems. Instead of producing the lowest cost gas suppliesfirst and moving successively to higher cost sources, producers areinduced by the different price categories to produce high-cost gas

103Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 110: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

first in many cases, and generally to shift production efforts awayfrom cost-minimizing alternatives. The initial boom in the productionof deep gas illustrated this effect.

Further problems arise from the control of the prices of new gasuntil those prices are decontrolled in 1985 and 1987. Since oil priceshave risen substantially since 1978, partial decontrol will generate acontinued increase in delivered gas prices in 1985 as consumers bidup gas prices to levels equivalent with those of close substitutes suchas oil. Although real gas prices have risen and real oil prices havefallen in the last year, average real domestic wellhead prices of gaswill rise by about 28 percent between 1983 and 1985 if there is nochange in the NGPA according to a preliminary Department ofEnergy estimate.

The price of decontrolled gas is averaged with the price of con-trolled gas in determining the price to gas users and the demand forgas is affected by prices for fuel substitutes. This is reflected in pre-liminary Department of Energy estimates which indicate that theaverage 1985 prices of gas under the NGPA are not likely to differgreatly from those that would evolve under full decontrol. Under thepartial decontrol authorized by NGPA, the prices of decontrolled gasare bid up somewhat above the levels that would be observed in afully decontrolled market. Indeed, even now decontrolled deep gas isbeing sold at the wellhead for over $7.00 per million cubic feet. Thepreliminary Department of Energy estimates suggest that the average1985 price under full decontrol will be $3.78 per million cubic feet(both in 1982 dollars).

The higher prices to be paid for decontrolled gas in 1985 andthereafter suggest that the average gas consumer will not benefitfrom the remaining controls, and that the primary beneficiaries willbe the producers of decontrolled gas. Under the NGPA, however,different groups of consumers will fare differently. Pipelines withaccess to substantial quantities of price-controlled gas will be able tobid deregulated gas away from other pipelines. This is because thehigher prices on decontrolled gas can be averaged with the lowerprices paid for gas still subject to controls.

This means, for some period, that consumers in different regionsmay face different average prices, and that some gas will be reallocat-ed artifically because of differential access to controlled gas. In par-ticular, the intrastate pipelines will have relatively little access to con-trolled gas, and so some amount of gas will shift out of the intrastatemarket into the interstate market. Interstate pipelines also will vary intheir ability to bid for decontrolled gas, depending on their access tocontrolled gas and the actions of local regulatory authorities. In sum-mary, in addition to the waste in gas production caused by the

104Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 111: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

NGPA, both controlled and decontrolled gas will be allocated ineffi-ciently among pipelines. The preliminary Department of Energy esti-mate of the present value of the efficiency gain that would accrue tothe economy from full gas decontrol in 1983, relative to the partialderegulation authorized by the NGPA, is about $4.2 billion (in 1982dollars).

The prospect of a price increase in 1985 may provide an impetustoward extension of the NGPA price controls beyond 1985. Such anextension would sustain the inefficiencies experienced as a result ofthe NGPA. The preliminary Department of Energy estimate of thepresent value of the efficiency gain of full decontrol in 1983, relativeto extension to 1995 of price controls now imposed by the NGPA, isabout $27 billion (in 1982 dollars). Because gas production would bereduced by extension of controls, oil consumption would probablyincrease. The preliminary Department of Energy estimate is that ex-tension of gas price controls would increase oil import levels byabout 288,000 barrels per day between 1983 and 1995.

Reported gas well completions in 1982 increased 21 percent over1980, while under full decontrol, reported oil well completions in-creased by 49 percent in the same period. Total proved gas reserves(excluding Prudhoe Bay) declined over one-third during the 1970s.The extension of controls thus would have very serious implicationsfor future domestic gas reserves.

Recent Natural Gas Price Developments

Natural gas prices have risen sharply in recent months because gascontrolled at relatively low prices is gradually becoming a smallercomponent of total production and because some contracts fixingvery low prices have expired. Moreover, the NGPA allows price in-creases for some gas beyond a simple inflation adjustment. While itappears that gas prices in some regions have reached short-termmarket clearing levels, that is not true for other regions. On average,gas prices are still apparently below market clearing levels—hence,the expected price increase in 1985 under the path outlined by theNGPA.

Some observers have noted that pipelines are buying expensive gaswhile gas subject to lower price ceilings remains unsold. They haveconcluded from this that gas markets are "irrational," and that fullprice decontrol would not work effectively. This analysis is question-able. Under "take-or-pay" contracts, pipelines agree to pay for agiven volume of gas whether or not they resell ("take") it. Sinceprice controls have prevented pipelines from competing for gas onthe basis of price, they compete on the basis of contract terms. In-creased "take-or-pay" contractual requirements are one form of suchnonprice competition. This behavior is a rational response to the ar-

105Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 112: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

tificial constraints imposed by price controls and the general expecta-tion of future shortages. In essence, increased "take-or-pay*' require-ments are a way for pipelines (and implicitly their customers) to buyinsurance against future shortages. Pipelines with high levels of"take-or-pay" commitments must now take and pay for relatively ex-pensive gas, even though "cheaper** gas is available. This is "irra-tional" only in hindsight since surpluses of gas exist. If shortages haddeveloped instead, the use of "take-or-pay*' commitments would lookquite rational and "farsighted."

EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS

Conditions in the world oil market and preceptions about the ef-fects of supply disruptions have both changed substantially in the lastseveral years. Trends in world oil production and consumption aresimilar to those of the United States. World (non-Communist) con-sumption fell from 51.5 million barrels per day (mmbd) in 1978 to45.5 mmbd in 1982. Production outside of the Organization of Petro-leum Exporting Countries (including Communist nations) increasedfrom 30.3 mmbd in 1978 to 34.3 mmbd in 1982 (for the first 10months). Furthermore, excess production capacity in OPEC has in-creased to at least 8.5 mmbd. It is likely that a future oil supply dis-ruption, should one occur, would have smaller proportionate priceeffects than those caused by disruptions during the 1970's. Both theincreasing geographic diversification of production and the presenceof substantial excess production capacity would mitigate the effect offuture disruptions.

The threat to use oil production as a political weapon may be lesseffective then was previously perceived. It is very difficult to "target*'individual nations with such a weapon because the international oiltransport industry has substantial capacity to transfer oil among na-tions. This is why the United States and the Netherlands, despitetheir status as the intended targets of the 1973 embargo, faced thesame prices for imported oil as other oil-importing nations. Gasolinelines in the United States were caused by the U.S. regulations. Equal-ly important, oil producers cannot impose large penalties uponothers without imposing substantial revenue losses upon themselves.

The policies of this Administration reflect the view that prepara-tion for disruptions in energy supplies can best take place throughthe operation of market forces, and that price adjustments presentthe most effective mechanism for dealing with such disruptions whenthey occur. Minimizing the aggregate adverse effects of energysupply disruptions is most efficiently accomplished by allowing pricesto allocate available supplies to their most productive uses and by en-couraging market forces to increase production of substitute fuels.

106Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 113: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

Price and allocation controls only redistribute some of the adverse ef-fects of the disruption away from politically favored groups, thereforemaking matters worse for other groups. In the aggregate, price andallocation controls would exacerbate the adverse effects of the dis-ruption.

Standby controls, even if never implemented, are harmful becausethey increase the perceived likelihood that controls will be imposedand thereby deter private preparedness. This is why the Presidentvetoed the standby controls legislation in March 1982.

Present policies also reflect a recognition that firms may have in-sufficient incentives to prepare for energy supply disruptions, in sub-stantial part because of past government policy. Previous price andallocation controls had the effect of penalizing those who had pre-pared for disruptions and subsidizing those who had not. Because ofgovernmental responses to energy supply disruptions in the past, andthe recent congressional proposal to establish standby price and allo-cation controls, firms must regard as substantial the likelihood thatcontrols would be imposed once again, despite this Administration'sfirm commitment to avoid such policies. This expectation discour-ages both those who expect to benefit from controls and those whoexpect to have their supplies appropriated from preparing sufficientlyfor a disruption beforehand.

In recognition of this perverse effect of past policy, the Administra-tion is striving to build up crude oil stocks in the Strategic PetroleumReserve (SPR) at an efficient rate. Built up to only slightly more than100 million barrels from 1977 until early 1981, the SPR now containsover 290 million barrels and is growing steadily toward.the plannedlevel of 750 million barrels. The SPR is intended to supplement, notsubstitute for, private sector stocks; accordingly, it would be usedonly in the event of a severe disruption. Once a decision was made touse SPR crude oil, it would be sold at market-clearing prices towhomever wished to purchase it. The Strategic Petroleum ReservePlan submitted to the Congress in December 1982 contains a provi-sion allowing the Secretary of Energy to reserve for special groupsfaced with extraordinary circumstances up to 10 percent of a givenperiod's drawdown; oil allocated under this provision would bepriced at the level established in the most recent competitive auctionof SPR crude oil. This provision is not intended as a subsidy for par-ticular groups. The policy of this Administration to fill the SPR at asteady rate will move energy security preparedness in the UnitedStates toward a more optimal level. To the extent that the availabilityof SPR crude oil, combined with other energy policies and programs,enables future Administrations to resist pressures for price and allo-

107Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 114: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

cation controls during a disruption, the SPR may enhance privatesector preparation as well.

Except to the extent that use of foreign energy supplies is in-creased artificially by price controls and other adverse policies, it isnot the policy of this Administration to reduce dependence on for-eign energy suppliers beyond the level determined by market forces.In a world with relatively free trade and substantial capacity for real-location of supplies, the allocative effects of a change in oil prices(other than those operating through the exchange rate) are inde-pendent of whether a given nation's use of foreign supplies is greator small. A disruption would raise prices and thus reallocate all avail-able supplies whether foreign or domestic. Thus, a nation totally self-sufficient in energy supplies still would face the same oil prices as anation totally dependent on foreign sources. It is the policy of thisAdministration to facilitate free trade while preparing for future con-tingencies through primary reliance on market adjustments and judi-cious use of the Strategic Petroleum Reserve.

TRANSPORTATION AND COMMUNICATIONS

The transportation and communications industries serve vital link-age functions in our Nation's economy. Until recently, these indus-tries were broadly subject to traditional rate and entry regulation.

Regulation of most transportation sectors is probably not efficientunder contemporary market conditions. Most transportation markets,due to the mobility of most of the capital assets of the firms in thosemarkets, are highly contestable. That is, with nearly costless entryand exit, new firms can enter markets which have excessive pricesand can take advantage of the profitable opportunities that they pro-vide. Thus, even with significant economies of scale in a transporta-tion market, the threat of entry by new rivals should result in near-competitive pricing of transportation services. Additionally, mosttransportation firms face significant intermodal competition. Theyare also disciplined indirectly in some cases by competitive condi-tions in the national or international markets in which the commod-ities they transport are sold. The only segments of the interstatetransportation system for which regulation on a natural monopolybasis may be justifiable are the major gas pipelines, long-dis-tance electric transmission lines, and those sections of the rail systemwhere shippers do not have an effective choice of carrier or mode oftransport.

Telecommunications, due to a high rate of technological develop-ment, is one of the most rapidly changing sectors of the U.S. econo-my. The Federal Government plays an active role in the telecommu-

108Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 115: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

nications industries through the regulation of common carriers andbroadcasters. Several important steps toward deregulation of theseindustries were initiated in 1982. The government can enhance thedevelopment of these industries through continued deregulation.

EFFECTS OF AVIATION DEREGULATION

Until the late 1970s the Civil Aeronautics Board (CAB) regulatedthe airline industry extensively. It allocated interstate routes amongthe airlines and controlled airline fares on those routes. Through itscontrol of air routes, the CAB restrained entry into the airline indus-try. From its inception in 1938 until the late 1970s, the CAB did notallow any new airline to enter the interstate trunk market. Largely asa consequence, air fares were higher on most interstate routes than ifprice competition and freedom of entry were permitted. This was re-flected by the differences in fares between intrastate city-pairs thatwere not subject to CAB regulation, such as Los Angeles-San Fran-cisco, and comparable interstate city-pairs that were. The latter oftenhad fares that were as much as 60 percent higher than the former.

In 1977 the CAB began to ease restrictions on fares and entry. In1978 the Congress affirmed and extended the CAB's measures bypassing the Airline Deregulation Act. This act provided for the grad-ual deregulation of the airlines, with the termination of CAB domes-tic route authority in 1981, the termination of CAB domestic pricingauthority in 1983, and the elimination of the CAB itself in 1985. Sub-sequent steps were taken to increase potential competition in interna-tional aviation. In July 1982 the U.S. Government entered a multilat-eral agreement with several European governments that permitsgreater flexibility in airline fares for trans-Atlantic flights than waspreviously allowed.

While rising aviation fuel costs, the weak economy, and the 1981air traffic controllers strike complicate assessment of the effects ofgradual deregulation, route and fare competition have increased sub-stantially since 1977. From 1978 to 1981, the number of U.S. certifi-cated airlines more than doubled (from 36 to 86). The market shareof the major trunk airlines declined from 87.3 to 80.4 percent in thepast 3 years while, during this same period, the market share of thelocal, intrastate, and new airlines increased from 11.5 to 16.4 per-cent. Aircraft departures from large, medium, small, and nonhub air-ports increased substantially over the 2 years immediately followingairline deregulation. The percentage of domestic markets with fouror more carriers grew from 13 in May 1978 to 73 in May 1981. InApril 1982, 77 percent of the domestic coach traffic of the major air-lines moved on discount fares, compared to 46 percent in April1978. And while operating expenses per available seat mile rose by

109

Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 116: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

73 percent from 1976 to 1981, airline revenue per available seat milerose by only 58 percent in this same period.

Deregulation has also led to increases in operating efficiency. Air-line labor cost increases have slowed and have actually declined rela-tive to inflation. The established airlines have been forced to controltheir labor costs in order to compete effectively with the new en-trants, many of which pay substantially lower wages. Load factors(the ratio of revenue passenger miles to available seat miles) rosefrom an average of less than 55 percent between 1973 and 1977 tomore than 59 percent between 1978 and 1982. Airlines are nowusing a wider variety of airplanes to serve their diverse markets.Small markets are more likely to be served by smaller airplanes.

There is little need to fear monopoly in airline markets when theCAB expires. Several studies have demonstrated that no system-wideeconomies of scale exist. Since airplanes are easily transferable fromone market to another, airline markets are readily con testable. Theprospect of potential entry by rival carriers creates pressures forclose-to-competitive fares even in markets served by only one airline.

Deregulation of airlines has established a competitive and more ef-ficient airline industry. As air travel in the United States increasesover this decade and as the busiest airports become even more con-gested, the new competitive structure may be challenged. Allowingcompetition and the full transferability of the right to land and takeoff at these airports may be necessary to sustain this competitivestructure. Additionally, the maintenance and future development of asafe and effective national airway system is important to ensure thatconsumers are well served.

EFFECTS OF PARTIAL DEREGULATION IN SURFACE TRANSPORTATION

The traditional rate and entry regulation of the trucking, freight-forwarder, intercity bus, barge, and maritime industries is now largelyout of date. Many studies have demonstrated the absence of signifi-cant economies of scale in these industries, weakening the "naturalmonopoly" rationale for entry restrictions. The high degree of capi-tal mobility in these industries implies that individual city-pair andport-pair markets are highly contestable. The existence of intermodalsources of competition and competitive international output marketsfor transported commodities further reduces any misallocations re-sulting from monoply behavior. Additionally, the high rate of techno-logical development in the transportation sector renders many regu-lations inapplicable. The experience since the recent deregulation ofairlines and the partial deregulation of surface transportation indi-cates that a competitive industry structure would not reduce the fi-nancial viability of firms in these industries.

110

Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 117: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

Several major pieces of legislation were enacted in the last fewyears to reduce the degree of regulation in the surface transportationindustries, including the Railroad Revitalization and RegulatoryReform Act of 1976, the Motor Carrier Act of 1980, the StaggersRail Act of 1980, and the Bus Regulatory Reform Act of 1982.

The effects of the partial deregulation of trucking—initiated by theInterstate Commerce Commission and affirmed by the Motor CarrierAct of 1980—have proven very encouraging. Published trucking ratesare now subject to large and widely available discounts. Shippersappear to be overwhelmingly satisfied with the rates, service options,and competition for their business. Service to small communities hasnot deteriorated, as was originally predicted by the opponents of de-regulation, and most shippers in small communities also appear tosupport deregulation. Both the number of new firms and failing firmshave increased substantially, the latter due in part to the recession.Concerns have been expressed over the last year that the InterstateCommerce Commission may be slowing the deregulatory process.For example, the percentage of applications for grants of operatingauthority approved by the ICC declined slightly in both fiscal yearssince the passage of the Motor Carrier Act. On net, however, theICC has facilitated increased competition in the trucking industry.The chaos predicted by the opponents of deregulation has not mate-rialized, even during a sustained recession. The experience to dateclearly supports the case for more general deregulation of surfacetransport.

The experience since the partial deregulation of railroads is simi-lar. Although direct evidence on rail rates is not available, thenumber of contracts negotiated between rail carriers and shippers (ameasure of the operating flexibility granted by the Staggers Rail Act)increased from 580 in fiscal 1980 to 2907 in fiscal 1982. Railroadshave increased their share of total freight traffic and have substantial-ly increased their shipments of some commodities, such as fruits andvegetables, that were previously carried almost exclusively by trucks.Railroad profits remained essentially steady despite the sustained re-cession.

While recent partial deregulation of the surface transportation in-dustries has increased the competitiveness of these industries, the op-portunity remains for significant gains from further deregulation.There seems to be little danger that further deregulation would en-hance the monopoly power of carriers. The high degree of capitalmobility in the trucking, bus, barge, and maritime industries shouldprevent monopoly pricing over a sustained period, even where thereis only one carrier on a route.

I l lDigitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 118: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

FURTHER DEREGULATION OF SURFACE TRANSPORTATION

For many decades, both carriers and shippers have made decisionsbased on expectations that the general regulatory system would con-tinue. As a consequence, the transition to deregulation can be dis-ruptive. The major conceptual problems of further deregulation in-volve the following four issues: (1) the antitrust status of the rate bu-reaus, (2) the vulnerability of shippers who do not have an effectivechoice of carrier or mode, (3) the restrictions on multimodal owner-ship, and (4) the restrictions on route abandonment.

As suggested below, these problems especially affect the prospectsfor further deregulation of the railroads.

Antitrust Status of Rate Bureaus

For many years the regional rate bureaus (composed of transporta-tion firms) have performed the normal functions of a trade associ-ation and have provided the forum for multilateral agreements onboth single-line and interline rates. These rate bureaus were exempt-ed from the antitrust laws, and their proposed rates were generallyendorsed by the ICC. The Motor Carrier Act of 1980 removed theantitrust immunity of the truck rate bureaus for single-line rates be-ginning in mid-1984, and established the Motor Carrier RatemakingStudy Commission to study whether the antitrust immunity for multi-lateral agreements on interline rates should be maintained. In testi-mony to this commission, the Administration supported eliminationof the antitrust immunity of the truck rate bureaus. Members of thecommission, which was scheduled to complete its study by the end of1982, were equally divided on this issue at that time. Additionally,following the Railroad Revitalization and Regulatory Reform Act of1976, the ICC restricted the authority of the rail rate bureaus to ad-dress single-line rates and restricted the carriers that could partici-pate in an agreement on interline rates.

There remains a legitimate dispute about whether the rail rate bu-reaus should retain antitrust immunity when setting interline rates.The general view of economists is that further deregulation shouldbe accompanied by the elimination of antitrust immunity. This ap-proach would prevent the adverse effects of a carrier cartel andpermit interline agreements to be treated as a joint venture. Someclarification of the application of the Sherman Act would also be ap-propriate to provide a stable legal environment for these interlineagreements. The contrary view is that the antitrust immunity shouldbe maintained as long as no carrier is bound by any bureau rates towhich it did not agree. A multilateral agreement on interline ratesmay have substantially lower transactions costs on small shipmentsthan the alternative pattern of bilateral joint ventures, and any at-

112Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 119: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

tempt to set cartel rates would be disciplined by the freedom of anycarrier to set other rates. (This issue is less important for trucks, be-cause interline traffic is now less than 15 percent of total truck traffic,and complete freedom of routes would further reduce such interlinetraffic. Interline rail traffic, however, is 48 percent of total rail traffic,and it is more important to maintain a process that economizes onthe contracting costs for small interline shipments.) The alternativemay be an undesirable situation in which rail carriers refuse small in-terline shipments, use trucks for shipments to points beyond theirroutes, or face an artificial incentive for mergers.

The "Captive Shipper Problem"

The "captive shipper problem'* is what initially led to rail rate reg-ulation. This problem was substantially reduced by the developmentof alternative carriers and modes but has not been eliminated. Twodimensions of this problem, however, have sometimes been misun-derstood. This relation is a bilateral monopoly. Both the rail carrierand the shipper have substantial bargaining power, and it is not clearthat this relation leads to rates that are generally "too high." Second,this relation does not lead to any long-term misallocation of re-sources as long as the price of the shipped commodity is determinedin a competitive market. In any case, the sum of the rents on rail andshipper property is constant. This inherent tension suggests that it isimportant to avoid any effective restraint on the common ownershipof rail carriers and major shippers. One alternative may be to requirejoint track use by competing carriers. Another alternative would beto index the rate bands now authorized for, say, another decade andto terminate these bands at that time. Unless this problem is re-solved, however, some form of maximum rate regulation is likely tobe maintained in the rail industry.

Restrictions on Multimodal Ownership

There no longer appears to be any case for restrictions on multi-modal ownership. It is especially important to allow rail carriers toown trucking operations to facilitate container and piggyback traffic.A change in the law would be required to allow rail carriers to ownbarge lines. A change in the law would also be required to allowfreight-forwarders to own trucks, even though trucking companiesare now allowed to own freight-forwarders. The Bus RegulatoryReform Act of 1982 provides a substantially streamlined process forapproving intermodal mergers not prohibited by law.

Restrictions on Route Abandonment

The primary problem of the railroads is excess route capacity, aproblem that reflects a combination of increased truck competitionand ICC restrictions on route abandonment. Some studies have indi-

113Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 120: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

cated that less than half of the existing rail mileage generates enoughtraffic to cover total costs. The Staggers Rail Act provides for moreflexible procedures to resolve disputes on route abandonment.Recent highway legislation, by increasing allowable truck size, is ex-pected to make trucks more competitive with railroads in moving lowdensity freight. A better resolution of the route abandonment issue isprobably necessary for a healthy railroad industry and an efficientdistribution of freight traffic across modes.

In summary, pending a resolution of these four issues as theyaffect railroads, it is probably appropriate to focus any near-term leg-islative proposals on the other modes of surface transport and for theICC to pursue selective rail deregulation within its existing authority.Additionally, the government should continue, through the appropri-ate application of user fees, to ensure that each mode of transportbears the entire costs of its operations when utilizing public facilities.

COMMON CARRIER TELECOMMUNICATIONS

Economies of scale provided the original rationale for makinglong-distance telecommunications a regulated monopoly. But rapidtechnological change has reduced the industry's natural monopolycharacteristics and has paved the way for a more competitive industrystructure. The growth of the market for telecommunications, duelargely to the convergence of data processing and telecommunica-tions technology, has further reduced the natural monopoly charac-teristics of the industry. These rapid developments in both demandand supply conditions have probably made the inherited regulatoryframework inappropriate.

Major legal changes were made recently to allow increased compe-tition. In 1982 a U.S. district judge gave final approval to a settle-ment between the American Telephone and Telegraph Company(AT&T) and the Department of Justice, transforming long-distancetelecommunications services into a competitive market with a greaternumber of companies and less regulation.

In conjunction with other deregulatory steps by the Federal Com-munications Commission, the settlement is expected to have majorbenefits for both the telecommunications industry and its customers.Equal access to local facilities, which is the cornerstone of the settle-ment, should allow competition to act as an adequate substitute forregulation of interstate services. While the transition to equal accesswill take a few years, individual telephone customers will have pro-gressively increased opportunities to make their own arrangementswith AT&T's competitors in long-distance services. Meanwhile,AT&T will be allowed to develop its data processing subsidiary,American Bell Inc. While AT&T is prohibited from offering home

114Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 121: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

computer information and advertising services via its long-distancelines for 7 years, it is likely to become a vigorous competitor in otherfields, such as cellular mobile radio technology. It is also likely toface increasing competition in these areas.

In 1982 an appeals court affirmed the Federal CommunicationCommission's power to deregulate where technological changemakes regulation outmoded. Developments in data processing andtransmission have tended to make many Federal and State regula-tions unnecessary, inappropriate, or unworkable.

BROADCASTING

The FCC regulates the radio and television industries through issu-ance and renewal of broadcast licenses. It promulgates guidelines onthe amount of news and public affairs programming that stationsmust broadcast, the maximum number of commercials permissible inany time period, the recording of broadcast materials, and the ascer-tainment and fulfillment of community needs. As a result, broadcast-ers are prevented in some cases from carrying programming that lis-teners and viewers would prefer.

The original purpose of FCC regulation was to allocate broadcastspectrum space. The FCC allocated these valuable spectrum rights inexchange for commitments on program content. Whatever the meritsof this argument 50 years ago, it may be appropriate to review thisform of regulation to reflect the rapidly developing competition fromcable television, pay television, and direct satellite transmission.

Recently, the FCC has made several moves toward deregulation. In1981 the Commission deregulated most commercial radio broadcast-ing and attempted, subject to legal challenge, to simplify the applica-tion renewal process. The FCC is in the process of repeating thisderegulatory initiative for the television industry. It will soon attemptto amend the renewal process by eliminating the following criteriafor renewal: nonentertainment content, ascertainment of communityneeds, advertising concentration, and recording. The last Congressalso considered bills to repeal many requirements, such as the "rea-sonable access/' "equal time," and "fairness" doctrines that arecostly to broadcasters and unevenly applied to the mass media.These steps would partially remove the government from the deter-mination of broadcast content.

DEREGULATION OF FINANCIAL MARKETS

The financial service sector has been among the most heavily regu-lated areas of the economy. Price regulation, entry restrictions, andportfolio regulation were pervasive in both the banking and securities

115Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 122: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

industries. Substantial and numerous innovations in the financial sec-tors in the last decade largely preceded and were later facilitated byrecent partial deregulation.

DEPOSITORY INSTITUTIONS

The present structure of regulatory restraints on commercial banksand other depository institutions was imposed primarily in responseto the collapse of the banking system in the 1930s. A common inter-pretation of the events at that time is that the banking collapse wasthe result of an unsound banking structure which caused too muchcompetition. Competition among banks was thought to force theminto paying high interest rates for deposits, which in turn led them toseek out high-yielding but risky—and ultimately unsound—invest-ments in the stock, bond, and real estate markets.

Legislative remedies in the Banking Acts of 1933 and 1935, andvarious revisions of the Federal Reserve Act, focused on limitingprice competition between banks, separating banking from securitiesmarket activity, supervising banking and financial markets moreclosely, and restoring public confidence in the financial system.

Reflecting a general concern about excessive competition, the pay-ment of interest on demand deposits was prohibited by law. In addi-tion, the Federal Reserve Board and the Federal Deposit InsuranceCorporation were given the power to place interest rate ceilings onthe passbook and time deposits of commercial banks. Interest rateceilings were extended to the deposits of mutual savings banks andsavings and loan associations in 1966.

The type and quality of assets held by banks were closely moni-tored. Commercial banks were not permitted to hold securities of aspeculative nature in their portfolios, and thrift institutions were sub-ject to even greater limits on their asset acquisition powers. In addi-tion, most securities activities were divorced from commercial bank-ing by the Glass-Steagall sections of the Banking Act of 1933, andentry into banking became more closely controlled. To maintain theconfidence of the public in the banking system, deposits were insuredby the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation and the Federal Sav-ings and Loan Insurance Corporation. With the introduction of de-posit insurance, the other regulations served mainly to limit the ex-posure of the insurance funds rather than to protect depositors. Nev-ertheless, recent studies suggest that the web of regulatory restraintswas generally greater than required for this purpose.

Moreover, this extensive regulatory framework for financial institu-tions has adapted slowly to the economic changes of the last two dec-ades. High inflation rates and consequent high nominal interestrates, combined with reduced transactions costs from the application

116Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 123: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

of computer technology to the payments system, have created seriousdistortions in financial markets. As market interest rates rose aboveRegulation Q, ceilings, inflows of funds to depository institutionswere curtailed, and new nonregulated instruments (especially moneymarket mutual funds) were created. The allocation of savings to var-ious sectors of the capital market—particularly housing vis-a-vis othersectors—was altered, and small and less informed savers suffered de-clines in the real rate of return on their savings. In addition, Regula-tion Q, generated a considerable amount of nonprice competition be-tween financial institutions, such as an excessive number of branchoffices, with resulting adverse effects on efficiency. Interest rate ceil-ings on selected deposits were removed progressively beginning in1978.

The Administration continues to support the removal of unneces-sary and excessive regulatory constraints on depository institutions.It is now widely asserted that the length and severity of the bankingcollapse of the 1930s was not the result of overly risky bank portfo-lios. Rather, many economists argue that these failures became wide-spread, initially, because of the reluctance of the Federal ReserveSystem to engage in aggressive open market operations to counterthe conversion of deposits to currency and, later, because of the Fed-eral Reserve's failure to assure adequate liquidity to banks experienc-ing runs on their deposits. As banks scrambled to liquidate theirassets to meet the demands of their depositors for currency, theirasset values fell, thus creating insolvencies. The provision of ade-quate liquidity by a lender of last resort has long been recognized asa primary responsibility of the Federal Reserve System.

Partial deregulation of depository institutions is now proceedingunder provisions of the Depository Institutions Deregulation andMonetary Control Act of 1980 and the Garn-St Germain DepositoryInstitutions Act of 1982. Under the 1980 act, interest rate ceilings ontime and savings deposits are to be phased out over a period of 6years. The same law permits depository institutions to offer negotia-ble order of withdrawal (NOW) accounts and preempted certainState usury ceilings. This act also created the Depository InstitutionsDeregulation Committee (DIDC) to administer the phaseout of inter-est rate ceilings at banks and thrifts.

In March 1982, the DIDC adopted a deregulation schedule thatphases out interest rate ceilings, beginning with longer term time de-posits. With the deregulation schedule in place, the focus of theDIDC turned to short-term deposit instruments. Prevailing high in-terest rates had caused a continued erosion of low-cost deposits atbanks and thrifts, as depositors sought market rates elsewhere, par-ticularly through money market mutual funds. The DIDC addressed

117Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 124: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

this problem by authorizing, effective May 1, 1982, a 91-day time de-posit with a $7,500 minimum denomination indexed to the 91-dayTreasury bill rate, and establishing, effective September 1, 1982, a 7-to 31-day deposit account with a $20,000 minimum denomination,also indexed to the 91-day Treasury bill rate.

Following the directions given by the Garn-St Germain Act, theDIDC authorized, effective December 14, 1982, a new money marketdeposit account that can be offered by commercial banks, savings andloan associations, and mutual savings banks. In addition, the DIDGauthorized a new super NOW account, effective January 5, 1983. Nei-ther account is subject to interest rate ceilings when account balancesexceed $2,500. The DIDC also reduced to $2,500 the minimum de-nomination required on the 6-montfi money market deposits, the 91-day time deposits, and the 7- to 31-day time deposits.

The introduction of NOW accounts nationwide in 1981, the au-thorization of the new money market accounts at banks and thrifts,and the general phasing out of interest rate restrictions substantiallyincrease the ability of depository institutions to compete for funds.Simultaneously, various actions have been taken to allow thrift insti-tutions greater flexibility in the investment of funds. The Deregula-tion and Monetary Control Act expands the asset powers of savingand loan associations and mutual savings banks to include consumer,corporate, and business loans. This will lead to more diversified port-folios for these institutions. In addition, new regulations issued bythe Comptroller of the Currency in 1981 and the Federal HomeLoan Bank Board in 1982 permit depository institutions to offer vari-able rate mortgages. Finally, the Garn-St Germain Act provides forFederal preemption of State laws and judicial decisions that restrictthe enforcement of due-on-sale clauses in real property loans.

The Garn-St Germain Act also deals with the problems of the sav-ings and loan institutions discussed above. It provides capital assist-ance to depository institutions that have suffered earnings and capitallosses resulting from regulatory restraints on their assets and liabil-ities. The assisted institutions issue capital investments, called "networth certificates," which the insuring agencies purchase with prom-issory notes. This increase in net worth reduces the likelihood of in-solvencies arising from losses created by holdings of old, fixed-ratemortgages. As market rates of interest fall, and the earnings of thesedepository institutions improve, the net worth certificates will be re-tired.

Legislation following the banking collapse of the 1930s tended toprevent competition among financial institutions and created a com-plex and often counterproductive labyrinth of financial regulations.Recent legislation and regulatory changes have begun to reverse this

118

Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 125: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

trend by widening the sources and uses of funds available to deposi-tory institutions, and by allowing for a far larger measure of pricecompetition in the financial services industry. These actions shouldcontribute to a stronger and more responsive financial system.

STOCK EXCHANGES

Much of the regulation of the Nation's stock exchanges began inthe 1930s, largely in response to the crisis in the financial marketscreated by the Great Depression. This regulation was broad and di-verse, and included mandatory and systematic disclosure of corporaterecords as well as rule-setting authority over stock exchanges. Overthe last several years, much of this regulation has been relaxed.

Commission Rates

Prior to 1968, commissions paid to members of stock exchangeswere fixed by those stock exchanges and approved by the Securitiesand Exchange Commission (SEC). After 1968, however, the fixedcommission schedule was slowly dismantled in favor of negotiatedcommissions. Beginning in May 1975, commission rates on all secu-rity transactions were negotiated.

Negotiated commission rates were the product of a market-inducedbreakdown of the fixed-rate commission structure. From 1961 to1966 the dollar volume and market share of the regional stock ex-changes increased dramatically because of the fixed-rate system. Re-gional stock exchanges allowed customers dealing on those ex-changes to "give up" or have transferred a portion of their fixedcommission to a third party who supplied other services. The NewYork Stock Exchange (NYSE) stipulated that customers of that ex-change could only give up commissions to other members of theNYSE. This constraint that the NYSE imposed on its customers en-couraged many of those customers to turn to the regional exchanges,where competition had effectively driven down the cost of exchangeservices.

Faced with a declining share of stock transactions, the NYSE askedthe SEC to force regional exchanges to eliminate the rules that wereaffording them a competitive advantage. Commenting on the NYSEproposal, the Department of Justice suggested that the broader issueof possible elimination of the fixed-rate commission structure shouldbe examined. In defense of the fixed-rate commission structure, aNYSE study suggested that "destructive competition," reflected in adecline in the quality of broker services, could result from the ab-sence of fixed commission rates.

Despite the objections of the NYSE, the Congress passed the Secu-rities Acts Amendments of 1975. These reconfirmed that nonmembercommission rates were fully negotiable and made exchange floor

119Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 126: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

rates fully negotiable by May 1976. The deregulation of fixed com-mission rates illustrates the efficiency gains that follow deregulation.Since the total deregulation of commission rates, average commis-sions charged to customers have decreased. Services which were pre-viously provided jointly whether customers used them or not, arenow substantially unbundled.

Financial Disclosure

The Securities Exchange Act of 1933 required financial disclosurefor corporations seeking to raise capital through the issuance of newsecurities. The Securities Exchange Act of 1934 required periodic fi-nancial disclosure for corporations with publicly traded securities.One of the motivations for this original legislation was a belief thatcorporations must be forced to disclose financial information inorder to protect the interests of investors. In recent years there hasbeen concern that these requirements have precluded new securityissues thus inhibiting the efficiency of the capital market. Additional-ly, a growing body of scholarship has questioned whether these re-quirements have served the interests of investors. Recently, some ofthese stringent disclosure requirements were ended for certain typesof corporations. Specifically, corporations with less than $3 million inassets and 500 stockholders are now exempt from the filing require-ments of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.

The SEC has also recently allowed, on an experimental basis, somefirms issuing new securities to use "shelf registration'* forms, thuseliminating the requirement to file for each new security issue. Theinitiation of shelf registration is expected to reduce the costs of rais-ing equity capital, allowing firms to manage their risk more efficientlyby entering the capital markets more often.

Industry Structure

Before 1980, stocks listed on stock exchanges could not be tradedby members of those stock exchanges in any other markets. This bar-rier to entry was partially lifted in June 1980, when the SEC ap-proved Rule 19c-3. This rule allows members of stock exchanges totrade securities in other markets that were listed on those stock ex-changes after May 1979.

Stock exchange members are now also allowed to execute trades inthe "19c-3 securities" in markets other than the stock exchanges.The market share of non-19c-3 stocks on the Over-the-Counter(OTG) markets is considerably less than the OTC market share for19c-3 securities. This larger market share for the OTC in 19c-3 se-curities suggests that, for some exchange members, it is more effi-cient to execute orders on the OTC rather than on the stock ex-

120Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 127: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

changes. That is, members can arbitrage price differentials that mayexist between the OTC market and the exchanges.

Futures Markets

The Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) has alsobeen very active in deregulation. In January 1982, the CFTC elimi-nated the 03 report, which had obligated large traders in future con-tracts to report their market positions daily to the CFTC. This actionreduced the filing costs of these large traders by around 50 percent.In an effort to lessen the burden of Federal regulation on the futuresindustry, the CFTC's new legislation eases the disclosure, registra-tion, and rule approval process.

OPPORTUNITIES FOR FURTHER DEREGULATION IN THE FINANCIAL

INDUSTRY

While the financial and securities markets of today operate relative-ly unencumbered by unnecessary regulations, owing to the deregula-tory advances discussed above, several opportunities for further de-regulation remain.

Geographic Restrictions in Banking

Federal laws, such as the McFadden Act of 1927 and the DouglasAmendment to the Bank Holding Company Act of 1956, continue toimpose geographic restrictions on commercial banking activities. Theformer law subjects the branching activities of national banks to thelimits imposed by the States; the latter law prohibits bank holdingcompanies from engaging in interstate banking unless given specificState authorization to do so. Although these prohibitions may reducethe concentration of financial resources on a national scale, they mayalso increase market concentration and lessen competition in localbanking markets.

Moreover, these restrictions are effective only insofar as they affectthe taking of retail deposits. Loan production offices, Edge Act cor-porations, personal finance companies, mortgage lending companies,and bank holding companies have long been the means used bybanks to conduct wholesale and retail business on an interstate basis.With the emergence of automatic teller machine networks, the elec-tronic revolution is incorporating even retail deposit-taking intolarge-scale operations. This process would be enhanced by exempt-ing automatic teller machines from the existing restrictions on the es-tablishment of branch offices. It is time to reconsider these geo-graphic restrictions because they are probably not in the best inter-ests of consumers or the more efficient financial institutions.

121Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 128: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

Portfolio Restrictions in Banking

The prohibitions of the Glass-Steagall Act have been eroded inrecent years as both banking organizations and securities firms haveattempted, either directly or indirectly, to enter each others' tradi-tional lines of business. Moreover, Glass-Steagall now makes no im-portant contribution to the protection of the public against bank fail-ure or undue concentrations of economic power. Other governmentmeasures, such as Federal deposit insurance and broadened andstrengthened Federal supervision, appear to have been more effectivein that role. The Administration has proposed an amendment to theGlass-Steagall Act that would authorize bank holding company sub-sidiaries to conduct two new activities immediately: (1) to underwriteand deal in municipal revenue bonds, and (2) to sponsor and under-write shares of mutual funds. The Garn-St Germain Act authorizes anew account at banks and thrifts that is directly competitive withmoney market mutual funds. However, the act does not provide forthe operation and sale of shares in mutual funds or the underwritingof municipal revenue bonds. Moreover, the act also extends the long-standing protection of insurance companies against bank competi-tion.

Margin Requirements

Margin requirements presently exist in the stock, options, and fu-tures markets. In futures trading, the margin is a performance bondintended to protect other participants from the consequences of afailure to make good on a contractual obligation. Each futures ex-change determines the margin without Federal regulation or over-sight. In stock and options exchanges, the Federal Reserve Boardsets initial margin requirements, and the exchanges set maintenancemargins subject to SEC oversight. Margin practices in the stock andoptions markets may be less efficient than in futures markets, sinceregulation constrains decisionmaking by participants. It is now appro-priate to review these regulations.

CONCLUSIONS

Federal regulation of price and entry are products of an earlier era,when both economic conditions and perceptions of economic prob-lems were very different than they are today. Federal regulation ofrailroads began nearly a century ago, when there was no significantcompetition from other transport modes and political debate reflect-ed strong populist sentiment. Most other Federal economic regula-tions date from the 1930s, when the severe economic problems, nowbelieved to be due to a collapse in aggregate demand, were per-

122Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 129: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

ceived to be a consequence of excessive competition. The presentstructure of Federal regulation of the energy markets dates from the1970s and primarily reflects an attempt to protect consumers fromthe effects of the large increase in oil prices originating abroad.

These policies may or may not have been appropriate to theperiod in which they were initiated. But both conditions and percep-tions are now very different. Increasing demand and changing tech-nology have substantially reduced the initial monopoly power ofmany regulated firms. Our perceptions have also changed, largely inresponse to developing conditions during the long history of regula-tion and the encouraging developments during the more recentperiod of partial deregulation. There is now a more general percep-tion that the developments in regulated markets have largely outrunthe present structure of economic regulation.

As we approach the 100th anniversary of the first broad body ofFederal economic regulation, it is time for a comprehensive review ofwhether this form of regulation serves the interests of the contempo-rary economy. A resolution of this issue would then permit greaterattention to the different and more complex issues affecting therecent Federal regulation of health, safety, and environmental condi-tions.

123Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 130: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

CHAPTER 6

Review of 1982 and theEconomic Outlook

FOR THE U.S. ECONOMY, 1982 was a year of painful transitiontoward price stability. The momentum of high inflation, built up overthe last 15 years, was broken and inflation was reduced to its lowestrate in a decade. Success in reducing inflation, however, was accom-panied by a recession that began in mid-1981 and lingered through1982. A drop in real exports, along with inventory adjustments, ac-counted for the decline in U.S. production. Despite the recession,final sales to domestic purchasers increased. Expenditures for someinterest-sensitive goods, such as housing and consumer durablegoods, registered their first rise in recent years.

Economic developments in 1982 clearly set the stage for a recoveryin 1983. The sizable slowdown in inflation contributed to the sharpdrop in interest rates in the summer of 1982. The inventory cyclethat held down production in 1982 is expected to turn around some-time in 1983. This development, combined with recovery in housingand durable consumer goods and continuing gains in defense spend-ing, is expected to bring a moderate sustainable economic recovery.Prospects are good that this recovery can be maintained through the1980s without reigniting inflationary pressures.

OVERVIEW OF 1982

Real gross national product (GNP) in 1982 was no higher than in1979. After a surge of economic growth in 1978, the economy stalledin 1979. Cyclically volatile types of spending, such as auto sales andhousing starts, had peaked in 1978. Since 1978 the output of goodsand services in the United States has followed a saw-tooth pattern ofalternating periods of growth and decline. The recessions of 1980and 1981-82 bracketed the shortest economic expansion in 50 years.Employment in 1982 was below its 1979 level.

Production and employment remained sluggish for 4 years whilesupplies of labor and capital continued to grow, so that by the end of1982 the unemployment rate rose to nearly 11 percent—its highestlevel since the early 1940s—and the capacity utilization rate fell to its

124Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 131: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

lowest point in the post-World War II period. With this high level ofunused economic capacity, inflationary pressures subsided.

The inflation rate fell dramatically in 1982 to its lowest level in adecade. The upward trend in inflation from 1976 through 1980strengthened the Federal Reserve's determination to slow the growthin the monetary aggregates and contributed to high interest rates foran extended period. By mid-1982, when evidence of progress againstinflation and continued weakness in economic activity became clear,interest rates began to fall sharply. The ensuing decline reduced in-terest rates to their lowest levels in more than 2 years, as illustratedin Chart 6-1.

Chart 6-1

PERCENT PER YEAR

22

Interest Rates

20

18

16

14

PRIME RATE

1978 1979 1980 1981 1982

SOURCES: DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY AND BOARD OF GOVERNORSOF THE FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM.

The decline in interest rates brought much-needed relief to the in-terest-sensitive, cyclical sectors of the economy. By the end of 1982,clear progress toward recovery had been made, as reflected in con-tinuing gains in the composite index of leading indicators of econom-ic activity, as shown in Chart 6-2.

125

Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 132: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

Chart 6-2

Index of Leading Indicators and Real GNP

1967-100145

140

135

130

125

120

BILLIONS OF 1972 DOLLARS

1,520

REALGNP(RIGHT SCALE}

mm tINDEX OF LEADING

INDICATORS(LEFT SCALE)

1,500

1,480

1,460

1,440

1,420

1,400

I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I n1981 19821978 1979 1980

SOURCE: DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE.

MAJOR SECTORS OF AGGREGATE DEMAND

Real output declined 1.2 percent from the fourth quarter of 1981to the fourth quarter of 1982. This was the fourth consecutive year oflittle change in economic activity (Table 6-1). Businesses liquidatedinventories in 1982, in contrast to the previous year when inventorylevels increased. Another important factor in the decline was a sharpdrop in U.S. exports that reflected both the strong dollar and theworldwide recession. Real final sales to domestic purchasers in-creased 1.3 percent in 1982, the largest increase in 3 years. Gains inpersonal consumption expenditures, residential investment, and Fed-eral purchases dominated a large decline in business capital spend-

126

Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 133: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

ing. Partly in response to the drop in interest rates, residential invest-ment increased for the first time in 5 years, and consumer purchasesof durable goods increased for the first time since 1978. State andlocal government purchases of goods and services were virtually un-changed over the year.

T A B L E 6-L—Growth in major sectors of real GNP, 1978-82

[Change^ fourth quarter to fourth quarter and 5-year average]

Component 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 * 5-yearaverage'

Percent change:

Real gross national product

Personal consumption expendituresConsumer durables

Business fixed investmentResidential fixed investmentGovernment purchases of goods and services

FederalDefense

State and local

Real final sales

Real final sales to domestic purchasers 3

Change in billions of 1972 dollars:

Change in business .inventoriesNet exports of goods and services

'Preliminary.2 Based on annual data.9 Final sales less exports plus imports.Source: Department of Commerce, Bureau of Economic Analysis.

5.8

4.45.7

12.8—22.3

2.63.4

5.44.7

5.111.2

1.4

2.1- 2 . 5

3.5-8.3

1.3

1.03.01.4

2.61.7

-17.514.9

-0.7

.3-4.6

- 2 . 6-.12.7

.7

1.42.1

.3

- . 4- . 5

- 3 . 91.4

0.7

4.7-19 .4

2.9

10.79.3

- 1 . 7

.0

.6

11.0- 9 . 1

- 1 . 2

2.66.5

- 8 . 44.52.6

6.66.8

.1

.31.3

-22 .5-15.4

1,5

2.1.1

3.3-8.0

1.6

2.93.8

.7

1.81.7

-4.41.7

PERSONAL CONSUMPTION EXPENDITURES

Despite declines in production, employment, and real wage andsalary income, real disposable (after-tax) personal income increasedin 1982, due in part to the reduction in personal income tax ratesand an increase in transfer payments. The average effective Federalpersonal income tax rate fell from 12.5 percent to 11.4 percent be-tween the third quarters of 1981 and 1982. Real personal consump-tion expenditures increased 2.6 percent in 1982 to reach their high-est share of real GNP since 1949. Although real personal saving de-clined from its high level at the end of 1981, the personal saving ratein 1982 was higher than in any year since 1976, as shown in Table6-2.

Consumer purchases of durable goods increased 6.5 percent inreal terms in 1982, the first increase since 1978. The turnaround oc-curred early in the year, when auto sales rebounded from the de-pressed level of late 1981. Sales then languished until late in theyear, when they again climbed, due in part to the decline in interestrates that produced lower financing costs. Nevertheless, domestic

127

Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 134: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

TABLE 6-2.—Real household income, consumption, saving, and residential investment, 1978-82

[Percent change, fourth quarter to fourth quarter and 5-year average]

Item 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 » 5-yearaverage 1*

Income by type:

Labor Income3.....Other income *Net transfer payments'..,

Personal Income

Less.- Federal tax paymentsOther tax and nontax payments*

Disposable personal income

4.78.9

- 3 . 0

4.9

10.95.4

4.0

1.23.54.3

2.0

5.61.8

1.5

- 0 . 4- 1 . 013.1

0.98.8

2.5

1.83.6

2.6

-1 .9

1 U

= 5.53.5

.6

1.64.63.9

2.4

3.63.1

2.3

Personal consumption expenditures...

Personal saving

Personal saving rate T

4.4

-5.3

61

2.1

-11 .4

5.9

.3

9.3

5.8

.3

39.8

6.4

2.6

-22.7

6.5

2.1

4.1

6.1

Housing starts 8

Single family

Muftifamily

Mobile home shipments'

Residential investment....

-1 .7

-3.32.3

- 7 . 5

- . 2

-23.1

-29.2=7.9

-9 .8

-8 .3

-4 .3

-5.2-2 .5

- 6 . 7

-12.7

-42.3

-45.0-37.3

-13.1

-19.4

44.5

48.038.9

12.1

4.5

-11.6

-14.4- 5 . 3

- 2 . 8

=8.0

'Preliminary.'Based on annual data.3Wage and salary disbursements and other labor income.•Proprietors' income, rental income, personal dividend income, and personal interest income."Transfer payments less personal contributions for social insurance.'State and local tax and nontax payments plus Federal nontax payments.7 Annual average.•Units.Note.—Income items, consumption, and saving deflated by the personal consumption deflator; residential investment deflated

by the residential deflator.Sources: Department of Commerce (Bureau of Economic Analysis and Bureau of the Census) and Council of Economic Advisers.

auto sales in 1982 for the entire year were lower than in any yearsince the early 1960s.

The extended period of weakness in durable goods sales accompa-nied a reduction in the burden of consumer debt. Consumer install-ment debt repayments relative to disposable personal income fellsteadily from their 1978 peak to reach, by the third quarter of 1982,their lowest level since 1964, as illustrated in Chart 6-3. Total house-hold debt has also fallen sharply relative to households' net worth.

RESIDENTIAL INVESTMENT

As indicated in Table 6-2,1982 showed the first rise in housing activityin 5 years. By the fourth quarter of 1982, housing starts rose to 1.25million at an annual rate, up nearly 45 percent from their trough of865,000 units in the fourth quarter of 1981. Starts averaged less than onemillion units until mid-1982 as interest rates on mortgage commitmentsstayed around 17 percent. In August, mortgage interest rates beganto fall, dropping below 14 percent by year-end. This drop encour-

128

Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 135: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

Chart 6-3

RATIO (PERCENT)

15.0

14.5 -

14.0 -

Ratio of Consumer InstallmentCredit to Personal Income

13.5 "

1977 1978 1979 1980 1981

SOURCES: DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE AND COUNCIL OF ECONOMIC ADVISERS,

1982

aged the sale of houses, reduced the inventory of unsold new housesrelative to current sales, and spurred new construction.

For the first time in recent years, house prices increased at aslower rate than general inflation. Moreover, the conventional meas-ures of house price increases, which rose less than 3 percent, maywell have overstated the 1982 rise because increased builder andseller financing at below market rates is not fully captured in theprice data. Lower interest costs and more moderate house price in-creases helped to hold down mortgage payments and, thus, mayfavor a recovery in housing investment.

BUSINESS FIXED INVESTMENT

Real business fixed investment peaked in the last quarter of 1981,having grown at a 5.2 percent annual rate from 1977 to 1981. From

129

Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 136: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

its 1981 peak to the last quarter of 1982, real business fixed invest-ment dropped 8.4 percent.

The 1982 decline in capital spending was broadly based, affectingeven sectors that had fared well in previous years. Industrial andcommercial construction declined about 1 percent in real terms fromthe fourth quarter of 1981 to the fourth quarter of 1982 havinggrown at an annual rate of more than 10 percent from 1977 to 1981.Computer, communications, and instrumentation equipment invest-ment fell about 4 percent in 1982, a sharp contrast to over 9 percentannual rate of real growth from 1977 to 1981.

In the energy area, real investment in coal mine development con-tinued to rise strongly in 1982. Real investment in oil field explora-tion and development dropped 15 percent between the fourth quar-ters of 1981 and 1982 as weak oil prices impaired cash flow in thepetroleum industry. Reflecting the weakness in overall economicgrowth, investment in transportation equipment—autos, trucks, air-craft, ships, boats, and railroad equipment—continued to decline in1982.

Business capital spending is likely to lag behind the recovery in theeconomy. Contracts and orders for new plant and equipment de-clined about 12 percent in real terms between the last quarters of1981 and 1982. In addition, a Department of Commerce survey ofbusiness spending plans indicated that real nonfarm investment willdecline about 5.2 percent in 1983.

INVENTORY INVESTMENT

Sluggish sales and high carrying costs encouraged businessto pare inventories in 1982. A sharp drop in final sales in late1981 triggered a swing to inventory liquidation in the first half of1982. Even the more moderate sales forecasts for the second half of1982 proved overly optimistic, and inventory-sales ratios climbed,prompting further cutbacks in production, employment, and inven-tories (Chart 6-4). Toward the end of the year, inventories werebrought more in line with sales. Auto inventories, which accountedfor about one-third of inventory liquidation in the final quarter of1982, were especially lean, as the industry's aggressive pricing andmarketing efforts helped to increase sales.

THE FARM ECONOMY

Total income per farm family in 1982 fell about 11 percent in realterms. Over two-thirds of farm family earnings came from off-farmsources as income from farm sources declined.

Net farm nominal income from farm operations declined from $25billion in 1981 to about $19 billion in 1982. Relatively tight meat

130

Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 137: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

Chart 6 -4

RATIO

1.85

1.80 -

1.75 -

1.70 -

1.65 —

1.60

1.55

Real Inventory/Sales Ratioand Industrial Production

•••t

tm»mm

\

\A\A

I I I !

#0

»#

**

TV

/

ll 1

•#9

#*

AT,A A/

A / U *rVy ¥

1 1 1 i l l I I 1 i l l

INDUSTRIAL PRODUCTION,MANUFACTURING

(RIGHT SCALE) .

• * • / ^ 1 1 f•A •-' -MA /A •' if v\ /f 1 1 t 1 /1 1 A • 1* 1 /L Wl • fa 1 /!• 1 • 1 ' II

• I • 1/1 • 1 • / • IfI • \l / • II • V / •1 • \ / •I • '\ / '1 • »\ / •1 • • \ <«' •

I • • \ / 'I • • \ / ' .*A / *-' Vrv\/ \ < \ .V REAL INVENTORY/SALES RATIO, • * «

¥ MANUFACTURING AND TRADE(LEFT SCALE)

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1ll II 1 1 1 1

A

1967=100160

- 155

— 150

- 145

— 140

,- 135

1301978 1979 1980 1981 1982

SOURCES. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE AND BOARD OF GOVERNORSOF THE FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM.

supplies and low feed prices in 1982 contributed to larger profit mar-gins for most livestock producers. Many crop farmers, on the otherhand, were hard hit by lower prices and increased production costs.Large domestic crops were only one of several factors contributing tolower prices. Livestock production declined, and domestic use offeedgrains and meals increased slowly. The value of agricultural ex-ports in fiscal 1982 fell about 11 percent, primarily because of lowerprices and reduced shipments of corn and grain sorghum. The weakexport market reflected the world recession, a strong dollar, and anincrease in world grain stocks. The U.S. share of world grain stocksis expected to continue its rapid growth of recent years and to reachover 50 percent in the 1982-83 crop year.

131

Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 138: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

Lower crop prices, high mortgage rates, and lower inflation werethe major factors leading to a decline in land values. Farm liabilitiescontinued to increase and farmers' debt-to-asset ratio is estimated tohave increased to about 20 percent, a significant rise from the 15 to17 percent range typical of the late 1960s and 1970s.

U.S. agricultural policies have once again become a major factor indetermining farm prices and incomes. Federal budget outlays forcommodity price support and related programs soared to $12 billionin fiscal 1982 from $4 billion in the previous fiscal year. A programof voluntary acreage controls, including payments to those who re-strict production in the 1983-84 crop year, was adopted in 1982 andsupplemented by the addition of the "payment-in-kind" option inearly 1983.

Food prices rose about 4 percent in 1982, with marketing costsrising at more than twice the rate of the farm value component offood prices.

FOREIGN TRADE

A reduction in U.S. trade was a key factor in the decline in aggre-gate demand in 1982. The main causes of the decline in net exportswere the strength of the dollar and the worldwide recession. In De-cember 1982 the trade-weighted value of the dollar was about 40percent above its low point in 1980. Because exchange-rate apprecia-tion lowers import prices and affects trade volume with a substantiallag, it initially tends to improve the trade balance. By the second halfof 1982, however, the reduced cost competitiveness of U.S. firmsbegan to overwhelm the short-term positive factors.

A secondary cause of the deteriorating trade balance was the inter-national debt problem. Some heavily indebted developing countries,especially in Latin America, experienced difficulty in attracting capitalinflows and were forced to cut imports sharply in 1982. Because sev-eral of the major high-debt developing countries have close tradingties with the United States, a large proportion of the import cutscame out of U.S. exports.

Cyclical factors had conflicting effects on the trade balance in1982. On one side, the recession in the United States tended toreduce import demand, so that import volume fell more than 4 per-cent. On the other side, the recession in other industrial countriescontributed to the 13 percent decline in real U.S. exports.

GOVERNMENT PURCHASES OF GOODS AND SERVICES

Real Federal, State, and local government purchases of goods andservices increased 2.6 percent from the fourth quarter of 1981 to thefourth quarter of 1982. Much of the increase was attributable to a 6.8

132

Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 139: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

percent increase in real defense purchases. Federal nondefense pur-chases rose in real terms, due to a large increase in real purchases ofagricultural commodities by the Commodity Credit Corporation.State and local government purchases were virtually flat.

LABOR MARKET DEVELOPMENTS

Along with output, employment declined 1 percent in 1982, asshown in Table 6-3. At the end of the year, employment was 1.7million persons below the peak level reached in the second quarterof 1981. The reduction in employment predominantly occurredamong production workers and other blue-collar employees. Sales,clerical, and service workers' employment did not peak until Septem-ber 1982.

TABLE 6-3.—Labor market developments, 1978-82

[Fourth quarter of indicated year]

Component 1978 | 1979 | 1980 | 1981 | 1982

Percent change from year earlier1

Change in civilian employment....

Males 20 years and overFemales 20 years and over..Both sexes 16-19 years

WhiteBlack and other...

Unemployment rate3.

Males 20 years and overFemales 20 years and over..Both sexes 16-19 years

WhiteBlack and other..,

Participation rate4.....

Males 20 years and overFemales 20 years and over..Both sexes 16-19 years

WhiteBlack and other..

3.8

2.75.62.7

3.37.3

2.3

1.54.0

- . 8

2.23.3

- 0 . 2

- . 61.6

- 6 . 6

- . 1- . 6

0.6

.22.8

- 8 . 9

.6- . 1

- 1 . 0

- 1 . 5.7

- 8 . 0

- 1 . 2.4

Percent 2

5.9

4.15.8

16.4

5.111.5

63.5

79.850.158.2

63.662.4

5.9

4.45.7

16.3

5.211.2

63.8

79.651.057.9

64.062.3

7.4

6.26.7

18.3

6.513.7

63.7

79.251.556.3

64.061.8

8.3

7.17.2

21.2

7.315.3

63.8

78.852.354.6

64.261.4

10.7

10.09.0

24.3

9.518.6

64.1

78.852.954.1

64.562.0

11978 data adjusted to reflect changes in sample and estimation procedures, which increased employment and labor force by250,000 in January 1978.

2 Seasonally adjusted.3 Unemployed as percent of civilian labor force.

* Civilian labor force as percent of civilian noninstitutional population.

Note.—Data relate to persons 16 years and over.

Source: Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics.

Generally speaking, the older the age cohort, the lower the unem-ployment rate. For example, the unemployment rate for the 55 andover age group was 5.7 percent in the final quarter of 1982. Youngworkers experienced the highest unemployment rate. Employment ofthe 16 to 19 year age group has dropped in every year since 1979.This decline was far faster than the decline in the number of persons

133

Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 140: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

in this age group. Women workers now have somewhat lower unem-ployment rates than men, a reversal of the historical relation.

The labor force participation rate—the ratio of the labor force tothe population over 16 years of age—has experienced a modestupward drift as women workers continue to join the labor force. Thegrowth in adult women's labor force participation has been strong inthe past. Declining participation has occurred among workers lessthan 20 years of age and among workers, especially males, over 55—who are likely to have an income cushion provided by social security,private pension plans, and savings.

WAGES, PRODUCTIVITY, AND PRICES

In response to slack labor markets and lower rates of price infla-tion, wage increases slowed substantially in 1982. As shown in Table6-4, the rate of increase in several measures of wages and compensa-tion declined about 2 percentage points from 1981. The 5.9 percentincrease in the hourly earnings index for private nonfarm workerswas the smallest since 1973. As measured by the employment costindex, wages and salaries of private industry workers increased 6.9percent between the third quarters of 1981 and 1982. The decelera-tion was about the same for union and nonunion workers. A surveyof major collective bargaining settlements reached in private industryshowed that in the first 9 months of 1982 the agreements providedwage adjustments that averaged 3.8 percent in the first contract year,exclusive of cost-of-living adjustments, compared with 8.3 percentwhen the same parties last bargained. Total labor compensation inthe nonfarm business sector increased 6.7 percent, compared with

TABLE 6-4.—Changes in wages and compensation, 1978-82

[Percent change, fourth quarter to fourth quarter and 5-year average]

Measure

8.4

7.7

8.07.6

9.0.0

1979

8.0

8.7

9.08.5

9.4- 2 . 9

1980

9.6

9.0

10.98.0

10.6- 1 . 7

1981

8.4

8.8

9.68.5

8.8

1982*

5.9

•6.9

5 7.46 6.6

6.62.0

5-yearaverage1*

8.2

8.1

8.87.8

9.C

Adjusted hourly earnings index3.

Employment cost index *

Union workersNonunion workers.

Nonfarm business sector:*

Compensation per hourReal compensation per hour..

'Preliminary.* Based on annual data.'Private nonfarm employees.4Wages and salaries, private nonfarm industry workers.•Third quarter 1981 to third quarter 1982.'All persons.Sources: Department of Commerce (Bureau of Economic Analysis), Department of Labor (Bureau of Labor Statistics), and

Council of Economic Advisers.

134

Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 141: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

8.8 percent in 1981. These declines in wage inflation provide a basisfor expecting that recent reductions in price inflation may be sus-tained.

Real compensation per hour rose 2.0 percent in 1982 as pay in-creased more rapidly than consumer prices. This was the first rise inthis series since early 1978 and suggests that the historic trend ofrising real wages and family incomes may resume.

Even though output declined for the third straight year, as shownin Table 6-5, labor productivity in the nonfarm business sector expe-rienced its first substantial improvement since 1977. Lower rates ofincrease in hourly compensation and higher productivity growth to-gether resulted in labor costs per unit of output increasing only 4.6percent. This was less than half the rate of increase recorded in1980, when labor productivity was weaker and hourly compensationrose at double-digit rates. The 4.6 percent increase in unit laborcosts was associated with a rise of 4.3 percent in the nonfarm busi-ness sector price deflator.

TABLE 6-5.—Productivity, costs, and prices in the nonfarm business sector, 1978-82

[Percent change, fourth quarter to fourth quarter and 5-year average]

Item 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 > 5-yearaverage 1 2

Output

Output per hour

Compensation per hour..

Unit tabor cost

Implicit price deflator

5.6

.3

9.0

8.6

8.2

0.2

- 1 . 9

9.4

11.6

8.5

- 0 . 6

.3

10.6

10.2

10.7

- 0 . 2

- . 1

8.8

8.9

9.6

- 1 . 7

1.9

6.6

4.6

4.3

1.2

.0

9.0

9.0

8.3

1 Preliminary.2 Based on annual data.Note.—Data relate to alt persons.Source: Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics.

By all other measures as well, the rate of inflation declined signifi-cantly in 1982, as shown in Table 6-6. After increasing at double-digit rates in 1980 and by nearly 9 percent in 1981, the broadestmeasures of inflation—the GNP fixed-weight price index and theGNP implicit price deflator—increased nearly 5 percent in 1982. Theall-urban consumer price index increased 4.5 percent, the slowestrate since 1972. Even when food and energy prices, which were espe-cially weak, are excluded, consumer prices increased about 5 percent.

Beginning in 1983, the homeownership component of the consum-er price index for all-urban consumers will be computed on a rentalequivalence basis. On this conceptual basis, consumer prices in-creased about 5 percent in 1982.

Producer prices of finished goods increased only 3.6 percent in1982, about the same as in 1972 and 1976. Price increases for bothconsumer finished goods and capital equipment showed a markeddeceleration.

135Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 142: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

T A B L E 6 -6 .—/V i re changes, 1978-82

[Percent change, fourth quarter to fourth quarter and 5-year average]

Item 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982' 5-yearaverage l

GNP price measures:

Fixed-weighted index..Implicit deflator

Consumer prices:'

All itemsAll items less food and energy...

Producer prices—finished goods:

Total..Consumer goodsCapital equipment..

8.98.5

9.08.5

8.79.07.8

9.38.2

12.710.7

12.713.98.8

10.310.2

12.612.2

12.412.611.7

8.98.9

9.610.2

7.26.89.1

5.04.6

4.55.2

3.63.44.2

8.68.2

9.89.4

9.19.28.7

1 Preliminary.1 Based on annual data.8 All urban consumers.Source: Department of Commerce (Bureau of Economic Analysis) and Department of Labor (Bureau of Labor Statistics).

CREDIT MARKETS

During the first three quarters of 1982 the total amount of fundsraised in U.S. credit markets averaged slightly more, at an annualrate, than the volume raised in 1981. As shown in Table 6-7, overthe last 5 years the volume of funds raised by the nonfinancial sectorhas dropped from 18.6 percent to 13.6 percent of nominal GNP, areturn to the cyclical lows recorded in 1974 and 1975.

TABLE 6-7.—Funds raised by the nonfinancial sector of the economy, 1978-82

[Billions of dollars, except as noted]

Sector 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 •

Total funds raised

Households

Business........

Federal Government

State and local government...

Foreign

Funds raised as percent of GNP....

401.7

169.3

126.3

53.7

19.1

33.2

18.6

402.0

176.5

146.9

37.4

20.2

21.0

16.6

397.1

117.5

143.9

79.2

27.3

29.3

15.1

406.9

120.4

149.5

87.4

22,3

27.3

13.9

413.7

87.0

139.1

139.1

37.2

11.1

13.6

'Average of first three quarters at seasonally adjusted annual rate.Note.—Detail may not add to total due to rounding.Sources: Department of Commerce (Bureau of Economic Analysis) and Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System.

Different sectors of the credit market experienced widely differenttrends in 1982. High interest rates1 in the first half of the year andsluggish disposable income contributed to reduced borrowing for

136

Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 143: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

housing. Borrowing by the nonfinancial business sector also declinedduring the first three quarters of 1982. However, the easing of creditconditions in late summer encouraged an expansion in net corporatebond issues; the funds raised were used in part to pay off short-termdebt.

Combined borrowing of State and local governments and the Fed-eral Government rose approximately 60 percent in the first threequarters of 1982 from 1981 levels, as the growth of tax receiptsslowed sharply relative to expenditures. For fiscal 1982, U.S. Treas-ury borrowing totaled $135.0 billion, of which $23.4 billion was usedfor making direct loans. Federally guaranteed loans declined sharplyfrom 1981 levels, but borrowing by federally sponsored enterprisessurged. Total Federal and federally assisted borrowing climbed to48.9 percent of the funds raised in U.S. credit markets, surpassingthe previous peacetime peak of 41 percent reached in 1976.

INTEREST RATES

As shown in Chart 6-1, interest rates rose in the first part of 1982but began to, decline sharply in the summer. The decline in interestrates partly reflected diminishing inflationary expectations that tendto be built into nominal interest rates.

The yield on 3-month Treasury bills, which had averaged justunder 11 percent late in 1981, held in the 12 to 13 percent rangeuntil mid-1982 and then fell to less than 8 percent in the closingmonths of the year. The prime rate charged by commercial banksbegan the year at 15% percent, climbed to 17 percent in February,and then in July began a steady fall to 11^ percent by December.The corporate Aaa bond rate, which peaked at 1534 percent in Febru-ary, fell below 12 percent by November.

The expected real after-tax interest rate is the correct measure ofthe cost of credit to borrowers and lenders. It is approximately equalto the after-tax nominal interest rate less the anticipated rate of infla-tion. For example, with a 12 percent nominal interest rate, the after-tax cost of credit to a borrower in the 30 percent marginal tax brack-et is 8.4 percent. If a 5 percent inflation rate is anticipated, the ex-pected real after-tax cost of credit is 3.2 percent.

Because the tax brackets of borrowers differ widely and the expect-ed rate of inflation cannot be observed directly, the realized realpretax interest rate—-approximated by the nominal interest rate lessthe actual rate of inflation—is a more convenient measure of the costof credit. The nominal 3-month Treasury bill rate and the corre-sponding realized real pretax rate are shown in Chart 6-5 for theperiod since 1955. The real pretax Treasury bill rate was abnormallylow in 1972-73 and 1976-77, tending to increase aggregate demand.

137

Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 144: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

It then moved to relatively high levels from 1980 through the firsthalf of 1982, tending to reduce aggregate demand. By the end of1982, however, the real pretax Treasury bill rate had fallen to aboutthe same level as its highs in the 1950s and 1960s.

Chart 6-5

Nominal and Real 3-Month Treasury Bill Yield

PERCENT

15 -

10 ~

1955 1960 1965 1970 1975 1980

'CONVERTED TO EFFECTIVE ANNUAL YIELD FROM DISCOUNT BASIS.

^EQUALS NOMINAL YIELD LESS ACTUAL RATE OF INFLATION, DEFINED BY PERSONALCONSUMPTION DEFLATOR, OVER THE PERIOD TO MATURITY. DEFLATOR FOR FIRSTQUARTER 1983 FORECAST BY COUNCIL OF ECONOMIC ADVISERS.

SOURCES: DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE, BOARD OF GOVERNORS OF THE FEDERAL RESERVESYSTEM, AND COUNCIL OF ECONOMIC ADVISERS.

The sharp run-up and subsequent decline in real pretax ratesduring the 1980-82 period probably reflect in part the adjustment ofcredit markets to the decontrol of interest rates. During the late1970s variable interest rate time and savings accounts were intro-duced by depository institutions, and the process of financial innova-tion speeded up the movement of funds out of regulated, fixed-rateaccounts. In addition, the consumer has recently become a more vig-

138

Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 145: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

orous competitor for credit as usury laws have been eliminated. As aresult, the financial system now relies less on nonprice rationing ofcredit and may exhibit higher interest rates when credit is tight.

Even though real short-term rates have returned more nearly tothe levels of the 1950s and 1960s, the equilibrium level of both long-and short-term rates may now be somewhat higher than before. Tothe extent that the accelerated cost recovery system in the EconomicRecovery Tax Act of 1981 reduced the tax on earnings of deprecia-ble property, it raised the real interest rate that business borrowersare willing to pay. In addition, large budget deficits in many coun-tries have lowered national saving rates, tending to lead to higherreal interest rates worldwide.

At the end of-1982, long-term interest rates were considerablyhigher than short-term interest rates, perhaps reflecting the concernthat-the inflation rate may be higher in the future than at present. Tothe extent that these inflationary expectations decline, further de-clines in nominal long-term interest rates can be anticipated.

MONETARY DEVELOPMENTS

The Administration's economic program includes support for apolicy of gradual reduction in the rate of monetary growth in orderto bring down inflation. Consistent with this policy, the Federal Re-serve reduced the Ml target growth rate range from 3.5 to 6 percentin 1981 to 2.5 to 5.5 percent in 1982. The target range for M2growth was kept at 6 to 9 percent.

In its February 1982 review of the tentative target ranges for 1982,established in July 1981, the Federal Open Market Committee recog-nized that the rapid increase of Ml in December 1981 and January1982 had already placed it well above the top of its target range.

Judging that the rapid money growth was temporary and that nobasic change in the relation between the monetary aggregates andnominal GNP had occurred, the committee reaffirmed the tentativetargets for 1982.

Consequently, the Federal Reserve slowed the growth of nonbor-rowed reserves during the first half of the year, with a view to gradu-ally bringing Ml and M2 back into their target ranges. By June, Mlwas within its target range, while M2 remained somewhat above thetop of its range. Because Ml had shown virtually no growth sinceJanuary, resumption of growth implied a step-up in the provision ofbank reserves. After midyear, continued weakness in the economy,and a more ample supply of reserves and money contributed to asharp drop in short-term interest rates. The 3-month Treasury billrate fell from about 12 percent in July to 9 percent in August. Aseries of reductions in the Federal Reserve's discount rate followed,

139

Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 146: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

maintaining its alignment with short-term market rates and prevent-ing sharp changes in the incentive for banks to borrow from the Fed-eral Reserve.

Starting in August, Ml growth began to speed up. By the fourthquarter of 1982, Ml had risen 8.5 percent above its level in thefourth quarter of 1981, well above the upper end of the 1982 targetrange. Over the same period, M2 increased 9.8 percent, slightly morethan the top of its target range. These increases in the monetary ag-gregates occurred against the background of an economy that wasstill in recession.

Part of the strength in Ml may be attributable to the effects of alarge volume of All-Savers Certificates maturing in the fourth quarterof 1982, as the maturing funds moved through checking accounts orwere temporarily "parked" there. Federal Reserve analysis suggestedthat an additional factor was an unusual demand for liquidity. Muchof the increase in Ml was in interest-bearing negotiable order ofwithdrawal (NOW) accounts, which provide elements of both savingsand transactions accounts. From the fourth quarter of 1981 to thefourth quarter of 1982, checkable deposits other than demand depos-its grew about 35 percent. With market interest rates falling, theseinterest-bearing deposits, such as NOW accounts, provided a safeand convenient store of liquidity at a time of economic and financialuncertainty. Increased liquidity demand may also account for theabove-target growth of M2.

As discussed in Chapter 1, the behavior of the "income velocity"measures—the ratios of GNP to the various monetary aggregates—was unusual in 1982. The velocity of Ml rose 3.2 percent a year onaverage over the 20 years ending in 1981, but in 1982 it declined 4.9percent. While a tendency toward slower velocity is not unusual inthe midst of a recession when interest rates generally are falling, theonly other fourth quarter to fourth quarter decline in Ml velocitysince the beginning of the current series in 1959 was a 0.1 percentfall in 1967. The velocity of M2, which historically has been relativelytrendless, declined 6.0 percent in 1982; the largest previous declinewas 3.8 percent in 1976. Without some accommodation of monetarygrowth—particularly for M1 —to this drop in velocity, monetarypolicy would have been more restrictive than had been"intendedwhen the 1982 targets were established.

The number, size, and rapidity of recent changes in the financialsector may well have affected the behavior of velocity. As indicated inTable 6-8, checkable deposits other than ordinary demand depositsaccounted for only 2.3 percent of Ml in December 1978. In Decem-ber 1980, just before NOW accounts were authorized nationally,other checkable deposits were 6.5 percent of Ml, but by December

140

Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 147: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

1982 their share had risen to over 21 percent. Because these interest-bearing deposits may be regarded by their holders in part as savingsrather than solely as transactions balances, the reported growth ofMl in 1981 and 1982 probably overstates the growth in transactionsbalances.

TABLE 6-8.—Components of Ml and M2, 1978-82[Averages of daily figures; billions of dollars; seasonally adjusted, except as noted]

Item

Currency

Plus* Demand deposits%

Other checkable deposits

Equals- Ml

Plus* Savings deposits3

Small time deposits

Overnight repurchase agreements (RPs) and overnight Eurodollars *...

Money market mutual fund balances (excluding institution ac-counts) *

Equals- M2 9

December

1978

97 4

257 4

84

363 2

479 9

533 9

24.0

71

1,403.9

1979

1061

265 9

16 9

389 0

4217

652 6

26.3

34 4

1,518.9

1980

1161

2714

26 9

414 5

398.9

751.7

35.0

61.9

1,656.2

1981

1231

240 7

77 0

440 9

343 6

854 7

38.1

1512

1,822.7

1982 »

132 6

244 6

1013

478 5

400 3

904 2

45.6

177 5

1,999.1

1 Preliminary.includes travelers checks.'Includes Money Market Deposit Account introduced December 14, 1982.4 Not seasonally adjusted.BM2 will differ from the sum of components by a consolidation adjustment that represents the estimated amount of demand

deposits and vault cash held by thrift institutions to service time and savings deposits.Source: Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System.

In general, the demand for any particular monetary aggregate—and hence its income velocity—depends in part on the difference be-tween market rates of interest and the rates earned on the deposits inthat aggregate. Consequently, the increased portion of Ml depositsthat pay interest and the decline in market interest rates have com-bined to lower Ml velocity.

The rapid growth of general purpose and broker/dealer moneymarket mutual fund balances, which are included in M2 but not inMl, has tended to raise Ml velocity and to lower M2 velocity. FromDecember 1980 to December 1982 these money market mutual fundbalances grew from $61.9 billion to $177.5 billion, which exceededthe growth in other checkable deposits by $41.2 billion. Althoughmost money market mutual fund balances are subject to transfer bycheck, the average turnover of these accounts has been relatively low.

Interpretation of the macroeconomic significance of changes in themonetary aggregates became more difficult in late 1982 when theDepository Institutions Deregulation Committee authorized two newaccounts. In mid-December, banks and thrift institutions introduced aMoney Market Deposit Account with limited transactions capabilitiesand no interest rate ceiling. Within about 2 weeks, these accounts

141

Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 148: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

had attracted an astonishing $87 billion. The Depository InstitutionsDeregulation Committee also authorized a new super NOW accounteffective January 1983, with no transactions limitations and no inter-est rate ceilings, having the same $2,500 minimum balance as theMoney Market Deposit Account.

Financial deregulation and innovation favorably affect the efficien-cy of the U.S. financial system but also complicate the implementa-tion of monetary policy. Large asset reallocations caused by changesin the financial and regulatory system can have large and unpredict-able effects on Ml and M2 and on their relations to nominal GNP. Inlight of the particular difficulties with regard to Ml, the FederalOpen Market Committee has voted to place greater emphasis on M2and M3 for an indefinite period. However, the broad framework oftargeting the monetary aggregates has been retained, as have the re-serve operating procedures, for implementing it.

PROSPECTS FOR 1983

Assuming that the Administration's 1984 budget proposals are en-acted and that the monetary aggregates grow within the Federal Re-serve's target ranges, the prospects for a moderate, sustainable eco-nomic recovery beginning early in 1983 are good (Table 6-9). As wastrue in the early stages of previous recoveries, the unemploymentrate is likely to stabilize for several months before a downward trendbecomes evident. A pattern of reduced inflation in 1982 is expectedto continue in 1983. The sharp rise in the Federal budget deficit re-flects reduced receipts because of lower inflation, as well as the ef-fects of the 1981-82 recession.

The expectation of economic recovery is based on the view thatcontinuing strength in household and defense spending will bring aturnaround in the inventory cycle. Cuts in production and increasesin sales brought business inventories more in line with sales by theend of 1982. Future sales gains are thus likely to be met by increasesin production, income, and employment, enhancing sales further.Once even a moderate but sustained increase in sales is underway,this sequence of events may lead to a temporary surge of above-aver-age economic growth.

Increases in sales will come primarily from households whoseincome will be bolstered by the third stage of the personal incometax cut, whose debt burden has declined sharply relative to incomeand assets, and whose financial assets, in many cases, appreciated inrallies in the stock and bond markets. With continued moderate in-creases in food and oil prices, more income will become available forother consumer purchases. Because outlays on durable consumer

142

Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 149: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

TABLE 6-9.—Economic outlook for 1983

Item 1982 *21

-1.2

2.S-8.44.56.6

.1

4.6

6.6

1.9

10.7

n

1983forecast

3.1

2.7

27*i1.2

- 2 . 0

5.6

6.0

2.2

10.4

1.5

Percent change (fourth quarter to fourth quarter):

Real gross national product

Personal consumption expenditures.,Nonresidential fixed investmentResidential investmentFederal purchasesState and local purchases

6NP implicit price deflator

Compensation per hour2

Output per hour2

Level in fourth quarter:3

Unemployment rate (percent) *

Housing starts (millions of units, annual rate)....

Preliminary.2Nonfarm business, all persons.3Seasonally adjusted.4Actual rate for 1982 is percent of civilian labor force; forecast rate for 1983 is percent of total labor force including persons

in the Armed Forces stationed in the United States.Sources: Department of Commerce (Bureau of Economic Analysis and Bureau of the Census), Department of Labor (Bureau of

Labor Statistics), and Council of Economic Advisers.

goods and houses have been depressed for the last 4 years, consum-ers are expected to devote increases in their income, and perhapssome of the recent gains in their financial wealth, to replenishingtheir holdings of durable goods. The sharp easing of credit termsand lower house price increases have already encouraged morehouseholds to consider buying houses. This uptrend is expected tointensify in 1983. New house purchases are invariably followed by apickup in expenditures for furniture, appliances, and other housing-related goods.

The pace of the recovery in 1983 will probably be moderate by his-torical standards. Low capacity utilization rates and the need to re-build corporate liquidity will restrain capital spending. The world-wide recession and the lagged effect of the appreciation of the dollarwill curtail the growth of exports. Continued reductions in the non-defense public sector will limit it as a source of increased aggregatedemand.

PROSPECTS AND POLICIES BEYOND 1983

Economic prospects for the rest of the 1980s depend greatly onthe economic policies that are followed. The Administration believesthat the four-point program it has pursued—reducing the growth ofFederal outlays, taxes, regulation, and the money supply—constitutesthe best approach for attaining and maintaining the economic goalsset forth in the Full Employment and Balanced Growth Act of 1978.

143

Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 150: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

The Full Employment and Balanced Growth Act calls for annualnumerical goals for several key economic indicators over a 5-yearperiod. The projections provided in Table 6-10 show gradual, steadyprogress toward our economic goals. These figures illustrate the Ad-ministration's belief, explained in Chapter 1, that policies based onconsistent, long-term objectives can simultaneously achieve full em-ployment, price stability, and sustained growth in real income. Amajor cause of our present economic ills was the inclination in thepast to pursue one economic goal single-mindedly, without adequateattention to the longer run consequences for other economic objec-tives. This Administration remains determined to avoid the errors ofpast policies.

TABLE 6-10.—Projections of economic goals, 1983-88

[Calendar years, except as noted]

Item 1983 1984 1985 1986 19871988

Level

Employment (millions)1

"Jnemployment rate (percent) a.:ederal budget outlays as percent of GNP (fiscal year basis).

101.5

10.7

25.2

104.2

9.9

24.3

107.0

8.9

24.1

109.6

8.1

23.9

112.3

7.3

23.5

Percent change

Consumer prices3

Real GNP

Real compensation per hour *

Output per hour *

4.9

1.4

1.2

2.1

4.6

3.9

.8

1.9

4.6

4.0

1.1

1.6

4.6

4.0

1.4

1.7

4.5

4.0

1.6

1.6

114.9

6.5

23.0

4.4

4.0

1.6

1.7

1 Labor force series includes persons in the Armed Forces stationed in the United States.3 Unemployed as percent of total labor force. See footnote 1.3Wage earners and clerical workers.•Nonfarm business, all persons.Source: Council of Economic Advisers.

A major prerequisite for achieving our economic goals is control ofinflation. Marked progress toward this end has been made in the last2 years. With continued moderate growth in the monetary aggre-gates, increased reliance on the private sector, and increased domes-tic and international economic competition, the prospects for sustain-ing and extending the progress against inflation are now quite favor-able.

An important factor in achieving and sustaining high real economicgrowth is a high level of capital formation. Chapter 4 of this volume,which fulfills the legislative requirement for an annual InvestmentPolicy Report, explains that lower inflation and the recently enactedtax incentives for saving and investment are the important first stepsin fostering capital accumulation. Controlling the Federal deficit isnow the single most important method of encouraging more capitalformation.

144

Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 151: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

A critical element in achieving healthy economic growth is maintaininga liberal worldwide trading system. As explained in detail in Chapter 3,the world's economies are now more integrated than ever before. Thissystem has recently experienced severe strains. It is of utmost importancethat these challenges be met in a manner consistent with an open,growing, balanced network of international trade.

Just as an open worldwide trading system is crucial for the freeworld economies, a competitive free market system unfettered by un-necessary government regulation is essential for a strong domesticeconomy. As Chapter 5 points out, substantial progress toward re-duction of traditional price and entry regulation has been made inrecent years, but further opportunities for deregulation exist.

The year 1983 is expected to be the first of many years of sus-tained economic growth. Continued economic growth is the only wayto sustain progress in reducing unemployment. But macroeconomicpolicies alone cannot reduce structural unemployment and achieve anacceptable level of employment. Chapter 2 describes some of themacroeconomic policies that, along with a sustained recovery, arenecessary to achieve noninflationary full employment. These policies aredesigned". . . to foster and promote free competitive enterprise . . ."as mandated in the Full Employment and Balanced Growth Act.

One major remaining threat to a sustainable, balanced recovery isthe danger that large Federal budget deficits would preclude the con-tinuing declines in real interest rates that are necessary for healthygrowth in all sectors of the economy. The Administration's 1984budget provides a plan which can lead to a steady decline in budgetdeficits and thus, ultimately, to a balanced Federal budget.

145

Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 152: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 153: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

Appendix A

REPORT TO THE PRESIDENT ON THE ACTIVITIES

OF THE

COUNCIL OF ECONOMIC ADVISERS DURING 1982

Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 154: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 155: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL

COUNCIL OF ECONOMIC ADVISERS,

Washington, D.C., December 31, 1982.MR. PRESIDENT:

The Council of Economic Advisers submits this report on its activi-ties during the calendar year 1982 in accordance with the require-ments of the Congress, as set forth in section 10(d) of the Employ-ment Act of 1946 as amended by the Full Employment and BalancedGrowth Act of 1978.

Sincerely,MARTIN FELDSTEIN, Chairman

WILLIAM A. NISKANEN

WILLIAM POOLE

149

Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 156: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

Council Members and their dates of service are listed below:

Name

Edwin 6. NourseLeon H. Keyserling

John D. Clark

Roy BloughRobert C TurnerArthur F. BurnsNeilH. JacobyWalter W. StewartRaymond J. Saulnier

Joseph S. DavisPaul W McCrackenKarl BrandtHenry C. WallichWalter W. HellerJames TobinKermit GordonGardner Ackley

John P. LewisOtto EcksteinArthur M Okun

James S. DuesenberryMerton J. PeckWarren L SmithPaul W. McCrackenHendrikS. HouthakkerHerbert Stein

Ezra SolomonMarina v.N. WhitmanGary L SeeversWilliam J FellnerAlan GreenspanPaul W. MacAvoyBurton G MalkielCharles L. SchultzeWilliam D. NordhausLyle E GramleyGeorge C. EadsStephen M. GoldfeldMurray L WeidenbaumJerry L. JordanWilliam A. NiskanenMartin FeldsteinWilliam Poole

Position

ChairmanVice ChairmanActing ChairmanChairmanMemberVice ChairmanMemberMemberChairmanMemberMemberMemberChairmanMemberMember .MemberMemberChairmanMemberMemberMemberChairmanMemberMemberMemberChairmanMemberMemberMemberChairmanMemberMemberChairmanMemberMemberMemberMemberChairmanMemberMember . .ChairmanMemberMemberMemberMemberChairmanMemberMemberChairmanMember

Oath of office date

August 9 ,1946August 9, 1946November 2. 1949May 10, 1950August 9. 1946May 10,1950June 29, 1950September8, 1952March 19, 1953September 15,1953December 2,1953April 4, 1955December 3,1956May 2,1955December 3,1956November 1, 1958May 7, 1959January 29, 1961January 29, 1961January 29, 1961August 3, 1962November 16, 1964May 17, 1963September 2, 1964November 16, 1964February 15, 1968February 2 ,1966February 15, 1968July 1, 1968February 4 ,1969February 4 ,1969February 4, 1969January 1,1972September 9, 1971March 13,1972July 23, 1973October 31, 1973September 4, 1974June 13, 1975July 22, 1975January 22, 1977March 18, 1977March 18,1977June 6, 1979August 20, 1980February 27, 1981July 14,1981June 12, 1981October 14, 1982December 10, 1982

Separation date

November 1, 1949.

January 20, 1953.

February 11,1953.August 20, 1952.January 20,1953.December 1,1956.February 9, 1955.April 29, 1955.

January 20 ,1961.October 31, 1958.January 31,1959.January 20 ,1961.January 20,1961.November 15, 1964.July 31, 1962.December 27,1962.

February 15, 1968.August 31, 1964.February 1,1966.

January 20. 1969.June 30, 1968.January 20, 1969.January 20, 1969.December 31, 1971.July 15, 1971.

August 31, 1974.March 26,1973.August 15, 1973.April 15, 1975.February 25,1975.January 20,1977.November 15,1976.January 20, 1977.January 20, 1981.February 4, 1979.May 27, 1980.January 20 ,1981.January 20 ,1981 .August 25, 1982.July 31, 1982.

150

Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 157: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

Report to the President on the Activities of theCouncil of Economic Advisers during 1982

The Employment Act of 1946 (P.L. 304-79th Congress), as amend-ed, provides the statutory base for the activities of the Council ofEconomic Advisers. The Council, through the Chairman, providesadvice to the President on a wide range of domestic and internationaleconomic policy issues.

Martin Feldstein became Chairman on October 14, 1982, succeed-ing Murray L. Weidenbaum, who returned to Washington University(St. Louis). The Chairman is on leave from Harvard University,where he is a Professor of Economics. On July 31, 1982, Jerry L.Jordan resigned to return to the University of New Mexico, where heis a Professor of Economics at the Anderson Schools of Management.On December 10, 1982, William Poole became a Member of theCouncil. Mr. Poole is on leave from Brown University where he is aProfessor of Economics. William A. Niskanen continued to serve as aMember.

MACROECONOMIC POLICIES

As is its tradition, during 1982 the Council devoted much of itstime to assisting the President in the formulation of broad economicpolicy objectives and the programs to carry them out. The develop-ment of economic assumptions and monitoring of current develop-ments, under Council Member Jordan and subsequently CouncilMember Poole, were an area of major interest. Monetary policy de-velopments received especially close attention.

Council Member Jordan and later Council Member Poole chairedthe interagency subcabinet "Troika" forecasting group, consisting ofrepresentatives from the Department of the Treasury and the Officeof Management and Budget, with participation by the Department ofCommerce. The Chairman of the Council continued his responsibili-ty for presenting to the President the economic assumptions devel-oped with the Office of Management and Budget and the Depart-ment of the Treasury.

Council Members chaired or participated in numerous CabinetCouncil working groups dealing with such issues as economic statis-tics, Federal credit programs, alternatives to Federal regulation, andFederal housing programs.

151

Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 158: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

The Chairman actively participated during the early months of theyear, and then during the late fall budget cycle, in Cabinet level reviewsof agency budget requests and appeals.

MICROECONOMIC POLICIES

A wide variety of microeconomic issues received Council attentionduring the year. Council Member Niskanen chaired Cabinet Councilworking groups dealing with employee pension legislation and alter-natives to Federal regulation. Trade issues were an area of continu-ing attention.

The Council assisted in the preparation of agency guidelines forimplementing Executive Order 12291 dealing with Executive Officereview of agency regulatory proposals, and worked closely with theOffice of Management and Budget on selected regulatory issues.

PUBLIC INFORMATION

The Council's Annual Report is the principal medium through whichthe Council informs the public of its work and its views. It is also animportant vehicle for presenting and explaining the Administration'sdomestic and international economic policies. Distribution of theReport in recent years has averaged about 50,000 copies. The Councilalso assumes primary responsibility for the monthly Economic Indica-tors, a publication prepared by the Council's Statistical Office, underthe supervision of Catherine H. Furlong. The Joint Economic Com-mittee issues the Indicators, which has a distribution of approximately10,000 copies. Information is also provided to members of the publicthrough speeches and other public appearances by the Chairman,Members, and staff economists of the Council.

ORGANIZATION AND STAFF OF THE COUNCIL

OFFICE OF THE CHAIRMAN

The Chairman is responsible for communicating the Council'sviews to the President. This function is carried out through directconsultation with the President and through written memoranda andreports on economic developments and on particular programs andproposals. The Chairman exercises ultimate responsibility for direct-ing the work of the professional staff. He represents the Council atmeetings of the full Cabinet and the various Cabinet Councils, andthe Trade Policy Committee.

COUNCIL MEMBERS

The two Council Members are responsible for all subject mattercovered by the Council, including direct supervision of the work ofthe professional staff. Members represent the Council at a wide vari-

152

Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 159: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

ety of interagency and international meetings and assume major re-sponsibility for selecting issues for Council attention.

In practice, the small size of the Council permits the Chairman andCouncil Members to work as a team in most circumstances. Therewas, however, an informal division of subject matter among them in1982. Mr. Jordan and subsequently Mr. Poole, assumed primary re-sponsibility for domestic and international macroeconomic analysis,economic projections, and monetary and financial issues. Mr. Nis-kanen is primarily responsible for microeconomic and sectoral analy-sis, international trade questions, and regulatory issues.

PROFESSIONAL STAFF

At the end of 1982 the professional staff consisted of the SpecialAssistant to the Chairman, who also acts as staff director, the SeniorStatistician, a domestic policy economist, an international policyeconomist, 12 senior staff economists, 3 staff economists, and 6junior staff economists.

The professional staff and their special fields at the end of 1982were:Eric I. Hemel Special Assistant to the ChairmanLawrence H. Summers Domestic Policy EconomistPaul R. Krugman , International Policy Economist

Senior Staff Economists

Lincoln F. Anderson Economic ForecastingGeoffrey O. Carliner International TradeDaniel J. Frisch Taxation and Social Insurance ProgramsDavid R. Henderson Health Policy and Social Insurance ProgramsThomas J. Kniesner Labor and Employment PolicyEvan R. Kwerel Regulatory Policies and Natural ResourcesThomas S. McCaleb Taxation and Public FinanceStephen K. McNees Macroeconomic PolicyGlenn L. Nelson Agricultural PolicyAdrian W. Throop Monetary Policy and Financial RegulationRobert S- Villanueva Current Economic Conditions, Housing, and

Economic ForecastingBenjamin Zycher Energy Policy and Regulation

Statistician

Catherine H. Furlong Senior Statistician

Staff Economists

Lawrence B. Lindsey Taxation and Public FinanceN. Gregory Mankiw Macroeconomic Policy and Public FinanceRobert H. Meyer Labor and Employment Policy

153

Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 160: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

Junior Staff Economists

Christopher B. Ballinger World Trade and International FinanceJohn H. Cochrane Macroeconomic Analysis and ForecastingJohn S. Earle Public Finance and Labor PolicyThomas W. Gilligan Transportation and Regulatory PolicyDavid S. Reitman Social Insurance Programs and General

Budget PolicyDan C. Roberts Financial Institutions and Macroeconomic

Policy

Catherine H. Furlong, Senior Statistician, continued to be incharge of the Council's Statistical Office. Mrs. Furlong has primaryresponsibility for managing the Council's statistical informationsystem. She supervises the publication of Economic Indicators and thepreparation of all statistical matter in the Economic Report. She alsooversees the verification of statistics in memoranda, testimony, andspeeches. Natalie V. Rentfro, Linda A. Reilly, and Barbara L. Sibelassist Mrs. Furlong.

Serving as consultants during the year were Stephen H. Brooks(consultant), Jose A. Gomez-Ibanez (Harvard University), and RobertA. Leone (Harvard University).

In preparing the Economic Report the Council relied upon the edi-torial services of John Phillip Sawicki.

SUPPORTING STAFF

The Administrative Office of the Council of Economic Advisersprovides general support for the Council's activities. Serving in theAdministrative Office were Elizabeth A. Kaminski, Staff Assistant tothe Council, and Catherine Fibich, Administrative Assistant.

Members of the secretarial staff for the Chairman and CouncilMembers during 1982 were Patricia A. Lee, Susan A. Lindsey, Geor-gia A. O'Connor, and Alice H. Williams. Secretaries for the profes-sional staff were Carolyn L. Bazarnick, Bessie M. Lafakis, RosemaryM. Rogers, Margaret L. Snyder, and Lillie M. Sturniolo.

DEPARTURES

The Council's professional staff are in most cases on leave of ab-sence from universities, other government agencies, or research insti-tutions. Their tenure with the Council is usually limited to 1 or 2years. Senior staff economists who resigned during the year and theirsubsequent affiliations were James B. Burnham (The World Bank),William D. Dobson (Purdue University), Michele U. Fratianni (Indi-ana University), Steven H. Hanke (Johns Hopkins University), Laur-

154

Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 161: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

ence J. Kotlikoff (Yale University), Michael J. McKee (Department ofthe Treasury), David C. Munro (General Motors), Susan C. Nelson(Department of the Treasury), Allen M. Parkman (University of NewMexico), Paul H. Rubin (Baruch College), and Elinor Y. Sachse (con-sultant).

Junior economists who resigned in 1982 were Robert G. Murphy(Massachusetts Institute of Technology), Chris P. Varvares (Washing-ton University, St. Louis), and F. Katharine Warne (Yale University).

155Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 162: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 163: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

Appendix B

STATISTICAL TABLES RELATING TO INCOME,EMPLOYMENT, AND PRODUCTION

Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 164: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 165: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

C O N T E N T S

NATIONAL INCOME OR EXPENDITURE:Page

B-l. Gross national product, 1929-82 163B-2. Gross national product in 1972 dollars, 1929-82 164B-3. Implicit price deflators for gross national product, 1929-82 166B-4. Fixed-weighted price indexes for gross national product, 1972

weights, 1959-82 168B-5. Changes in gross national product and GNP price measures, 1929-

82 169B-6. Gross national product by major type of product, 1929-82 170B-7. Gross national product by major type of product in 1972 dollars,

1929-82 171B-8. Gross national product by sector, 1929-82 172B-9. Gross national product by sector in 1972 dollars, 1929-82 173B-10. Gross national product by industry, 1947-81 174B-l 1. Gross national product by industry in 1972 dollars, 1947-81 175B-12. Gross domestic product of nonfinancial corporate business, 1929-

82 176B-l3. Output, costs, and profits of nonfinancial corporate business,

1948-82 177B-14. Personal consumption expenditures, 1929-82 178B-15. Gross private domestic investment, 1929-82 180B-I6. Gross and net private domestic investment, 1929-82 181B-17. Inventories and final sales of business, 1946-82 182B-18. Inventories and final sales of business in 1972 dollars, 1947-82 183B-l9. Relation of gross national product, net national product, and na-

tional income, 1929-82 184B-20. Relation of national income and personal income, 1929-82 185B-21. National income by type of income, 1929-82 186B-22. Sources of personal income, 1929-82 188B-23. Disposition of personal income, 1929-82 190B-24. Total and per capita disposable personal income and personal con-

sumption expenditures in current and 1972 dollars, 1929-82 191B-25. Gross saving and investment, 1929-82 192B-26. Saving by individuals, 1946-82 193B-27. Number and median income (in 1981 dollars) of families and per-

sons, and poverty status, by race, selected years, 1947-81 194

POPULATION, EMPLOYMENT, WAGES, AND PRODUCTIVITY:B-28. Population by age groups, 1929-82 195B-29. Noninstitutional population and the labor force, 1929-82 196B-30. Civilian employment and unemployment by sex and age, 1947-82.. 198B-31. Selected employment and unemployment data, 1948-82 199B-32. Civilian labor force participation rate by demographic characteris-

tic, 1954-82 200

159

Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 166: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

B-S3. Civilian unemployment rate by demographic characteristic,1948-82 201

B-34. Unemployment by duration, 1947-82 202B-35. Unemployment by reason, 1967-82 203B-36. Unemployment insurance programs, selected data, 1946-82 204B-37. Wage and salary workers in nonagricultural establishment, 1929-

82 205B-38. Average weekly hours and hourly earnings in selected private non-

agricultural industries, 1947-82 206B-39. Average weekly earnings in selected private nonagricultural indus-

tries, 1947-82 207B-40. Productivity and related data, business sector, 1947-82 208B-41. Changes in productivity and related data, business sector, 1948-82. 209

PRODUCTION AND BUSINESS ACTIVITY:B-42. Industrial production indexes, major industry divisions, 1929-82.... 210B-43. Industrial production indexes market groupings 1947-82 211B-44. Industrial production indexes, selected manufactures, 1947-82 212B-45. Capacity utilization rate in manufacturing, 1948-82 213B-46. New construction activity, 1929-82 214B-47. New housing units started and authorized 1959-82 216B-48. Nonfarm business expenditures for new plant and equipment

1947-83 217B-49. Sales and inventories in manufacturing and trade, 1947-82 218B-50. Manufacturers' shipments and inventories, 1947-82 219B-51. Manufacturers' new and unfilled orders, 1947-82 220

PRICES:B-52. Consumer price indexes, major expenditure classes, 1929-82 221B-53. Consumer price indexes, selected expenditure classes, 1939-82 222B-54. Consumer price indexes, commodities, services, and special

groups, 1939-82.. 224B-55. Changes in consumer price indexes, commodities and services,

1948-82 225B-56. Changes in special consumer price indexes, 1958-82 226B-57. Producer price indexes by stage of processing, 1947-82 227B-58. Producer price indexes by stage of processing, special groups,

1974-82 229B-59. Producer price indexes by major commodity groups, 1940-82 230B-60. Changes in producer price indexes for finished goods, 1950-82 232

MONEY STOCK, CREDIT, AND FINANCE:B-61. Money stock measures and liquid assets, 1959-82 233B-62. Components of money stock measures and liquid assets, 1959-82... 234B-63. Commercial bank loans and investments, 1939-82 235B-64. Total funds raised in credit markets by nonfinancial sectors, 1974-

82 236B-65. Federal Reserve Bank credit and member bank reserves, 1929-82... 238B-66. Aggregate reserves of depository institutions and monetary base,

1959-82 239B-67. Bond yields and interest rates, 1929-82 240B-68. Consumer credit outstanding and net change, 1950-82 242B-69. Consumer installment credit extended and liquidated, 1950-82 243

160

Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 167: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

B-70. Mortgage debt outstanding by type of property and of financing,1939-82 244

B-71. Mortgage debt outstanding by holder, 1939-82 245

GOVERNMENT FINANCE:B-72. Federal budget receipts, outlays, and debt, fiscal years 1973-84 246B-73. Federal budget receipts and outlays, off-budget outlays, and debt,

fiscal years 1929-84 248B-74. Relation of Federal Government receipts and expenditures in the

national income and product accounts to the unified budget,fiscal years 1982-84 249

B-75. Government receipts and expenditures, national income and prod-uct accounts, 1929-82 250

B-76. Federal Government receipts and expenditures, national incomeand product accounts, 1958-84 251

B-77. State and local government receipts and expenditures, nationalincome and product accounts, 1946-82 252

B-78. State and local government revenues and expenditures, selectedfiscal years, 1927-81 253

B-79. Interest-bearing public debt securities by kind of obligation, 1967-82 254

B-80. Estimated ownership of public debt securities, 1967-82 255B-81. Maturity distribution average length and of marketable interest-

bearing public debt securities held by private investors, 1967-82, 256

CORPORATE PROFITS AND FINANCE:B-82. Corporate profits with inventory valuation and capital consumption

adjustments, 1929-82 257B-83. Corporate profits by industry, 1929-82 258B-84. Corporate profits of manufacturing industries, 1929-82 259B-85. Sales, profits, and stockholders' equity, all manufacturing corpora-

tions, 1950-82 260B-86. Relation of profits after taxes to stockholders' equity and to sales,

all manufacturing corporations, 1947-82 261B-87. Relation of profits after taxes to stockholders' equity and to sales,

all manufacturing corporations, by industry group, 1981-82 262B-88. Determinants of business fixed investment, 1955-82 263B-89. Sources and uses of funds, nonfarm nonfinancial corporate busi-

ness, 1946-82 264B-90. Current assets and liabilities of U.S. corporations, 1939-82 265B-91. State and municipal and corporate securities offered, 1934-82 266B-92. Common stock prices and yields, 1949-82 267B-93. Business formation and business failures, 1929-82 268

AGRICULTURE:B-94. Farm income, 1929-82 269B-95. Farm output and productivity indexes, 1929-82 270B-96. Farm input use, selected inputs, 1929-82 271B-97. Indexes of prices received and prices paid by farmers, 1940-82 272B-98. U.S. exports and imports of agricultural commodities, 1940-82 273B-99. Balance sheet of the farming sector, 1929-83 274

INTERNATIONAL STATISTICS:B-100. Exchange rates, 1967-82 275B-101. U.S. international transactions, 1946-82 276

161

Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 168: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

B-102. U.S. merchandise exports and imports by principal end-use catego-ry, 1965-82 278

B-103. U.S. merchandise exports and imports by area, 1973-82 279B-104. U.S. merchandise exports and imports by commodity groups, 1960-

82 280B-105. International investment position of the United States at year-end,

selected years, 1970-81 281B-106. World trade: Exports and imports, 1965, 1970, 1975, and 1979-82 282B-107. World trade balance and current account balances, 1965, 1970,

1975, and 1979-82 283B-108. International reserves, selected years, 1952-82 284B-109. Growth rates in real gross national product, 1960-82 285B-110. Industrial production and consumer prices, major industrial coun-

tries, 1960-82 286B— 111. Unemployment rate, and hourly compensation, major industrial

countries, 1960-82 287

General Notes

Detail in these tables may not add to totals because of rounding.Unless otherwise noted, all dollar figures are in current dollars.Symbols used:

p Preliminary,Not available (also, not applicable).

162

Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 169: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

NATIONAL INCOME OR EXPENDITURE

TABLE B-l.—Gross national product, 1929-82

[Billions of dollars, except as noted; quarterly data at seasonally adjusted annual rates]

Year or quarterGross

nationalproduct

Per-sonalcon-

sump-tion

expend-itures

Grossprivate

do-mesticinvest-ment

Netexports

Net exports of goodsand services

Exports Imports

Government purchases of goods andservices

Total

Federal

TotalNa-

tional de-fense

Non-de-

fense

Stateandlocal

Finalsales

Percent changefrom preceding

period l

Grossnation-

alprod-uct

Finalsales

1929....

1933....

1939....

1940....1941....1942....1943....1944....1945....1946....1947....1948....1949....

1950....1951....1952....1953....1954....1955....1956....1957....1958....1959....

I960....19611962....1963....1964....1965....1966....196719681969

19701971....197219731974....1975....19761977....19781979

198019811982"..

1980:III.IllIV

1981:

III"111IV

1982:IIIIllIV...

103.4

55.8

90.9

100.0125.0158.5192.1210.6212.4209.8233.1259.5258.3

286.5330.8348.0366.8366.8400.0421.7444.0449.7487.9

506.5524.6565.0596.7637.7691.1756.0799.6873.4944.0

992.71,077.61,185.91,326.41,434.21,549.21,718.01,918.32,163.92,417.8

2,633.12,937.73,057.5

2,575.92,573.42,643.72,739.4

2,864.92,901.82,980.93,003.2

2,995.53,045.23,088.2

77.3

45.8

67.0

71.080.888.699.4

108.2119.5143.8161.7174.7178.1

192.0207.1217.1229.7235.8253.7266.0280.4289.5310.8

324.9335.0355.2374.6400.5430.4465.1490.3536.9581.8

621.7672.2737.1812.0888.1976.4

1,084.31,204.41,346.51,507.2

1,667.21,843.21,972.0

1,618.71,622.21,682.01,745.8

1,799.91,819.4

1,884.5

1,919.41,947.81,986.3

3,101.3 2,034.6

16.2

1.4

9.3

13.117.99.95.87.2

10.630.734.045.935.3

53.859.252.153.352.768.471.069.261.978.1

75.974.885.490.997.4

113.5125.7122.8133.3149.3

144.2166.4195.0229.8228.7206.1257.9324.1386.6423.0

402.3471.5421.9

424.0391.0384.1410.3

455J475.5486.0468.9

414.8431.5443.3397.9

1.1

1.2

1.81.5

- L 9- 1 . 7

~7.*811.96.96.5

2.24.43.21.32.53.05.37.33.31.4

5.56.66.47.6

10.18.86.56.34.34.2

6.74.1

.714.213.426.813.8

- 4 . 0- 1 . 113.225.226.116.5

14.024.239.023.5

31.223.725.923.5

31.334.9

6.9- 6 . 9

7.0

2.4

4.6

5.46.15.04.65.57.4

15.120.217.516.3

14.419.719.118.018.721.025.028.124.224.8

28.929.931.834.238.841.144.647.352.457.5

65.768.877.5

109.6146.2154.9170.9182.7218.7281.4

339.2367.3349.7

335.7337.3337.2346.7

365.4368.9367.2367.9

359.9365.8349.5323.7

5.9

2.0

3.4

3.64.74.86.57.27.97.38.3

10.59.8

12.215.315.916.716.218.019.820.821.023.4

23.423.325.426.628.832.338.141.048.153.3

59.064.776.795.4

132.8128.1157.1186.7219.8268.1

314.0341.3333.2

321.7313.1298.2323.2

334.2345.1341.3344.4

328.6330.9342.5330.6

8.8

8.2

13.5

14.224.959.888.997.082.827.525.532.038.4

38.560.175.682.575.875.079.487.195.097.6

100.3108.2118.0123.7129.8138.4158.7180.2199.0208.8

220.1234.9253.1270.4304.1339.9362.1393.8431.9474.4

538.4596.9647.1

519.2536.0538.5559.8

578.1583.2600.2626.3

630.1630.9651.7675.7

1.4

2.1

5.2

6.116.952.081.389.474.617.612.716.720.4

18.738.352.457.547.944.545.950.053.953.9

53.757.463.764.665.267.378.890.998.097.6

95J96.2

101.7102.0111.0122.7129.2143.4153.6168.3

197.2228.9257.3

189.6198.8193.3207.0

217.0218.2230.0250.5

249.7244.3259.0276.1

1.2

2.213.749.479.787.473.514.89.0

10.713.2

14.033.545.848.641.138.440.244.045.645.6

44.547.051.150.349.049.460.371.576.976.3

73.670.273.172.877.083.086.092.8

100.3111.8

131.4153.7178.5

126.8130.0130.5138.1

143.1150.5154.4166.9

166.2176.2182.7188.9

3.9

3.93.22.61.62.01.12.83.76.07.2

4.74.86.58.96.86.05.75.98.38.3

9.310.412.714.316.217.818.519.521.221.2

22.226.028.529.133.939.743.250.653.356.5

65.875.278.8

62.868.862.868.9

73.967.775.783.6

83.568.276.387.2

7.4

6.1

8.3

8.18.07.87.57.68.29.9

12.815.318.0

19.821.823.225.027.830.633.537.141.143.7

46.550.854.359.064.671.179.889.3

101.0111.2

124.4138.7151.4168.5193.1217.2232.9250.4278.3306.0

341.2368.0389.8

329.6337.2345.2352.8

361.1365.0370.1375.7

380.4386.6392.7399.6

101.7

57.4

90.5

97.8120.6156.7192.8211.6213.5203.5233.5254.8261.4

279.7320.5344.8366.3368.4394.1417.0442.6451.2482.2

503.6522.2558.8590.7632.1681.2741.9789.3865.5934.2

989.51,070.01,175.71,307.91,420.11,556.11,706.21,895.32,137.42,403.5

2,643.12,917.33,078.9

2,576.62,573.92,664.82,757.1

2,852.72,877.22,949.12,989.9

3,031.13,061.43,083.53,139.8

6.6

- 4 . 2

7.0

10.025.026.721.3

9.6.9

- 1 . 211.111.3

10.915.55.25.4

.09.05.45.31.38.5

3.83.67.75.66.98.49.45.89.28.1

5.28.6

10.111.88.18.0

10.911.712.811.7

8.911.64.1

12.2- . 411.415.3

19.65.3

11.43.0

- 1 . 06.85.81.7

- 5 . 6

5.3

8.123.230.023.0

9.8.9

- 4 . 714.89.12.6

7.014.67.66.2

.67.05.86.11.96.9

4.43.77.05.77.07.88.96.49.77.9

5.98.19.9

11.28.69.69.6

11.112.812.4

10.010.45.5

11.8- . 414.914.6

14.63.5

10.45.7

5.64.12.97.5

'Changes are based on unrounded data and therefore may differ slightly from changes computed from data shown here.Source: Department of Commerce, Bureau of Economic Analysis.

163

Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 170: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

TABLE B-2.—Gross national product in 1972 dollars, 1929-82

[Billions of 1972 dollars, except as noted; quarterly data at seasonally adjusted annual rates]

Year orquarter

Grossnationalproduct

1929

1933

1939

19401941194219431944194519461947194819491950195119521953195419551956195719581959

19601961196219631964198519661967196819691970197119721973197419751978197719781979198019811982".1980:

IIIIllIV

1981:IIIIllIV

1982:IIIIllIV"

315.7

222.1

319.8344.1400.4461.7531.6569.1560.4478.3470.3489.8492.2

534.8579.4600.8623.6616.1657.56/1.6683.8680.9721.7

737.2756.6800.3832.5876.4929.3984.8

1,011.41,058.11,087.61,085.61,122.41,185.91,254.31,246.31,231.61,298.21,369.71,438.61,479.4

1,474.01,502.61,475.5

1,494.91,457.81,463.81,479.4

1,507.81,502.21,510.41,490.1

1,470.71,478.41,481.11,471.7

Personalconsumptionexpenditures

Total Durablegoods

215.1

170.5

219.8

229.9243.6241.1248.2255.2270.9301.0305.8312,2319.3

337.3341.6350.1363.4370.0394.1405.4413.8418.0440.4

452.0461.4482.0500.5528.0557.5585.7602.7634.4657.9672.1696.8737.1767.9762.8779.4823.1864.3903.2927.6930.5947.6957.1

937.0915.8928.0941.0

951.1944.6951.4943.4

949.1955.0956.3968.0

durable Services

20.9

10.7

18.6

21.224.215.714.013.014.425.430.132.535.5

42.639.138.042.142.551.148.848.645.350.7

51.449.354.759.764.872.678.479.588.391.8

89.198.2

111.1121.3112.3112.7126.6138.0146.8147.2137.1140.0138.7

145.4128.9134.6139.5

145.3138.6142.2134.1

137.5138.3136.4142.8

Non-lurablgoods

98.1

82.9

115.1

119.9127.6129.9134.0139.4150.3158.9154.8155.0157.4

161.8165.3171.2175.7177.0185.4191.6194.9196.8205.0

208.2211.9218.5223.0233.3244.0255.5259.5270.5277.3

283.7288.7300.6307.4302.5307.5321.9333.4344.4353.1355.8362.4365.2

357.8352.7353.7359.0

361.6361.7363.0363.1

362.2364.5365.9368.2

96.1

76.9

86.1

88.891.895.5

100.2102.8106.3116.7120.9124.7126.5

132.9137.2140.9145.6150.5157.6165.0170.3175.9184.8

192.4200.2208.8217.8229.8240.9251.8263.7275.6288.8

299.3309.9325.3339.2348.0359.3374.7393.0412.0427.3437.6445.2453.2

433.9434.3439.7442.5

444.2444.3446.2446.2

449.5452.2454.0457.0

Gross private domestic investment

Total

55.8

8.4

33.6

44.555.829.518.119.727.770.970.082.165.4

93.593.983.085.383.1

103.8102.697.087.5

108.0

104.7103.9117.6125.1133.0151.9163.0154.9161.6171.4

158.5173.9195.0217.5195.5154.8184.5214.2236.7236.3208.4225.8196.9

222.7201.9199.2209.6

221.6229.5233.4218.9

195.4202.3206.3183.6

Fixed investment

Total

51.2

13.2

32.0

38.343.824.318.022.031.458.770.276.669.8

83.080.278.783.885.396.196.895.589.3

100.9

101.2100.9109.7117.5125.9140.1146.2142.7152.6160.4

154.8165.8184.8200.4183.9161.5176.7200.9220.7229.1213.3216.9205.4

225.3204.4207.8215.9

219.2217.4216.9214.1

210.8206.7202.9201.3

Nonresidential

Total

37.5

10.4

20.9

25.830.417.614.018.727.642.148.951.146.0

50.052.952.156.355.461.365.466.259.363.6

66.966.772.075.182.797.4

108.0105.6109.5116.8

113.8112.2121.0138.1135,7119.3125.6140.3158.3169.9

166.1172.0165.4

171.9162.4163.8166.4

169.7170.1173.9174.2

172.0166.7163.4159.6

Struc-tures

Produc-ers'

durableequip-ment

21.1

5.0

8.7

10.012.06.84.25.58.3

18.917.418.417.9

19.220.720.622.623.625.428.328.426.827.4

29.530.231.631.934.440,643.442.042.845.0

43.942.844.147.443.638.339.540.444.649.1

48.551.653.2

51.148.547.147.5

49.551.052.553.3

53.553.753.052.7

16.4

5.5

12.1

15.818.510.99.8

13.219.223.231.532.628.1

30.832.231.533.731.835.937.037.832.536.2

37.436.540.443.148.356.864.563.666.871.8

69.969.376.990.792.181.186.199.9

113.7120.8117.6120.4112.2

120.8113.9116.7118.9

120.1119.1121.4120.9

118.5113.0110.4106.9

Residential

Total

13.7

2.8

11.1

12.513.36.74.03.43.8

16.621.325.623.8

33.027.326.627.529.934.831.529.230.037.4

34.234.337.742.543.142.738.237.143.143.6

41.053.763.862.348.242.251.260.762.459.147.244.940.0

53.442.044.049,5

49.647.342.939.9

38.940.139.541.7

Non-farm

struc-tures

13.0

2.5

10.4

11.612.36.03.53.03.4

15.319.723.822.1

31.325.725.126.128.533.530.027.828.635.9

32.932,836.340.941.541.236.635.441.341.7

39.251.661.559.945.339.848.757.959.556.344.342.137.1

49.939.441.546.6

47.044.639.936.7

36.037.036.638.8

Farmstruc-tures

Produc-ers'

durableequip-ment

0.6

Changein

busi-ness

inven-tories

0.1

.1

.2

.1

.0

.0

.1

.2

.3

.3

.3

.3

.3

.3

.3

.3

.4

.4

.4

.5

.6

.5

.5

.6

.6

.7

.7

.8

.8

.91.1

1.11.31.51.71.71.61.71.81.92.02.02.01.9

2.12.02.02.0

2.02.02.02.0

1.91.91.91.9

4.6

=4.9

1.6

6.212.05.2

~2!3~3.fi12.2

.25.5

-4 .4

10.613.74.31.5

-2 .27.75.81.5

= 1.87.0

3.53.07.87.57.1

11.816.81119.0

11.1

3.88.1

10.217.211.6

-6 .77.8

13.316.07.3

-5 .09.08.5

2.6--2.5- 8 . 5-6 .2

2.412.116.54.8

= 15.44.43.4

= 17.7

See next page for continuation of table.

164

Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 171: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

TABLE B-2.—Gross national product in 2972 dollars, 1929-82—Continued

[Billions of 1972 dollars, except as noted; quarterly data at seasonally adjusted annual rates]

Year or quarter

1929

1933

1939

19401941194219431944 ..19451946194719481949

1950195119521953195419551956195719581959

196019611962 ...1963196419651966196719681969

1970197119721973197419751976197719781979

198019811982p

1980:IIIIIIIV

1981:1IIIIIIV

1982:|

IIIIV *

Net exports of goods andservices

Netexports

3.7

.4

3.4

4.43.2

- . 6- 5 9- 6 . 2- 3 . 713.218 910,810.7

5910.17.94.8697.3

10111.8562.7

778.57594

12.81016.55.41.9.9

3.916.7

15.527.832.225.422.024 037.2

50.642.030.3

50 553.253.145.6

48 244.239.236.5

36.935.727.521.1

Exports

16.7

9.1

14.3

15.516.411.49.8

10.513.827.332 226.325.8

23 628.627.926.627.830.735.338.033.233.8

38439.341.844 850.351.754.456.761.265.0

70.571.077.597.3

108.5103.5110.1112.9126.7146.2

159.2158.5147.5

164 4161.2155.9155.1

159 3159.7157.8156.9

151.7154.4147.5136.4

Imports

12.9

8.6

10.9

U. l13.212.015 716.817.514.013 315.515.2

17 718.520.021.820 923.425 226.127 631.1

30 730.934 335 437.541647.951.359.364.1

66.669 376.781.880.771.484.790.9

102 7109.0

108.6116.4117.2

113 9108.0102.8109.6

111 1115.5118.7120.4

114.7118.7120.0115.3

Government purchases of goods andservices

Total

41.0

42.9

63.0

65.397.8

191.62713300.4265.493.175 784.796.8

981133.7159.8170.1156.0152.3153.5161.2169.8170.6

172 8182.9193.2197 6202.6209 8229.7248.5260.2257.4

251.12501253.1253.3260.3265.2265.2269.2274.6278.3

284.6287.1291.2

284 7286.9283.4283.2

286 8283.9286.4291.3

289.2285.3291.1299.0

Federal

Total

7.0

10.9

22.8

26.761,0

157.4239 6269.7233.758.236.342.849.2

47 382.2

107.2114.796188.286 890.693 491.4

90 495.3

102 81018100.2100 3112.6125.1128.1121.8

110.6103 7101.795.996.697.496.8

100.4100 3102.1

106.5110.4116.1

106 4109.1105.5104.8

107 9107.0110.7116.0

114.4110.3116.2123.7

Nation-al

de-fense

73.168.366.966.464.965.465 767.4

70.173.578.7

70 370.470.069.6

71072.974.376.1

74.578.280.681.3

Non-de-

fense

=

28.527.629.731.031.835.034,734.8

36.436.837.4

36.138.735.535.2

36 934.136.539.9

39.832.135.542.4

Stateandlocal

33.9

32.0

40.3

38 636.834 331730.731.734.939441.947.5

50 851.552.755.359 964.166 770.676.479.2

82 487.590.495 8

102.4109 5117.1123.4132.1135.6

140.5146 4151.4157.4163.6167.8168.4168.8174.3176.2

178.1176.7175.0

178 3177.8177.9178.4

179 0176.9175.7175.3

174.9175.0174.9175.4

Finalsales

311.0

227.0

318.2

337.9388.4456.55315571.4564.0466.1470 6484.3496.6

524 2565.6596.5622.1618.2649.8665.8682.2682.7714.7

733 7753.7792.4825 0869.3917.5968.0999,2

1,049,11,076.6

1,081.81,114.31,175.71,237.11,234.71,238.41,290.41,356.41,422.61,472.2

1,479.01,493.71,484.0

1,497 51,460.31,472.31,485.7

1505 41,490.11,493.91,485.3

1,486.11,482.71,477.81,489.3

Percent changefrom preceding

period1

Grossnation-

alprod-uct

6.6

- 2 . 2

7.8

7.616.315.31517.1

-1 .5-14.7- 1 7

4.1.5

878.33.73.8

- 1 . 26.72.11.8

- . 46.0

2.22.65.84.05.36.06.02.74.62.8

- . 23.45.75.8

- . 6- 1 . 2

5.45.55.02.8

- . 41.9

- 1 . 8

1.5- 9 . 6

1.64.3

7.9- 1 . 5

2.2- 5 . 3

- 5 . 12.1

.7-2 .5

Finalsales

- 3 . 1

6.3

6.214.917 516 475

- 1 . 3- 1 7 4

102.92.5

567.95.54.3

- 65.1252.5

4.7

272.75.1415.4555.53.25.02.6

.5305.55.2

- . 2.3

4.25.14.93.5

.51.0

- . 6

16- 9 . 6

3.33.7

54-4 .0

1.0- 2 . 3

-.9- 1 . 3

3.2

1 Changes are based on unrounded data and therefore may differ slightly from changes computed from data shown here.Source: Department of Commerce, Bureau of Economic Analysis.

165Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 172: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

TABLE B-3.—Implicit price deflators for gross national product, 1929-82

[Index numbers, 1972. 100, except as noted; quarterly data seasonally adjusted]

Year orquarter

192919331939 ..19401941 .1942194319441945194619471948 .. .....194919501951195219531954 .19551956 .19571958 .1959I9601961196219631964 .196519661967 .1968196919701971197219731974 .19751976 .197719781979 .198019811982 P

1980:

IIIllIV

1981:|||IIIIV

1982:1||HIIV P

Grossnational

product»

32.7625.1328.4329.06312334.32361437.0137 9143.8849.5552.9852.4953.5657.0957 9258.8259.5560.8462.7964.9366.0467.6068.7069.3370.6171.6772.7774.3676.7679.0682.5486.7991.4596.01

100.00105.75115 08125.79132.34140.05150.42163,42178.64195.51207.23

172.31176.52180.60185.16

190 01193.17197.36201.55

203.68205.98208.51210.73

Personal consumption expenditures

Total

35.926.930.530.933 236.740142.444147.852.956055.856.960.662 063.263.764.465.667.869.270.671.972.673.774.875.977.279.481.484.688.492.596 5

100.0105.71164125.31317139.3149.1162.5179.2194.5206.0

172.8177.1181.2185.5

189 2192.6196.4199.8

202.2204.0207.7210.2

Durablegoods

44.232.535.936.740 043.746 751.355562167.870 370.572.276 376 777.275.075677.780 981.383.883.884.385.486.287.186.886.788.291.193.395.799 0

100.01017108 2117.3123 9129.2136 4145.0156.3167 5174.9

151.9154.4158 0161.1

163 0166.2169.7171.3

173 0174.0176.1176.3

Non-durablegoods

38.426.830.530.933 639.143 746.247 852.158.762 360.360.765.866 566.366.666.367.369.471.071.472.673.373.974.975.877.380.181.985.389.493.696 6

100.0108 51234132.5137 2143.6153 4169.9188.4202.7208.9

181.9186.2190.5195.1

199 3201.7204.2205.6

206 8207.1210.0211.4

Services

31.626.129.229.530 832.434 236.137 338.841.744 446.047.449.952 655.457.258460.162 264.166.067.969.070.471.772.774.276.478.781.986.0

90.595 6

100.0104 7113 0121.61296139.31500162.3178.8196 3213.3

172.2176.5180.9185.4

189 6193.4198.6203.6

207 4210.6215.3219.8

Total

28.322.427.728.530 733.535 737.037 241.349.053.754.956.760.962 363.163.665.068.571.171.071.872.171.872.272.372.974.076.378.882.287.091.195.7

100.0105.5116 7131.9139 2149.8163 2178.5193.3208.0215.8

188.5191.5195.1198.3

202 3207.4209.4212.9

213 6216.6216.2216.8

Gross private domestic investmentl

f'ixed investment

Nonresidential

Total

28.322.928.229.131033.935 936.836 740.046.951.553.054.559.160161.261.762.967.371.070.972.272.572.072.573.173.874.776.979.582.886.791.396 2

100.0103 81154132.2138 6146.3157 2170.8186.12013210.1

181.0184.9187.9190.8

194 5200.7203.0206.8

207 6211.3210.7210.9

Structures

24.319.223.023.424 928.432 433.833 936.644.048.848.449.355.156 357.456.557.662.464.963.964.263.763.363.664.164.966.469.272.275.881.588.294 5

100.0107.7128 2144.8149 0159.41764200.2227.72515266.4

216.9224.9232.7237.2

2415249.1252.7261.9

264 5267.6266.7266.7

Pro-ducers'

dur-able

equip-ment

33.426.232.032.834.937.337.338.037.942.848.653.056.057.861.762.663.865.566.671.175,576.678.379.479.379.479.780.180.682.184.387,289.993.297 2

100.01018109 3126.21339141.0149 7158.8169.0179.8183.4

165.8167.9169 9172.3

1751179.9181.4182.5

1819184.6183.8183.5

Total

28.220.726.627.430 032.434 938.140844.653.758.158.760.064.466 466.967.168.771.071.471.271.171.471.371.570.971.272.374.677.080.787.790.594.8

100.0109.1120 3131.0140.7158.0178.3200.5218.5233.6239.3

212.5217.2221.8223.4

229 0231.7235.8239.2

240 5238.6238.8239.4

Residential

Non-farmstruc-tures

27.819.826.327.229 731.834.337.340.043.953.057.558.159.563.865.866.366.668.270.570.970.770.670.970.971.170.570.872.074.376780.587.590.394.7

100.0109.4120.8131.6141.3159.0179.8202.7221.7237.1242.8

215.2220.6225.2226.4

232 2234.9239.4243.3

244.3242.1242.3242.7

Farmstruc-tures

28.619.523.423.626 630.735 740.842 946.652.857.358.059.463.865 766.266.568.370.670.970.870.771.170.771.270.670.972.274.276.780.687.590.695.0

100.0109.2120.5131.9140.7157.0180.0202.7218.8236.9242.6

214.7219.1221.2224.3

227 3233.4237.9242.7

243.8242.0241.9242.9

Pro-ducers'

dur-able

equip-ment

77.258.861.159.663 871.371.475.084.695.2

105.61U.5107.9107.4114.9114.6114.2112.4109.1104.3103.4101.9101.8100.899.096.895.394.392.190.891.093.595.797.899.3

100.0100.6106.8116.9122.7126.7132.6140.3149.2159.4168.3

145.2148.0150.8153.0

155.4158.3161.3162.8

165.7168.1169.4170.0

See next page for continuation of table.

166

Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 173: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

TABLE B-3.—Implicit price deflators for gross national product, 1929-82—Continued

[Index numbers, 1972=100, except as noted; quarterly data seasonally adjusted]

Year or quarter

1929

1933

1939

1940194119421943194419451946194719481949

1950195119521953195419551956195719581959

1960196119621963196419651966196719681969

1970197119721973197419751976197719781979

198019811982 p

1980:I .,IIIIIIV

1981:

IIIIIIV

1982:

IIIll ...IV P

Exports andimports of goods

and services1

Exports

42.2

26.5

32.1

34.937.343.646.851.953.655.462.866.563.1

61.068.868 667.567.268.571.074.073173.5

75.276176.076377.279.481983 585.588.5

93.297.0

100.0112.7134 8149 6155.3161.9172.6192.5

213.1231.8237.1

204 2209.2216.3223.5

229 3230.9232.6234.5

237 3236 8236 9237.4

Imports

45.5

23.6

31.0

32.835.440 041.342 744.951.862.367.864.6

68.882.679 976.777.277.178.479.676175.2

76.175 574.275 276.877.779 479 981.183.2

88.693 3

100.0116.7164 6179 6185.6205.5214.1246.1

289.3293.1284.3

282 5289.8290.1294.9

3007298.7287.7286.1

286 4278 8285 4286.7

Government purchases of goods and services

Total

21.5

19.2

21.4

21725.531232.832 331.229 633.637.739.7

39.245.047 348.548.649.251.754.056057.2

58.059161.162 664.166.069 172 576.581.1

87.793 9

100.0106 7116 8128 2136.6146.3157.3170.4

189.2207.9222.3

182 4186.8190.0197.7

2015205.5209.5215.0

217 8221 1223 9226.0

Federal

Total

20.5

194

22.7

22 727.833 034.033131.930 235.039 041.4

39.646.648 950.149.950.452.955.157 759.0

59.460 262.063 565167.170 072 776.580.1

86.692 7

100.0106 3114 9126 0133.5142.8153.1164.8

185.2207.4221.6

178 2182.2183.3197.5

2012204.0207.8216.0

218 3221 6223 0223.3

Nationaldefense

ioo.o106.6115.1124 9132.4141.9152.7166.0

187.4209.0226.9

180 3184.6186.5198.4

2017206.4207.9219.5

223 0225 2226 5232.4

Non-defense

100.0105.6114.2128 2135.7144.6153.8162.5

181.0204.2210.4

1741177.9176.8195.7

200 3198.9207.4209.4

209 6212 6214 9205.9

Stateandlocal

21.8

19.1

20.7

20 921.722 823.724 825.828 532.436 437.8

38.942.344145.246.547.650.252.653 855.1

56.558 060.161663.164.968 272 476.482.0

88.694 7

100.0107.0118.0129 4138.3148.4159.7173.7

191.6208.2222.7

184 8189.6194.0197.8

2017206.3210.7214.3

217 5220 9224 5227.9

Finalsales

32.7

25.3

28.4

29 031.034 336.337 037.943 749.652 652.6

53.356.757 858.959.660.662.664.966167.5

68.669 370 571672.774.276 679 082.586.8

91.596 0

100.0105.7115.0125 7132.2139.7150.3163.3

178.7195.3207.5

1721176.3181.0185.6

189 5193.1197.4201.3

204 0206 5208 7210.8

Percent changefrom preceding

period2

GNPimplicitprice

deflator

0.0

- 2 . 1

- . 8

227.5995.3242.4

15 712.969

- . 9

2.16.6141.61.22.23.23.4172.4

1.69

1.8151.52.232304.45.1

5.4504.25.88.89.35.25.87.48.6

9.39.46.0

10.510.19.6

10.5

10 96.89.08.8

4.34.6504.3

Finalsales

implicitprice

deflator

-2 .6

- . 9

187.2

1065.6212.2

15 313.760

.1

1.36.2201.91.21.83.33.6192.1

1.7101815152.132314.45.2

5.4504.15.78.8935.25.77.58.7

9.59.36.2

10.110.111.210.5

877.89.38.1

5450434.2

1 Separate deflators are not calculated for gross private domestic investment, change in business inventories, and net exports ofgoods and services.2 Changes are based on unrounded data and therefore may differ slightly from changes computed from data shown here. Quarterlychanges are at annual rates.

Source: Department of Commerce, Bureau of Economic Analysis.

167

Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 174: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

TABLE B-4.—Fixed-weighted price indexes for gross national product, 1972 weights, 1959-82

[Index numbers, 1972=100, except as noted; quarterly data seasonally adjusted]

Year or quarter

1959

19601961196219631964

19651966196719681969

19701971197219731974

19751976197719781979

198019811982"

1980:

IIIIIIV

1981:I

IllIV

1982:|

IllIV**

Grossnationalproduct

69.8

70.871672.473.274.1

75 377579 883 187.3

91896 2

100 0106 0115.9

126.4133 7142.2153 3167.8

184.4202 0214.6

177 8182.1186 3191.3

195.9199 9204,2208.4

210 8213.0216.0218.8

Personalcon-

sumptionexpendi-

tures

73.1

74.174 875.576.377.2

78 280182 085088.7

92 796 6

100 01061117.1

126 3133 0141.21516166.3

184.82021213.8

178 2182.7187 0191.5

196.6200 2203.9207.5

209 9211.6215.4218.4

Gross private domesticinvestment1

Fixed investment

Total

74.4

74.774 474.274.074.3

75 277 079 382587.3

91295 8

100 0105 8117.9

132.3140 215L8167 0185.4

204.1220 9231.1

1971202.5207 5210.2

215.0219 0223.2226.8

229 2230.4232.0233.0

Nonresi-dential

74.1

74.574 374.474.775.3

76 177 980 383 387.0

91696 3

100 0104 0116 5

132 91399148 5160 9177.2

196.0213 5225.7

188 7194.2199 2202.8

20712117215.6219.3

222 0225.0227.4228.7

Residen-tial

74.9

74.974 773.972.672.6

73 575 377 581087.8

90.694 9

100.0109.2120.5

131.2140 8158.0178.4200.8

219.5235.0241.3

213.2218.4223.0224.3

229.9233 0237.5241.2

242 7240.7240.7241.1

Exports andimports of goods

and services1

Exports

73.4

75.076.076.076.377.1

79 481883 385 588.5

93.197 0

100.0112 6137.4

151.8156 9164.0174.9197.2

218.6239.3245.7

210 4214.3221.2229.1

235.4238 4241.1242.5

245.6246.3245.2245.5

Imports

75.0

76.075 273.774.776.3

77 178 879 380.783.0

88.493.3

100.0116.7161.5

175.1178 7195.0210.1244.5

303.7319.0315.5

2910300.6309.8314.6

322.6323 4316.3314.0

3191313.6313.6315.3

Government purchases of goods and services

Total

56.9

58.359 561.362.864.4

66 269 272 476.481.3

87.994.0

100.0106.9117.9

129.2137.3147.0158.4173.2

193.8212.2226.2

186.6191.4195.1202.1

206.0210 3213.6219.3

222 4224.5227.2231.0

Federal

Total

58.5

59.660 561.763.365.3

67169.671575.779.8

86.792.9

100.0106.7117.0

128.0135.4145.0155.4169.5

192.7214.7230.1

184.9189.5191.9203.9

208.1212 2214.5223.9

2271228.4230.1234.9

Nationaldefense

100.0106.9117.5

127.9135.6145.5156.5171.7

196.5219.7236.4

188.2193.7196.1208.2

211.6217 4219.6230.1

2334234.6236.3241.4

Non-defense

100.01061115.6

128.3135.0143.6152.6164.0

182.8201.7214.0

176.4178.7181.4192.7

199.11988201.6207.9

2110212.6214.2218.2

Stateandlocal

55.8

57.458.961,062.563.9

65668.873176 982.3

88.794 8

100.0107.0118.4

130.0138.5148.4160.4175.7

194.6210.6223.6

187.7192.7197.2200.9

204.62090212.9216.1

219 2221.9225.2228.3

Percentchangefrom

ingperiod,gross

nationalproductfixed-

weight-ed priceindex*

1.5111.21.11.2

172930415.0

5.2484.0609.4

9.15.86.37.89.5

9.99.66.2

10.510.09.4

11.2

10.08.48.98.5

4.84.15.95.2

1 Separate deflators are not calculated for gross private domestic investment, change in business inventories, and net exports ofgoods and services.

* Quarterly changes are at annual rates.

Source: Department of Commerce, Bureau of Economic Analysis.

168

Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 175: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

TABLE B-5.—Changes in GNP and GNP price measures, 1929-82

[Percent change from preceding period; quarterly data at seasonally adjusted annual rates]

Period

1929

19331939

1940194119421943194419451946194719481949

19501951195219531954

19551956195719581959

I9601961196219631964

19651966196719681969

19701971197219731974

19751976197719781979 .

198019811982 *

1980:|||IIIIV

1981:

IIIIIIV

1982:

||IIIIV P

Gross national product

Currentdollars

6.6

- 4 . 2

7.0

10 025.026 721.39.6

.912

11.1113-.510915.5525.4.0

905.4531.38.5

3.83.67.75.66.9

8.4945.89.28.1

5.28.6

10111.88.1

8.010 911712.811.7

8911.64.1

12 2_ 411.415.3

19 653

1143.0

1.068581.7

Con-stant

(1972)dollars

6.6

-2 .2

7.8

7616 315 315.17.1

- 1 5- 1 4 7-1.7

41

8783373812672118

- .46.0

222.6584.05.3

6.0602.7462.8

- . 2345758

6- 1 2

54555028

41.9

-1.8

15961.643

791522

-5 .3

- 5 121

725

Implicitprice

deflator

0.0

-2.1

- . 8

2.27.59.95.32.4

2.415.712.96.9

- .92.16.6141.61.2

2.23.23.41.72.4

1.6.9

1.81.51.5

2.23.23.04.45.1

5.45.0425.88.8

9.3525.87.48.6939.46.0

10.51019.6

10.5

10.968908.8

4.34.65.04.3

Chainpriceindex

1.61.21.41.31.4

1.93.13.04.35.0

5.34.94.16.09.1

9.25.76.17.68.99.09.46.4

9.0969.7

11.0

9.38.2928.4

5.04.66.05.2

Fixed*weight-ed price

index(1972

weights)

1.51.11.21.11.2

1.7293.04.15.0

5.24.8406.09.4

9.1586.37.895999.66.2

10 510 09.4

11.2

10 084898.5

4.84.15.95.2

Personal consumption expenditure

Currentdollars

- 5 . 7

4.6

6013.897

12.28.8

10.520.312.58.01.9787.9485.82.7

764.95.43.27.4

4.53.16.05.56.9

7.58.15.49.58.4

6.98.196

10.29.4

9.911011.111.811.9

10.610.67.0

10.79

15.616.1

13.04.4

1133.4

7.66.18.1

10.1

Con-stant

(1972)dollars

-2.0

5.3

465.9

-1 .02.92.8

6.211.11.62.12.3561.3253.81.8

6.52.92.11.05.4

2.62.14.53.85.5

5.65.12.95.33.7

2.23.75.84.2

- . 7

2.25.65.04.52.7

.31.81.0

- .7-8.7

5.45.7

4.4-2.7

2.9-3 .3

2.52.5.6

5.0

Implicitprice

deflator

- 3 . 8

- . 7

137.4

10.89.05.8

4.18.3

10.75.8

206.5231.9.9

1.01.93.32.21.9

1.91.01.51.61.4

1.82.92.44.04.5

4.64.33.75.7

10.1

7.65.15.87.09.0

10.38.65.9

11.510.59.69.8

8.37.38.27.0

5.03.57.54.9

Chainpriceindex

1.71.1111.41.2

1.52.72.53.84.5

4.64.3366.1

10.4

7.7536.07.39.3

10 79.16.0

12.61019.8

10.0

10.37.4807.2

5.23.67.15.6

s

Fixed-weight-ed price

index(1972

weights)

1.5.99

1.21.1

1.32.42.43.64.4

4.54.2356.1

10.4

7.8536.27.49.7

11.29.35.8

13.410 49.8

10.1

10.97.7767.1

4.83.27.35.7

Note.—Changes are based on unrounded data and may differ slightly from changes computed from data shown elsewhere in thesetables.

Source: Department of Commerce, Bureau of Economic Analysis.

169Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 176: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

TABLE B-6.—Gross national product by major type of product, 1929-82

[Billions of dollars; quarterly data at seasonally adjusted annual rates]

Year orquarter

1929

1933

1939

194019411942194319441945..1946194719481949

19501951..1952195319541955195619571958 ..............1959

1960 .19611962..1963196419651966..19671968..1969

197019711972..1973197419751976197719781979

19801981..1982 ".

1980;

||IllIV

1981:

||IllIV

1982:

||'IllIV ".

Grossnationalproduct

103.4

55.8

90.9

100.0125.0158 5192.12106212.4209.82331259.5258.3

286.5330 8348.0366.8366 8400.0421.7444 0449.7487.9

506 5524.6565 0596.7637.7691.1756 0799.6873 4944.0

992.71,077.61185 9U26.41,434 21,549.21,718.01,918.3216392/17.8

2,633.12,937 73,057.5

2,575.92,573.42 643 72J39.4

2,864.92 90182 980 93,003.2

2,995.53 045 23 088 23ilO1.3

Finalsales

101.7

57.4

90.5

97.8120.6156.7192.82116213.5203.5233.5254.8261.4

279.7320.5344.8366.3368 4394.1417.0442.6451.2482.2

5036522.2558.8590.7632.1681.2741.9789.3865.5934.2

989.51,070.01175.71,307.91,420.11,556,11,706.21,895.32137 42;403.5

2,643,12917.33iO78.9

2,576.62,573.92 664 82,757.1

2,852.72 877 22 94912,989.9

3,031.13 06143'083 53[l39.8

Inven-tory

change

1.7

-1 .6

.4

2.24.518

- . 6= 10-1 .0

6.4

4.7= 3.1

6.810.33.1.4

- 156.04.713

-1 .55.7

302.3636.05.69.9

14110.3799.8

3.27.7

10 218.514.1

=6.911.823.026 514.3

= 10.020 5

=21.4

- . 7= .4212

-17.7

12.224 631813.2

=35.6- 1 6 247=38.5

Total

Total

56.1

27.0

49.0

56.072.593 7

120.4132 3128.9125.3139.8154.4147.7

162.4189.5194.6203.11961214.5223.3232 3228.2248.5

254 2257.4278 5290.3309.8338.4375 0389.44213450.2

459.9485.3529 6604.1646 7694.0771.1855.09586

1,065.6

1,141.91,289 21,280.6

1,125.21,114.5114041,187.4

1,265.3127611317 01,298.4

1,269.41,283 11295 5l|274.5

Finalsales

54.4

28.6

48.6

53.868.091.9

121.0133.3129.9118.9140.3149.7150.8

155.6179.2191.5202.7197 6208.5218.6231.0229.7242.9

2513255.0272.2284.3304.2328.5360.9379.1413.4440.4

456.6477.75194585.6632.5700.9759.3832.09321

1,051.3

1,151.91,268.71,302.0

1,125.81,114.911616l>05.1

1,253.1125141*285 11,285.2

1,305.01 299.3l'29O71J313.0

Inven-tory

change

1.7

= 1,6

.4

2.24.51.8

= .6-1 .0-1 .0

6.4

1.7=3.1

6.810.33.1.4

-1 .56.04.71.3

-1 .55.7

3.02.36.36.05.69.9

14.110.37.99.8

3.27.7

10.218.514.1

=6.911.823.026.514.3

= 10.020.5

-21.4

= .7— 4

= 2 U= 17.7

12.224.631.813.2

-35.6= 16.2

4.7= 38.5

Goods

Durable goods

Finalsales

16.1

5.4

12.4

15.423.834.554.258.550.131.844.448.050.0

56.266.472.577.873.981.485.991.384.490.8

93.392.7

102.9109.4118.9131.6147.0153.5167.9178.5

179.2187.1207.4237.6250.7279.4312.5354.9402.1454.3

482.5519.4510.7

488.1461.4481.2499.2

519.8519.7527.5510.5

513.2512.6506.8510.3

Inven-tory

change

1.4

=.5

.3

1.23.11.0.0

= .6-1 .3

5.31.41.0

-1 .8

3.66.11.21.5

-2 .53.42.1

=2.83.1

1.6=.13̂ 42.74.06.7

10.25.54.76.4

= .12.87.2

13.112.0

-8 .47.7

10.419.110.5

= 5.28.7

= 15.5

-11.8= .5

-13.14.6

2.218.519 8

-5 .6

=30.96.6

10.1-34.7

Nondurable goods

Finalsales

38.3

23.2

36.2

38.444.257.466.874.879.887.195.9

101.7100.9

99.4112.8119.0124.9123.7127.1132.7139.6145.3152.1

158.0162.4169.3174.9185.3196.9213.9225.6245.5261,9

277.5290.6312.0348.0381.8421.5446.7477.2530.1597.0

669.4749.4791.3

637.7653,5680.4705.9

733.3731.7757.6774.7

791.8786.7783.9802.7

lnven»tory

change

0.3

= 1.1

.1

1.01.4

- .6

.21.1

= 1.93.7

= 1.3

3.24.22.0

- 1 . 11.02.62.6

.81.32.5

1.32.42.83.31.63.23.94.93.13.4

3.34.83.05.32.21.54.212.67.33.8

=4.811.7

=5.9

11.1.0

8.1=22.3

10.06.1

12.018.9

=4.8-9 .6=-5.4-3 .8

Services

35,9

25.9

34.4

35.740.850.863.072.377.068.871.677.282.2

88.5103.5113.9121.6126.2136.1146.2158.7167.7179.8

193.8207.0222.0237.1255.0273.3299.0326.5358.2391.9

429.9472.0519.0571.5636.1705.2779.3867.2972.2

1,089.7

1,225.51,364.31.492.1

1,174.71,207.21,243.31,277.0

1,313.51,340.21,382.11,421.5

1,444.41,476.71,509.51,537.6

Struc-tures

11.4

2.9

7.5

8.311.814.08.76.16.5

15.721.728.028.4

35.637.839.442.044.549.552.253,053.859.5

58.560.264.569.372.979.382.083.694.0

101.8

102.9120.3137.3150.8151.4150.0167.6196.1233.1262.5

265.7284.2284.9

276.0251.8259.9275.1

286.1285.6281.9283.3

281.7285.3283.2289.2

Autooutput

7"28.8

11.9

15.413.312.016.114.721.216.919.414.419.4

21.317.822.525.225.931.230.428.035.134.9

28.739.141.646.239.240.755.965.169.568.0

59.869.265.7

63.151.956.867.5

66.173.778.758.3

53.569.975,264.3

Source: Department of Commerce, Bureau of Economic Analysis.

170Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 177: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

TABLE B-7.—Gross national product by major type of product in 1972 dollars, 1929-82

[Billions of 1972 dollars; quarterly data at seasonally adjusted annual rates]

Year orquarter

Grossnationalproduct

Finalsales

Inven-tory

change

Goods

Total

Total Finalsales

Inven-tory

change

Durable goods

Finalsales

Inven-tory

change

Nondurable goods

Finalsales

Inven-tory

change

Services Struc-tures

Autooutput

1929

1933

1939

1940194119421943194419451946194719481949

1950195119521953195419551956195719581959

19601961196219631964196519661967.19681969

1970197119721973197419751976197719781979 ........

198019811982 >

1980:

\\"""ZZIIIIV

1981:IIIIllIV

1982:IIIIllIV P.

315.7

222.1

319.8

344.1400.4461.7531.6569.1560.4478.3470.3489.8492.2

534.8579.4600.8623.6616.1657.5671.6683.8680.9721.7

737.2756.6800.3832.5876.4929.3984.8

1,011.41,058.11,087.6

1,085.61,122.41,185.91,254.31,246.31,231.61,298.21,369.71,438.61,479.4

1,474.01,502.61,475.5

1,494.91,457.81,463.81,479.4

1,507.81,502.21,510.41,490.1

1,470.71,478.41,481.11,471.7

311.0

227.0

318.2

337.9388.4456.5531.5571.4564.0466.1470.6484.3496.6

524.2565.6596.5622.1618.2649.8665.8682.2682.7714.7

733.7753.7792.4825.0869.3917.5968.0999.2

1,049.11,076.6

1,081.81,114.31,175.71,237.11,234.71,238.41,290.41,356.41,422.61,472.2

1,479.01,493.71,484.0

1,497.51,460.31,472.31,485.7

1,505.41,490.11,493.91,485.3

1,486.11,482.71,477.81,489.3

4.6

-4 .9

1.6

6.212.05.2

.1- 2 . 3-3 .612.2- . 25.5

-4 .4

10.613.74.31.5

-2.27.75.81.5

- 1 . 87.0

3.53.07.87.57.1

11.816.812.29.0

11.1

3.88.1

10.217.211.6

- 6 . 77.8

13.316.07.3

- 5 . 09.0

- 8 . 5

- 2 . 6- 2 . 5- 8 . 5- 6 . 2

2.412.116.54.8

-15.4-4 .4

3.4-17.7

144.3

97.5

154.3

171.7198.6221.4263.3287.3278.5238.3237.7244.8240.3

261.5283.7292.1306.8292.7316.7320.9321.7311.6332.5

335.8338.0361.3372.2393.8422.6456.4463.4483.1496.0

486.9497.2529.6572.3562.5547.4587.2628.1662.0677.7

667.9689.5661.1

682.5658.2659.5671.6

692.8689.8697.2678.0

661.8663.2665.1654.5

139.7

102.3

152.7

165.5186.6216.2263.3289.6282.2226.2237.9239.4244.7

250.9270.0287.8305.3294.9309.0315.1320.2313.4325.5

332.3335.0353.5364.7386.7410.8439.6451.2474.1484.9

483.2489.1519.4555.1550.9554.2579.4614.8645.9670.4

672.9680.5669.6

685.1660.7668.0677.8

690.4677.7680.7673.2

677.2667.5661.7672.1

4.6

- 4 . 9

1.6

6.212.05.2

-2.3-3 .612.2- . 25.5

- 4 . 4

10.613.74.31.5

- 2 . 27.75.81.5

- 1 . 87.0

3.53.07.87.57.1

11.816.812.29.0

11.1

3.88.1

10.217.211.6

- 6 . 77.8

13.316.07.3

-5 .09.0

- 8 . 5

- 2 . 6- 2 . 5- 8 . 5- 6 . 2

2.412.116.54.8

-15.4-4 .4

3.4-17.7

40.4

17.5

35.5

43.157.875.7

118.8135.9121.260.375.577.378.3

86.198.2

107.9116.2109.0117.2117.8119.4109.2113.6

115.6114.7125.7132.5143.0157.2174.0178.3187.4193.0

187.5188.7207.4236.1234.1230.2242.7264.7285.4299.1

290.8289.3273.3

304.2279.8286.9292.4

298.9290.5290.2277.6

278.7274.9269.2270.6

3.5

- 2 . 1

.7

3.48.23.5

- 1 . 8- 3 . 710.81.41.6

- 2 . 9

5.59.01.72.3

- 3 . 74.52.9

.9- 3 . 4

3.9

2.0- . 14.23.45.18.2

12.36.65.47.2

.03.07.2

12.79.4

- 6 . 45.46.9

11.86.2

- 2 . 63.8

- 6 . 5

- 4 . 7- 1 . 2- 6 . 2

1.8

.19.18.6

- 2 . 5

-13.7- 2 . 6

4.8-14.7

99.3

84.9

117.2

122.4128.7140.5144.4153.7161,0165.8162.4162.1166.4

164.8171.8179.9189.1185.9191.9197.2200.8204.3211.9

216.6220.3227.8232.2243.7253.6265.6272.9286.7291.9

295.7300.4312.0319.0316.8324.0336.7350.1360.5371.3

382.1391.2396.3

380.8380.9381.1385.5

391.5387.2390.5395.6

398.5392.6392.5401.5

1.1

- 2 . 8

2.83.81.7

- . 6- . 5

U- 1 . 6

3.8- 1 . 5

5.14.72.6

- . 81.53.22.9

.61.63.1

1.63.03.74.21.93.64.55.63.63.9

3.75.13.04.52.2

~2A6.34.31.1

- 2 . 45.1

- 2 . 0

2.2- 1 . 3- 2 . 4- 8 . 0

2.33.07.97.3

- 1 . 7- 1 . 7- 1 , 5- 2 . 9

127.4

110.7

135.2

139.9158.5193.9242.0263.7263.0200.8188.1192.5198.3

207.4231.3243.2247.5249.1260.1270.2282.4287.6299.4

312.5326.9341.5356.2374.0390.7412.6434.1453.0469.2

482.4497.8519.0542.8562.8575.9595.0617.3644.7670.7

687.1695.6701.3

684.2686.0690.0688.2

693.1693.2697.5698.6

697.0702.2703.6702.3

43.9

14.0

30.3

32.543.346.326.218.118.839.144.652.453.6

65.964.365.569.374.380.780.579.781.789.8

89.091.797.4

104.1108.6116.0115.9113.9122.0122.5

116.3127.3137.3139.1121.0108.3116.0124.4131.9131.0

118.9117.6113.1

128.3113.6114.3119.6

121.9119.2115.7113,4

111.9113.0112.5114.9

12.313.918.0

23.019.317.122.621.629.823.024.518.623.2

25.321.226.028.729.435.734.831.838.537.4

29.838.941.646.437.135.745.350.750.347.0

38.741.537.6

42.033.836.742.2

41.644.545.634.4

31.339.742.337.1

Source: Department of Commerce, Bureau of Economic Analysis.

171Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 178: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

TABLE B-8.—Gross national product by sector, 1929-82

[Billions of dollars, except as noted; quarterly data at seasonally adjusted annual rates]

Year or quarter

1929

1933

1939

19401941...19421943194419451946194719481949...

1950...19511952...195319541955 ..19561957...19581959..

1960..19611962...1963196419651966196719681969

197019711972... , ..197319741975..197619771978.1979

1980..19811982 p.

1980:

IIIIIIV

1981:1IIIllIV....

1982:I

IllIV P

Grossnationalproduct

1034

55.8

90.9

100.0125 0158.5192.1210.6212 4209.82331259.5258.3

286 5330.8348 0366 8366.8400 0421.7444 0449.7487.9

506 5524.6565 0596.7637 7691.1756 0799.6873 4944.0

992 71,077.61185 91,326.41434 21,549.21,718.01,918.32,163.92,417.8

2,633.12,937.73.057.5

2,575.92,573.42,643.72,739.4

2,864.92,901.82,980.93,003,2

2,995.53,045.23 088 23,101.3

Gross domestic product

Total1

102.6

55.5

90.5

99.6124.5157.9191.6210.1212.0209.0231.8257.9256.9

284.8328.7345.7364.6364.5397.3418.5440.5446.6484.6

5029520.7560.5591.8632.3685.2750.3793.7866.7937.1

98541,068.51,175.01,310.41,414.41,531.91,697.51,894.92,134.32,375.2

2,587.02,888.53,011.9

2,527.22,526.62,597.82,696.5

2.817.92,855.22,931.22,949.8

2,949.62,995.73,041.63,060.5

Business *

Total

95.4

49.1

80.6

89.4112.6139.9162.8174.2172.8183.8210 0234.9231.5

257 5294.4307.3324 9323.9354 0372.1390 8393.1428.3

442 0455.7490 6517.25516598.4652.6685.17454803.2

837 3907.1998 6

1,118.71206 41,301.71,447.31,624.01,837.22,052.1

2,228.82,492.42,582.5

2,183.32,173.72,237.22,321.1

2,433.42,463.92 533.92,538.6

2,530.62,570.12,610.02,619.3

Nonfarm1

84.7

43.8

72.9

81.8103.1127.7149.3156.2152.7164.4188 2213.1212.2

236 3268.3283 4302 3302.3333 9355.7373 7372.2410.6

424 2435.74681495.0532 2577.76284663.3725 0782.1

8131875.4963 4

1,068.01155 01,247.31,396.31,574.21,781.01,982.1

2,159.52,418.52,507.6

2,106.42.108.62,168.02,255.2

2,357.52,394.62 454 72,467.4

2,465.12,494.42 530.22,540.6

Farm

9.74.6

6.3

6.48.9

13.015.315.316.018.820.223.318.8

20.022.922.220.319.718.818.618.420.719.0

20 220.220 420.519 321.922.822.122.625.1

25 827.631949.947 748.945.948.458.771.6

65.475.874.8

66.361.267.066.9

70.873.980.178.4

72.974.876.175.2

Statis-tical

discrep-ancy

1.1

.7

1.4

1.1.6

- . 8- 1 . 8

2.74.1

.51.5

- 1 . 6.6

133.21.7232.013

-2 .1- 1 2

.213

24- .1211.7

1- 1 . 2

1.4.3

- 2 . 1-3 .9

154.13 3

.8375.55.11.4

-2 .6- 1 . 5

3.91.9.1

10.53.82.2

-1 .0

5.1- 4 . 6= .8

- 7 . 2

- 7 . 5.8

3.63.6

House-holdsandinsti-

tutions

2.S

1.7

2.3

2.42.52.93.23.74.14.55.15.65.9

6.46.97.27.88.19.19.8

10.511.412.3

13 814.415.516.617.819.221.123.426.129.4

32.335.438.642.145.850.655.660.567.875.6

85.496.4

106.7

81.584.086.589.7

92.995.297.1

100.3

103.3105.3107.9110.4

Governmen

Total

4.3

4.7

7.6

7.89.4

15.125.632.235.220.816 717.419.4

20.927.431.231932.534.236.639142.144.0

47150.554 358.062.967.676.585.195.2

104.5

115 8126.0137 8149.6162 2179.6194.6210.3229.3247.4

272.82997322.7

262.4269.0274.0285.8

291.6296.2300.1310.9

315.8320.3323.8330.8

Federal

0.9

1.2

3.4

3.55.0

10.620.927.229.814.69.48.9

10.0

10.716.218.918.617.818.419.019.620.520.9

21.722.624.125.227.028.332.435.639.341.9

44.846.850.151.954.959.062.466.371.775.7

82.992.399.8

79.881.481.688.7

89.990.591.097.9

98.698.999.1

102.4

2

Stateandlocal

3.5

3.5

4.2

4.34.44.54.74.95.46.27.38.59.4

10.111.212.313 314.715.817.619 621.623.1

25.527.930.232.935.939.344.149.555.962.6

71179.387.797.7

107.3120.6132.3144.0157.6171.8

189.9207.4222.9

182.7187.6192.4197.0

201.7205.6209.2213.0

217.1221.4224.7228.4

Restof theworld

0.8

.3

.5

.4

•5

.5

.4

.81.21.61.4

1.62.12.3222.32.83.23.53.03.3

3.63.94.64.95.55.95.65.96.76.9

7.39.2

10.916.019.817.320.523.529.642.6

46.149.245.7

48.746.845.942.9

47.146.649.753.3

45.849.546.640.8

Percent

frompreced-

period,gross

nationalproduct3

6.6

=4.2

7.0

10.025.026.721.3

9.6.9

-=1.211.111.3= .5

10.915.55.254

.0905.45.31.38.5

3.83.67.75.66.98.49.45.89.28.1

5.28.6

10.111.88.18.0

10.911.712.811.7

8.911.64.1

12.2

15.3

19.65.3

11.43.0

- 1 . 06.85.81.7

1 Includes compensation of employees in government enterprises.8 Compensation of government employees.3 Changes are based on unrounded data and therefore may differ slightly from changes computed from data shown here.

Source: Department of Commerce, Bureau of Economic Analysis.

172

Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 179: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

TABLE B-9.—Gross national product by sector in 1972 dollars, 1929-82

[Billions of 1972 dollars, except as noted; quarterly data at seasonally adjusted annual rates]

Year or quarterPrrxeeUfOSS

nationalproduct

315.7

222.1

319.8

344.1400.4461.7531.6569.1560.4478.3470.3489.8492.2

534.8579.4600.8623.6616.1657.5671.6683.8680.9721.7

737.2756.6800.3832.5876.4929.3984.8

1,011.41,058.11,087.6

1,085.61,122.41,185.91,254.31,246.31,231.61,298.21,369.71,438.61,479.4

1,474.01,502.61,475.5

1,494.91,457.81,463.81,479.4

1,507.81,502.21,510.41,490.1

1,470.71,478.41,481.11,471.7

Gross domestic product

Total

313.2

220.9

318.2

342.8398.7460.1530.3567.7559.3476.4467.8486.8489.4

531.8575.6596.9619.8612.1653.0666.5678.3676.2716.8

732.0751.0793.8825.6868.9921.4977.5

1,003.91,050.01,079.7

1,077.61,112.81,175.01,239.21.229.01,217.81.282.61,352.81,418.71,453.2

1,447.91,477.21,453.2

1,466.41,431.01,438.11,456.0

1,482.81,477.81,485.01,463.3

1,448.01,454.11,458.61,452.2

Businessl

Totall

271.5

180.0

261.0

282.7327.6361.8385.6403.6397.9385.5393.8412.0409.8

448.7478.0492.8515.6508.5547.0557.4566.1561.7600.0

610.1625.1663.2691.6730.3777.7824.0842.0882.1907.1

904.8938.6998.6

1,060.71,047.41,032.41,095.41,163.71,224.31,255.6

1,246.71,274.31,249.7

1,266.61,230.01,236.21,254.0

1,279.71,274.81,282.41,260.2

1,244.41,250.51,255.41,248.4

Nonfarm1

244.7

152.5

231.3

254.6299.8335.3362.1370.1362.8358.6367.0389.0383.4

419.4447.2463.7484.3477.0516.0531.5539.5532.0574.0

584.2596.3631.5659.7701.3749.6794.1812.8855.6881.9

875.4901.7963.4

1,028.41,012.4

994.51,059.51,129.51,193.51,222.4

1,210.31,236.81,210.1

1,224.91,192.61,200.91,222.6

1,242.91,240.91,241.91,221.5

1,210.01,212.21,214.41,204.0

Farm

23.6

24.9

25.2

24.526.228.627.727.125.625.824.025.825.6

27.025.826.427.728.429.328.928.229.327.8

29.228.928.829.628.829.828.229.529.029.5

31.132.631.931.631.833.632.133.132.634.2

34.238.439.6

35.635.334.032.0

34.136.340.942.3

38.138.039.342.8

Statisti-raiC3I

discrep-ancy

3.1

2.6

4.6

3.61.6

- 2 . 1- 4 . 2

6.49.41.12.9

- 2 . 8.8

2.45.02.63.63.11.8

- 3 . 0- 1 . 7

.3- 1 . 9

- 3 . 3- .22.92.3.2

- 1 . 61.7

- .3- 2 . 5- 4 . 4

- 1 . 74.23.3.7

3.24.43.81.0

-1.8-1.0

2.2- . 9

.0

6.12.11.2

- .5

2.7- 2 . 4- .4

- 3 . 6

- 3 . 7.4

1.71.7

Urn teanouse-holds

andinsti-

tutions

15.6

12.2

15.1

16.115.916.415.215.115.015.116.016.717.3

18.318.718.619.319.421.422.523.124.224J

26.627.028.128.929.830.932.634.335.437.0

36.737.638.639.439.340.540.941.543.344.6

45.846.948.1

45.345.446.046.4

46.846.746.747.4

47.847.948.048.6

Government2

Total

26.2

28.8

42.1

44.055.281.9

129.4149.1146.475.958.058.162.3

64.779.085.585.084.184.686.789.190.392.2

95.398.9

102.5105.2108.8112.7120.8127.7132.4135.7

136.1136.7137.8139.1142.3144.9146.3147.7151.2153.0

155.4156.0155.4

154.4155.6155.9155.7

156.3156.2155.9155.8

155.7155.7155.2155.1

Federal

5.2

6.6

16.9

18.629.656.7

105.0125.2121.849.729.829.231.3

32.746.251.649.647.245.945.645.844.544.5

45.246.248.348.248.548.753.057.258.058.2

55.252.550.148.248.548.448.548.649.349.0

49.549.749.8

49.049.849.849.4

49.649.749.849.8

49.849.849.849.9

Stateandlocal

21.0

22.1

25.2

25.425.625.224.523.924.626.228.229.031.0

32.032,833.935.436.938.641.043.345.847.7

50.152754.357.060.464.067.970.574.477.4

80.984.287.790.893.896.597.899.1

101.9104.1

105.9106.3105.6

105.4105.8106.1106.3

106.8106.5106.1106.0

106.0105.9105.4105.3

Restof theworld

2.4

1.3

1.6

1.41.71.51.31.41.11.82.53.02.7

3.03.73.93.74.04.55.15.54.64.9

5.25.76.56.97.57.97.47.58.27.9

8.09.5

10.915.117.313.815.616.919.926.3

26.125.422.2

28.626.825.723.4

25.024.425.426.7

22.724.222.519.5

Percentchangefrom

preced-ing

period,gross

nationalproduct3

6.6

- 2 . 2

7.8

7.616.315.315.17.1

- 1 . 5-14 .7

- 1 . 74.1.5

8.78.33.73.8

- 1 . 26.72.11.8

- .46.0

2.22.65.84.05.36.06.02.74.62.8

- .23.45.75.8

- .6- 1 . 2

5.45.55.02.8

- .41.9

-1.8

1.5-9.6

1.64.3

7.9-1.5

2.2-5.3

- 5 . 12.1

.7- 2 . 5

1929

1933

1939

194019411942194319441945194619471948....1949

1950195119521953195419551956195719581959....

196019611962....1963196419651966....196719681969....

197019711972....1973....197419751976....1977 ....1978....1979....

1980....1981....1982 »..

1980:IIIIllIV

1981:

if.'.'."'.IllIV

1982:

if.'."'.!IllI V . .

1 Includes compensation of employees in government enterprises.2 Compensation of government employees.3 Changes are based on unrounded data and therefore may differ slightly from changes computed from data shown here.Source: Department of Commerce, Bureau of Economic Analysis.

173

Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 180: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

TABLE B-10.—Gross national product by industry, 1947-81

[Billions of dollars]

Year

194719481949

19501951195219531954

19551956195719581959

19601961196219631964

19651966196719681969

19701971197219731974

19751976197719781979

19801981

Grossnation-alprod-uct

233.1259.5258.3

286.5330.8348.0366.8366.8

400.0421.7444.0449.7487.9

506.5524.6565.0596.7637.7

691.1756.0799.6873.4944.0

992.71,077.61,185.91,326.41,434.2

1,549.21,718.01,918.32,163.92,417.8

2,633.12,937.7

AnrirnlAgricul-ture,forestry,

andfisheries

20.824.019.5

20.823.823.121.320.7

19.919.719.521.920.2

21.421.521.922.021.0

23.824.824.225.027.8

28.630.835.453.852.2

53.351.254.666.079.6

74.185.6

Mining

6.89.48.1

9.310.210.110.610.9

12.413.413.512.412.3

12.612.712.813.113.4

13.514.214.615.316.1

17.617.419.021.732.2

38.843.047.452.066.8

94.1127.2

fVincon-

struction

9.111.511.5

13.015.416.617.117.2

18.520.621.421.022.8

23.224.025.727.429.8

32.835.937.541.346.3

48.953.659.466.369.2

69.976.686.6

102.1115.7

121.2127.2

Gross domestic product

Manufacturing

Total

66.274.772.1

83.798.7

103.0112.1106.4

120.9126.8131.4123.8141.3

143.8144.4157.9167.4179.4

197.7216.6222.3242.8256.7

252.2265.6292.5326.1340.7

358.2410.4464.8518.7563.2

581.2644.0

Dura-ble

goods

33.538.137.1

45.855.458.965.960.8

70.673.777.769.781.2

82.181.391.597.6

105.3

118.0130.4133.6146.0154.5

146.2153.9173.2195.9201.3

207.6240.0277.7316.7344.3

347.8388.4

Non-durablegoods

32.736.535.0

37.943.344.146.245.6

50.353.253.754.160.0

61.763.166.469.874.2

79.786.388.796.8

102.2

105.9111.7119,3130.2139.4

150.6170.4187.1202.0218.9

233.4255.6

Trans*portationand

publicutilities

20.523.123.4

25.729.231.032.932.6

35.638.340.240.443.7

45.847.450.253.056.3

60.565.368.674.080.0

85.793.8

104.3114.3122.9

135.7152.6170.9193.3209.6

232.4261.9

Ulhnlownoie-sale

andretailtrade

44.248.448.0

51.356.458.559.860.8

66.270.473.975.281.9

84.286.392.196.1

104.7

112.6121.5130.1144.4157.0

166.5181.4199.5221.5241.5

266.2291.4322.3362.3401.5

425.7472.7

Fi-nance,insur-ance,andreal

estate

23.226.228.6

31.935.238.742.846.5

50.053.557.662.467.3

71.675.480.685.391.0

98.0105.9114.2123.8133.6

142.4156.4169.8184.9202.0

216.2238.6275.5317.4358.3

405.2448.2

Services

20.221.922.6

24.025.927.529.430.5

34.037.340.242.346.3

49.252.356.160.065.3

70.878.486.194.2

105.3

114.4123.6136.5153.1167.5

186.2208.2234.3265.9302.4

342.5386.9

Govern-mentand

govern-mententer-prises

19.320.222.5

23.830.835.336.436.9

38.540.744.047.150.0

53.456.761.165.971.2

76.786.496.3

108.1118.2

130.5141,8155.4167.8182.7

202.0220.4237.2259.1279.6

306.8336.7

Statisti-Cdl

discrep-ancy

1.51.6.6

1.33.2

.1.72.32.0

1.3- 2 . 1= 1.2

.2- 1 . 3

- 2 . 4= .12.11.7.1

= 1.21.4

— 3- 2 ! l- 3 . 9

= 1.54.13.3.8

3.7

5.55.11.4

=2,6= 1.5

3.9- 1 . 9

Daetnestof the

world

1.21.61.4

1.62.12.32.22.3

2,83.23.53.03.3

3.63.94.64.95.5

5.95.65.96.76.9

7.39.2

10.916.019.8

17.320.523.529.642.6

46.149.2

Note.—The industry classification is on an establishment basts and is based on the 1972 Standard Industrial Classification.Source: Department of Commerce, Bureau of Economic Analysis.

174Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 181: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

TABLE B-ll.—Gross national product by industry in 1972 dollars, 1947-81

[Billions of 1972 dollars]

YearGross

nationalproduct

Gross domestic product

Agri-culture,forest-ry, andfisher-

ies

Min-ing

Con-struc-tion

Manufacturing

TotalDura-

blegoods

Non-durable

Trans-por-

tationand

publicutil-ities

Whole-saleand

retailtrade

Fi-nance,insur-ance,andreat

estate

Serv-ices

Govern-mentand

govern-mententer-prises

Sta-tis-ticaldis-

crep-ancy

Resid-ual '

Restof theworld

194719481949

19501951195219531954

19551956195719581959

19601961196219631964

19651966196719681969

19701971197219731974

19751976197719781979

19801981

470.3489.8492.2

534.8579.4600.8623.6616.1

657.5671.6683.8680.9721.7

737.2756.6800.3832.5876.4

929.3984.8

1,011.41,058.11,087.6

1,085.61,122.41,185.91,254.31,246.3

1,231.61,298.21,369.71,438.61,479.4

1,474.01,502.6

26.328.228.0

29.328.429.230.531.3

32.131.731.132.230.6

32.131.831.732.531.8

32.831.332.632.132.7

34.435.935.435.335.8

37.135.836.937.038.9

39.143.4

10.811.39.9

11.112.111.912.211.8

13.213.913.812.713.3

13.513.613.914.515.1

15.716.517.017.618.2

18.918.419.019.219.2

18.919.119.520.120.8

21.622.3

22.926.526.5

29.332.533.834.836.0

38.240.940.942.145.5

46.146.748.449.952.2

54.454.653.456.955.8

53.457.959.460.153.3

48.352.855.058.858.2

53.352.0

114.9121.4115.1

131.1146.0150.8161.1149.6

165.7166.9167.7153.3171.2

171.8172.0186.7202.2216.7

236.7254.9254.3268.2277.2

261.2266.8292.5325.3311.7

289.6317.4339.2357.2367.0

351.2359.2

68.572.066.3

78.189.994.3

102.691.7

103.4102.5102.988.8

100.9

101.099.5

110.0119.5129.8

144.6157.3157.4165.5170.3

155.2156.4173.2194.2186.3

168.8187.2202.9217.4223.4

210.0215.3

46.449.448.8

53.056.156.558.557.9

62.364.464.864.570.3

70.872.576.782.886.8

92.097.696.9

102.7106.8

106.0110.4119.3131.1125.3

120.8130.1136.3139.8143.6

141.2143.9

42.342.139.2

41.245.545.546.645.8

49.752.153.251.955.4

57.558.661.565.068.1

73.479.481.688.292.6

94.997.9

104.3110.6111.9

113.5118.6125.1134.2140.0

140.8142.1

75.978.079.8

87.588.391.093.994.5

103.1106.2107.9107.8115.4

117.5118.7126.3131.1139.1

148.2156.3160.1169.9173.6

176,4185.5199.5211.1207.0

209.7220.2231.0244.6250.7

243.3250.4

54.756.659.8

63.966.770.973.977.3

81.885.889.893.498.5

102.7107.3113.3116.8122.1

128.5133.9139.4145.7152.9

155.8162.6169.8177.2184.5

187.9194.8207.2217.8229.4

237.9243.6

55.957.557.6

59.760.861.662.762.9

67.670.974.176.280.8

83.586.690.394.098.8

103.1109.0115.0118.8124.0

126.7128.4136.5144.8147.9

148.5154.7164.3174.2183.0

189.0196.7

68.769.273.3

75.690.096.996.395.2

95.797.8

100.4101.7104.0

107.7111.6115.5118.7123.1

127.8136.9144.1148.9152.5

152.9153.9155.4157.2161.2

164.3165.7167.5171.7174.3

177.3178.1

2.45.02.63.63.1

1.8- 3 . 0- 1 . 7

.3- 1 . 9

- 3 . 3- . 22,92.3

-1 .61.7

- l i s- 4 . 4

- 1 . 74.23.3

4.43.81.0

- 1 . 8- 1 . 0

2.2- . 9

- 7 . 4-1 .2

- . 6

.8

.22.64.14.6

4.23.4

.94.54.0

3.14.43.2

- 1 . 51.7

2.33.06.76.24.6

4.71.2

.0- 2 . 5- 6 . 5

- 4 . 2- . 26.04.9

- 8 . 1

- 7 . 7- 9 . 7

2.53.02.7

3.03.73.93.74.0

4.55.15.54.64.9

5.25.76.56.97.5

7.97.47.58.27.9

8.09.5

10.915.117.3

13.815.616.919.926.3

26.125.4

1 Equals GNP in constant dollars measured as the sum of incomes less GNP in constant dollars measured as the sum of gross productby industry.

Note.—-The industry classification is on an establishment basis and is based on the 1972 Standard Industrial Classification.Source: Department of Commerce, Bureau of Economic Analysis.

175Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 182: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

T A B L E B-12.—Gross domestic product of nonfinancial corporate business, 1929-82

[Billions of dollars; quarterly data at seasonally adjusted annual rates]

Year orquarter

192919331939

1940194119421943194419451946194719481949

1950195119521953195419551956195719581959

1960196119621963196419651966196719681969

1970197119721973197419751976197719781979

198019811982"

1980:

ll"Z!Z!I l l

IV1981:

1

nZZZIIIIV

1 9 8 2 :1IIIllIV "

GrossHnmacdomes-

ticproduct

ofnon-

financialcorpo-rate

business

50.124.443.7

50.465.682.998.7

102.195.399.3

120.0137.3133.5

151.9174.5182.3195.0191.9216.7231.6242.3236.3266.0

277.0285.0311.3331.8358.4393.6431.5454.1500.2544.1

563.7609.9678.0759.4818.9890.0

1,001.31,128.41,276.21,416.8

1,537.71.732.31,779.3

1,501.11,499 71,543.61,606.5

1,683.31,715.01,763.61,767.2

1,756.61,771.01,794.4

Capitalconsump-

tionallow-anceswith

capitalconsump-

tionadjust-ment

5.54.34.84.95.46.16.26.36.57.69.3

10.911.7

12.614.615.816.817.919.121.823.824.825.8

26.827.528.429.430.832.735.638.942.647.1

52.257.362.667.979.594.9

104.8115.7130.9149.6

172.0195.8213.7

162.7169.3175.4180.8

186.3192.6199.1205.1

207.8212.1216.0219.0

Total

44.520,239.0

45.460.276.892,495.888.891.8

110.7126.4121.8

139.3159.9166.6178.2174.0197.6209.8218.5211.6240.2

250.2257.5283.0302.3327.6360.9395.9415.2457.6497.0

511.4552.6615.5691.6739.4795.1896.5

1,012.71,145.31,267.3

1,365.71,536.51,565.6

1,338.41,330.51,368.21,425.7

1,497.01,522.41,564.51,562.0

1,548.81,559.01,578.4

Indi-rectbusi-nesstax,

etc.1

3.43.85.15.56.46.87.38.18.9

10.111.212.112.6

14.115.216.818.217.419.220.822.422.825.4

28.330.133.035.638.441.142.945.851.558.0

63.470.576.783.789.797.1

105.3112.6122.0130.5

148.6178.3182.0

138.4143.5151.3161.0

172.9179.0179.9181.3

176.3181.2184.2186.4

Total

41.216.333.9

40.053.870.085.287.779.981.699.6

114.3109.2

125.2144.7149.7160.0156.6178.4189.0196.1188.8214.8

221.9227.3249.9266.8289.3319.8353.0369.5406.1439.1

448.1482.1538.7607.9649.7697.9791.2900.1

1,023.31,136.7

1,217.11,358.21,383.6

1,200.01,186.91,216.91,264.7

1,324.01,343.41,384.51,380.8

1.372.41,377.81,394.2

Compen-sation

ofemploy-

ees

32.316.728.2

31.239.851.062.265.161.967.279.187.885.3

94.7110.2118.3128.7126.5138.5151.4159.1155.9171.6

181.1185.1199.8210.7226.3246.1273.5291.9322.8358.5

378.4402.0447.0506.2556.5581.1654.4738.5844.3958.1

1,041.71,150.11,189.2

1,020.61,023.61,043.21,079.6

1,118.61,140.01,167.01,174.5

1,181.61,190.41,195.81,188.8

Net domestic product

Domestic income

Corporate profits with inventory valuation and capitalconsumption adjustments

Total

7.5-2 .1

4.27.4

12.717.721.821.617.113.819.725.622.9

29.633.430.230.028.638.335.934.930.240.1

37.438.345.651.257.767.772.268.873.367.5

52.762.172.778.663.686.1

107.3129.5142.1134.7

123.0145.6121.9

129.6112.8121.8127.7

150.4142.1151.8138.2

120.3114.8125.3

Profits

Profitsbefore

tax

8.4.6

6.1B.B

16.420.123.622.217.822.029.131.824.9

38.539.133.834.932.142.041.839.833.743.1

39.739.544.248.955.465.270.366.372.969.4

56.865.476.696.0

105.3107.3135.0156.5178.4191.8

183.0186.6136.5

201.6157.4181.3191.6

202.5181.8191.5170.5

134.8131.3139.8

Prof-itstax

liabili-ty

1.2.5

1.42.77.5

11.213.812.610.28.6

10.811.89.3

16.921.217.818.515.620.220.119.116.220.7

19.219.520.622.824.027.229.527.733.433.1

27.029.833.640.042.041.252.659.666.969.2

64.863.340.6

74.353.563.667.8

71.561.465.554.8

38.937.142.1

Profits after tax

Total

7.3.1

4.76.19.08.99,89.67.6

13.418.320.015.6

21.617.916.016.416.421.821.820.717.522.4

20.520.123.526.231.438.040.838.639.536.2

29.835.643.056.063.366.182.396.8

111.5122.5

118.2123.395.9

127.3103.9117.7123.8

131.0120.4126.0115.7

95.894.297.6

Divi-dends

5.12.03.33.53.93.73.94.14.14.85.56.06.07.57.17.17.37.48.59.09.39.3

10.0

10.610.611.412.613.715.616.817.519.119.1

18.518.520.121.121.425.730.131.937.739.8

42.452.961.0

38.342.743.544.9

49.451.254.456J

58.059.762.663.8

Undis-tributedprofits

2.2-1 .9

1.42.65.05.25.85.63.58.6

12.814.09.6

14.110.88.89.19.0

13.412.711.48.2

12.4

9.99.5

12.213.517.722.424.021.220.417.1

11.317.122.935.041.940.452.264.973.882.8

75.870.334.9

89.061.274.278.9

81.669.271.658.9

37.834.535.0

Inven-tory

valua-tion

adjust-ment

0.5- 2 . 1-.7=.2

-2 .5- 1 . 2

— 8-'.Z- .6

- 5 . 3= 5.9- 2 . 2

1.9-5 .0- 1 . 2' 1.0- 1 . 0= .3

-1 .7-2 .7- 1 . 5- .3-=.3

- .2.3.0.1

=.5- 1 . 2- 2 . 1- 1 . 6-3 .7-5 .9

- 6 . 6-4 .6-6 .6

=20.0=40.0-11.6-=14.7= 16.2-24.0-43.1

-43.0-24.6"9.4

-57.2-28.2-41.1-45 .5

-35 .5-22 .8-23.0-17.1

- 4 . 4-=9.4

= 10.3-13.4

Capitalconsump-

tionadjust-ment

= 1.4= .6

= 1.1

- 1 . 2- 1 . 3= 1.2- .9- .3= .2

=3.03 5

=3.9

=3.9=4.6- 4 . 5-3 .9- 3 . 2- 2 . 0=3.2=3.4- 3 . 2-2 .7

=2.1- 1 . 5

1.42.32.93.73.94.04.04.02.41.32.72.6

=1.8-9 .7

-13 .0= 10.8-12.3= 13.9

-17.0= 16.3- 5 . 2

-14 .8™ 16.3-18 .4= 18.4

-16 .6-16.9= 16.7= 15.1

-10.0= 7.1=4.2

.5

Netinter-est

1.41.71,51.41.31.31.11.01.0.7.8.9

1.0.9

1.11.21.31.51.61.72.22.73.13.53.94.54.85.36.17.48.7

10.113.1

17.018.019.123.029.630.829.532.136.943,9

52.462.572.5

49.850.551.857.5

55.061.265.768.1

70.572.673.173.8

1 Indirect business tax and nontax liability plus business transfer payments less subsidies.Source: Department of Commerce, Bureau of Economic Analysis.

176

Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 183: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

TABLE B-13.—Output, costs, and profits of nonfinancial corporate business, 1948-82

[Quarterly data at seasonally adjusted annual rates]

Year orquarter

19481949

195019511952..19531954

19551956195719581959.

19601961196219631964

19651966..196719681969

19701971197219731974

19751976197719781979

198019811982*.

1980:

IIIllIV

1981:

IIIIIIV

1982:

\\ZZZZ.Ill

Gross domestic

nonfinancialcorporate

business (billionsof dollars)

Currentdollars

137 3133.5

151.9174 5182.3195.0191.9

216.723L6242.3236.3266.0

277.0285.0311.33318358.4

393.64315454.1500.2544.1

563.7609.9678.0759.4818.9

890.0100131,128.41,276.21,416.8

1,537.71,732.31,779.3

1,501.11,499.71,543.61,606.5

1683 3l>15.01,763.61,767.2

1,756.61,771.01,794.4

1972dollars

229 7219.9

247.52702275.2292.0283.4

315.1324.1328.3313.4347.4

358.4367.2399.74263455.6

495.2530.7543.0578.9604.0

599.6626.8678.0731.9708.2

694.2745.5795.8846.3876.1

860.3881.3856.4

874.1847.3852.5867.4

883 0884.2887.5870.4

858.8857.9859.3

Current-dollar cost and profit per unit of output (dollars)1

Totalcostand

profit2

0.598.607

.614646.663.668.677

.688

.715

.738

.754

.766

.773

.776

.779778.787

.795

.813

.836

.864

.901

.940

.9731.0001.0381.156

1.2821.3431.4181.5081.617

1.7871.9662.078

1.7171.7701.8111.852

1.9061.9401.9872.030

2.0452.0642.088

Capitalconsump-

tionallow-anceswith

capitalconsump-

tionadjust-ment

0 047.053

.051054.057.058.063

.061

.067

.073

.079

.074

.075

.075

.071069.068

.066

.067

.072

.074

.078

.087

.091

.092

.093

.112

.137141

.145

.155

.171

.200

.222

.250

.186

.200

.206

.208

211,218.224.236

.242

.247

.251

Indi-rectbusi-nesstax,

etc.3

0 053.057

.057056.061.062.061

.061

.064

.068

.073

.073

.079

.082

.083083.084

.083

.081

.084

.089

.096

.106

.113

.113

.114

.127

.140141

.141

.144

.149

.173

.202

.213

.158

.169

.178

.186

196.202.203.208

.205

.211

.214

Compen-sation

ofemploy-

ees

0 382.388

.383408.430.441.446

.439

.467

.484

.497

.494

.505

.504

.500494.497

.497

.515

.538

.558

.594

.631

.641

.659

.692

.786

.837878

.928

.9981.094

1.2111.3051.389

1.1681.2081.2241.245

12671.2891.3151.349

1.3761.3881.392

Corporate profits withinventory valuation and

capital consumptionadjustments

Total

0112.104

.120124

.110

.103

.101

.122

.111

.106

.097

.116

.104

.104

.114120

.127

.137

.136

.127

.127

.112

.088

.099

.107

.107

.090

.124144

.163

.168

.154

.143

.165

.142

.148

.133

.143

.147

170.161.171.159

.140

.134

.146

Profitstax

liability

0 051.042

.068079.065.063.055

.064

.062

.058

.052

.060

.054

.053

.052053.053

.055056.051.058.055

.045

.047

.049

.055

.059

.059071.075.079.079

.075

.072

.047

.085

.063

.075

.078

081.069.074.063

.045

.043

.049

Profitsaftertax4

0 060.062

051045045.040.046

057.049048.045.056

.051

.051

.062067.074

.082080.076.069.057

.043

.052

.058

.053

.030

.065073.088.089.075

.068

.093

.095

.063

.070

.068

.069

089.091.097.096

.095

.091

.097

Netinterest

0 004.004

.004004.004.004.005

.005

.005

.007

.009

.009

.010

.011

.011Oil.012

.012

.014

.016

.017

.022

.028

.029

.028

.031

.042

.044040.040.044.050

.061

.071

.085

.057

.060

.061

.066

.062

.069

.074

.078

.082

.085

.085

Outputper hour

of allemploy-

ees(1972

dollars)

5.2065.433

5.5365.7275 9976 2486.469

6.6736.7766.8477.0747.092

7.1157.4507.6647.8497.555

7.7748 0028.1448.2178.202

8.1698.311

8.1648.0898.1928.235

8 3288.3208.3248.273

8.2798.3348.429

Compen-sation

per hourof all

employ-ees

(dollars)

2.5892.684

2.7972.8872.9983 0893.213

3.3163.4923.6803.9454.209

4.4914.7785.0525.4295.937

6.5077.0247.5588.1998.970

9.89110.846

9.5339.771

10.02410.249

10 55110.72710.94711.163

11.39111.56411.730

1 Output is measured by gross domestic product of nonfinancial corporate business in 1972 dollars.2 This is equal to the deflator for gross domestic product of nonfinancial corporate business with the decimal point shifted two

places to the left.3 Indirect business tax and nontax liability plus business transfer payments less subsidies.4 With inventory valuation and capital consumption adjustments.Sources: Department of Commerce (Bureau of Economic Analysis) and Department of Labor (Bureau of Labor Statistics).

177Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 184: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

TABLE B-14.—Personal consumption expenditures, 1929-82

[Billions of dollars; quarterly data at seasonally adjusted annual rates]

Year or quarter

1929

1933

1939

1940194119421943194419451946194719481949

1950195119521953195419551956195719581959

I960196119621963196419651966196719681969

1970197119721973197419751976197719781979

198019811982 p

1980:I

tilIV

1981:

IIIIIIV

1982:

IIIIIIV P

consump-tion

expendi-tures

77.3

45.8

67.0

71.080.888.6994

108 2119 5143 8161 7174 7178 1

192 0207 L217 L229 1235 8253 7266 0280 4289 53108

324 9335 0355.2374 6400 54304465. L490 3536 95818

621.?672 2737 1812 0888 1976.4

1 084.31,204.41 346.51,507.2

1667 21,843.21,972.0

1618 71622 21682 01,745.8

1,799.91819 41,868.81,884.5

1919.41947 81,986.32,034.6

Durablegoods

9.2

3.5

6.7

7.89.76.96.56.780

15.820422.925.0

30829.829.132.531.838 637.939.336.842.4

43.141.646.751.456.463 068.070.180 585.7

85.297.2

111.1123.31215132.2156 8178.2200 2213.4

214 3234.6242.7

220 8199 0212 7224.7

236 9230 4241.2229.6

237.9240.7240.3251.7

Nondura-ble goods

37.7

22.3

35.1

37.042.950.858.664.371982.790.996.694.9

98 2108.8113.9116.5118.0122.9128.9135.2139.8146.4

1511155.3161.6167.1176.9188 6204.7212.6230 6247.8

265.7278.8300.6333 4373 4407.34417478.8528 2600.0

670.4734.5762.7

650 6656 7673 7700.5

720 6729 6741.3746.5

7491755 0768.4778.3

Services

30.3

20.1

25.2

26.228.231.034.337.139.645.350.455.358.2

63 068.574.080.686.192.199.2

105.9112.8121.9

130.7138.1147 0156.1167.1178 7192.4207.6225 8248.2

270.8296.2325.3355 2393 2437.0485 7547.46180693.7

782 5874.1966.6

747 3766 6795 6820.6

842 4859 4886.3908.3

932.49521977.6

1,004.5

Durable goods

Motorvehicles

and parts

3.3

1.1

2.3

2.83.5

.7

.8

.8104.16.68.0

10.6

13 712.211.313.913.017.815.817.214.818.9

19.717.821.524.426.130 030.430.136 338.7

36.245.452.457.150 455.872 684.895.796.6

89.798.6

106.2

97.979 288193.7

102194 2

104.093.9

103.2103 3104.3114.1

Furnitureand

householdequip-ment

4.7

1.9

3.4

3.84.84.63.93.8458.4

10.611.511.3

13.714.014.014.614.616.217.116.916.617.8

17.717.918.920.322.824 727.729.532 334.1

35.237.241.747.150 653.559165.772.881.8

86.393.492.7

85 583 486 090.4

93193 393.893.3

91.093 292.794.0

Other

1.2

.5

1.0

1.11.31.61.92.12.53.2333.43.2

333.63.94.14.24.65.05.25.45.8

5.85.86.36.77.68.39.9

10.511813.0

13.914.616.919.220 522.925.227.731.735.1

38.342.643.7

37.536 438 640.6

41.742 943.442.4

43.744.243.343.6

Nondurable goods

Food

19.5

11.5

19.1

20.223.428.433.236.740647.452 354.252.5

53960.463.464.465.467.269.973.676.479.1

81.183.285.587.892.798.9

106.6109.6118 7127.5

138.9144.2154.9172.1193.7213.6230.6249.8275.9311.6

343.7375.3397.8

333.9336 4346 4358.0

368.83721378.0382.3

387.9395 0401.3406.8

Clothingand

shoes

9.4

4.6

7.1

7.58.8

11.013.414.616 518.218 820.119.3

19 621.221.922.122.123.124.124.324.726.1

26.727.428.729.531.933.536.638.242.145.5

46.850.655.461.464.869.675.382.692.499.1

104.7114.6118.6

103.0102 2104 8108.9

112.3114 0115.9116.0

117.5118 4119.1119.5

See next page for continuation of table.

178Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 185: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

TABLE B-14.—Personal consumption expenditures, 1929-82—Continued

[Billions of dollars; quarterly data at seasonally adjusted annual rates]

Year orquarter

1929

1933

1939

1940194119421943194419451946194719481949

1950195119521953195419551956195719581959

I960196119621963196419651966196719681969

1970197119721973197419751976197719781979

198019811982 p

1980:|IIMlIV

1981:1IIIIIIV

1982:1IIIllIV

Nondurable goods-cont'd

Gasolineand oil

1.8

1.5

2.2

2.32.62.11.31.41.83.44.04.85.3

5.56.16.87.4788.69.4

10.210.611.3

12.012.012.612.913.514.716.017.018.620.7

22 423.925.428.636.640.444.048.151.266.6

87.096.893.9

82.086.187.092.8

95.296.797.797.5

95.391.394.294.9

Fuel oiland coal

1.6

1.2

1.4

1.51.7192.0202.22.53.03.43.1

3.43.53.43.4353.83.94.14.24.0

383.73.74.0414.44.74.84.74.5

444.5506.27.78.29.8

10 711.916.1

19.019.717.6

18.818.619.319.2

20.019.919.919.2

17.317.318 417.6

Other

5.4

3.5

5.3

5.66.4758.796

10.811.312.814.114.7

15.817.618.319.319 220.321.623.024.025.9

27 529.031.132.834 637.240.943.046.549.6

53 255.559 865.070.575.582.187 696.9

106.6

116.0128.2134.8

112.9113.4116.2121.6

124.3127.0129.8131.5

131.1133.1135 4139.6

Services

Housing 1

11.7

8.1

9.4

9.710.411.211.812.312.814.216.017.919.6

21.724.327.029.832.234.336.739.342.045.0

48.151.254.758.061465.569.574.179.887.0

93 9102.7112.5123.8137.4149.8166.51859209.6236.0

266.0295.3324.7

254.8261.6269.6278.1

284.4291.3298.7307.0

314.5320.4328.2335.5

Household operation

Total

4.0

2.8

3.8

4.04.34 85.2596.46.87.58.18.5

9.510.411.112.012 614.015.216.217.318.5

20121.022.223.424 826.328.030.032.235.0

37 741.045 249.655.263.371.681190.199.3

111.7128.9144.1

105.1108.9114.7118.2

120.7125.2132.8136.9

141.4140.7145.0149.3

Electricityand gas

1.2

1.1

1.4

1.51.5161.7181.92.12.32.62.9

3.33.74.14.5505.56.16.57.17.6

838.89.49.9

10 410.911.512.213.114.2

15 417.018 820.524.029.232.938 542.947.8

56.666.875.2

50.954.859.261.4

61.964.669.471.2

75.172.675 277.8

Other

2.9

1.7

2.4

2.62.7323.5414.54.75.15.45.6

6.26.77.07.5768.59.29.7

10.210.9

11812.212.813.614 415.416.517.819.220.8

22 224.026 429.131.234.138.742 647.251.5

55.162.168.9

54.254.155.556.8

58.860.763.565.7

66.368.169.971.5

Transpor-tation

2.6

1.5

2.0

2.12.4273.4374.05.05.35.85.9

6.26.77.17.8798.28.69.09.3

10.1

10 711.211.712.212 813.715.016.217.619.5

22 025.127 528.830.933.238.646.451.256.3

62.965.470.3

61.261.664.164.6

66.264.365.565.7

66.969.571.573.4

Other

Total

12.0

7.7

10.0

10.311.212 213.915 216.419.421.723.624.1

25.627.028.831.033 335.638.741.444.348.3

51754.858.362.568173.379.987.296.2

106.8

117 2127.41401153.0169.8190.7209.0234.1267.1302.0

341.9384.4427.6

326.2334.5347.2359.8

371.1378.5389.3398.7

409.6421.5432.9446.4

Medicalcare

2.2

1.5

2.1

2.22.4262.9333.64.55.56.36.4

6.97.38.08.997

10.311.012.013.114.3

15 416.418.019.522 323.926.028.431.436.5

41045.951457.464.573.783.396.5

108.4124.1

143.5170.9194.7

134.7140.6145.9152.9

159.7166.9175.6181.5

186.4192.1197 9202.4

1 Includes imputed rental value of owner-occupied housing.Source: Department of Commerce, Bureau of Economic Analysis.

179Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 186: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

TABLE B-15.—Gross private domestic investment, 1929-82

[Billions of dollars; quarterly data at seasonally adjusted annual rates]

Year or quarter

1929.

1933.

1939.

1940194119421943194419451946194719481949

1950 . .195119521953195419551956.19571958.1959

1960.196119621963196419651966.196719681969

1970.1971197219731974197519761977.1978.1979

198019811 9 8 2 "

1980:(||IIIIV

1981:

||IIIIV

1982:IIIIII.IV P

Grossprivate

domesticinvest-ment

16.2

1.4

9.3

13.117 99.9587.2

10 630.734 045.935.3

53.859.252.153.352 768.471069.261.978.1

75 974.885 490.997 4

113.5125 7122.8133.3149.3

144 2166.4195.0229 8228.72061257.93241386 6423.0

402.3471.5421.9

424 03910384.1410.3

455 7475 5486.0468.9

414 8431.5443.3397.9

Fixed investment

Total

14.5

3.0

8.8

10.91348.1648.1

11724.334 441.138.4

47.048.949.052 954 362.466367.963 472.5

72 972 579 284.9917

103.71116112.5125 4139.5

1410158.8184 82113214 5213 0246.030103601408.8

412.4451.1443 3

424 63914405.3428.0

443 5450 9454.2455.7

450 4447.7438 6436.4

Nonresidential

Total

10.6

2.4

5.9

7.5946.05.06.9

10.116.923 026.324.4

27.331.331.334.534 238.544 047.042 045.9

48 548.052 254.861072.783183.9907

101.3

103 9107.91210143 3156.6157 7174.1205 22489290.2

309.2346.1347.5

3112300 2307.8317.5

330 03413353.0360.2

357 0352.2344.2336.6

Struc-tures

5.1

1.0

2.0

2.33.01.91.41.92.86.97.79.08.7

9.511.411.612.913 414.617.718.417.217.6

18 819.120.120.522 427.030.130.332.436.7

38740.544.151055.955458.864.478 798.3

110.5129.7141.7

110 91091109.5112.6

119 6127 0132.7139.6

1414143.6141.3140.4

Pro-ducers'

dur-able

equip-ment

5.5

1.4

3.9

5.2644.13.75.0739.9

15.317.315.7

17.819.919.721.520 823.926328.624 928.3

29 728.932134.438 745.853 053.758 264.6

65 267.476992 3

100.7102 3115.3140 81702191.9

198.6216.4205.8

200 21912198.2204.9

210 4214 3220.2220.6

215 6208.6203.0196.2

Residential

Total

3.9

.6

2.9

3.44.02.21.41.31.57.4

11.414.913.9

19.817.617.718.420123.922.320.921.426.6

24 524.527.030.130.730.928.528.634.838.2

37150.963.868 057.955.372.095.8

1112118.6

103.2104.995.8

113.591297.6

110.5

113 6109 5101.295.5

93 495.594.399.8

Non-farmstruc-tures

3.6

.5

2.7

3.23.61.91.21.11.46.7

10413.712.8

18.616.416.517.319 022.821.219.720.325.3

23 323.225.828.929 429.627.127.233.336.5

35.448.961.565 654.852.468.892.0

107 0114.0

98.399.790.1

107 486 993.5

105.4

1091104 795.689.4

87 989.688.794.1

Farmstruc-tures

0.2

.0

.1

.2

.2

.2

.1

.5

.7

.9

.8

.8

.8

.8

.8

.7

.6

.7

.7

.7

.7

.6

.6

.7

.6

.7

!6

.6

7.7

1.31.01.11.51.71.7

1.92.12.5

3.1141.02.0

1.3162.42.9

242.82.42.4

Pro-ducers'

dur-able

equip-ment

0.1

.0

.1

.1

.1

.1

.0

.0

.0

.3

.3

.4

.4

.4

.4

.4

.4

.5

.5

.5

.6

.5

.5

.5

.6

.6

7.7.9

1.0

1.11.31.51.71.81.92.12.32.52.9

3.03.23.2

3.02.93.03.1

3.23.23.23.2

3.13.23.23.2

Change in

inventories

Total

1.7

- 1 . 6

.4

2.24.51.8

=.6-1 .0-1 .0

6.4= .54.7

- 3 . 1

6.810.33.1

.4- 1 . 5

6.04.71.3

- 1 . 55.7

3.02.36.36.05.69.9

14.110.37.99.8

3.27.7

10.218.514.1

- 6 . 911.823.026.514.3

= 10.020.5

-21.4

= .7= 4

-21.2= 17.7

12.224 631.813.2

=35.6-16.2

4.7-38.5

Non-farm

1.8

~ 1.4

.3

1.940.7

= 6= .6- 66.4133.0

=2.2

6.09.12.11.1

= • 2 15.55.1.8

=2.357

272,05.55.26.28.9

14.39.67.897

3.16.49.6

15.216.0

™ 10.513.921.925.4

8.6

=5.715.0

=21.6

740

-15.4= 12.3

10 019 324.66.0

=36 0= 15.0

3739.0

Source: Department of Commerce, Bureau of Economic Analysis.

180Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 187: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

TABLE B-16.—Gross and net private domestic investment, 1929-82

[Billions of dollars]

Year

1929

1933

1939

1940194119421943194419451946194719481949

19501951195219531954195519561957.. . .1958.. . .1959...

196019611962196319641965..196619671968 . . ..1969

1970197119721973197419751976197719781979

198019811982 p

Grossprivatedomes-

ticinvest-ment

16.2

1.4

9.3

13.117.99.9587.2

10 630.734 045.935.3

53.859.252.153.352 768.471.069.261.978.1

75.974.885.490.997.4

113.5125.7122.8133.3149.3

144 2166.4195.0229.8228 7206.1257.9324.1386.6423.0

402 3471.5421.9

Less:

con-sumption

allow-anceswith

capitalcon-

sumptionadjust-ment

9.7

7.4

8.7

9.110.011.211.511.712.214.017.320.221.8

23.527.229.331.032 734.838.741.743.544.9

46.347.549.050.652.956.060.765.972.180.0

88196.5

106.4116.5136 0159.3175.0195.2222.5256.0

293 2330.1356.8

Total

6.5

-6 .0

.6

4.17.9

- 1 . 3- 5 7- 4 . 6- 1 616.616 625.613.5

30.332.022.822.420 033.632.327.518.433.2

29.627.336.540.344.557.565.057.061.269.3

56 269.988.6

113 392 746.882.8

128.9164.1167.0

1091141.465.1

Total

4.8

45

.1

1.93.430

- 5 . 036

-.610.317.120.916.6

23.521.719.721.921627.627.626.119.927.5

26.724.930.234.438.947.650.946.653.359.5

52 962.378.494 878 553.771.0

105.9137.7152.7

119.1121.086.5

fIquals: Net private domestic investment

fYet fixed investment

Nonresidential

Total

3.1

- 3 . 5

6

.72.0

-2 .5- 3 . 5-1 .7

136.6

10211.38.1

9.610.79.1

10.891

11.913.914.38.1

10.6

12.310.914.015.319.728.935.431.933.638.1

33 931.137.051949 230.334.350.773.689.0

77 382.960.9

Struc-tures

1.7

16

10

7- .317

- 2 . 6201.22.42.12.72.3

2.93.93.84.85.15.97.97.96.46.4

7.37.37.97.89.1

12.914.813.814.516.6

16 315.616.620.718 913.114.116.023.333.7

36.045.949.5

Pro-ducers'durableequip-ment

1.4

18

.3

1.422

7_ 9

.3244.2828.65.8

6.76.75.36.0406.06.06.41.84.2

5.03.66.17.5

10.616.020.618.219.121.5

17 615.520.431230 317.320.234.750.455.3

41.337.011.5

Residential

Total

1.7

10

.8

1.215

- . 6- 1 . 6- 1 . 9- 1 8

3.76.89.78.5

13.911.010.611.112.515.713.711.811.816.9

14.414.016.219.019.118.715.514.719.821.3

19.031.241.342.929.323.436.855.264.063.7

41.838.125.6

Non-farmstruc-tures

1.7

9

.8

1.114

- . 5- 1 4-1 .7- 1 6

3.4649.17.9

13.410.610.310.812 215.613.411.711.616.7

14.313.916.118.818.918.615.314.519.621.0

18 930.940.942.528 423.136.554.563.363.2

41.437.725.1

Farmstruc-tures

- 0 . 1

- . 1

- . 0

.00

- . 1_ l- . 1_ 2

3.4.4

.3

.3

.3

2.0.1.1.1.1

- . 0.1.0,0.0

- . 0.0.0

- . 1

- . 0

- . 2- . 2- . 2- .4

.2- .2- . 2

.1

.1- .2

- .2- .1

.2

Pro-ducers'durableequip-ment

0.0

- . 0

.0

.0

o- .0

- . 1- 1

.12.2.1

.2

.1

,\,1

.1

.1

.1

.2

.1

.1

.1

.1

.2

'.2

A

A

'.6.7.7.5

.6

.6

.6

.5

.2

Change

busi-ness

inven-tories

1.7

- 1 . 6

.4

2.2451.8

6- 1 . 0

106.4

4.7- 3 . 1

6.810.33.1

A- 1 , 5

6.04.71.3

- 1 . 55.7

3.02.36.36.05.69.9

14.110.37.99.8

3.27.7

10.218.514.1

-6 .911,823.026.514.3

-10.020.5

-21.4

Source: Department of Commerce, Bureau of Economic Analysis.

181

Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 188: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

TABLE B-17.—Inventories and final sales of business, 1946-82

[Billions of dollars, except as noted; seasonally adjusted]

Year and quarter

Fourth quarter:1946194719481949

19501951195219531954

19551956195719581959

I9601961196219631964

19651966196719681969

19701971197219731974

19751976197719781979

198019811982 p

1980:

IIIllIV

1981:•I

IIIIV

1982:|||111IV P

Inventories1

Total

72.082.687.278.7

98 0110.5109 2110.1107.6

114 8124.0127 6127.3132.0

136 0137.9144 6150.4156.2

170.5187.4199.4213.5234.6

244.0260.8288 7357.7434.4

439.4473 6519.5602 3705.0

776.0822.4806.1

724.1737 2757.3776.0

791.6804.2814.3822.4

809.7812.5816.0806.1

Farm

22 725.122 919.8

26128.326024.623.8

22 522.924 325.624.4

25 625.927 327.626.5

29.929629.530633.3

32.336.745 666.662.4

64 560659.973981.9

86.981880.6

79.081186.286.9

85.986.581.581.8

84.586.483.580.6

Total

49.357.564.359.0

71982.283.185.583.9

92.2101.0103.3101.7107.6

1104112.1117 3122.7129.7

140.6157.8169.91829201.3

211.6224.12431291.2372.0

374.94130459.6528 3623.1

689.1740 5725.5

645.16561671.1689.1

705.7717.7732.8740.5

725.2726.1732.5725.5

Manu-facturing

26 729.332.528.9

35 243.444 446.444.3

48 854.554853.255.7

56 657.760 962.966.4

71.581788.7952

104.8

108.4109.9116 8141.1189.6

189 8207 5224.7254 2306.6

342.6366 4346.9

321.03281333.2342.6

352.6357.2365.1366.4

358.1352.7351.3346.9

Honfarm

Whole-sale

trade

10.110.511.711.8

13.814.614.815.015.3

16.617.918.218.320.0

204, 20.9

21.523.124.4

26.329.932.434.337.7

41.744.949460.276.9

77.386 998.7

114 6135.7

153.0163.0162.1

140.5144 0148.5153.0

156.5158.1159.5163.0

158.4160.8161.9162.1

Retailtrade

11.413.115.114.0

17 518.017.718.318.5

20.921.722.922.923.9

25 324.926 327.629.0

31.934.635.339042.8

44.350.555 764.874.1

74 682 993.7

1090121.0

127.7140 7141.8

121.3122 4126.1127J

129.0134.2139.1140.7

137.6140.2145.6141.8

Other

3.54.65.04.3

5.46.16.25.85.9

6.06.97.37.38.0

8.18.78.69.29.9

10.911.613.514.416.0

17.318.821225.031.3

33.335742.550.659.8

65.770.574.8

62.261563.465.7

67.668.369.170.5

71.172.473.774.8

Finalsales •

16018.319.619.5

21724.626,127.227.5

29.731.432.733.735.6

36938.841143.746.2

51.054.157.663 367.4

70.877.285 894.5

102.0

113.61241138.9159 5176.9

194.92104221.5

182.01812188.2194.9

201.8203.3208.5210.4

213.8215.5217.1221.5

Inventory—finalsales ratio

Total

4,504.514.444.03

4.534.494.184.053.91

3.863.953.903.773.71

3.693.553 523.443.38

3.343.463.463.373.48

3.453.383.373.794.26

3.873.823.743.783.99

3.983.913.64

3.984.074.023.98

3.923.963.913.91

3.793.773.763.64

Non-farm3

3 083.143 273.02

3 323.343183.153.05

3103.223163.013.02

2992.892 852.812.81

2.762.922.952 892.99

2.992.902833.083.65

3.303 333.313.313.52

3.543.523.28

3.543 623.573.54

3.503.533.513.52

3.393.373.373.28

1 End of quarter.8 Quarterly totals at monthly rates. Business final sales equals final sales less gross product of households and institutions,

government, and rest of the world, and includes a small amount of final sales by farms.3 Ratio based on total business final sales, which includes a small amount of final sales by farms.Note.—The industry classification of inventories is on an establishment basis and is based on the 1972 Standard Industrial

Classification (SIC) beginning 1948 and on the 1942 SIC prior to 1948.Source: Department of Commerce, Bureau of Economic Analysis.

182

Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 189: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

TABLE B-18.—Inventories and final sales of business in 1972 dollars, 1947-82

[Billions of 1972 dollars, except as noted; seasonally adjusted]

Year and quarter

Fourth quarter:194719481949

19501951195219531954

195519561957..19581959

19601961196219631964

19651966196719681969

197019711972..19731974

19751976197719781979

198019811982 p

1980:

11IMIV

1981:

NHIIV

1982:

ItIllIV

Inventories'

Total

116.11216117.2

127.71414145.7147.2145.0

152 8158.61601158.3165.3

168.8171.8179.7187.2194.3

206.1222.92351244.1255.1

258 9267.0277 2294.4306.0

299 2307 0320.3336 3343.6

338 6347.6339.1

342 9342.3340.2338 6

339 2342.3346.4347.6

343.7342 6343 5339.1

Farm

25.726 726.2

27.529130.430 231.1

3 1 530.731432.432.4

32.833.234.535 735.1

36.236.036 837.037.3

37 739.239 842.141.8

43 041140.840 843.2

41143.243.3

43 042.441.7411

41241.742.443 2

43.343.143343.3

Total

90.594 891.0

100.2112 3115.4117.1114.0

1212127.8128.7125.9132.9

136.1138.6145.2151.5159.2

169.9186.8198 3207.0217.8

2212227.8237 4252.3264.2

256 3265 9279.5295 5300.4

297 5304.4295.7

299.9299.9298.4297.5

298 0300.6304.0304.4

300.5299.5300.2295.7

f

Manu-facturing

47.448 846.2

49.360 062.764560.9

64369.168 766.169.1

69.971.775.678 282.0

87.097.2

1041108.4112.8

112 9111.8114 41218130.9

12711309134.1139 8145.0

145 9148.4141.0

146.6147.4146.3145.9

146 9147.5149.41484

146.4144.6143.3141.0

tonfarm

Whole-satetrade

16.017 217.2

19.219 720.120320.6

22122.822 522.524.6

25.125.726.628429.9

31.635.337 838.941.244045.947 950.454.1

52 255559.763 564.7

65 066.565.7

64.664.965.065.0

64665.165.466 5

65.365.866.165.7

Retailtrade

18.320319.8

23.023 023.023.623.7

26.526.827.827.528.7

30.329.831.633.034.5

37.440.040.043.045.9

46.151.254.658.858.3

55.858 863.167.366.1

63.066.165.4

64.263.763.563.0

62.864.665.966.1

65.165.467.265.4

Other

8.7867.8

8.79.59.68.78.8

8.49.29.89.8

10.5

10.711.411.412.012.8

13.814.316.316.817.9

18.219.020.521.420.9

21.120.822.624.924.6

23.623.423.6

24.523.823.623.6

23.623.423.323.4

23.623.723.723.6

Finalsales2

33.234 434.6

36.939 841.643.043.1

45 646.547.148.149.7

50.753.155.358 360.9

66.167.570173.874.775.278.984.787.285.0

88.192.297.6

103.0105.4

105.0104.6105.5

105.8102.7103.7105.0

106.4105.2105.5104.6

105.0104.6104.3105.5

Inventory—finalsales ratio

Total

3.503 533.38

3.463 553.513423.36

3 353.413403.293.33

3.333.243.253 213.19

3.123.303 363.313.413443.383.273.383.60

3.403.333.283.273.26

3.223.323.21

3.243.333.283.22

3.193.253.283.32

3.273.283.293.21

Non-farm3

2.732 762.63

2.722 822.782 722.64

2 662.752 732.622.68

2.682 612.622 602.61

2.572.772 832.812.92

2 942.892 802.893.11

2.912.882.862.872.85

2.832.912.80

2.842.922.882.83

2.802.862.882.91

2.862.862.882.80

1 End of quarter.2 Quarterly totals at monthly rates. Business final sales equals final sales less gross product of households and institutions,government, and rest of world, and includes a small amount of final sales by farms.3 Ratio based on total business final sales, which includes a small amount of final sales by farms.

NOte.—The industry classification of inventories is on an establishment basis and is based on the 1972 Standard IndustrialClassification {SIC) beginning 1948 and on the 1942 SIC prior to 1948.

Source: Department of Commerce, Bureau of Economic Analysis.

183

Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 190: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

TABLE B-19.—Relation of gross national product, net national product, and national income, 1929-82

[Billions of dollars; quarterly data at seasonally adjusted annual rates]

Year or quarter

1929

1933

1939

194019411942194319441945 . . . . .19461947 ,19481949

19501951195219531954 „„1955195S . . .195719581959

1960196119621963196419651966196719681969

197019711972197319741975 . .1976197719781979

198019811982 p

1980:

IIIllIV

1981:

ItIIIIV

1982:IIIIllIV "

Grossnationalproduct

103.4

55.8

90.9

100.0125.0158.5192.1210.6212.4209.8233.1259 5258.3

286.53308348.0366.8366.8400.0421.7444.0449.7487.9

506 5524.6565 0596.7637.7691.1756 0799.6873 4944.0

992 71,077.61185.91,326.41,434.21 549.21,718.01,918.32,163.92,417.8

2 633.12,937.73,057.5

2,575.92 573 42*643 72J39.4

2 864.92 901.82,980.93,003.2

2,995.53,045.23 088.23J01.3

Less:Capital

consump-tion

allowanceswith

capitalconsump-

tionadjustment

9.7

7.4

8.7

9.110.011.211.511.712.214.017.320.221.8

23.527.229.331.032.734.838.741.743.544.9

46 347.549 050.652.956.060 765.972.180.0

88196.5

106.4116.5136.0159.3175.0195.2222.5256.0

293.2330.1356.8

278.4289,2298 6306.6

315.4325 0335.2344.8

348.7353.9359.4365.0

Equals:Net

nationalproduct

93.7

48.4

82.2

91.0115.0147.3180.7198.9200.2195.8215.7239.3236.5

263.0303.6318.7335.8334.1365.3383.0402.3406.2443.0

460 2477.05161546.1584.8635.06953733.7801.3864.0

904 7981.1

1 079.51,209.91,298.21 389.91,543.01,723.21,941.42,161.7

2 339 92,607.62,700.8

2,297.52 284 32 345 02,432.9

2 549.52 576 82,645.82,658.4

2,646.72,691.22,728.92,736.3

Indirectbusinesstax andnontaxliability

7.1

7.1

9.4

10.111.311.812.814.215.517.118.420.121.3

23.425.311129.729.632.235.137.538.741.8

45 448.051654.658.862.665 370.278986.6

94 3103.7111.5120.9129.1140.1151.7165.7178.2189.6

213.0251.3258.8

200.1206.7216 3228.9

244.6252 0253.3255.3

250.2256.7261.7266.5

Less:

Busi-ness

transferpay-

ments

0.6

.7

.5

.4

.5

.55.5.5.5.6.7.8

.8

.91.01.21.11.2141.51.61.8

202.0212.42.72.8303.1343.9

414.44.95.55.87.47.98.69.3

10.3

11412.413.7

11.011311511.8

12 012 212.512.8

13.113.513.814.3

Statis-tical

discrep-ancy

1.1

.7

1.4

1.1.6

=.8-=1.8

2.74.1.5

1.5=1.6

.6

1.33.21.72.32.01.3

= 2.1= 1.2

.2= 1.3

- 2 . 4• = . 12.11.7.1

= 1.21.4

= .3- 2 . 1=3.9

•-1.54.13.3

.83.75.55.11.4

= 2.6- 1 . 5

3.9- 1 . 9

.1

10.53.82.2

- 1 . 0

5.14.6

- . 8=7.2

- 7 . 5.8

3.6

PIUS:Subsidies

lesscurrentsurplus

ofgovern-

mententer-prises

-0 .2

--.0

.4

.4

.1

.1

.6

.7

.9-.2

- .1= .3

.1= .1- .3- .5

- ,0

.71.1

.41.71.81.11.71.62.51.61.41.9

2.92.63.83.41.12.41.03.13.73.4

5.56.68.3

3.84.77.46.0

5.87.26.57.0

6.04.95.8

16.5

Equals:Nationalincome

84.8

39.9

71.4

79.7102.7135.9169.3182.1180.7178.6194.9219.9213.6

237.6274.1287.9302.1301.1330.5349.4365.2366.9400.8

415.7428.8462.0488.5524.9572.4628.1662.2722.5779.3

810.7871.5963.6

1,086.21,160.71,239.41,379.21,550.51,760.31,966.7

2,117.12,352.52,436.5

2,079.72,067.22,122.32,199.2

2,293.72 324.42[387.32,404.5

2,396.92,425.22,455.6

Source: Department of Commerce, Bureau of Economic Analysis.

184

Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 191: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

TABLE B-20.—Relation of national income and personal income, 1929-82

[Billions of dollars; quarterly data at seasonally adjusted annual rates]

Year or quarter Nationalincome

Less:

Corporateprofits

withinventoryvaluation

andcapital

consump-tion

adjust-ments

Netinterest

Contribu-tions for

socialinsurance

Wageaccruals

lessdisburse-

ments

Plus:

Govern-ment

transferpayments

topersons

Personalinterestincome

Personaldividendincome

Businesstransfer

payments

Equals:

Personalincome

1929

1933

1939

1940194119421943194419451946194719481949

1950195119521953195419551956195719581959

1960196119621963196419651966196719681969

1970197119721973197419751976197719781979

198019811982 P

1980:

\\ZZIIIIV

1981:

IIIIV

1982:IIIIllIV "...

84.8

39.9

71.4

79.7102.7135.9169.3182.1180.7178.6194.9219.9213.6

237.6274.1287.9302.1301.1330.5349.4365.2366.9400.8

415.7428.8462.0488.5524.9572.4628.1662.2722.5779.3

810.7871.5963.6

1,086.21,160.71,239.41,379.21,550.51,760.31,966.7

2,117.12,352.52,436.5

2,079.72,067.22,122.32,199.2

2,293.72,324.42,387.32,404.5

2,396.92,425.22,455.6

9.0

-1.7

5.3

8.614.119.323.523.619.016.622.329.427.1

33.938.736.136.335.245.543.743.338.549.6

47.648.656.662.169.280.085.182.489.185.1

71.483.296.6108.394.9110.5138.1167.3192.4194.8

181.6190.6161.1

195.3172.2177.8181.2

200.3185.1193.1183.9

157.1155.4166.2

4.7

4.1

3.6

3.33.33.12.72.42.21.82.32.42.7

3.03.54.04.45.35.96.67.99.6

10.3

11.413.014.716.418.321.024.427.630.034.8

41.446.551.260.276.184.587.2

102.5121.7153.8

187.7235.7265.3

175.7181.6190.4203.0

217.6231.6244.0249.5

258.7267.5268.1267.0

0.2

2.1

2.32.83.54.55.26.16.15.85.45.9

7.18.59.09.1

10.111.512.914.915.218.0

21.121.924.327.328.730.038.843.447.955.0

58.664.674.292.4

104.3110.9126.0140.6161.8186.9

204.0238.1253.7

199.4200.5204.6211.3

232.5236.2240.3243.5

250.8253.0255.2255.8

0.0 0.9

1.5

2.5

2.72.62.72.53.15.6

10.811.210.611.7

14.411.612.112.915.116.217.320.124.325.2

27.030.831.633.434.837.641.649.556.462.8

76.190.099.8

114.0135.4170.9186.4199.3214.6240.0

285.8323.9360.8

263.2271.9301.8306.5

310.8314.8332.3337.9

341.4351.7367.2382.9

6.9

5.5

5.4

5.35.35.25.15.25.96.67.68.18.7

9.710.511.212.513.714.916.718.820.322.5

25.026.429.032.235.639.744.448.353.461.1

69.474.880.993.9

112.4123.2132.5152.8179.4218.7

263.4329.0371.8

249.1258.0266.4280.2

304.7320.6339.6351.0

359.7372.0378.2377.2

5.8

2.0

3.8

4.04.44.34.44.64.65.66.37.07.2

8.88.58.58.89.1

10.311.111.511.312.2

12.913.314.415.517.319.119.420.221.922.4

22.222.624.126.529.129.936.539.645.350.8

55.962.567.0

54.155.756.557.4

59.261.564.165.2

65.866.167.268.8

.8

.91.01.21.11.21.41.51.61.8

2.02.02.12.42.72.83.03.13.43.9

4.14.44.95.55.87.47.98.69.3

10.3

11.412.413.7

11.011.311.511.8

12.012.212.512.8

13.113.513.814.3

85.0

47.0

72.4

77.995.4

122.6150.8164.5170.0177.6190.1209.0206.4

227.2254.9271.8287.7289.6310.3332.6351.0361.1384,4

402.3417.8443.6466.2499.25407588.2630.0690.6754.7

811.1868.4951.4

1,065.21,168.61,265.01,391.21,540.41,732.71,951.2

2,160.42,415.82,569.7

2,086.82,109.62,185.32,260.0

2,330.02,380.62,458.22,494.6

2,510.52,55272,592.52.623.2

Source: Department of Commerce, Bureau of Economic Analysis.

185

Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 192: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

TABLE B-21.—National income by type of income, 1929-82

[Billions of dollars; quarterly data at seasonally adjusted annual rates]

Year orquarter

192919331939

19401941.19421943194419451946194719481949

1950195119521953195419551956195719581959

I960196119621963196419651966196719681969

1970197119721973197419751976197719781979

198019811982 P

1980:

||IllIV

1981:

IIIllIV

1982:1.

IllI V

Nationalincome1

84 839 971.4

79 7102.7135 9169.31821180 7178 6194 9219.9213.6237.6274.1287.93021301.1330.5349.4365 2366.9400.8

4157428.8462.0488.5524.9572.4628.1662.2722.5779.3

810.7871.5963 6

1,086.21,160 71,239.41,379 21,550.51,76031,9667

2,117.12,352.52,436.5

2.079 72,067.22,122.32,199.2

2,293.72,324.42,387.32,404.5

2,396.92,425.22,455.6

Compensationof employees

Total

51.129 548.1

52164.885 3

109.51212123.11181129.2141.4141.3

154.8181.0195.7209 6208.4224.9243.5256 5258.2279.6

294 9303.6325.1342.9368.0396.5439.3471.4519.9572.9

612.0652.2718 0801.3877 5931.4

1,036 31,152.11,30111,458.1

1,598.61,767.61,855.9

1,555 21,571.71,604.91,662.8

1,718.01.750.01,789.11,813.4

1,830.81,850.71,868.31,873.7

Wagesand

salaries

50.529 046.0

49962.182,1

105.8116 7117.5112 0123.1135.5134.7

147.0171.3185.3198.5196.82117228.3239 3240.5258.9

2719279.5298,0313.4336.1362.0398.4427.0469.65157

548.7581.5635 2702.6765 2806.4889 9983.2

1106 51,237.4

1,356.11,494.01,560.1

1319 51,332.11,361.01,411.7

1,452.81,479.41,512.61,531.1

1,541.51,558.61,570.01,572.3

Supple-ments

towages

andsal-

aries 2

0.65

2.1

2327323.8455.6606.15.96.6

7.89,7

10.411011.613.215.217 217.720.6

23 024.127129.531.834.540.944.450.357.2

63.270.782 8987

112 3125.0146 4168.9194 62207

242.5273.6295.8

235 7239.6243.9251.0

265.2270.6276.5282.3

289.3294.1298.3301.4

Proprietors' income with inventory valuation and capital consumptionadjustments

Total

15.059

11.8

13 017.524.229.130431.836 735.940.936.4

38.743.243.441.841.242.943.945 347.747.6

47 248.649 950.552.556.960.561.264.067.0

66.269.476993.888,790.0941

103.9118,5132.1

116.3124.7120.1

122 7108.9115.5118.0

123.4123.8127.5124.1

116.4117.3118.4128.1

Farm

Total

6.12.54.4

4.46.4

10.112.012.012.414.915.117.612.8

13.716.115.113.1

n'i11.2n.i13.210.9

11712.112 312.010.813.114.112.612714.6

14.315.018732.826 524.619.119.126 331.9

19.424.018.6

22.115.920.319.2

21.622.527.124.6

17.817.416.622.6

Propri-etors'

in-come3

6.32.64.5

4.56.5

10.312.212.212.715.215.718.213.5

14.416.916.013.913.312.212.112.114.111.9

12.612.913.012.811.513.814.913.513715.7

15.616.420434.629.028.022.823.331.337.8

26.431.826.8

28.722.927.526.5

29.130.335.132.8

26.025.524730.8

Capitalconsump-

tionadjust-ment

0.2- .0

- .1- .2- .2

=.3- .3- .3=.5- . 6- . 7

= 7- . 8- . 8- . 8

- .9- .9- .9

= 1.0

- . 9- . 8- . 8- 7- . 7- . 7

- . 9- 1 . 0- 1 . 2

- 1 . 3- 1 . 4- 1 . 6-1 .8-2 .5-3 .4-3 .7- 4 . 3- 5 . 0- 5 . 9

- 7 . 0- 7 . 9-8 .1

-6 .6- 7 . 0- 7 . 2- 7 . 3

- 7 . 5- 7 . 8- 8 . 0- 8 . 2

- 8 . 2- 8 . 1- 8 . 1- 8 . 2

Total

8.9337.4

8.611.114.117.118.419.421.820.823.323.6

25.027.228.228628731.432.734.234.5367

35.536.537.638.541743.846.448.651.352.5

51.954.458.161.062.265.475.084.892.2

100.2

96.91007101.4

100.593.095.198.8

101.8101.2100.499.5

98.699.9

101.7105.5

Nonfarm

Propri-etors'

In-come4

8.8397.6

8611714.417.118.319.323.321.823.122.2

25.126.426.927 627.630.531.833.133.235.3

34.235.336.437.240.242.745.347.550.651.9

51754.558.162.365.867.477.186.894.9

103.2

99.9100.394.6

104.995.198.2

101.4

103.2100.999.397.7

93.894.594.4957

Inven-tory

valua-tion

adjust-ment

015

•= 2

» 0= .6= 4=.2= 1=.1

-1.7-1.5

-1.1- . 3

= 2=.0

= 3=.1= .0

.0

.0= .0= .0=.1

l ! 2- . 2

=.'5

= .'6

=2.0- 3 7- 1 . 2- 1 . 2= 1.2=2.0= 2.9

-=3.1- 1 . 6

4.3=2.0- 3 . 1=3.0

- 2 . 5- 1 . 4- 1 . 2- 1 . 2

.0= 1.0

-A

Capitalconsump-

tionadjust-ment

=01o

- . 0

o.01.2,2.22.5.6.9

1.01.01.11,21.21.21.41.41.41.4

1.31.21.21.41.51.31.31.31.11.1

.8

.4

.8

.6,1

= 8- .9

-.7= .1

.1

7.3

.0- . 2

.0

.5

1.21.82,33.0

476.47.9

10.3

1 National income is the total net income earned in production, ft differs from gross national product mainly in that it excludesdepreciation charges and other allowances for business and institutional consumption of durable capital goods and indirect businesstaxes. See Table B 19.

2 Employer contributions for social insurance and to private pension, health, and welfare funds; workmen's compensation; directors'fees; and a few other minor items.

See next page for continuation of table.

186Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 193: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

TABLE B-21.—National income by type of income, 1929-82—Continued

[Billions of dollars; quarterly data at seasonally adjusted annual rates]

Year or quarter

192919331939

1940194119421943194419451946194719481949

1950195119521953195419551956195719581959..

I9601961196219631964196519661967 *.'.'."19681969

19701971197219731974 ..v19751976197719781979

198019811982"

1980:

||IIIIV

1981:

IIIll(V

1982:I||IllIV*

Rental income of personswith capital consumption

adjustment

Total

4.92.22.6

2.73.14 04.4454.65.55.35.76.1

7.17.78.8

10.011.011.311.612.212.913.6

14.515.015.816.517.118.018.719.719 519.6

19.720.221022.623.523.023.524.826.627.9

32.933.934.1

30.832.733.834.2

34 434.033.633.6

33.934.234.633.9

Rentalincome

ofpersons

5.72.33.1

333.9505.6596.2737.7858.9

10.011012.213414.414 815.215916.717.4

18.018.419119.720.221.222.323.624 025.2

25.827129 032.135.336 839.244.050.056 2

65.369.470.8

61.864.866.967.5

68 768.969.570 5

71.070.770.970.9

Capitalcon-

sumptionadjust-ment

- 0 . 8- . 1- . 6

- . 6- . 8

- 1 . 0- 1 . 2-1 .4- 1 . 6- 1 . 8- 2 . 5- 2 . 8- 2 . 8

- 2 . 9- 3 3- 3 . 4- 3 4- 3 . 3- 3 5- 3 . 6- 3 . 6-3 .8- 3 . 8

- 3 . 5- 3 . 4- 3 4- 3 . 2- 3 . 2- 3 . 3- 3 . 6- 3 . 9- 4 5- 5 . 6

- 6 . 1- 6 . 9- 8 0- 9 . 5

-11.8- 1 3 8-15.6-19 .1-23 .4- 2 8 3

-32.4-35 .5-36.7

-31 .0-32 .1-33 .1-33.3

-34.3-34.9-35.9-36.9

-37 .1-36.4-36.3-37.0

Corporate profits with inventory valuation and capital consumption adjustments

Total

9.0175.3

8614.119 323.523 619.016 622.329427.1

33.938 736.136 335.245 543.743 338.549.6

47.648 656 662.169.280.085.182.489185.1

71.483 296 6

108.394.9

110 5138.1167.3192.4194 8

181.6190.6161.1

195.3172.2177.8181.2

200 3185.1193.1183.9

157.1155.4166.2

Profits with inventory valuation adjustment and withoutcapital consumption adjustment

Total

10.5- 1 . 2

6.5

9.815.420.524.524.019.319.625.933.431.1

37.943.340.640.238.447.546.946.641.652.3

49.750.055159.766.076.080.978.184 980.8

68.982.094 0

105.696.7

120.6151.6178.5205.1209.6

199.4207.5166.0

211.0189.4197.0200.4

217.6202.6210.3199.4

167.2162.2170.0

Profits

Profitsbeforetaxes

10.01.07.2

10 017.921725.324.219.824.831.835 629.2

42.944 539.641238.749.249.648.141.952.6

49.849.755 059.666.577.283.079.788 586.7

75.486.6

100 6125.6136.71321166.3194.7229.1252.7

242.4232.1175.4

268.2217.6238.1245.9

253.1225.4233.3216.5

171.6171.7180.3

Profitstax

liability

1.4

U

2.87.6

11.414.112.910.79.1

11.312.410.2

17.922.619.420.317.622.022.021.419.023.6

22.722.824 026.228.030.933.732.539.239.5

34.237.541.649.051.650.663.872.783.287.6

84.781.258.8

95.373.382.287.8

91.579.282.471.6

56.755.360.9

Profits after tax

Total

8.6

57

7.210.310.311.211.39.1

15.720.523 219.0

25.021.920.220 921.127.227.626.722.928.9

27.126.931133.438.546.349.447.249447.2

41.349.058 976.685.181.5

102.5122.0145.9165.1

157.8150.9116.6

172.9144.3155.9158.1

161.6146.2150.8144.9

115.0116.3119.4

Divi-dends

5.82.03.8

4.04.44.34.44.64.65.66.37.07.2

8.88.58.58.89.1

10.311.111.511.312.2

12.913.314.415.517.319.119.420.222.022.5

22.522.924.427.029.930.837.440.847.052.7

58.165.170.3

56757.858,759.6

61.564.066.868.1

68.869.370.572.4

Undis-tributedprofits

2.8- 1 . 6

2.0

325.8606.7674.5

10 214.216211.8

16.213.411.812.111.916.916.615.211.616.7

14.313.616 617.921.227.229.927.027.324.7

18.826.134.549.655.250.765.181.298.9

112.4

99.785.846.3

116.786.497.398.5

100.182.284.076.9

46.147.048.8

Inven-tory

valua-tion

adjust-ment

0.5- 2 . 1

- . 7

- . 2- 2 . 5- 1 2- .8

- . 6- 5 . 3-5 .9- 2 . 2

1.9

- 5 . 0- 1 . 2

1.0- 1 . 0

- 1 7-2 .7- 1 . 5- .3

- .2

.0

.1

~\2- 2 . 1- 1 . 6-3 .7- 5 . 9

-6 .6- 4 . 6- 6 . 6

-20.0-40.0-11.6-147-16.2-24.0-43.1

-43 .0-24.6- 9 . 4

-57.2-28.2-41.1-45.5

-35 .5-22.8-23.0-17.1

- 4 . 4- 9 . 4

-10.3-13 .4

Capitalcon-

sumptionadjust-ment

-1 .4- . 6

-1 .1

- 1 2- 1 . 3

12- 1 . 0

- 3- . 2

- 3 0-3 .6

40- 3 . 9

40- 4 6- 4 . 5- 3 9-3 .2- 2 0- 3 . 2- 3 . 4- 3 . 2- 2 . 7

- 2 . 0- 1 . 4

1.52.53.14.04.24.34.34.3

2.51.32.72.7

- 1 . 8-10.1-13.5-11 .3-12.7-14.8

-17.8-16.8- 4 . 9

-15.7-17.2-19.3-19.2

-17.3-17.5-17.1-15.5

-10.1- 6 . 9- 3 . 8

1.2

Netinterest

474.13.6

333.3312.7242.2182.3242.7

3.03.54.04.45.35.96.67.99.6

10.3

11.413.014.716.418.321.024.427.630.034.8

41.446.551.260.276.184.587.2

102.51217153.8

187.72357265.3

175.7181.6190.4203.0

217.6231.6244.C249.5

2587267.5268.1267.0

3 With inventory valuation adjustment and without capital consumption adjustment.4 Without inventory valuation and capital consumption adjustments.Source: Department of Commerce, Bureau of Economic Analysis.

187Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 194: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

TABLE B-22.~$ourees of personal income, 1929-82

[Billions of dollars; quarterly data at seasonally adjusted annual rates]

Year or quarter

1929

1933

1939

1940194119421943194419451946194719481949

1950195119521953195419551956195719581959

1960 . .. .196119621963196419651966196719681969

19701971 .. .19721973197419751976197719781979

198019811982"

1980:IIIHIIV

1981:1||IIIIV

1982:1||IIIIV P

Personalincome

85.0

47.0

72.4

77.995.4

122.6150.8164.5170.0177.6190.1209.0206.4

227.2254.9271.8287.7289.6310.3332.6351.0361.1384.4

402.3417.8443.6466.2499.2540.7588 2630.0690.6754.7

811.1868.4951.4

1,065.21168 61,265.01,391.21,540.41,732,71,951.2

2,160.42,415.82,569.7

2 086 82]lO9.62,185.32,260.0

2,330.02,380.62,458.22,494.6

2 510.52*552 72^592.52,623.2

Wage and salary disbursements1

Total

50.5

29.0

46.0

49 962.1821

105.6116.9117.5112.0123.1135.5134.8

147.01713185.41986196.82117228.3239 3240.5258.9

2719279.5298 0313 4336.1362 0398 4427.0469 6515.7

548.7580 9635.2702 7765 7806.48899983.2

1,106 31,237.6

1,356.11,493.91,560.1

1319 71,332.11,360.51,412.2

1452 81479 41,512.31,531.2

154161556 61,570.01,572.3

Commodity-producingindustries

Total

21.5

9.8

17.4

19.727.539.149.050.445.946.054.261.157.8

64.876.382.089.685.793.1

100.6104.2100.0109.6

1131113.7121.8126 9135.4146.01610168.3183.4199.6

203.0208.3227.3254.3274 7275.0307.3343.6389.4438.4

468.0510.8509.9

462 7458.6465.6485.1

499.2507 2519.3517.7

514.3513 6510.2501.4

Manu-facturing

16.1

7.8

13.6

15 621.730.940.942.938.236.542.547.144.6

50.359 364.171267.573 879.482 478.686.8

89 789.896 7

100 6107.1115 5128 0134.1145 8157.5

158.2160 3175.4196 22114211.0237 4266.0299.2333.9

354.4386.4382.6

350 3347.0352.8367.7

377 0386 9392.9388.7

3851385 6383.8375.8

Distrib-utiveindus-tries

15.6

8.8

13.3

14.216.318.020.122.724.831.035.237.537.7

39.844.346.949.750.153.457.760.560.864.8

68.269.372.876 381.487.294 4

100.9110.0120.8

130.3139.4152.1168.3184 6195.6216.6239.5270.7303.4

330.5361.4375.7

323 2324.9331.9341.9

352.1358 7366.5368.3

371.4375 4378.4377.4

Serviceindus-tries

8.4

5.2

7.1

7.58.19.09.9

10.911.914.316.117.918.5

19.821.523.124.926.128.631.3.33.635.638.5

41.444.147.250.254.458.964.771.379.689.7

98.3106.7118.2131.3145.6159.7177.4197.7226.6259.7

297.4338.6372.3

2834292.0301.4313.1

325.2333.7342.8352.8

359.5367.6377.8384.3

Govern-mentand

govern-mententer-prises

5.0

5.2

8.2

8510.216.026.633.034.920.717.519.020.8

22.629.233.334.434.936.638.841.044.146.0

49.252.456.360064.969.978 386.496.6

105.5

117.1126.5137.5148.7160.9176.1188.7202.4219.5236.2

260.2283.1302.3

250 4256.6261.6272.2

276 2279 8283.8292.4

296.5300 0303.5309.1

Otherlabor

income1

0.5

.4

.6

.6

.91.11.51.82.02.42.72.9

3.74.65.25.96.17.08.09.09.4

10.6

11.211.813.014.015.717.819.921.725.228.5

32.536.743.048.855.864.575.989.4

102.5114.9

127.2140.4153.8

123 2125.9128.4131.5

135.3138.4142.2145.8

149.1152 5155.5157.9

Proprietorwith invaluati

capconsuradjust

Farm

6.1

2,'5

4.4

4.46.4

10.112.012.012.414.915.117.612.8

13.716.115.113.112.511.511.211.113.210.9

11.712.112.312.010.813.114.112.612.714.6

14.315.018.732.826.524.619.119.126.331.9

19.424.018.6

22.115.920.319.2

21.622.527.124.6

17.817.416.622.6

s' income

sn andtalnptionmpntc

Nonfarm

8.9

3.3

7.4

8.611.114.117.118.419.421.820.823.323.6

25.027.228.228.628.731.432.734.234.536.7

35.536.537.638.541.743.846.448.651.352.5

51.954.458.161.062.265.475.084.892.2

100.2

96.9100.7101.4

100.593.095.198.8

101.8101.2100.499.5

98.699.9

101J105.5

1 The total of wage and salary disbursements and other labor income differs from compensation of employees in Tabfe 8-21 in that itexcludes employer contributions for social insurance and the excess of wage accruals over wage disbursements.

See next page for continuation of table.

188Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 195: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

TABLE B-22.—Sources of personal income, 1929-82—Continued

[Billions of dollars; quarterly data at seasonally adjusted annual rates]

Year or quarter

1929

1933

1939

1940194119421943194419451946 ..194719481949

1950195119521953195419551956195719581959

I9601961196219631964196519661967196819691970197119721973197419751976197719781979198019811982 '

1980:I||HIIV

1981:

IIIllIV

1982:|||IllIV P

Rental

ofpersons

withcapital

con-sumptionadjust-ment

4.9

2.2

2.6

273.14.0444.54.6555.3576.1

7.1778.8

10.011.011311612.212 913.6

14.515015.816.517.118.018 719.719 519.619 720 221.022 623 523.023.524 826 627.932.933.9341

30.832.733 834 2

34.434.033.633.6

33 934.234.633.9

Personaldividendincome

5.8

2.0

3.8

404.44.34.44.64.65.66.37.07.2

8.88.58.58.89.1

10.311111.511.312.2

12.913.314.415.517.319.119.420.221.922.4

22.222 624.126.529.129.936.539.645.350.855.962.567.0

54.155.756.557.4

59.261.564.165.2

65.866.167.268.8

Personalinterestincome

6.9

5.5

5.4

535.35.25.15.25.96.67.68.18.7

9.710.511.212.513.714.916 718.820 322.5

25.026429.032.235.639.744 448.353.461.169 474 880.993 9

112.4123.2132.5152.81794218.7263.4329.0371.8

249.1258.0266.4280.2

304.7320.6339.6351.0

359 7372.0378.2377.2

Transfer payments

Total

1.5

2.1

3.0

313.13.13.03.66.2

11311.711312.5

15.212.613.114.116.217.518 721.625 927.0

28.932 833.835.837.440.444 752.659 866.7

80194 4

104.7119 5141.2178.3194.3207.9223 8250.3297.2336.3374.5

274.2283.2313.4318.2

322.8327.0344.8350.7

354.6365.2381.0397.2

Old-age,survivors,disability,

andhealthinsur-ance

benefits

0.0

0.1

.2

.3

.4

.5

.6

1.01.92.23.03.64.9577.385

10.2

11.112.614.315.216.018.120 825.530.232.9

38.544.549.660.470.181.492.9

104.9116.2131.8154.2182.0204.5

142.1144.7163.4166.4

171.0173.7190.6192.8

194.7197.5209.2216.6

Govern-mentunem-

ploymentinsur-ance

benefits

0.4

5.4.4.1.1.4

1.1.8.9

1.9

1.5.9

1.11.02.21.5151.9412.8

3.04.33.13.02.72.3192.22.12.24.0585.74.46.8

17.615.812.79.79.8

16.115.424.9

11.815.918.718.0

15.715.114.116.7

18.723.525.531.8

Veteransbenefits

0.6

.6

.5

5

.5

1.03.0707.0595.3

7.74.64.34.14.24.4444.5474.6

4.6504.74.84.74.9495.6596.77.7889.7

10.411.814.514.413.813.914.415.016.116.3

14.814.614.915.7

16.015.916.016.4

16.316.116.316.6

Govern-ment

employ-ee

retire-ment

benefits

0.1

.2

.3

3.3

'AA.5.7

.7

.9

1.01.11.21.41.51.7192.22.52.8

3.13.43.74.24.75.26.16.97.68.7

10.211.813.816.019.011126.129.032.736.943.049.254.0

40.142.343.446.0

47.249.149.650.8

51.554.454.955.3

Aid tofamilies

withdepend-

entchildren(AFDC)

Other

0.8

1.4

1.7

171.81.81.82.02.021

.34.5

.6

.6

.5

.5

.6

.66.78.9

1.01.11.31.41.51.7192.32.83.54.86.26.97.27.99.2

10.110.610.711.012.413.413.1

11.712.112.813.0

13.113.413.513.4

13.213.213.013.1

2.52.93.3

3.53.63.84.14.14.34.54.95.35.8

6.26.46.77.37.88.39.2

10.211.112.515.017.419.021.125.632.835.136.940.746.356.660.361.6

53.653.560.259.1

59.859.861.060.6

60.160.662.163.8

Less:Personalcontribu-tions for

socialinsurance

0.1

.2

.6

7.8

1.21.82.22.3202.12.22.2

2.93.43.84.04.65.2586.76.97.9

9.39.7

10.311.812.613.317.820.622.926.227.930.734.542.647.950.455.561.169.881.188.7

104.9111.7

86.986.989.1.91.8

102.5104.1106.1107.0

110.6111.4112.4112.4

Nonfarmpersonalincome2

15991719188 2190.4

210.2235 4253.12713273.9295 5318 0336.6344 4369.8

386.7401.6427.1449.7483.7522.6568.9611.9672.1733.9790.0846.5925.3

1,023.71,131.81,229.11,359.31,506.51,689.71,899.32,117.32,364.12,518.9

2,042.22,070.32,140.92.216.C

2,282.52,330.92,402.62,440.3

2,461.62,503.22,543.32,567.6

2 Personal income exclusive of farm proprietors' income, farm wages, farm other labor income, and farm net interestNote.—The industry classification of wage and salary disbursements and proprietors' income is on an establishment basis and is

based on the 1972 Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) beginning 1948 and on the 1942 SIC prior to 1948.Source: Department of Commerce, Bureau of Economic Analysis.

189Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 196: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

TABLE B-23.—Disposition of personal income, 1929-82

[Billions of dollars, except as noted; quarterly data at seasonally adjusted annual rates]

Year or quarter

1929

1933

1939

194019411942194319441945 ,.,1946194719481949

195019511952 ....'.'.....'.* .*1953 . ..195419551956195719581959

I960196119621963196419651966196719681969

1970197119721973197419751976197719781979

198019811982 p

1980:IItHIIV

1981:|||HIIV

1982:1||III\M P

Personalincome

85.0

47.0

72.4

77.9954

122.6150 8164.5170.0177 6190.1209 0206.4

227.2254.9271.8287 7289.6310 3332.6351.0361.1384.4

402.3417 8443.6466 2499.2540.7588.2630.0690.6754.7

811.1868.4951.4

1,065.21,168.61,265.01,391.21,540.41,732.71,951.2

2,160.42,415.82,569.7

2,086.82,109.62,185.32,260.0

2,330.02,380.62,458.22,494.6

2,510.52,552.72,592.52,623.2

Less:Personaltax andnontax

payments

26

14

24

2.6335.9

17 818.920 818 721421018.5

20.628.934.035 532.535439.742 442.146.0

50 452156860 358.664.974.582197.2

115.7

115.8116 7141.0150.7170.2168.9196.82264258.7301.0

336.3386.7397.2

319.9328 6339.7357.1

371.2384.23981393.2

393.4401.2394.4399.7

Equals:Dispos-

ablepersonalincome

82.4

45.6

70.0

75.392 2

116.6133 0145.61491158 9168.7188 0187.9

206.6226.0237.7252 2257.1275 0292.9308 6319.0338.4

352 0365838684059440.6475.8513.7547 9593.4638.9

695.37518810.3914.5998.3

1,096.11,194.41,314 01,474.01,650.2

1,824.12,029.12,172.5

1,766.91,78101,845.51,902.9

1,958.71,996.52,060 02,101.4

2,117.12,151.52,198.12,223.5

Less: Personal outlays

Total

79.1

46.5

67.8

72.081.889.4

100.1109.0120.4145 2163.51769180.4

194.7210.0220.4233 7240.1258 5271.6286 4295.4317.3

332.3342 7363.5384 0411.0442.1477.7503 6551.5598.3

639.56911757.7835.5913.2

1,001.81,111.91,236 01,384.61,553.51,717.91,898.92,031.4

1,669.11,672 41,732.51,797.6

1,852.81,874.51,925.71,942.7

1,977.92,007.22,046.12,094.6

Personalcon-

sumptionexpendi-

tures

77.3

45.8

67.0

71.080.888.699.4

108.2119.5143.8161.7174.7178.1

192.0207.1217.1229.7235.8253.7266.0280.4289.5310.8

324.93350355.2374 6400.5430.4465.1490.3536.9581.8

621.7672 2737.1812.0888.1976.4

1,084.31 204.41,346.51,507.2

1,667.21,843.21,972.0

1,618.71622 21,682.21,745.8

1,799.91,819.41,868.81,884.5

1,919.41,947.81,986.32,034.6

Interestpaid byconsum-ers tobusi-ness

1.5

.5

.7

.8

.9

ij

.71.01.41.7

2.32.52.93.63.84.45.15.55.66.1

7.0737.8889.9

U.I12.012.513.815.6

16.717.719.522.324.124.426.730.737.445.5

49.955.158.6

49.649.449.750.8

52.454.456.257.5

57.858.459.059.1

Per-sonal

transferpay-

mentsto

for-eigners

(net)

0.3

.2

.2

.2

.1

.2

.4

.5

.7J,7.5

.4

.4

.4

.5

.5,4.5.5.4.4

.4

.4

.5

.6

.6

.7

.7

.9

.8

.9

1.11.11.11.31.0.9.9.9.8.8

.8

.6

.9

.7

.7

.8

.9

,5.8

.7

.8

.9

.8

.9

Equals:Personalsaving

3.3

-0 .9

2.2

3.410.327.232.936.628.713 75.2

11.17.5

11.916.117.418.517.016.421.322.323.621.1

19.723 023.321929.633.736.044.341.940.6

55.860.752.679.085.194.382.578 089.496.7

106.2130.2141.1

97 9108 6113.1105.3

105 9122.0134 4158.6

139.1144.3152.0128.9

Percent of dispopersonal incor

Personal outlays

Total

96.0

102.0

96.9

95.588.876.775.374.880.891.496.994.196.0

94.292.992.792.793.494.092.792.892.693.8

94.493.794.094.693.392.993.091.992.993.6

92.091.993.591.491.591.493.194.193.994194.293.693.5

94 593993.994.5

94.693.993 592.5

93.493.393.194.2

PersonalConsump-

tionexpend-itures

93.8

100.5

95.6

94.287.676.074.774.380.190.595.993.094.8

92.991.691.391.191.792.390.890.990.791.8

92.391.691.892.390.990.590.589.590.591.1

89.489.491.088.889.089.190.891.791.391.3

91.490.890.8

91691191.191.7

91991.190 789.7

90.790.590.491.5

sable

Personalsaving

4.0

=2.0

3.1

4.511.223.324.725.219.28.63.15.94.0

5.87.17.37.36.66.07.37.27.46.2

5.66.36.05.46.77.17.08.17.16.4

8.08.16.58.68.58.66.95.96.15.9

5.86.46.5

5.5616.15.5

546.1657.5

6.66.76.95.8

Source: Department of Commerce, Bureau of Economic Analysis.

190Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 197: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

TABLE B-24.—Total and per capita disposable personal income and personal consumption expenditures in

current and 1972 dollars, 1929-82

[Quarterly data at seasonally adjusted annual rates, except as noted]

Year or quarter

Disposable personal income

Total (billions ofdollars)

Currentdollars

1972dollars

Per capita(dollars)

Currentdollars

1972dollars

Personal consumption expenditures

Total (billions ofdollars)

Currentdollars

1972dollars

Per capita(dollars)

Currentdollars

1972dollars

Popula-tion

(thou-sands) l

1929...,

1933...,

1939....

1940....1941...,1942....1943...1944....1945....1946....1947....1948....1949...,

1950...,1951...,1952...,1953....1954...,1955...,1956...,1957...,1958....1959...,

I960...,1961...,1962...,1963....1964....1965...,1966....1967...,1968...1969....

1970...1971...1972...1973...1974...1975...,1976...1977...1978...1979...

1980...,1981...,1982 ",

1980:IIIIII ....IV

1981:IIIIll...,IV

1982:I

i!Z

82.4

45.6

70.0

75.392.2

116.6133.0145.6149.1158.9168.7188.0187.9

206.6226.0237.7252.2257.1275.0292.9308.6319.0338.4

352.0365.8386.8405.9440.6475.8513.7547.9593.4638.9

695.3751.8810.3914.5998.3

1,096.11,194.41,314.01,474.01,650.2

1,824.12,029.12,172.5

1,766.91,781.01,845.51,902.9

1,958.71,996.52,060.02,101.4

2,117.12,151.52,198.12,223.5

229.5

169.6

229.8

244.0277.9317.5332.1343.6338.1332.7318.8335.8336.8

362.8372.6383.2399.1403.2426.8446.2455.5460.7479.7

676

363

534

570691865973

1,0521,0661,1241,1701,2821,259

1,3621,4651,5151,5811,5831,6641,7411,8021,8321,911

489.7503.8524.9542.3580.8616.3646.8673.5701.3722.5

751.6779.2810.3864.7857.5874.9906.8942.9988.8

1,015.7

1,9471,9912,0732,1442,2962,4482,6132,7572,9563,152

3,3903,6203,8604,3154,6675,0755,4775,9656,6217,331

1,018.01,043.11,054.5

1,022.81,005.51,018.21,025.7

1,035.01,036.61,048.81,051.9

1,046.91,054.81,058.31,057.9

8,0128,8279,362

7,7937,8348,0958,325

8,5518,6988,9519,107

9,1559,2859,4619,546

1,883

1,349

1,754

1,8472,0832,3542,4292,4832,4162,3532,2122,2902,257

2,3922,4152,4412,5012,4832,5822,6532,6602,6452,709

2,7092,7422,8132,8653,0263,1713,2903,3893,4933,564

3,6653,7523,8604,0804,0094,0514,1584,2804,4414,512

4,4724,5384,544

4,5114,4234,4664,487

4,5194,5164,5574,559

4,5274,5524,5554,542

77.3

45.8

67.0

71.080.888.699.4

108.2119.5143.8161.7174.7178.1

192.0207.1217.1229.7235.8253.7266.0280.4289.5310.8

324.9335.0355.2374.6400.5430.4465.1490.3536.9581.8

621.7672.2737.1812.0888.1976.4

1,084.31,204.41,346.51,507.2

1,667.21,843.21,972.0

1,618.71,622.21,682.01,745.8

1,799.91,819.41,868.81,884.5

1,919.41,947.81,986.32,034.6

215.1

170.5

219.8

229.9243.6241.1248.2255.2270.9301.0305.8312.2319.3

337.3341.6350.1363.4370.0394.1405.4413.8418.0440.4

452.0461.4482.0500.5528.0557.5585.7602.7634.4657.9

672.1696.8737.1767.9762.8779.4823.1864.3903.2927.6

930.5947.6957.1

937.0915.8928.0941.0

951.1944.6951.4943.4

949.1955.0956.3968.0

634

364

511

537605657727781854

1,0171,1221,1921,194

1,2661,3421,3831,4391,4521,5351,5811,6371,6621,755

1,7971,8231,9041,9792,0872,2142,3662,4672,6742,870

3,0313,2373,5113,8314,1524,5214,9725,4686,0486,695

7,3238,0188,498

7,1407,1367,3787,638

7,8587,9268,1208,167

8,3008,4068,5508,735

1,765

1,356

1,678

1,7401,8261,7881,8151,8441,9362,1292,1222,1292,140

2,2242,2142,2302,2772,2782,3842,4102,4162,4002,487

2,5012,5112,5832,6442,7512,8682,9793,0323,1603,245

3,2773,3553,5113,6233,5663,6093,7743,9244,0574,121

4,0874,1234,125

4,1334,0294,0714,117

4,1524,1154,1344,088

4,1044,1214,1164,156

121,878

125,690

131,028

132,122133,402134,860136,739138,397139,928141,389144,126146,631149,188

151,684154,287156,954159,565162,391165,275168,221171,274174,141177,073

180,760183,742186,590189,300191,927194,347196,599198,752200,745202,736

205,089207,692209,924211,939213,898215,981218,086220,289222,629225,106

227,654229,872232,050

226,727227,332227,978228,579

229,053229,539230,145230,751

231,246231,724232,320232,910

1 Population of the United States including Armed Forces overseas; includes Alaska and Hawaii beginning 1960. Annual data are forJuly 1 through 1958 and are averages of quarterly data beginning 1960. Quarterly data are average for the period. Data beginning 1970reflect results of the 1980 census of population.

Source: Department of Commerce (Bureau of Economic Analysis and Bureau of the Census).

191Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 198: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

TABLE B-25.—Gross saving and investment, 1929-82

[Billions of dollars; quarterly data at seasonally adjusted annual rates]

Year orquarter

19291933193919401941194219431944194519461947194819491950195119521953...1954195519561957195819591960196119621963196419651966196719681969197019711972197319741975197619771978197919801981...1982 p,1980:

|||IIIIV

1981:

(IIllIV

1982:I||IllIV P

Gross saving

Total

15.9.9

8.813.518.610 7542.45.2

35.141.749.835.650 756.951.049.850.967.575.975.262.678.381.178.786.793.6

104.0120.2127.3125 7136.0153.6148.9161.6186.6235.5227 8218.9257.9309.1374.8422.7406.2477.5413.9

410.8395.8404.4414.0

461.4482.4490.0476.3

428.8441.5422.4

Gross private saving

Total

14.92.2

11.014.222.442.049 654.344.729.627.341.439.042 750.854.856.758.164.470.774.375.379.978.083.090.592.9

106.3119.7128.6139 9142.0143.6158.6180.3189.2227.7234 5282.7294 4326.9374.0407.3438.3504.7529.9

420.2438.8449.2445.1

468.7488.9513.4547.7

519.4529.0546.1

Personalsaving

33- . 92.23.4

10.327 232936.628.713.7

5.211.17.5

11916.117 418.517.016.421.322.323.621.119.723.023.321.929 633.736.044 341.940.655.860 752,679.085194.382 578.089 496.7

106 2130.2141.1

97.9108.6113.1105.3

105.9122.0134.4158.6

1391144 3152.0128.9

Grossbusinesssaving'

1163.18.8

10.812.114 816 717.616.015.922.130 231.530 734.837.438.241147.949.452.051758.758.360.067.271.076 786.092.795 6

100.0103.0102.8119 7136.6148.71494188.42119248.9284 6310.63321374.5388.8

322.3330.2336.1339.8

362.8367.0379.0389.1

380 3384 7394.1

Governr

and pr

Total

10- 1 . 4=2.2

7=3.8

= 3 1 4—44 1- 5 1 . 8- 3 9 . 5

5414.484

-3 .4

806.1

- 3 8- 6 . 9- 7 1

3.152.9

= 12 6- 1 . 6

3.1- 4 . 3-3 .8

- 2 3.5

- 1 . 3— 142

- 6 . 09.9

= 10.6= 19 4- 3 . 3

7.8- 4 7

-63 .8- 3 6 5-17.8

814.3

- 3 3 2=28.2

= 116.1

-10.6-44.2-45.9= 32.2

- 8 . 3- 7 . 6

-24.5-72.5

=90 7—87 5

= 123.7

nent surplus or), national income3duct accounts

Federal

1.2- 1 . 3- 2 . 2

- 1 . 3=5.1

=33.1=46.6-54.5=42.1

3.513.48.3

- 2 . 6

9.26.5

- 3 . 7- 7 . 1-6 .0

4.46.12.3

= 10.3- 1 . 1

3.0= 3.9=4.2

- 1 3

- l ! 8= 132

-6 .08.4

"12.4-?2.0= 16.8= 5.6115

-69.3- 5 3 1-45.9-29 .5-16.1

- 6 1 4=60.0

= 147.9

-39.7=67.5-73.1-65.2

-39.7-40 .5= 58.0

= 101.7

— 1184= 1196-156.0

Stateandtocal

— 2= .1

.0

.61.31.8252.72.61.91.0,1

- 1 . 2= .4- . 0

-1 .113

- .9- 1 . 4- 2 . 4

- . 4

.1= .4

.5

10= .0

11.1

1.5

1.926

13.513.4685.5

16 628.030 330.4

28231.731.9

29.123.327.133.0

31.332.933.529.1

21132132.3

Capita)grants

receivedby theunitedStates(net)2

ZZZ

0.9.7.7.0

4 20.00.00

1.1121.1

.0

1.21.21.21.2

1.11.11.11.1

00

.0

.0

Gross investment

Total

17 01.6

10.3

14.719.298375.29.3

35.643.248.336.2

52.060.152.752.152.968.873.874.062.877.0

78.778.688.895.3

104 2119.0128.7125 4133.9149.7

147.4165 7189.9236.32315224.4263 0310.4372 3421.2

410 2475.6414.0

421.3399.6406.6413.0

466.5477.8489.1469.0

4213442 3426.0366.3

Grossprivate

domesticinvest-ment

16.21.49.3

13.117.99.9587.2

10.630.734.045.935.3

53.859.252.153.352.768.471.069.261.978.1

75.974.885.490.997.4

113.5125.7122.8133.3149.3

144.2166.4195.0229.8228.7206.1257.9324.1386.6423.0

402.3471.5421.9

424.0391.0384.1410.3

455.7475.5486.0468.9

414 84315443.3397.9

Netforeigninvest-ment *

0.8.2

1.0

1.51.3

=.121

- 2 . 0- 1 . 3

4.99.32.4

.9

- 1 . 8.9.6

=1.3

.42.84.8

.9- 1 . 2

2.83.83.44.46.85.43.02.6.6.4

3.2= 7516.52.9

18.35.1

= 13.6= 14.3

-1 .8

7.84.1

=7.9

=2.68.6

22.52.8

10.82.33.1

6510 8

= 17.3=31.7

Statis-tical

discrep-ancy

1.1

\A1.1.6

=.8182,74.1

.51.5

- 1 . 6.6

1.33.21.72.32.01.3

- 2 . 1- 1 . 2

.2- 1 . 3=2.4

l.'l1.7

121.4

=2.1= 3.9- 1 . 5

4.13.3

.8375.55.11.4

=2.6= 1.53.9

- 1 . 9

10.53.82.2

- 1 . 0

5.1=4.6

g7 2

758

3.6

1 Undistributed corporate profits with inventory valuation and capital consumption adjustments, corporate and noncorporate capitalconsumption allowances with capital consumption adjustment, and private wage accruals less disbursements.2 Allocations of special drawing rights (SDRs), except as noted in footnote 4.3 Net exports of goods and services less net transfers to foreigners and interest paid by government to foreigners plus capital grantsreceived by the United States, net.4 In February 1974, the U.S. Government paid to India $2,010 million in rupees under provisions of the Agricultural TradeDevelopment and Assistance Act. This transaction is being treated as capital grants paid to foreigners, i.e., a $2.0 billion entry incapital grants received by the United States, net.

Source: Department of Commerce, Bureau of Economic Analysis.

192

Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 199: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

TABLE B-26.—Saving by individuals, 1946-821

[Billions of dollars; quarterly data at seasonally adjusted annual rates]

Year or quarter

1946194719481949

19501951195219531954

1955 .1956195719581959

19601961196219631964

19651966196719681969

1970197119721973.1974

19751976197719781979

19801981

1980:I

IllIV

1981:1II..IllIV

1982:

II..Ill

Total

24.620.124.320.9

30 634.731.332.528.2

34.137.236.534.138.0

36 735 942.046.756.8

65 072.877.080.571.5

86.495 6

109.3132 0128.3

153 0165.1167 2200.6208.1

250.5283.1

242.9237.0263 62584

256 0257.0320 4299.1

300.5290.2335.9

Increase in financial assets

Total

18.813.29.19.9

13 719.123.222.822.2

28 030.228,631.637.4

32 135 440.146.655.7

58 857.969.875.665.2

81.51021131.5148 5147.3

174 3210.5233 8274 4296.1

337.5355.2

347.9270 536143701

328 7365 4387 6339.0

333 7357 7393.3

Check-able

depos-itsandcur-

rency

5.6

- 2 . 9- 2 . 0

264.61.61.02.2

1.21.8

- . 43.81.0

10_ 9

- 1 . 24.25.3

762.49.9

11.1- 2 . 5

8.912 213.914.17.4

6915.720122.622,4

6.525.8

8.1-11.1

41 1- 1 1 9

55 0

5942.7

32.8- 3 . 9

1.7

Timeandsav-ingsde-

posits

6.33.42.22.6

244.77.88.19.1

869.4

11.913.911.0

12 018 326.126.226.1

27 819.035.331.19.1

43.667 774.463 655.7

83 4107.5107 5100 378.5

125.665.6

96.881.8

120 0203 7

25 292 884 360.1

131.4102 494.7

Moneymar-ket

fundshares

2.4

13- . 0

269

34.4

29.2107.5

61.3

5.1-11 .9

148 459.9

137.384.3

41?86.5

Securities

Govern-ment

securi-ties2

- 1 . 51.61.31.8

_ 1- . 62.52.51.0

5.83.92.3

- 2 . 510.1

2.21.41.3

.64.8

3.711.3

- 1 . 25.2

25.9

- 5 . 4= 12 2

2.724.228.3

25 011.718 233.655.5

40.557.3

65.7- 6 . 640.162.7

51103.2

83.737.0

42.6105.2

68.9

Cor-porateequi-ties3

1.11.11.0

.7

.71.81.61.0

.8

1.02.01.51.5

- . 6.3

- 2 . 1- 2 . 6

—2

- 2 . 17

- 4 . 775

- 2 . 8

-1 .7- 5 . 5- 5 . 1

- . 6

- 3 . 8-4 .6

3.5

-15.9

2.1-31.6

.6R9

1.5

15 529.0

-55.0-26.8

n n44

-12.5

Othersecuri-ties*

- 0 . 9- . 8

.0- . 4

- . 7.3.0.3

— 9

.81.21.01.1

— 3

2.4,1.1

1.4.4

1.32.45.27.9

10.0

6.9654.9

11.16.8

448.647

12.518.4

7.0- 6 . 4

.42.4

13.312.1

- 1 1 3- 7 . 4

-21.914.9

-19.9-30.7

3.0

Insur-anceand

pensionre-

serves5

5.35.45.35.6

6.96.37.77.97.8

8.59.59.5

10.411.9

11.512.112.713.916.1

16.919.218.619.821.5

23.927.429.433.036.2

43 552.467.473.868.2

89.698.7

80.795.8

100.181.9

84.6103.5113.393.6

90.6112.0104.4

Otherfinan-

cialas-

sets6

2.82.42.21.6

191.92.02.12.1

2 12.52.83.53.3

3.6433.22.93.2

3.74.46.78.14.0

5.458

11.483

11.1

13 619.219229.834.6

36.938.3

34.3

42.2V\

37 24?fi40133.2

?9fi

46.6

Net investment7

Owner-occu-pied

homes

3.66.79.18.4

11.811.711.312.312.7

16.715.613.212.316.3

14.812.713.514.315.0

14.513.511.715.716.3

13.620.728.031.025.2

23 536.152.363.967.9

48.743.8

59.849.340.845.6

49.048.442.435.7

27.129.629.5

Con-sumerdura-bles

6.19.09.8

10.6

14 811.38.6

10.17.1

12 28.57.73.67.3

7.0438.5

11.815.0

20 223.121.127.026.3

20.026 634.640.428.4

26 540.049 6

52.5

32.438.2

46.4185

VO

45 7

4? 829.0

35 737 735.2

Non-cor-

poratebusi-nessas-

sets8

2.31.86.91.8

684.52.31.01.9

291.22.72.65.0

3.64.77.59.89.2

13.310.810.210.012.7

11.517.520.626.610.6

5.83.3

15.2

26.3

8.727.9

14.7

60139

25.33? 9?9fi

5,978

Less: t

Mort-gagedebton

non-farm

homes

3.64.74.64.4

676.66.27.68.7

12 211.28.99.5

12.8

11.712 214.116.217.5

17 013.812.516.918.6

14.126 241.446.538.0

40661.4911

111 ^121.3

98.381.4

123.783 794 4914

91.699 577 8

66 8SIR51.1

Jet increase indebt

Con-sumercredit

3.13.73.23.2

481.65.34.21.5

723.92.9

.58.0

4.42.56.38.99.8

10 66.55.7

11.510.8

5.414.719.8

9.9

9.625.440.248 845.4

4.925.3

21.8

141

26.53??34?8.3

fi.6

8.2

Otherdebt8 8

- 0 . 42.22.82.2

503.72.71.95.5

643.23.86.07.2

4.9657.2

10.710.8

14 312.217.619.219.4

20.730 344.243 835.4

26 937.952 459.368.0

73.775.2

80.445.763.9

104.7

74.793.270.162.8

28.565.462.8

1 Saving by households, personal trust funds, nonprofit institutions, farms, and other noncorporate business.2 Consists of U.S. savings bonds, other U.S. Treasury securities, U.S. Government agency securities and sponsored agency securities,mortgage pool securities, and State and local obligations.

3 Includes mutual fund shares.4 Corporate and foreign bonds and open market paper.s Private life insurance reserves, private insured and noninsured pension reserves, and government insurance and pension reserves.6 Consists of security credit, mortgages, accident and health insurance reserves, and nonlife insurance claims for households and ofconsumer credit, equity in sponsored agencies, and nonlife insurance claims for noncorporate business.

7 Purchases of physical assets less depreciation.8 Includes data for corporate farms.9 Other debt consists of security credit, policy loans, and noncorporate business debt.Source: Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System.

193

Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 200: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

TABLE B-27.—Number and median income (in 1981 dollars) of families and persons, and poverty status,

by race, selected years, 1947-81

Year

ALL RACES1947195019551960196119621963196419651966 3

19671968196919701971197219731974 »19751976197719781979*19801981WHITE19701971197219731974 3

19751976197719781979*19801981BLACK19701971197219731974 •19751976197719781979*19801981

Number(mil-

lions)

37 239.942 9

45.546 447147.548 048.549.250.150 851652 253.354.455.155 756.256 757.257.859 660.3610

46 547.648 548949 449 950150 550952.252 753.3

4.95.25.35.45.55.65.85.85.96.26.36.4

Medianincome

$12,34112,53915,006

17,25917,43517,90718,56319,26220,05421,10821,60922,56623,40223,11123,09724,16624,66323,79523,18323,89824,02724,59124,54223,20422,388

23,97523,96625,10725,77724,72824,11024,82325,12425,60625,61024,17623,517

14,70714,46214,92214,87714,76514,83514,76614,35215,16614,50213,98913,266

Families >

Below poverty level

Total

Num-hprDel

(mil-lions)

8.28.48.17.67.26.75.85.75.05.05.35.35.14.84.95.55.35.35.35.56.26.9

3.73.83.43.23.43.83.63.53.53.64.24.7

1.51.51.51.51.51.51.61.61.61.71.82.0

Rate

18.118.117.215.915.013.911.811.410.09.7

10.110.09.38.88.89.79.49.39.19.2

10.311.2

8.07.97.16.66.87.77.17.06.96.98.08.8

29.528.829.028.126.927.127.928.227.527.828.930.8

Female householder

Number(mil-lions)

2.02.02.02.01.81.91.71.81.81.82.02.12.22.22.32.42.52.62.72.63.03.3

1.11.21.11.21.31.41.41.41.41.41.61.8

.8

.91.01.01.01.01.11.21.21.21.31.4

Rate

42.442.142.940.436.438.433.133.332.332.732.533.932.732.232.132.533.031.731.430.432.734.6

25.026.524.324.524.825.925.224.023.522.325.727.4

54.353.553.352.752.250.152.251.050.649.449.452.9

Personsbelow

poverty level

Num-ber

/millions)

39.939.638.636.436.133.228.527.825.424.125.425.624.523.023.425.925.024.724.526.129.331.8

17.517.816.215.115.717.816.716.416.317.219.721.6

7.57.47.77.47.27.57.67.77.68.18.69.2

Rate

22.221.921.019.519.017.314.714.212.812.112.612.511.911.111.212.311.811.611.411.713.014.0

9.99.99.08.48.69.79.18.98.7

19.010.211.1

33.532.533.331.430.331.331.131.330.631.032.534.2

Median income of persons 14 yearsold and over with income *

M

Allpersons

$9,0809,710

11,405

12,53012,73513,14513,40013,62614,47914,87015,12615,63315,95015,62315,50216,19616,48715,58814,96015,05915,19315,24414,75913,83013,473

16,42116,25216,98717,30016,32915,71515,87615,91315,96615,41814,71014,296

9,7379,692

10,28910,46410,1189,3959,5599,4439,5659,5448,8408,501

ales

Year-round

full-timeworkers

$14,405

16,68817,21717,51718,03118,42619,01919,49119,85520,42721,50421,51121,62822,90923,47022,43021,85622,14222,61722,39121,90121,16220,692

22,12722,23723,73624,15022,86722,36122,80223,08022,80722,53421,76621,178

15,07215,20516,02916,27616,38316,64116,33115,91217,46816,24015,31414,984

Ferr

Allper-sons

54,1413,6013,804

3,8733,8884,0354,0764,2494,3844,5904,9065,2785,2895,2405,4085,6505,7225,6845,7205,7135,9155,6715,4535,4305,458

5,3075,4975,6875,7775,7495,7795,7616,0055,7395,5045,4605,519

4,8324,8175,3135,2155,1905,2505,4295,1855,1685,0095,0554,903

ales

Year-roundfull-time

work-ers

(9,289

10,12210,15710,39410,56310,87811,00011,28311,43511,94212,59512,74212,80313,15913,27813,23113,04413,28013,22813,44013,19512,79312,457

12,96712,95113,41813,50313,34313,07413,38213,31213,56713,31112,91712,665

0,6241,4351,4791,4512,3142,4912,5112,4422,5742,1972,0471,438

1 The term "family" refers to a group of two or more persons related by blood, marriage, or adoption and residing together; all suchpersons are considered members 01 the same family. Beginning 1979 based on householder concept and restricted to primary families.3 Beginning 1979, data are for persons 15 years and over.

'Based on revised methodology; comparable with succeeding years.* Based on 1980 census population controls; comparable with succeeding years.

Note.—The poverty level is based on the poverty index adopted by a Federal interagency committee in 1969. That index reflecteddifferent consumption requirements for families based on size and composition, sex and age of family householder, and farm-nonfarmresidence. Minor revisions implemented in 1981 eliminated variations in the poverty thresholds based on two of these variables, farm-nonfarm residence and sex of householder. The poverty thresholds are updated every year to reflect changes in the consumer price indexFor further details see "Current Population Reports," Series P 60, No. 133.

Source: Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census.

194

Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 201: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

POPULATION, EMPLOYMENT, WAGES, AND PRODUCTIVITY

TABLE B-28.—Population by age groups, 1929-82

[Thousands of persons]

July l TotalAge (years)

Under 5 5-15 16-19 20-24 25-44 45-64 65 andover

1929

1933

1939

19401941194219431944

19451946194719481949

19501951195219531954

19551956195719581959

19601961196219631964

19651966196719681969

19701971197219731974

19751976197719781979

198019811982

121,767

125,579

130,880

132,122133,402134,860136,739138,397

139,928141,389144,126146,631149,188

152,271154,878157,553160,184163,026

165,931168,903171,984174,882177,830

180,671183,691186,538189,242191,889

194,303196,560198,712200,706202,677

205,052207,661209,896211,909213,854

215,973218,035220,239222,585225,055

227,658229,807231,990

11,734

10,612

10,418

16,41017,33317,31217,63818,057

18,56619,00319,49419,88720,175

20,34120,52220,46920,34220,165

19,82419,20818,56317,91317,376

17,16617,24417,10116,85116;487

16,12115,61715,56415,73516,063

16,44816,939

26,800

26,897

25,179

10,57910,85011,30112,01612,524

12,97913,24414,40614,91915,607

24,81124,51624,23124,09323,949

23,90724,10324,46825,20925,852

26,72127,27928,89430,22731,480

32,68233,99435,27236,44537,368

38,49439,76541,20541,62642,297

42,93843,70244,24444,62244,840

44,81644,59144,20343,58242,989

42,50842,09941,29840,42839,552

38,81438,040

9,127

9,302

9,822

9,8959,8409,7309,6079,561

9,3619,1199,0978,9528,788

8,5428,4468,4148,4608,637

8,7448,9169,1959,543

10,215

10,68311,02511,18012,00712,736

13,51614,31114,20014,45214,800

15,28915,68816,03916,44616,769

17,01717,19417,27617,28817,242

17,13116,679

10,694

11,152

11,519

11,68011,55211,35011,06210,832

10,71410,61610,60310,75610,969

11,13411,48311,95912,71413,269

13,74614,05015,24815,78616,480

17,20218,15918,15318,52118,975

19,52719,98620,49920,94621,297

21,60521,938

35,862

37,319

39,354

11,69011,80711,95512,06412,062

12,03612,00411,81411,79411,700

39,86840,38340,86141,42042,016

42,52143,02743,65744,28844,916

45,67246,10346,49546,78647,001

47,19447,37947,44047,33747,192

47,14047,08447,01346,99446,958

46,91247,00147,19447,72148,064

48,47348,93650,48251,74953,051

54,30255,85257,56159,40061,379

63,46565,487

21,076

22,933

25,823

26,24926,71827,19627,67128,138

28,63029,06429,49829,93130,405

30,84931,36231,88432,39432,942

33,50634,05734,59135,10935,663

36,20336,72237,25537,78238,338

38,91639,53440,19340,84641,437

41,99942,48242,89843,23543,522

43,80144,00844,15044,28644,390

44,48744,471

6,474

7,363

8,764

9,0319,2889,5849,86710,147

10,49410,82811,18511,53811,921

12,39712,80313,20313,61714,076

14,52514,93815,38815,80616,248

16,67517,08917,45717,77818,127

18,45118,75519,07119,36519,680

20,10720,56121,02021,52522,061

22,69623,27823,89224,50225,134

25,70826,253

1 Not available.Note.—Includes Armed Forces overseas beginning 1940. Includes Alaska and Hawaii beginning 1950.Source: Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census.

195Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 202: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

TABLE B-29-—Noninstitutional population and the labor force, 1929-82

[Monthly data seasonally adjusted, except as noted]

Year or month

Noninsti-tutionalpopula-tion »

ArmedForcesl

Civilian labor force

Total

Employment

Total Agri-cultural

Nonagri-cultural

Unem-ployment

ment rate(percent

of civilianlabor

force)

Civilian labor forceparticipation rate2

Total Males Females

1929..

1933..

1939,.

1940..1941..1942..1943..1944..

1945..1946..1947..

1947....1948....1949....

1950....1951....1952....19533..1954....

1955....1956....1957....1958....1959....

I9603

19611962819631964

1965...1966...1967...1968...1969...

1970197119723....19733....1974

19751976197719783....1979

1980..1981..1982..

Thousands of persons 14 years of age and over Percent

100,380101,520102,610103,660104,630

105,530106,520107,608

103,418104,527105,611

106,645107,721108,823110,601111,671

112,732113,811115,065116,363117,881

119,759121,343122,981125,154127,224

129,236131,180133,319135,562137,841

140,272143,033146,574149,423152,349

153.333158,294161,166164,027166,951

169,848172,272174,451

260

250

370

5401,6203,9709,02011,410

11,4403,4501,590

49,180

51,590

55,230

55,64055,91056,41055,54054,630

53,86057,52060,168

47,630

38,760

45,750

47,52050,35053,75054,47053,960

52,82055,25057,812

10,450

10,090

9,610

9,5409,1009,2509,0808,950

8,5808,3208,256

37,180

28,670

36,140

37,98041,25044,50045,39045,010

44,24046,93049,557

Thousands of persons 16 years of age and over

1,5911,4561,616

1,6493,0983,5933,5473,350

3,0482,8562,7992,6362,551

2,5142,5722,8272,7372,738

2,7223,1223,4463,5343,506

3,1882,8162t4492,3262,229

2,1802,1442,1332,1172,088

2,1022,1422,179

59,35060,62161,286

62,20862,01762,13863,01563,643

65,02366,55266,92967,63968,369

69,62870,45970,61471,83373,091

74,45575,77077,34778,73780,734

82,77184,38287,03489,42991,949

93,77596,15899,009

102,251104,962

106,940108,670110,204

57,03858,34357,651

58,91859,96160,25061,17960,109

62,17063,79964,07163,03664,630

65,77865,74666,70267,76269,305

71,08872,89574,37275,92077,902

78,67879,36782,15385,06486,794

85,84688,75292,01796,04898,824

99,303100,39799,526

7,8907,6297,658

7,1606,7266,5006,2606,205

6,4506,2835,9475,5865,565

5,4585,2004,9444,6874,523

4,3613,9793,8443,8173,606

3,4633,3943,4843,4703,515

3,4083,3313,2833,3873,347

3,3643,3683,401

49,14850,71449,993

51,75853,23553,74954,91953,904

55,72257,51458,12357,45059,065

82,43885,42188,73492,66195,477

95,93897,03096,125

1,550

12,830

9,480

8,1205,5602,6601,070

670

1,0402,2702,356

2,3112,2763,637

3,2882,0551,8831,8343,532

2,8522,7502,8594,6023,740

60,31860,54661,75963,07664,782

66,72668,91570,52772,10374,296

75,21575,97278,66981,59483,279

3,8524,7143,9114,0703,786

3,3662,8752,9752,8172,832

4,0935,0164,8824,3655,156

7,9297,4066,9916,2026,137

7,6378,273

10,678

3.2

24.9

17.2

14.69.94.71.91.2

1.93.93.9

3.93.85.9

5.33.33.02.95.5

4.44.14.36.85.5

5.56.75.55.75.2

4.53.83.83.63.5

4.95.95.64.95.6

8.57.77.16.15.8

7.17.69.7

55.756.057.258.758.6

57.255.856.8

58.358.858.9

59.259.359.058.958.8

59.360.059.659.559.3

59.459.358.858.758.7

58.959.259.659.660.1

60.460.260.460.861.3

61.261.662.363.263.7

63.863.964.0

83.784.385.686.487.0

84.882.684.0

86.486.686.4

86.586.386.085.5

85.385.584.884.283.7

83.382.982.081.481.0

80.780.480.480.179.8

79.779.178.978.878.7

77.977.577.777.977.8

77.477.076.6

See next page for continuation of table.

196Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 203: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

TABLE B-29.—Noninstitutional population and the labor force, 1929-82—Continued

[Monthly data seasonally adjusted, except as noted]

Year or monthNoninsti-tutionalpopula-tion1

ArmedForcesl

Civilian labor force

TotalEmployment

Total Agri-cultural

Nonagri-cultural

Unem-ployment

Unemploy-ment rate(percent

of civilianlabor

force)

Civilian labor forceparticipation rate2

Total Males Females

Thousands of persons 16 years of age and over Percent

1980:JanFebMar

May".'.".'.'"".".'.June

JulyAugSeptOctNovDec

1981:JanFebMarAprMayJune

JulyAugSeptOctNovDec

1982:JanFebMarAprMayJune

MyAugSeptOctNovDec

168,625168,846169,073169,289169,494169,735

170,030170,217170,419170,624170,814171,007

171,229171,400171,581171,770171,956172,172

172,385172,559172,758172,966173,155173,330

173,495173,657173,843174,020174,201174,364

174,544174,707174,889175,069175,238175,380

2,0812,0862,0902,0922,0882,092

2,0992,1142,1212,1212,1192,124

2,1252,1212,1282,1292,1272,131

2,1392,1602,1652,1582,1582,164

2,1592,1682,1752,1762,1752,173

2,1802,1962,1982,1882,1802,182

106,546106,637106,394106,552106,892106,832

107,169107,116107,148107,438107,596107,446

108,012108,175108,471108,866109,101108,440

108,602108,762108,375109,028109,254109,066

109,034109,364109,478109,740110,378110,147

110,416110,614110,858110,752111,042111,129

99,87299,96399,67799,20498,92298,769

98,81698,82999,10499,32799,56799,650

99,964100,143100,504101,006100,968100,393

100,748100,709100,104100,355100,22999,677

99,68899,69599,59799,48499,99499,681

99,58899,68399,54399,17699,13699,093

3,3133,3873,4123,3183,3853,309

3,3313,2473,4483,3623,3873,486

3,4203,3403,3563,5193,3713,360

3,3203,3963,3583,3743,3893,219

3,3793,3673,3673,3563,4463,371

3,4453,4293,3633,4133,4663,411

96,55996,57696,26595,88695,53795,460

95,48595,58295,65695,96596,18096,164

96,54496,80397,14897,48797,59797,033

97,42897,31396,74696,98196,84096,458

96,30996,32896,23096,12896,54896,310

96,14396,25496,18095,76395,67095,682

6,6746,6746,7177,3487,9708,063

8,3538,2878,0448,1118,0297,796

8,0488,0327,9677.8608,1338,047

7,8548,0538,2718,6739,0259,389

9,3469,6699,881

10,25610,38410,466

10,82810,93111,31511,57011,90612,036

6.36.36.36.97.57.5

7.87.77.57.57.57.3

7.57.47.37.27.57.4

7.27.47.68.08.38.6

8.68.89.09.39.49.5

9.89.9

10.210.510.710.8

64.063.963.763.763.963.7

63.863.763.763.863.863.6

63.963.964.064.264.263.8

63.863.863.563.863.963.7

63.663.863.863.964.264.0

64.164.164.264.164.264.2

77.777.877.577.477.677.5

77.577.377.377.377.377.0

77.377.277.377.477.476.7

76.876.976.776.776.876.7

76.576.676.576.677.076.5

76.576.676.876.776.876.6

51.651.551.351.451.551.4

51.551.551.451.651.651.6

51.852.052.152.352.4521

52.152.151.752.252.352.0

52.152.352.352.452.752.7

52.952.952.852.752.853.0

1 Not seasonally adjusted.2 Civilian labor force as percent of civilian noninstitutional population.3 Not strictly comparable with earlier data due to population adjustments as follows: Beginning 1953, introduction of 1950 census

data added about 600,000 to population and about 350,000 to labor force, total employment, and agricultural employment. Beginning1960, inclusion of Alaska and Hawaii added about 500,000 to population, about 300,000 to labor force, and about 240,000 tononagricultural employment. Beginning 1962, introduction of 1960 census data reduced population by about 50,000 and labor force andemployment by about 200,000. Beginning 1972, introduction of 1970 census data added about 800,000 to civilian noninstitutionalpopulation ana about 333,000 to labor force and employment. A subsequent adjustment based on 1970 census in March 1973 added60,000 to labor force and to employment. Beginning 1978, changes in sampling and estimation procedures introduced into thehousehold survey added about 250,000 to labor force and to employment. Unemployment levels and rates were not significantlyaffected.

Note.—Labor force data in Tables B-29 through B-35 are based on household interviews and relate to the calendar week includingthe 12th Of the month. For definitions of terms, area samples used, historic comparability of the data, comparability with other series,etc., see "Employment and Earnings."

Source: Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics.

197Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 204: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

TABLE B-30.—Civilian employment and unemployment by sex and age, 1947-82

[Thousands of persons 16 years of age and over; monthly data seasonally adjusted]

Year ormonth

Civilian employment

Total

Males

Total 16-19years

20yearsandover

Females

Total 16-19years

20yearsandover

Unemployment

Total

Males

Total 16-19years

20yearsandover

Females

Total 16-1920

yearsandover

194719481949

1950195119521953K..1954

19551956195719581959

I9601.,.,19611962»....19631964

19651966196719681969197019711972»...1973 >...1974

1975197619771978 »....1979

198019811982

1981:JanFebMar...,

May...,June..,

July....Aug....

fSzNov...,Dec...,

1982:JanFebMar....

fcJune..,July....Aug..Sept.Oct...Nov..Dec..

57,03858,34357,651

58,91859,96160,25061,17960,109

62,17063,79964,07163,03664,630

65,77865,74666,70267,76269,30571,08872,89574,37275,92077,90278,67879,36782,15385,06486,794

85,84688,75292,01796,04898,824

99,303100,39799,526

99,964100,143100,504101,006100,968100,393

100,748100,709100,104100,355100,22999,677

99,68899,69599,59799,48499,99499,68199,58899,68399,54399,17699,13699,093

40,99541,72540,925

41,57841,78041,68242,43041,619

42,62143,37943,35742,42343,466

43,90443,65644,17744,65745,474

46,34046,91947,47948,11448,81848,99049,39050,89652,34953,024

51,85753,13854,72856,47957,607

57,18657,39756,271

57,35757,33757,55757,83757,73957,314

57,61457,54057,40457,25757,06256,746

56,66756,67056,49956,44456,72456,249

56,12756,15956,07255,93255,89255,809

2,2182,3442,124

2,1862,1562,1072,1361,985

2,0952,1642,1152,0122,198

2,3612,3152,3622,4062,587

2,9183,2533,1863,2553,4303,4093,4783,7654,0394,103

3,8393,9474,1744,3364,300

4,0853,8153,379

3,9683,9333,9163,9813,8923,736

3,7863,7963,7583,7503,6833,578

3,5683,5403,4733,4203,5343,306

3,2223,3273,2963,2833,3033,275

38,77639,38238,803

39,39439,62639,57840,29639,634

40,52641,21641,23940,41141,267

41,54341,34241,81542,25142,886

43,42243,66844,29444,85945,38845,58145,91247,13048,31048,922

48,01849,19050,55552,14353,308

53,10153,58252,891

53,38953,40453,64153,85653,84753,578

53,82853,74453,64653!50753,37953,168

53,09953,13053,02653,02453,19052,943

52,90552,83252,77652,64952,58952,534

16,04516,61716,723

17,34018,18118,56818,74918,490

19,55120,41920,71420,61321,164

21,87422,09022,52523,10523,831

24,74825,97626,89327,80729,08429,68829,97631,25732,71533,769

33,98935,61537,28939,56941,217

42,11743,00043,256

42,60742,80642,94743,16943,22943,079

43,13443,16942,70043,09843,16742,931

43,02143,02543,09843,04043,27043,432

43,46143,52443,47143,24443,24443,284

1,6911,6821,588

1,5171,6111,6121,5841,490

1,5471,6541,6631,5701,640

1,7681,7931,8331,8491,929

2,1182,4682,4962,5262,6872,7352,7302,9803,2313,345

3,2633,3893,5143,7343,783

3,6253,4113,170

3,5583,5383,5143,5453,5043,383

3,4133,4433.3443,2633,2473,194

3,2043,2003,2153,2133,2063,178

3,1503,1563,1853,1323,1213,069

14,35414,93615,137

15,82416,57016,95817,16417,000

18,00218,76719,05219,04319,524

20,10520,29620,69321,25721,903

22,63023,51024,39725,28126,397

26,95227,24628,27629,48430,424

30,72632,22633,77535,83637,434

38,49239,59040,086

39,04939,26839,43339,62439,72539,696

39,72139,72639,35639,83539,92039,737

39,81739,82539,88339,82740,06440,254

40,31140,36840,28640,11240,12340,215

2,3112,2763,637

3,2882,0551,8831,8343,532

2,8522,7502,8594,6023,740

3,8524,7143,9114,0703,786

3,3662,8752,9752,8172,8324,0935,0164,8824,3655,156

7,9297,4066,9916,2026,137

7,6378,273

10,678

8,0488,0327,9677,8608,1338,047

7,8548,0538,2718,6739,0259,389

9,3469,6699,881

10,25610,38410,466

10,82810,93111,31511,57611,90612,036

1,6921,5592,572

2,2391,2211,1851,2022,344

1,8541,7111,8413,0982,420

2,4862,9972,4232,4722,2051,9141,5511,5081,4191,4032,2382,7892,6592,2752>14

4,4424,0363,6673,1423,120

4,2674^776,179

4,4774,4484,3974,30044954,439

4,2264,4444,4994,7645,0525,396

5,3815,4865,6625,8565,9216,076

6,2346,3456,7036,8447,0067,046

270256353

318191205184310

274269300416398

426479408501487

479432448426440599693711653757

966939874813811

913962

1,090

958947955947

883

$949

1,0261,029

1,019

L0861,1031,0601,0841,1131,1251,1301,1411,137

1,4221,3052,219

1,9221,029

9801,0192,035

1,5801,4421,5412,6812,022

2,0602,5182,0161,9711,718

1,4351,1201,060

993963

1,6382,0971,9481,6241,957

3,4763,0982,7942,3282,308

3,3533,6155,089

3,4793,5003,4393,3533.5403,492

3,3433.5133,5593,8154,0264,367

4,3624,4514,6074,7704,8185,016

5,1505,2325,5785,7145,8655,909

619717

1,065

1,049834698632

1,188

9981,0391,0181,5041,320

1,3661,7171,4881,5981.581

1,4521,3241,4681,3971.429

1,8552,2272,2222,0892,441

3,4863,3693,3243,0613,018

3,3703,6964,499

3,5713,5443,5703,5603,6383:608

3,6283,6093,7723,9093,9733,993

3,9654,1834,2194,4004,4634,390

4,5944,5864,6124,7324,9004,990

144153223

195145140123191

176209197262256

286349313383385

395405391412413506568598583665

802780789769743

755800

762778805800792778

761760819866868819

856897817872895825

922915902908911919

475564841

854689559510997

823832821

1,2421,063

1,0801,3681,1751,2161,195

1,056921

1,078985

1,015

1,3491,6581,6251,5071,777

2,6842,5882,53522922,276

2,6152,8953,613

2,8092,7662,7652,7602,8462,830

2,8672,8492,9533,0433,1053,174

3,1093,2863,4023,5283,5683,565

3,6723,6713,7103,8243,9894,071

1 See footnote 3, Table B-29.Note.—See Note, Table B-29.Source: Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics.

198

Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 205: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

TABLE B-31.—Selected employment and unemployment data, 1948-82

[Percent; monthly data seasonally adjusted]

Year ormonth

19481949

19501951....1952195319541955 "".19561957 .19581959

1960 .196119621963196419651966196719681969

1970197119721973197419751976197719781979

198019811982

1981:Jan....Feb....Mar...

June..

July...Aug...Sept..Oct....Nov...Dec...

1982:Jan....Feb....Mar...

May!"June..

July...Aug...Sept..Oct....Nov...Dec...

Civilian employment as percent of population1

Total

55854.6

55 255.755.455.353 855.156.155 754.254.8

54 954.254 254.154 555.055 655.856.056.5

56.155.556.056.957.055.356.157.158.659.2

58.558.357.1

58.458.458.658.858.758.3

58.458.457.958.057.957.5

57.557.457.357.257.457.2

57.157.156.956.656.656.5

Bothsexes16-19

years

45543.0

43 844.944.143.940141.342.741137.638.1

39.037.537 635.835 837.740740.440.642.1

41.240.442.644.845.042.343.245.147.447.7

45.843.740.8

45.044.844.645.344.643.0

43.644.043.242.842.441.5

41.641.541.341.141.840.4

39.840.640.740.440.640.1

Males20

yearsandover

83 981.6

81.981.680.880.678.880.080.880278.079.0

78.777.677 477.377 777.977 677.477.176.9

76.175.375.876.375.772.973.273.774.574.7

72.972.370.2

72.672.672.873.072.872.4

72.672.472.171.871.571.2

71.070.970.770.670.770.3

70.169.969.869.569.369.1

Fe-males

20yearsandover

30.730.6

31.632.633.032.932 333.834.935.034.635.1

35.735.535836.236937.638 639^340.041.1

41.240.841.342.242.742.343.544.746.547.6

48.048.548.3

48.248.448.648.748.848.7

48.648.648.048.548.648.3

48.348.348.348.148.348.5

48.548.548.448.148.048.1

White

54.054354.855 455.755.956.5

56.255.756.457.357.555.956.857.959.360.0

59.459.358.2

59.359.559.559.859.759.4

59.559.559.059.158.958.6

58.558.558.458.358.558.3

58.258.258.157.757.757.6

Blackand

other

55.256156.857 256.956.656.7

55.553.853.254.053.350.451.051.553.754.0

52.451.449.8

52.151.652.052.552.051.2

51.350.951.151.051.050.6

50.550.350.149.750.149.7

49.849.749.649.549.349.3

Unemployment rate2

Allwork-

ers

3.85.9

5.33.33.02.95.54.44.14.36.85.5

5.56.7555.7524.5383.83.63.5

4.95.95.64.95.68.57.77.16.15.8

7.17.69.7

7.57.47.37.27.57.4

7.27.47.68.08.38.6

8.68.89.09.39.49.5

9.89.9

10.210.510.710.8

By sex and age

Bothsexes18-19

years

9213.4

12.28.28.57.6

12.611.011.111615.914.6

14 716.814 717.216 214.812 812.912.712.2

15.316.916.214.516.019.919.017.816.416.1

17.819.623.2

19.019.119.218.819.119.5

18.618.919.920.621.521.4

21.722.321.922.822.922.5

23.923.823.824.124.224.5

Males20

yearsandover

3.25.4

4.72.52.42.5493.83.43.66.24.7

4.75.74.64.5393.2252!32.22.1

3.54.44.03.33.86.85.95.24.34.2

5.96.38.8

6.16.26.05.96.26.1

5.86.16.26.77.07.6

7.67.78.08.38.38.7

8.99.09.69.8

10.010.1

Fe-males

20yearsandover

3.65.3

514.03.22.955444.24.16.15.2

5.16.3545'.4524.5384.23.83.7

4.85.75.44.95.58.07.47.06.05.7

6.46.88.3

6.76.66.66.56.76.7

6.76.77.07.17.27.4

7.27.67.98.18.28.1

8.38.38.48.79.09.2

By selected groups

Experi-encedwageand

salarywork-

ers

436.8

6.03.73.43.26.2484.44.67.35.7

5.76.8565.6504.3353.63.43.3

4.85.75.34.55.38.27.36.65.65.5

6.97.39.3

7.17.17.06.87.27.0

6.97.07.37.67.98.4

8.28.58.79.19.29.2

9.49.49.8

10.110.510.7

Mar-riedmen,

spousepres-ent »

3.5

461.51.41.7402.62.32.85.13.6

3.74.6363.4282.4191.81.61.5

2.63.22.82.32.75.14.23.62.82.8

4.24.36.5

4.24.24.23.84.04.2

4.04.04.34.75.05.6

5.35.45.66.06.16.4

6.66.87.27.57.67.8

Wom-en

whomain-tain

fami-lies

4.94.44.4

5.47.37.27.17.0

10.010.19.48.58.3

9.210.411.7

10.39.99.89.9

10.410.5

11.210.210.610.710.810.3

10.410.410.811.511.912.1

12.011.712.411.312.513.2

Full-time

work-ers*

5.4

502.62.5

523.83.7407.2

6.7

5.5494.235343.13.1

4.55.55.14.45.18.17.36.65.65.3

6.97.39.6

7.27.27.16.97.17.1

6.97.07.37.78.08.5

8.48.58.99.19.29.4

9.69.7

10.210.510.610.8

Blue-col-lar

work-ers5

428.0

7.23.93.6347.25.85.16.2

10.27.6

7.89.2747.3635.3424.44.13.9

6.27.46.55.46.7

11.79.48.16.97.0

10.010.34.2

10.110.210.09.69.99.8

9.69.7

10.210.911.612.6

12.412.513.013.513.614.0

14.414.415.515.816.216.3

1 Civilian employment as percent of total noninstitutional population.2 Unemployment as percent of civilian labor force in group specified.3 Data for 1949 and 1951-54 are for April; 1950, for March.* Data for 1949-61 are for May.8 Includes craft and kindred workers, operatives, and nonfarm laborers. Data for 1948-57 are based on data for January, April, July,

and October.Note—Data relate to persons 16 years of age and over. See footnote 3 and Note, Table B-29.Source: Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics.

199Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 206: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

TABLE B-32.—Civilian labor force participation rate by demographic characteristic, 1954-82

[Percent;1 monthly data seasonally adjusted]

Year or month

1954

19551956195719581959

I9601961196219631964

19651966196719681969 ,

19701971197219731974

19751976197719781979

198019811982

1981:JanFebMarApr!&:::::::JuneJulyAug ........SeptOctNovDec

1982:JanFebMar

ftJune :*:"

Auc .....Sept

<3 :NovDec

Allcivil-ian

work-ers

58.8

59.360059.659 559.3

59.459 358.858 758.7

58.959 259.659 660.1

60.460.260.460.861.3

61.261.662 363.263.7

63.863.964.0

63.963.964.064.264.263.8

63.863.863.563 863.963.7

63.663.863 863.964,264.0

64.164164.264.164.264.2

White

Total

58.2

58.759.459.158958.7

58.858 858.358.258.2

58.458.759.259359.9

60.260.160.460.861.4

61.561.862 563.363.9

64.164.364.3

64.364.364.464.564.764.2

64.264.263.964 264.264.2

64.064.164164.364.664.4

64.464.464.664.464.564.6

Males

Total

85.6

85.485 684.884 383.8

83.483082.181581.1

80.880680.780480.2

80.079.679.679.479.4

78778.478 578.678.6

78.277,977.4

78.178.278 278.378.477.7

77 777.777.577 677.777.7

77.377 477 477.577.977.3

77 277 477.777.677.677.5

16-19years

57.6

58.660.459.256 555.9

55.954 553.853.152.7

54.155.956.355956.8

57.557.960.162.062.9

61.962,364 065.064.8

63.762.460.0

63.664.063 663.662.961.1

61.161.862.062 262.461.0

61.160 960 360.662.458.7

57.959 759.459.460.059.6

20yearsandover

87.8

87.587 686.986686.3

86.085 784.984 484.2

83.983683.583 283.0

82.882.382 081.681.4

80 780.380 280.180.1

79.879 579.2

79.779.779879.980.079.5

79 579.479 279 279.279.4

79.079279179.279.579.2

79 279179.579.479.479.3

Females

Total

33.3

34.535.735.735.836.0

36.536936.737.237.5

38.139.240.140 741.8

42.642.643.244.145.2

45946.948049.450.5

51.251,952.4

51.751.851851.952.251.8

52 051.951551952.051.8

51.952 052 052.352.552.5

52 852 752.752.452.652.8

16-19years

40.6

40.743142.240139.6

40.340 639.838 737.8

39.242 642.543 044.6

45.645.448150.151.7

51552.854556.757.4

56.255455.0

56.056.556 256.456.254.4

55156.055154254.653.8

54.654954 455.755.454.6

55055 055.355.255.154.6

20yearsandover

32.7

34.035.135.235 535.6

36.236 636.537.037.5

38.038.839.840441.5

42.242.342.743.544.4

45 346.247 348.749.8

50.651552.2

51.251.351451.551.951.6

51751.551151751.851.7

51.651751851.952.252.4

52 652 552.452.152.452.6

Black and other

Total

64.3

64.264 964.464 864.3

64 564163.263 063.1

62.963062.862 262.1

61.860.960 260.560.3

59659.860462.262.2

61.761361.6

61.360.861661.961.561.1

60 861.161261561.561.4

61.261261461.161.761.3

61661861.962.061.862.1

Males

Total

85.2

85,085,184,384 083.4

83.082 280.880.280.0

79.679.078,577 676.9

76.574.973.974.073.5

71.971.271672.672.5

71.570 671.0

71.070.170670.971.070.0

69 970.970870770.570.7

70.470 470 470.770.870.7

71271171.471.471.571.5

16-19years

61.2

60.861.558.857.355.5

57.655.853.551.549.9

51.351.451.149.749.6

47.444.746.046.347.2

42.942.343.645.444.0

43.541.740.6

45.341.741.244.943.940.5

40.840.839.339 240.741.6

39.941.740.938.741.137.7

39.341.441.742.041.340.7

20yearsandover

87,1

87.887.887.087186.7

86.285 584.283.984.1

83.783.382.982 281.4

81.480.078.678.678.0

76 876.176277.177.1

75.975.075.4

74.974.575174.975.274.5

74.475.575.575 575.074.9

74.974 674.875.475.275.6

75.975 575.875.875.976.0

Total

46.1

46.147.347,248.047.7

48.248 348.048.148.5

48.649.349.549.349.8

49.549.248.849.349.3

49.450.451.253.553.7

53.653.653.9

53.353.054.154.453.653.7

53.353.053.453.954.153.7

53.653.654.053.254.253.6

53.854.254.154.253.754.3

Females

16-19years

31.0

32.736333.231928.2

32.932 833.132 631.7

29.533 535.234 834.6

34.131.232.334.434.1

35.633.633638.037.8

35.934.534.5

36.032.335 937.734.634.8

32,431.333.237 435.032.9

33.534 633.431,934,131,5

34 936936.435.635.335.8

20yearsandover

47.7

47 S48.44ft fi49 849.8

49.950149.649950.7

51.151.6S1fi51452.0

51.851.851.251.451.5

51.452.853.655.655.8

55.9%\56.3

55.555.756.456.556.056.1

55.955.855.956056.556.4

56.156.056.555.856.756.4

56156 256.256.455.956.5

1 Civilian labor force as percent of civilian noninstitutional population in group specified.Note.—Data relate to persons 16 years of age and over.See footnote 3 and Note, Table B-29.Source: Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics.

200

Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 207: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

TABLE B-33.—Civilian unemployment rate by demographic characteristic, 1948-82

[Percent;1 monthly data seasonally adjusted]

Year or month

19481949

19501951195219531954

19551956195719581959

I9601961196219631964

19651966196719681969

19701971197219731974

19751976197719781979

198019811982

1981:Jan

MarAprMayJune

JulyAugSeptOctNovDec

1982:JanFebMarAprMayJune

JulyAugSept

o5 :NovDec

Allcivil-ian

work-ers

3.859

533330295.5

4.4414.3685.5

5.56755575.2

4.5383.8363.5

4.9595.64.95.6

857.7716.15.8

7.1769.7

7.5747372757.4

7274768.08.38.6

86889.09.39495

9.899

10 210 510 710.8

White

Total

3.556

493.1282.75.0

3.9363.8614.8

5.0604.9504.6

4.13.43.43.23.1

4.5545.14.35.0

787.0625.25.1

6.3678.6

6.66,56.464666.4

6.36 366fi97.37.6

76777.98.38484

8.78.79.193969.7

Males

Total

3.456

472.625254.8

3.7343.6614.6

485746474.1

3.6282.7262.5

4.0494.5384.4

726.4554.64.5

61658.8

6464636 1656.3

5962646.87.27.8

76778.08.48586

8.99.19598

10 010.1

16-19years

13.4

11.310 511.515 714.0

14.015 713.715 914.7

12.910.510.710110.0

13.715114.212.313.5

18 317.315 013.513.9

16.217 921.7

17.418 017 917 017 617.8

16.716 717 817.919.720.2

20 620 420.421.920.9212

22.522.522.223.022 622.8

20yearsandover

4.4

3.33.03.25.54.1

4.25.14.03.93.4

2.92.22.12.01.9

3.24.03.63.03.5

6.25.44.73.73.6

5.3567.8

5.55.45.45.25.55.3

5.15.35.45.96.26.8

6.66.77.07.37.57.7

7.98.08.68.89.19.2

Females

Total

3.857

534.2333.15.5

4.3424.3625.3

5.3655.5585.5

5.04.34.64.34.2

5.46.35.95.36.1

867.9736.25.9

6.5698.3

6.96.76.6676.96.7

6.86.5707.17.47.4

7.5777.88.18.28.1

8.38.38.58.79.09.2

16-19years

10.4

9.19.79.5

12 712.0

12.714.812.815.114.9

14.012.111.512.111.5

13.415.114.213.014.5

17.416.415.914.414.0

14.816 619.0

15.516.015.916.216.616.3

16.315.717.217.518.317.7

18.119.017.918.818.718.0

19.118.919.119.919.820.4

20yearsandover

5.1

3.9373.8564.7

4.6574.7484.6

4.03.33.83.43.4

4.45.34.94.35.1

756.8625.25.0

5.6597.3

6.05.7565.65.95.7

5.85.66.06.16.36.4

6.4666.87.17.27.1

7.37.27.57.68.08.1

Black and other

Total

5.989

905.3544.59.9

8.78.37.9

12 610.7

10.212.410.910.89.6

8.17.37.46.76.4

8.29.9

10.09.09.9

13.813.113.111.911.3

13.114.217.3

13.113.213.613.213.614.2

13714814.615?15?15.7

15.516.016.61fi8171171

17.417718118418*)18.8

Males

Total

5.89.6

9.44.95.24.8

10.3

8.87.98.3

13.711.5

10.712.810.910 58.9

7.46.36.05.65.3

7.39.18.97.79.2

13.612.712.311.010.4

13.214.118.2

13.213.012.712.913.614.4

13.814.914.214 815.516.2

16.116.417.317.317.618.2

18.018.519.519.919.720.3

16-19years

14.4

13.415.018.426 825.2

24.026 822.027 324.3

23.321.323.922.121.4

25.028.829.726.931.5

35.235.136.634.031.3

34.437.544.0

39.636.332.936.834.138.1

37.044.535.739.138.437.7

34.939.044.042.844.148.1

45.345.445.843.848.046.7

20yearsandover

9.9

8.47.47.6

12 710.5

9.611.710.09.27.7

6.04.94.33.93.7

5.67.36.95.86.9

11.610.610.08.78.5

11.312.116.2

10.711.011.010.711.712.4

11.912.412.5

13.614.4

14.614.615.115.315.516.0

15.916.317.318.017.418.2

Females

Total

6179

846.1574.19.2

8.5897.3

1089.4

9.411911.011210.7

9.2879.18.37.8

9.310.911.410.610.8

13.913.613.913.012.3

13.114.316.4

13.013.414.513.613.514.0

13 fi14 7

15 614815.1

14911S15.8lfi?164160

16.7169Ififi18817?17.2

16=19years

20.6

19.222 820.228 427.7

24.829 230.234 731.6

31.731.329.628.727.6

34.535.438.434.434.5

38.338.839.638.135.6

36.538.343.8

33.134.842.235.533.337.4

33.241.238.846.141.441.4

42.641.841.042.045.743.1

47.749.743.342.343.142.7

20yearsandover

8.4

7.77864958.3

8310 6

9490

7.56671635.8

6.9878.88?8.5

11 511 311710.610.2

11 1

14 3

11411.8

117

1??

1??

13313,0

13.1

13414.014414 314?

14.414 314414915?15.3

1 Unemployment as percent of civilian labor force in group specified.Note.—See footnote 3 and Note, Table B-29.Source: Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics.

201

Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 208: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

TABLE B-34.—Unemployment by duration, 1947-82

[Monthly data seasonally adjusted1]

Year or month

194719481949

19501951195219531954

19551956195719581959

19601961196219631964

19651966196719681969

19701971197219731974

19751976197719781979

198019811982

1981:JanFebMarAprMayJune

JulyAugSeptOclNovDec

1982:JanFebMar

fcJuneJulyAugIt.:::NovDec

Totalunem-ploy-ment

Duration of unemployment

Less than5 weeks

5-14weeks

15=26weeks

27 weeksand over

Thousands of persons 16 years of age and over

2,3112,2763,637

3,2882,0551,8831,8343,532

2,8522,7502,8594,6023,740

3,8524,7143,9114,0703,786

3,3662,8752,9752,8172,832

4,0935,0164,8824,3655,156

7,9297,4066,9916,2026,137

7,6378,273

10,678

8,0488,0327,9677,8608,1338,047

7,8548,0538,2718,6739,0259,389

9,3469,6699,881

10,25610,38410,466

10,82810,93111,31511,57611,90612,036

1,2101,3001>56

1,4501,1771,1351,1421,605

1,3351,4121,4081,7531,585

1,7191,8061,6631,7511,697

1,6281,5731,6341,5941,629

2,1392,2452,2422,2242,604

2,9402,8442,9192,8652,950

3,2953,4493883

3,2783,2843,2783,1673,3823,342

3,3173,3413,5153,6963,8204,040

3,8303,8073,8313,9303,8713,605

3,9593,9334,0043,9303,9634,019

704669

1,194

1,055574516482

1,116

815805891

1,3961,114

1,1761,3761,1341,2311,117

983779893810827

1,2901,5851,4721,3141,597

2,4842,1962,1321,9231,946

2,4702,5393,311

2,3322,3902,4222,4452,5792,390

2,3712,4932,5442,6772,8473,028

3,0793,0683,0983,2553,2813,398

3,2493,3463,5493,5113,5493,460

234193428

425166148132495

366301321785469

503728534535491

404287271256242

428668601483574

1,3031,018913766706

1,0521,1221,708

1,1231,0961,0561,0951,0631,146

1,0851,0651,1301,1691,2181,224

1,2091,4791,6051,5821,6331,683

1,7801,8081,8301,9512,1912,125

164116256

3571378478

317

336232239667571

454804585553482

351239177156133

235519566343381

1,2031,3481,028648535

8201,1621,776

1,2721,2431,2181,1331,1581,131

1,0761,1481,1111,1231,1401,183

1,1931,2711,3571,4981,6341,834

1,7891,8292,0262,2162,3332,607

1 Because of independent seasonal adjustment of the various series, detail will not add to totals.Note.=See footnote 3 and Note, Table B-29.Source: Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics.

202

Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 209: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

TABLE B-35.—Unemployment by reason, 1967-82

[Monthly data seasonally adjusted1]

Year or month

Totalunem-ploy-ment

Job losers Job leavers Reentrants Newentrants

Thousands of persons

1967....19681969....

1970....1971197219731974....

1975....19761977....19781979....

1980....19811982

1982:Jan..Feb..Mar..

May".June.

July..Aug..Sept.Oct..Nov..Dec.

1967....1968....1969....

19701971....197219731974....

1975....1976....19771978....1979....

1980....19811982

1982:Jan..Feb..Mar..Apr..May.June.

July..Aug..Sept.Oct..Nov..Dec.

2,9752,8172,832

4,0935,0164,8824,3655,156

7,9297,4066,9916,2026,137

7,6378,27310,678

9,3469,6699,88110,25610,38410,466

10,82810,93111,31511,57611,90612,036

1,2291,0701,017

1,8112,3232,1081,6942,242

4,3863,6793,1662,5852,635

3,9474,2676,268

5,2435,2465,6285,8895,9386,181

6,3236,4466,9797,3257,3697,295

438431436

550590641683768

827903909874880

891923840

842942885901864826

819814786803794826

945909965

1,2281,4721,4561,3401,463

1,8921,9281,9631,8571,806

1,9272,1022,384

2,1332,2722,2612,3422,3932,378

2,4782,4402,4372,3222,5462,629

396407413

504630677649681

823895953885817

872981

1,185

1,0551,0961,0611,0961,1591,091

1,2301,3041,3031,2961,2441,288

Percent of civilian tabor force

3.83.63.5

4.95.95.64.95.6

8.57.77.16.15.8

7.17.69.7

8.68.89.09.39.49.5

9.89.9

10.210.510.710.8

1.61.31.2

2.22.82.41.92.4

4.73.83.22.52.5

3.73.95.7

4.84.85.15.45.45.6

5.75.86.36.66.66.6

0.6.5.5

.7

.7

.7

.8

.8

.9

.9

.9

.9

.8

1.21.21.2

1.51.71.71.51.6

2.02.02.01.81.7

1.81.92.2

2.02.12.12.12.22.2

2.22.22.22.12.32.4

0.5.5.5

.6

.7

.8

.7

.7

.9

.91.0.9.8

.91.1

1.01.01.01.01.11.0

1.11.21.21.21.11.2

1 Because of independent seasonal adjustment of the various series, detail will not add to totals.

Note.—Data relate to persons 16 years of age and over.See footnote 3 and Note, Table B-29.

Source: Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics.

203

Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 210: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

TABLB B-36.—Unemployment insurance programs, selected data, 1946-82

Year or month

All programs

Coveredemploy-ment1

Insuredunemploy-

ment(weeklyaver-

age) • •

Totalbenefits

paid(millions

ofdollars)2 *

State programs

Insuredunem-

ploymentInitialclaims

Exhaus-tions5

Insuredunemploy-ment aspercent

ofcoveredemploy-

ment

Benefits paid

Total(millions

ofdollars)*

Averageweeklycheck

(dollars)s

1946194719481949

19501951195219531954195519561957195819591960196119621963196419651966196719681969

19701971197219731974197519761977197819791980

1981 •>...1981:JanFebMar...,

flfay"..June..

July...Aug...

Nov

Dec1982:Jan,.Feb..Mar..

fcJune..JulyAugSeptOcfNovDec

Thousands Weekly average; thousands

31,85633,87634,64633,098

34,30836,33437,00638,07236,62240,01842,75143,43644,41145,72846,33446,26647,77648,43449,63751,58054,73956,34257,97759,999

59,52659,37566,45869,89772,45171,03773,45976,419

92,06292,65993,300

2,8041,7931,4462,474

1,6051,0001,0691,0672,0511,3991,3231.5712,7731,8602,0712,9941,946

71,9731,7531,4501,1291,2701,1871,177

2,0702,6082,1921,7932,5584,9373,8463,3082,6452,5923,8373,410

4,6214,2643,9483,4533,1112,949

3,0122,8742,6802,7533,2283,935

4,6814,7234,8924,7604,3874,328

4,4954,3984,2824,3914,635

2,878.51,785.51,328.72,269.81,467.6

862.91,043.51,050.62,291.61,560.21,540.61,913.04,290.62,854.33,022.84,358.13,145.13,025.92,749.22,360.41,890.92,221.52,191.02,298.6

4,209.36,154.05,491.14,517.36,933.9

16,802.412,344.810,998.99,006.99,401.3

16,175.415,283.5

1,740.91,567.81,663.71,453.31,192.71,191.3

1,187.71,098.41,088.21,064.41,146.21,666.9

1,835.11,904.52,295.22,141.11,871.92,003.9

1,929.22,033.02,003.71,927.32,044.5

1,295997980

1,9731,513

9691,044

9901,8701,2651,2151,4462,5101,684

1,9082,2901,783

71,8061,6051,3281,0611,2051,1111,101

1,8052,1501,8481,6322,2623,9862,9912,6552,3592,434

3,3503,048

**3,0692,9882,9762,9262,8822,824

2,8012,8672,9413,1273,4003,613

3,5773,5823,7753,9823,9724,011

3,9884,1364,3794,6154,6354,428

189187200340

236208215218304226227270369277

331350302

7 298268232203226201200

296295261247363478386375346388488460

425424420402401413

411436472511542560

563529574573579560

539617654659618546

4.33.13.06.24.62.82.92.85.23.53.23.66.44.4

4.85.64.44.33.83.02.32.52.22.13.44.13.52.73.56.04.63.93.32.9

3,93.5**3.53.43.43.43.33.2

3.23.33.43.63.94.1

4.14.14.34.64.54.6

4.64.75.05.35.35.1

1,094.9775.1789.9

1,736.01,373.1

840.4998.2962.2

2,026.91,350.31,380.71,733.93,512.72,279.02,726.73,422.72,675.42,774.72,522.12,166.01,771.32,092.32,031.62,127.9

3,848.54,957.04,471.04,007.65,974.9

11,754.78,974.58,357.27,717.28,612.9

13,761.113,257.8

1,419.61,315.31,394.71,226.71,006.21,009.8

1,062.01,006.61,001.2

997.81,080.81,592.5

1,764.21,783.42,072.61,849.91,573.41,692.2

1,679.41,746.21,710.61,646.61,810.3

18.5017.8319.0320.48

20.7621.0922.7923.5824.9325.0427.0228.1730.5830.4132.8733.8034.5635.2735.9237.1939.7541.2543.4346.17

50.3454.0256.7659.0064.2570.2375.1678.7983.6789.6798.95

106.54

103.67104.48105.74105.98105.47104.59

103.56106.02107.39108.92110.51112.89

114.83117.05117.10117.61118.08118.64"

117.28118.97120.78122.75123.22

"Monthly data are seasonally adjusted.1 Includes persons under the State, UCFE (Federal employee, effective January 1955). and RRB (Railroad Retirement Board) programs.

Beginning October 1958, also includes the UCX program (unemployment compensation for ex-servicemen).'Includes State. UCFE, RR, UCX, UCV (unemployment compensation for veterans, October 1952 January 1960), and SRA

(Servicemen's Readjustment Act, September 1944-September 1951) programs. Also includes Federal and State extended benefitprograms. Does not include FSB (Federal supplemental benefits), SLlA (special unemployment assistance), and Federal supplementalcompensation programs.

9 Covered workers who have completed at least 1 week of unemployment.4 Annual data are net amounts and monthly data are gross amounts.* Individuals receiving final payments in benefit year.6 For total unemployment only.7 Programs include Puerto Rican sugarcane workers for initial claims and insured unemployment beginning July 1963.H Latest data available for all programs combined. Workers covered by State programs account for about 97 percent of wage and

salary earners.Source: Department of Labor, Employment and Training Administration.

204Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 211: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

TABLE B-37.— Wage and salary workers in nonagricultural establishments, 1929-82

[Thousands of persons; monthly data seasonally adjusted]

Year ormonth

192919331939

1940194119421943194419451946194719481949

1950195119521953195419551956195719581959

1960196119621963196419651966196719681969

1970197119721973197419751976197719781979

198019811982*

1981:JanFebMarAprMayJune

JulyAugSeptOctNovDec

1982:JanFebMar

fc:June

JulyAugSeptOctNov*Dec"

Totalwageand

salaryworkers

31,32423,69930,603

32,36136,53940,10642,43441,86440,37441,65243,85744,86643,754

45,19747,81948,79350,20248,99050,64152,36952,85351,32453,268

54,18953,99955,54956,65358,28360,76563,90165,80367,89770,384

70,88071,21473,67576,79078,26576,94579,38282,47186,69789,823

90,40691,10589,619

90,90990,91391,01491,09991,13191,286

91,39691,32291.36391,22490,99690,642

90,46090,45990,30490,08390,16689,839

89,53589,31289,26788,86088,68488,518

Manufacturing

Total

10 7027,397

10,278

10,98513,19215,28017,60217,32815,52414,70315,54515,58214,441

15,24116,39316,63217,54916,31416,88217,24317,17415,94516,675

16,79616,32616,85316,99517,27418,06219,21419,44719,78120,167

19,36718,62319,15120,15420,07718,32318,99719,68220,50521,040

20,28520,17318,849

20,17120,14820,19720,27520,33220,334

20,37920,31120,26720,09719,90319,676

19,51719,45419,31919,16919,11518,930

18,81318,67218,57218,32518,18318,134

Durablegoods

4,715

5,3636,9688,823

11,08410,8569,0747,7428,3858,3267,489

8,0949,0899,349

10,1109,1299,5419,8339,8558,8299,373

9,4599,0709,4809,6169,816

10,40511,28211,43911,62611,895

11,20810,63611,04911,89111,92510,68811,07711,59712,27412,760

12.18712,11711,114

12,12012,09712,14312,20112,23712,246

12,26612,22812,18412,05911,90111,724

11,62211,57511,49011,37511,33211,203

11,13310,99310.90010,66610,55510,533

I

Non-durablegoods

5.564

5,6226,2256,4586,5186,4726,4506,9627,1597,2566,953

7,1477,3047,2847,4387,1857,3417,4117,3217,1167,303

7,3377,2567,3737,3807,4587,6567,9308,0078,1558,272

8,1587,9878,1028,2628,1527,6357,9208,0868,2318,280

8,0988,0567,735

8,0518,0518,0548,0748,0958,088

8,1138,0838,0838,0388,0027,952

7,8957,8797,8297,7947,7837,727

7,6807,6797,6727,6597,6287,601

Mining

1087744854925957992925892836862955994930901929898866791792822828751732712672650635634632627613606619623609628642697752779813851958

1,0271,1321,122

1,1021,1131,124

978985

1,137

1,1641,1801,1921,1951,2021,206

1,2011,2031,1971,1821,1521,124

1,1001,0861,0751,0581,0511,036

Construc-tion

1,512824

1,165

1,3111,8142,1981,5871,1081,1471,6832,0092,1982,194

2,3642,6372,6682,6592,6462,8393,0392,9622,8173,004

2,9262,8592,9483,0103,0973,2323,3173,2483,3503,575

3,5883,7043,8894,0974,0203,5253,5763,8514,2294,463

4,3464,1763,912

4,3154,2404,2674,2814,2234,185

4,1754,1464,1244,1014,0714,026

3,9663,9743,9343,9383,9883,940

3,9273,8993,8833,8563,8483,818

Transpor-tationand

publicutilities

3 9162,6722,936

3,0383,2743,4603,6473,8293,9064,0614,1664,1894,001

4,0344,2264,2484,2904,0844,1414,2444,2413,9764,011

4,0043,9033,9063,9033,9514,0364,1584,2684,3184,442

4,5154,4764,5414,6564,7254,5424,5824,7134,9235,136

5,1465,1575,057

5,1395,1455,1535,1635,1585,162

5,1685,1685,1815,1625,1505,128

5,1255,1155,1005,0945,1015,078

5,0445,0255,0315,0074,9944,979

Whole-saleand

retailtrade

6,1234,7556,426

6,7507,2107,1186,9827,0587,3148,3768,9559,2729,264

9,3869,742

10,00410,24710,23510,53510,85810,88610,75011,127

11,39111,33711,56611,77812,16012,71613,24513,60614,09914,705

15,04015,35215,94916,60716,98717,06017,75518,51619,54220,192

20,31020,55120,547

20,38020,42220,43820,50820,54320,590

20,62020,65020,66020,65420,62320,524

20,63020,67020,65520,58420,65220,595

20,61520,55020,49220,44120,39020,297

finance,insur-ance,andreal

estate

149412801,447

1,4851,5251,5091,4811,4611,4811,6751,7281,8001,828

1,8881,9562,0352,1112,2002,2982,3892,4382,4812,549

2,6292,6882,7542,8302,9112,9773,0583,1853,3373,512

3,6453,7723,9084,0464,1484,1654,2714,4674,7244,975

5,1605,3015,350

5,2525,2645,2705,2865,2955,302

5,3115,3195,3285,3255,3245,331

5,3265,3265,3365,3355,3425,352

5,3595,3605,3675,3575,3625,376

Services

3 4252,8613,502

3,6653,9054,0664,1304,1454,2224,6975,0255,1815,240

5,3575,5475,6995,8355,9696,2406,4976,7086,7657,087

7,3787,6207,9828,2778,6609,0369,498

10,04510,56711,169

11,54811,79712,27612,85713,44113,89214,55115,30316,25217,112

17,89018,59219,000

18,35218,38218,41418,48018,51718,556

18,61518,65418,70718,77318,81518,834

18,83118,86718,90418,92918,96318,988

19,04219,04819,08419,07419,12519,143

Government

Federal

533565905996

1,3402,2132,9052,9282,8082,2541,8921,8631,908

1,9282,3022,4202,3052,1882,1872,2092,2172,1912,233

2,2702,2792,3402,3582,3482,3782,5642,7192,7372,758

2,7312,6962,6842,6632,7242,7482,7332,7272,7532,773

2,8662,7722,733

2,7982,7892,7802,7742,7762,777

2,7752,7692,7642,7572,7492,756

2,7412,7372,7362,7302,7282,739

2,7372,7392,7342,7232,7262,728

Stateandlocaf

2,5322 6013,090

3,2063,3203,2703,1753,1163,1373,3413,5823,7873,948

4,0984,0874,1884,3404,5634,7275,0695,3995,6485,850

6,0836,3156,5506,8687,2487,6968,2208,6729,1029,437

9,82310,18510,64911,06811,44611,93712,13812,39912,91913,174

13,37513,25313,051

13,40013,41013,37113,35413,30213,243

13,18913,12513,14013,16013,15913,161

13,12313,11313,12313,12213,12513,093

12,89812,93313,02913,01913,00513,007

Note.—Data in Tables B-37 through B-39 are baser! on reports from employing establishments and relate to full* and part-time wageand salary workers in nonagricultural establishments who worked during or received pay for any part of the pay period which includesthe 12th of the month. Not comparable with labor force data {Tables B-29 through B-35), which include proprietors, self-employedpersons, domestic servants, and unpaid family workers; which count persons as employed when they are not at work because ofindustrial disputes, bad weather, etc., even if they are not paid for the time off; and which are based on a sample of the working-agepopulation. For description and details of the various establishment data, see "Employment and Earnings."Source: Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics.

205Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 212: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

TABLE B-38.—Average weekly hours and hourly earnings in selected private nonagrieultural industries,

1947-82

[For production or nonsupervisory workers; monthly data seasonally adjusted, except as noted]

Year ormonth

Average weekly hours

Totalprivate

non-agricul-tural >

Manufac-turing

Con-struction

Whole-saleand

retailtrade

Average gross hourly earnings,current dollars

Totalprivate

non-agricul-tural x

Manufac-turing

Con-struction

Whole-saleand

retailtrade

Adjusted hourly earnings, totalprivate nonagricultura!2

Index,1977^100

Currentdollars

1977dollars3

Percent changefrom a year

earlier4

Currentdollars

1947194819491950195119521953195419551956195719581959

19601961196219631964196519661967196819691970197119721973197419751976197719781979198019811982"....1981:JanFebMar

tz.June....JulyAugNov."!.'.'Dec

1982:JanFebMar

May'."."June....

JulyAugSept....OctNov...Dec "...

40.340.039.439.839.939.939.639.139.639.338.838.539.0

38.638.638.738.838.738.838.638.037.837.737.136.937.036.936.536.136.136.035.835.735.335.234.8

35.635.235.335.435.435.235.335.235.035.135.135.0

34.435.034.934.935.034.9

34.934.834.834.734.734.6

40.440.039.140.540.640.740.539.640.740.439.839.240.339.739.840.440.540.741.241.440.640.740.6

39.839.940.540.740.0

39.540.140.340.440.239.739.838.9

40.439.739.940.140.240.140.039.939.439.539.339.1

37.639.439.039.039.139.239.239.038.838.838.938.9

38.238.137.737.438.138.937.937.237.137.537.036.837.0

36.736.937.037.337.237.437.637.737.337.937.337.236.536.836.636.436.836.536.837.0

37.036.936.7

38.636.337.237.237.036.537.036.835.336.837.437.0

35.237.136.936.937.536.837.237.036.436.336.436.5

40.540.440.540.540.540.039.539.539.439.138.738.638.838.638.338.238.137.937.737.136.636.135.7

35.335.134.934.634.2

33.933.733.332.932.6

32.232.231.9

32.332.232.232.332.232.132.232.232.132.032.132.0

31.732.031.931.832.031.931.931.932.131.931.831.8

$1,1311.2251.275

1.3351.451.521.611.651.711.801.891.952.022.092.142.222.282.362.462.562.682.853.043.233.453.703.944.244.534.865.255.696.16

6.667.257.67

7.007.057.107.147.197.237.277.347.377.407.457.46

7.527.537.547.597.657.67

7.717.747.727.777.787.83

$1,2161.3271.3761.4391.561.641.741.78

1.851.952.042.102.19

2.262.322.392.452.53

2.612.712.823.013.19

3.353.573.824.094.42

4.835.225.686.176.70

7.277.998.50

7.697.757.817.907.947.998.038.098.148.168.208.20

8.388.348.378.448.488.52

8.568.578.568.568.618.62

$1,5401.7121.792

1.8632.022.132.282.38

2.452.572.712.822.93

3.073.203.313.413.55

3.703.894.114.414.79

5.245.696.066.416.81

7.317.718.108.669.27

9.9410.8011.55

10.4010.4710.5310.5710.6410.7310.8210.9010.9511.0611.1411.22

11.5211.3411.3911.4311.5411.51

11.5611.5811.5611.7111.6011.82

$0,9401.0101.060

1.1001.181.231.301.35

1.401.471.541.601.66

1.711.761.831.891.97

2.042.142.252.412.56

2.722.883.053.233.483.733.974.284.675.06

5.485.936.22

5.725.785.825.855.895.915.945.986.036.036.066.08

6.096.106.126.166.206.22

6.236.266.256.326.346.35

21.623.424.5

25.427.328.730.331.332.434.035.737.238.539.841.042.443.644.8

46.448.450.853.957.5

61.365.769.874.180.0

86.792.9

100.0108.1116.8

127.3138.9148.4

133.7134.8135.7136.6137.6138.4

139.1140.5141.4142.0143.0143.5

144.9145.0145.4146.3147.7148.1

148.9149.9150.1150.8151.1151.9

58.558.962.3

64.063.665.568.770.5

73.375.976.978.080.081.483.085.086.387.5

89.090.392.294.095.095.798.3

101.2101.198.3

97.699.0

100.0100.597.4

93.592.693.3

92.892.792.793.093.092.9

92.292.592.192.192.392.3

92.992.893.393.793.793.1

93.093.293.293.293.394.0

8.34.73.77.55.15.63.3

3.54.95.04.23.5

3.43.03.42.82.83.64.35.06.16.7

6.67.26.26.28.0

8.47.27.68.18.0

9.09.16.8

9.99.99.49.59.48.9

3.89.39.38.68.48.2

8.37.57.27.27.37.1

7.16.66.16.25.65.9

1 Also includes other private industry groups shown in Table B-37.2 Adjusted for overtime (in manufacturing only) and for interindustry employment shifts.3 Current-dollar earnings index divided by the consumer price index for urban wage earners and clerical workers on a 1977=100base.

4 Monthly data are computed from indexes to two decimal places and are based on data not seasonally adjusted.Note.—See Note, Table B-37.Source: Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics.

206

Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 213: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

TABLE B-39.—Average weekly earnings in selected private nonagricultural industries, 1947-82

[For production or nonsupervisory workers; monthly data seasonally adjusted, except as noted]

Year or month

194719481949

19501951195219531954

1955.1956195719581959

19601961196219631964

19651966196719681969

1970197119721973. .. .1974

19751976197719781979

198019811982 p

1981:JanFebMarAprMayJune

JulyAugSeptOctNovDec

1982:JanFebMarAprMay .. . .June;. '. Z I I . .JulyAugSeptoct :Nov.Dec

Average gross weekly earnings

Total privatenonagricultural *

Currentdollars

$45 5849 0050.24

53.1357.8660 6563.7664.52

67 7270.7473 3375.0878.78

806782.6085.9188 4691.33

95 4598.82

101.84107.73114.61

119.83127 31136.90145 39154.76

163 53175 45189.00203 70219.91

23510255.20266.92

249 20248.1625063252 76254.53254.50

25663258 37257.95259.74261.50261.10

258 69263 55263.15264.89267.75267.68

269 08269 35268.66269.62269.97270.92

1977dollars2

$123 52123.43127.84

133.83134.87138 47144.58145.32

153.21157.90158.04157.40163.78

164.97167.21172.16175.17178.38

183.21184.37184.83187.68189.44

186.94190 58198.41198.35190.12

184.16186 85189.00189.31183.41

172.74170.13167.87

172.94170.56171.3117218171.98170.92170.18170 09168.05168.44168.82167.91

165.93168 62168.90169.69169.89168.14

167.97167.61166.87166.53166.75167.75

Manufac-turing

(currentdollars)

$491353 0853.80

58.2863.3466 7570.4770.49

75 3078.78811982.3288.26

89 7292.3496.5699.23

102.97

107.53112.19114.49122.51129.51

133.33142 44154.71166 46176.80190 79209 32228.90249 27269.34

288 62318.00330.65

310 68307.68311.62316 79319.19320.4032120322 79320.72322.32322.26320.62

315 09328 60326.43329.16331.57333.98335.55334.23332.13332.13334.93335.32

Construc-tion

(currentdollars)

$58 83652367.56

69.6876.96828686.4188.54

90.9096.38

100 27103.78108.41

112 67118.08122.47127.19132.06

138.38146.26154.95164.49181.54

195.4521167221.19235 89249.25266.08283 73295.65318.69342.99

367 78398.52423.89

401.44380.06391.72393 20393.68391.65400.34401 12386.54407.01416.64415.14

405.50420.71420.29421.77432.75423.57

430.03428.46420.78425.07422.24431.43

Wholesaleand retail

trade(currentdollars)

$38 0740 8042.93

44.5547.7949 2051.3553.33

551657.4859 6061.7664.41

66 0167.4169.91720174.66

76 9179.3982.3587.0091.39

96.0210109106.4511176119.02

126 45133 79142.52153 64164.96

176 46190.95198.42

184 76186.12187.40188 96189.66189.71191.27192 56193.56192.96194.53194.56

193.05195.20195.23195.89198.40198.42198.74199.69200.63201.61201.61201.93

Percent change froma year earlier, total

privatenonagricultural3

Currentdollars

752.5

5.88.9485.11.2

504.5372.44.9

242.44.0303.2

453.53.15.86.4

4.6627.56.26.45.7737.77.88.0

6.98.54.6

9.59.19.29.59.99.2

10.09.68.47.97.36.1

3.76.24.84.55.24.94.74.34.03.53.23.8

1977dollars

013.6

4.7.8

274.4

.5

543.1

1__ £,

U7

143.0171.8

27.6.2

1.5.9

-1 .3194.1

- 0-4 .1

= 3 1151.2.2

- 3 . 1

= 58- 1 . 5-1 .3

-2 .0-2 .1-1 .2

- 4.1

- . 3- . 7

- 1 . 1-2 .2-2 .0-1 .8-2 .4

=4.1-1 .1-1 .6-1 .7-1 .2-1 .9-1 .4-1 .4- .9

-1 .4-1 .2- .1

1 Also includes other private industry groups shown in Table B-37.2 Earnings in current dollars divided by the consumer price index on a 1977=100 base.3 Based on data not seasonally adjusted.Note.-See Note, Table B-37.Source: Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics.

207

Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 214: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

TABLE B-40.—Productivity and related data, business sector, 1947-82

[1977=100; quarterly data seasonally adjusted]

Year orquarter

Output per hourof all persons

Busi-ness

sector

Nonfarmbusiness

sector

Output1

nesssector

Nonfarmbusiness

sector

Hours of allpersons2

Busi-ness

sector

Nonfarmbusiness

sector

Compensation perhour3

nesssector

Nonfarmbusiness

sector

Real compensationper hour4

Busi-ness

sector

Nonfarmbusiness

sector

Unit labor cost

nesssector

Nonfarmbusiness

sector

Implicit pricedeflator*

nesssector

Nonfarmbusiness

sector

1947.19481949

19501951195219531954

19551956.195719581959

19601961196219631964

1965196619671968.1969

19701971197219731974

19751976.197719781979

198019811982

1980:IIIIllIV

1981:

II.'.""IllI V

1982:I

43.746.046.7

50.451.853.555.256.1

58.358.960,462.364.3

65.267.369.972.575.6

78.380.782.585.385.5

86.289.292.494.792.5

94.597.6100.0100.699.6

98.9100.7101.0

99.398.238.999.3

100.7100.7101.0100.2

100.0100.3101.2102,2

49.952.053.1

56.357.258.659.560.4

62.862.964.065.567.7

68.370.372.875.178.1

80.582.584.086.886.5

86.889.793.095.392.9

94.797.8100.0100.699.3

98.599.9100.0

98.797.698.49C.2

100.4100.0100.099.1

99.299.4

100.3

100.9

35.037.236.5

39.842.143.545.444.6

48.149.349.849.052.6

53.554.457.459.963.5

67.871.573.176.879.0

78.480.786.191.8

88.293.8

100.0105.5107.8

106.2108.9106.4

107.9104.7105.3107.0

109.1109.1109.6107.8

106.3106.4106.7

106.0

34.036.035.3

38.641.142.544.343.4

47.048.348.948.051.8

52.553.556.659.162.8

67.271.272.776.678.8

78.080.385.891.789.8

87.893.7

100.0105.7108.0

106.3108.6105.9

107.9104.6105.3107.3

109.2109.0109.1107.1

106.0106.1106.3

105.3

80.280.778.1

78.981.381.482.279.5

82.583.782.578.881.9

82.080.882.182.683.9

86.688.688.690.192.5

91.090.593.296.897.3

93.396.0

100.0104.9108.2

107.4108.2105.3

108.7106.6106.5107.7

108.3108.3108.5107.5

106.3106.1105.4

103.7

68.169.266.6

68.771.972.674.571.9

74.976.876.473.276.5

77.076.177.878.780.5

83.586.386.588.291.1

89.889.592.396.296.7

92.795.8

100.0105.0108.7

108.0108.7105.9

109.3107.2107.0108.2

108.8109.0109.1108.1

106.8106.7106.0

104.3

17.018.418.7

20.022.023.424.925.7

26.428.129.931.232.6

33.935.236.838.240.2

41.744.647.050.754.2

58.262.066.171.378.0

85.592.9

100.0108.6119.1

131.4144.1154.6

126.7130.0133.1136.1

140.0142.5145.6148.2

150.9153.4155.7

158.0

18.520.120.6

21.823.825.126.527.3

28.330.031.732.934.2

35.736.838.339.641.4

42.845.447.951.554.8

58.762.566.771.778.5

86.093.0

100.0108.6118.8

130.9143.6154.0

126.2129.3132.6135.7

139.5142.0145.1147.7

150.4152.7155.1

157.4

46.146.447.6

50.551.353.456.458.0

59.662.664.465.567.7

69.571.373.775.578.4

80.183.385.388.389.6

90.892.895.797.395.9

96.398.9

100.0100.999.4

96.796.097.0

97.096.496.996.2

96.296.495.795.6

96.597.196.8

97.5

50.150.552.5

55.055.457.259.961.6

64.066.868.268.971.1

73.074.676.778.480.9

82.284.786.989.690.6

91.593.596.697.896.4

96.899.0

100.0100.999.2

96.395.796.7

96.696.096.595.9

96.096.095.495.3

96.396.696.4

97.2

38.940.040.1

39.742.543.845.145.9

45.247.749.550.250.7

52.052.352.752.653.1

53.355.356.959.463.4

67.569.571.575.384.4

90.595.1

100.0108.0119.5

132.9143.1153.0

127.6132.3134.7137.0

139.0141.5144.2147.9

150.9152.9153.8

154.5

37.038.638.9

38.841.542.844.445.2

45.047.649.550.250.5

52.252.452.652.753.0

53.255.057.059.363.4

67.669.771.775.384.5

90.895.1

100.0108.0119.6

133.0143.8153.9

127.8132.5134.7136.8

139.0141.9145.1149.0

151.6153.5154.7

155.9

38.140.840.3

41.044.044.544.945.3

46.047.549.249.850.8

51.651.852.653.253.7

54.756.457.960.263.2

66.069.071.375.382.4

90.594.7

100.0107.5117.2

128.3140.4148.2

123.7126.9129.9132.8

136.5138.8141.9144.6

146.0147.5149.1

150.4

36.639.139.4

40.142.843.544.445.0

46.047.649.349.750.9

51.651.952.753.353.9

54.856.358.160.463.3

66.369.371.374.081.6

90.094.6

100.0107.1116.5

128.3140.8149.0

123.6127.2129.9132.7

136.5138.9142.3145.5

146.6148.1149.8

151.7

1 Output refers to gross domestic product originating in the sector in 1972 dollars.2 Hours of all persons engaged in the sector, including hours of proprietors and unpaid family workers. Estimates based primarily onestablishment data.

3 Wages and salaries of employees plus employers' contributions for social insurance and private benefit plans. Also includes anestimate of wages, salaries, ana supplemental payments for the self-employed.

4 Hourly compensation divided by the consumer price index.8 Current dollar gross domestic product divided by constant dollar gross domestic product.Source: Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics.

208

Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 215: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

TABLE B-41.—Changes in productivity and related data, business sector, 1948-82

[Percent change from preceding period; quarterly data at seasonally adjusted annual rates]

Year

Output per houro1 all persons

sector

Konfarmbusiness

sector

Output1

sector

Nonfarmlusirtesssector

Hours of all

sector

Nonfarmbusinesssector

Compensation per

sector

Nofifarmbusinesssector

Real compensationper hour*

sector

Nonfarmbusiness

Unit labor cost

Nonfarmbusinesssector

Implicit pricedeflator^

Businesssector

Nonfarmbusiness

sector

19481949

19501951195219531954

19551956195719581959

19601961196219631964

19651966196719681969

19701971197219731974

19751976197719781979

198019811982 P

1980:I

in"'."'.'.";;;;iV

1981:itintiv

1982:

IIIllIV

5.31.5

7.92.83.23.21.6

4.01.02.53.13.2

1.53.33.83.74.3

3.53.12.23.3

.2

.83.63.52.6

- 2 . 4

2.23.32.4

.6- . 9

- . 71.8.4

.6-4.3

2.62.0

5.6.0

1.1-2.9

-1.01.43.64.1

4.32.0

6.01.72.31.71.4

3.9.3

1.72.43.4

.82.93.63.23.9

3.12.51.93.3

- . 3

.33.33.72.4

- 2 . 5

2.03.22.2

.6- 1 . 3

- . 91.4.2

- . 4- 4 . 6

3.43.1

4.9- 1 . 3

- . 3- 3 . 5

.6

.83.42.7

6.1- 1 . 9

9.15.83.34.3

- 1 . 8

7.92.61.0

- 1 . 67.3

1.61.75.54.36.0

6.85.52.25.12.9

- . 83.06.66.6

- 2 . 0

- 2 . 06.46.65.52.3

- 1 . 52.5

- 2 . 3

-11 .42.16.8

7.9- . 11.9

- 6 . 4

- 5 . 5.6

1.1- 2 . 5

6.0- 1 . 9

9.46.53.44.2

- 2 . 0

8.22.81.2

- 1 . 97.9

1.51.85.84.46.4

6.95.92.15.32.9

- 1 . 02.96.96.8

- 2 . 1

- 2 . 26.76.75.72.2

- 1 . 52.2

- 2 . 5

- . 2-11 .6

2.77.8

7.2- . 8

.3- 7 . 1

- 4 . 2.6.7

- 3 . 8

0.7- 3 . 3

1.12.9

.11.0

- 3 . 3

3.81.5

- 1 . 5- 4 . 5

3.9

.2- 1 . 5

1.6.6

1.6

3.22.3

.01.72.6

- 1 . 6- . 53.03.9

.4

- 4 . 13.04.14.93.2

- . 7.7

- 2 . 6

- . 4- 7 . 4— 54.7

2.1- . 1

- 3 . 6

- 4 . 5- . 8

- 2 . 4- 6 . 4

1.6- 3 . 8

3.14.61.02.5

- 3 . 4

4.12.5

- . 5- 4 . 2

4.4

.6- 1 . 1

2.21.12.4

3.73.4

.32.03.2

- 1 . 3- . 43.14.3

.5

- 4 . 13.44.45.03.5

- . 7.7

- 2 . 6

.2- 7 . 4

- . 74.6

2.2.5.6

- 3 . 7

- 4 . 7- . 1

- 2 . 7- 6 . 3

8.51.6

7.19.86.46.43.2

2.56.56.54.44.3

4.23.84.63.75.2

3.97.05.37.87.0

7.36.66.58.09.4

9.68.67.78.69.7

10.49.67.3

12.510.710.19.4

11.77.59.07.4

7.36.96.16.0

8.62.9

5.88.85.55.63.2

3.66.05.73.84.0

4.33.24.03.54.5

3.46.05.57.56.5

7.06.66.77.69.4

9.68.17.58.69.3

10.29.77.3

11.910.210.49.8

11.87.19.07.3

7.76.16.66.0

0.72.6

6.01.74.15.72.8

2.84.92.91.63.5

2.62.73.42.53.8

2.24.02.43.51.5

1.32.23.11.6

- 1 . 4

.52.61.2.9

=1.4

- 2 . 8— 71.1

.2

.5- 2 . 6- . 4

3.92.2

-1.43.3

0.83.9

4.8.7

3.24.82.7

3.94.42.21.03.2

2.72.12.82.23.2

1.73.02.63.21.1

1.02.23.31.3

- 1 . 4

.42.21.0.9

- 1 . 7

- 2 . 9- . 71.1

-3.9-2.6

2.5-2.8

.4

.1- 2 . 6- . 5

4.31.4

- . 93.3

3.0.1

- . 86.93.03.11.6

1.45.53.91.31.0

2.7.5.7.0

.33.83.04.46.7

6.42.92.95.3

12,1

7.35.15.18.0

10.7

11.27.76.9

11.815.77.37.2

5.77.57.8

10.6

8.45.52.41.8

4.1.9

- . 26.93.13.91.7

- . 35.73.91.4.6

3.5.3.4.2

.33.53.54.16.8

6.63.22.95.0

12.2

7.54.75.28.0

10.7

11.28.17.1

12.415.56.86.5

6.6

9.311.2

7.15.23.13.2

7.0-1.0

1.67.41.1.9

1.0

1.63.33.51.32.0

1.4.6

1.51.11.0

1.93.02.74.04.9

4.54.43.45.59.5

9.84.75.67.59.0

9.49.55.5

11.210.810.09.3

11.66.69.38.0

3.84.34.43.5

6.8.9

1.76.61.82.01.4

2.23.53.6

.92.3

1.5.6

1.51.21.2

1.62.83.24.04.7

4.84.53.03.8

10.2

10.35.05.77.18.8

10.29.75.9

13.212.28.68.9

12.17.1

10.29.2

3.34.04.95.1

1 Output refers to gross domestic product originating in the sector in 1972 dollars.2 Hours of all persons engaged in the sector, including hours of proprietors and unpaid family workers. Estimates based primarily on

establishment data.3 Wages and salaries of employees plus employers' contributions for social insurance and private benefit plans. Also includes an

estimate of wages, salaries, and supplemental payments for the self-employed.* Hourly compensation divided by the consumer price index.5 Current dollar gross domestic product divided by constant dollar gross domestic product.

Note.—Data relate to all persons engaged in the sector. Percent changes are based on original data and therefore may differ slightlyfrom percent changes based on indexes in Table B-40.

Source: Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics.

209

Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 216: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

PRODUCTION AND BUSINESS ACTIVITY

TABLE B-42.—Industrial production indexes, major industry divisions, 1929-82

[1967-100; monthly data seasonally adjusted]

Year or month

1967 proportion

192919331939

19401941 ,„„19421943194419451946194719481949

1950195119521953 ,195419551956195719581959

1960196119621963196419651966196719681969

1970197119721973197419751976197719781979

198019811982 *

1981:JanFebMarAprMayJune....

JulyAm; ,Sept"

mZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ.NovDec

1982:JanFebMarAprMayJune ..

JulyAugsept : ::.: ::: :::::..OctNov"Dec "

Totalindustrialproduction

100.00

21.613.721.7

25.031.636.344.047.440.735.039.441.138.8

44.948.750.654.851.958.561.161.957.964.8

66 266.772.276.581.789.897.8

100.0106.3111.1

107.8109 6119.7129 8129.3117 8130.5138 2146.1152.5

147.0151.0138.6

1514151.81521151.9152.7152.9

153.9153 61516149.1146.3143.4

140.7142.9141.7140.2139.2138.7

138 8138.4137.3135.8134.8134.7

Total

87.95

22.814.021.5

25.432.437.847.050.942.635.339.440.938.7

45.048.650.655.251.558.260.561.257.064.2

65.465.671.575.881.089.797.9

100.0106.4111.0

106.4108 2118.9129.8129.41163130.3138.4146.8153.6

146.7150.4137.6

1511151.21516152.0152.8152.4

153.2153.21511148.0145.0142.0

138.5140.9140.1138.7137.9137.7

1381138.0137.1135.0134.0133.9

Manufacturing

Dura-ble

51.98

22 59.1

17.7

23 531.439954.259.945.231.637.739.335.7

43.548.951.958751.859.261.161.653.961.9

62 961.868673.178 389.0

N 989100.0106.5110.6

102.3102 4113.71271125.7109 3122.3130 0139.7146.4

136.7140.5124.7

1410140.81421142.5143.5143.2

143 6143 4140 9137.8134.4131.3

127.1129.3128.2126 71261125.5

125 9124.9123.5120.5119.3119.3

Non-durable

35.97

23 219.926.1

27 533.334 637.138.638.539.741.342.742.0

46.748.349.251,251.657.260.161.161.667.7

69.371.575.880.085.290.996.7

100.0106.2111.5

112.31166126.5133.8134.6126.4141.8150.5156.9164.0

161.2164.8156.1

165 6166.2165 3165.9166.4165.8

167.1167 31659162.8160.3157.4

155.1157.8157.3156.1155 0155.3

155 7156.9156.7156.0155.2155.1

Mining

6.36

43.130.642.1

46.849.751.352.556.255.154.261.364.457.1

63.870 069.471269.977.982.082.175.378.7

80.380.883.186.489.993.298.2

100.0104.2108.3

112.2109 8113.1114.7115,3112.8114.2118.2124.0125.5

132.7142.2126.1

140 4143.1143 2135.2135.4141.7

146.5146 01450145.3143.3142.6

144.5142.4138.1134.1128.9123.5

120.1116.9114.7116.4115.9118.0

iitili

ties

5.69

746.7

10.7

11.813.314.916.517.517.818.620.122.423.9

27.231033.736 539.343.948.251.553.959.3

63.467.072.077.083.688.795.5

100.0108.4117.3

124.5130 5139.4145.4143.7146.0151.7156.5161.4166.0

168.3169.1169.0

167 6166.4167 8167.6170,7172.7

173.1171.9167 8168.1168.9168.2

171.8170.4170.0171.0170.9169.4

167 7168.5167.5167.8167.1165.5

Source: Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System.

210

Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 217: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

TABLE B-43-—Industrial production indexes, market groupings, 1947-82

[1967=100; monthly data seasonally adjusted]

Year or month

1967 proportion

194719481949

19501951195219531954

19551956195719581959

19601961196219631964

19651966196719681969

19701971197219731974

19751976197719781979

198019811982 P

1981:JanFebMarAprMayJune

JulyAugSeptOct '"•NovDec

1982:JanFebMarApr

STayJune .:.::....

JulyAugSept

oc?.:::::::::::::::::::::::Nov.Deep

Totalindustrialproduction

100.00

39.441.138.8

44.948.750.654.851.9

58.561.161.957.964.8

66 266.772 276.581.7

89.897.81000106.3111.1

107 8109.6119.7129 8129.3

117.8130.5138 2146.1152.5

147 0151.0138.6

151.41518152.1151.9152 7152.9

153.9153.6151.6149 1146.3143.4

140 7142 9141.7140.2139.2138.7

138.8138 4137 3135.8134.8134.7

Final products

Total

47.82

38.640.038.8

43.747 250.754151.3

55.458.660.357.663.2

65 365.871475.579.7

87 695.91000106.2109.6

1053106.3115.7124 4125.1

118.2127.6135 9142.2147.2

145 3149.5141.3

147 8148 2149.0149.91513151.4

152.1151.5150.01489147.2146.3

142 81441143.3142.6142.2142.1

142.51412140 0138.6137.7138.1

Consumer goods1

Total

27.68

42.443.743.4

49.649.150.253.252.9

59.061.262.662.168.1

70 772.277181.385.9

92.697.3100.0105.9109.8

109.0114.7124.4131.5128.9

124.0137.1145 3149.1150.8

145 4147.9142.6

146 9147 8148.3148.9150.7150.3

150.7149.6147.8146.5144.0142.0

139.6141.8141.5142.1143.6144.8

145.8144.1143.4142.2141.1141.4

Auto-motiveproducts

2.83

45.347.447.0

59.152347.159 555.4

73.660.663.550.563.3

72 566.180187.791.9

113 3112.81000119.4118.1

98.8124.4141.4153 0132.8

125.8155.7175 6179.9167.7

132 8137.9129.6

130 4133 9139.2142.91518153.1

147.6137.6139.1132 8121.7119.2

109 2117 5125.0129.9138.9143.0

149J135.5135 5124.0121.4129.8

Homegoods

5.06

37.539.136.2

49.943.043.048.644.9

53.055.754.551.459.0

59.461.366.571.878.4

88.997.9100.0106.4113.2

110.2115.6129.5142.5136.8

118.8134.1141.9147.7149.2

138 9142.0129.3

145.6145 2146.1145.0144.8145.0

145.8145.3141.1138.2134.1125.4

126.3130.6129.9131.1129.1129.9

130.413141289128.6126.9125.9

Equipment •

Total

20.14

30.632.228.7

31.143 351.956349.3

50.455.357.551.556.5

58157.363 767.571.4

80 794.0100 0106.5109.3

100194.7103.8114 5120.0

110.2114.6123 0132.8142.2

145 2151.8139.4

1491148 7150.0151.41521153.0

154.1154.0152.91521151.5152.1

147.2147.3145.9143.4140.4138.4

138.0137.3135.2133.5133.0133.6

Busi-ness

12.63

38.039.534.5

37.045.251.253.346.8

50.858.861.151.557.9

59.457.762.765.873.7

84.497.7100.0105.5112.5

107.0104.1118.0134.2142.4

128.2135.4147.8160.3171.3

173 2181.1157.3

177.7177.5179.3181.0182.0183.6

184.8184.4182.7180.5179.0179.0

172.2171.6169.0164.9159.9156.7

154.9153.9150.5146.4144.6144.1

Inter-mediateproducts

12.89

41.944.342.0

48.851350.954 554.3

61.764.464.463.069.5

70 071.475 779.985.2

90.696.2100.0106.3112.9

112.9116.7126.5137.2135.3

123.1137.2145.1154.1160.5

1519154.4143.4

157.5157 7157.1156.3156.1154.9

156.2156.8154.6151.4148.7145.9

143.4146.3145.2143.7142.6141.9

142.8144.7143.7142.4141.9141.0

Materials3

Total

39.29

39.541.237.6

45.049 850.556151.8

61.362.862.856.565.2

66.166.272176.782.9

92.4100.7100.0106.5112.5

109.2111.3122.3133.9132.4

115.5131.71386148.3156.4

147 6151.6133.8

153 8154 3154.4152.9153.4154.0

155.3155.2152.5148.5144.6139.0

137.2140.4138.5136.2134.3133.5

133.0132.8132.0130.3128.9128.4

Dura-ble

goods

20.35

38.339.435.3

44.450 551.660 352.0

63.763 963.853 764.0

64 863.370475181.9

93 8103.3100 0106 2112.1

103 8104.9117 7134 6132.7

109.1128.01361149.0157.8

143 0149.1125.3

1500150 6152.2151.8152.8152.4

153.6154.3150.4145.6141.0134.0

129.7132.4130.7128.1126.6126.6

126.0125.1123.0119.3118.0117.3

Non-durablegoods

10.47

Z'.'Z

45.9

52.554 954.754.462.1

63 265.871375.682.2

90 397.51000108.8115.7

1154120.2132.9142 2142.6

126.6147.8155.6165.6175.9

1715174.6157.3

180.2179.9177.5179.3179.0176.9

176.5175.4175.5170.6164.7158.3

156.8164.2162.0160.3156.6153.5

152.3154.5158.5157.7155.5155.5

1 Also includes clothing and consumer staples, not shown separately.2 Also includes defense and space equipment, not shown separately.3 Also includes energy materials, not shown separately.Source: Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System.

211

Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 218: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

TABLE B-44.—Industrial production indexes, selected manufactures, 1947-82

[1967; -100; monthly data seasonally adjusted]

Year or month

1967 proportion

194719481949

19501951195219531954

19551956195719581959

I9601961196219631964

19651966196719681969

1970197119721973197419751976197719781979

198019811982 p.1981:

JanFebMarAprMayJuneJulyAugSeptOct.NovDec

1982:JanFebMarAprMayJuneJulyAucSeptOct..;;:::::Nov " ....Dec*

Primarymetals

Total

6.57

63.365.855.469.775 869.278 563.5

82.582.078 562.372.7

72 471.176 382.392.8

1021108.41000104.3113.8

106.6100.2112.1126.7123.196.4

109.7111 1119.9121.3

102.3107.975.8

114.1114 5114.9110.61119107.4109.4113.1108.6102.396.689.6

89.788 583.076.475.272.8

72.972.973 270 067165.9

Ironandsteel

4.21

70.1

93.291.588 266.576.5

11174.277 384.395.9

105 2108.4100 0103.2112.6

104 796.1

1071122.3119.895.8

104.8103 8113.2113.2

92.499.8

108 71084108.0103.4105 698.599.7

105.199.292.287.279.2

79 678 573.065.162.458.0

58.157 456 4541514

Fabri-catedmetalprod-ucts

5.93

49.950.845.8

56.159958.566 059.4

67.868.870 663.371.071169.475477.882.6

90897.2

100 0105.6107.9

102 4103.51121124.7124.2

109.9123.91310141.6148.5

134.1136.4114.8

135 8137 6139.2139.5138 4139.3140.11400136.8133.8130.2126.1

120 71214121.1119.1115.8115.0115 5114 3112 3108 5107 4106.5

Durable manufactures

Non-elec-trical

machin-ery

9.15

39.039.233.4

37.547 751.954 046.1

50.658.057 948.656.7

56955.462166.375.6

85 098.8

100 0101.8109.3

104 4100.2116 0133.7140.1

125.1134.51436153.6163.7162.8171.2148.6

167 3168 3169.2169.71721174.1176.71764173.9169.7167.9167.4

160 9160 0157.3153.7150.0147.4

1471147 2144 9140 5138 0135.8

Electri-cal

machin-ery

8.05

22.223.021.6

29.629.834.039.034.7

39.943.142.839.247.6

51.654.862.964.768.4

81.797.9

100.0105.5111.9

108.1107.7122.2143.1143.8116.5134.8145 4159.4175.0172.8178.4169.2

177.6174 9177.4178.8179.9180.1

180.9182.6180.0179.6175.7170.7

168.2172 9172.6172.2170.9170.8

170.3169.7167.0165.7164 9164.5

Transportationequipment

Total

9.27

31.834.834.9

41.846.654.268.059.2

68.066.070.755.863.2

65.461.571.178.080.0

95.1102.0100.0111.1108.4

89.597.9

108.2118.3108.7

97.4111.1122 2132.5135.4

116.9116.1104.9

117.41161119.5121.3123.7123.4119.8115.4114.2110.6106.1103.7

96 6102 0104.4105.9110.0111.6112.7107 0105.3100 8100 0103.7

MotorV earfd e S

parts

4.50

60.581.265.869.051.066.274.765.579.888.390.7

115.9113.9100.0120.3116.592.3

118.6135.8148.8128.2111.1142.01611169.9159.9

119.0122.3109.8

120.0119 9127.1130.7136 4137.5

130.5123.1120.4113.8105.5100.4

90 498 6

105.6110.7119.8124.0

127.2116.7113.5103 01017108.8

Lumberand

prod-ucts

1.64

58.961.354.1

65.765.564.768.468.0

75.975.068869.979.3

74778.282.586.392.7

96.3100.0100.0105.5107.9

105.6113.8120.8126.0116.2

107.6123.2131.2136.3136.9

119.3119.1

127.4126 2125.6126.3126 2122.5

122.9119.1113.2109.6104.7104.8

99 2104 9103.5106.2110.6112.2

116.9120 31199117 2119 4

Nondurable manufactures

Apparelprod-ucts

3.31

57.860.359.7

64.363.166.367.266.4

73.375.074.972.880.1

81.782.285.589.192.2

97.499.9

100.0102.9106.7

101.4104.7109.4117.3114.3

107.6125.7134.2134.2134.4127.0120.4

123.81216120.2121.6122 6121.1122.6122.6122.5117.8113.8114.1

Printingand

publish-ing

4.72

43.345.446.648.949.749.752.054.1

59.563.265 463.968.2

71.071.373.977.882.687.994.6

100.0103.2107.4107.0107.1112.7118.2118.2

113.3122.5127 6131.5136.9

139.6144.2144.3

143.9144 8142.7141.61413143.1144.4146.1145.9145.6143.4145.3

145 6146 4145.9144.2143.8142.6143 9145 3144 3142 61426144 0

Chem-icalsand

prod-ucts

7.74

19.721.321.0

26.229 731.133.634,1

39.842.745246.654.3

56.459.265.771.878.8

87 895.7

1000109.5118.4

120.4125.9143.6154.5159.4

147.2170.9185 7197.4211.8207.1215.6

2189219 8218.5219.8220 6218.4

221.5219.2216.3208.8204.6199.8

196 72013200.3198.6193.6193.2

1941195 6196 4193 7192 8

Foods

8.75

55.855.255.957.959 060.261462.7

66.370.171172.976.5

78.680.983486.490.4

92496.0

1000102.6106.1

108.9112.8116,8120.9124.0

123.4133.0138 8142,7147.5

149.6152.1

1519152 5152.4151.9152 2151.3151.6151.9150.7151.4153.0152.8

15111517150.8149.7150.5151.0

1510150 7149 0150 6

Source.* Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System.

212Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 219: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

TABLE B-45.—Capacity utilization rate in manufacturing, 1948-82

[Percent; quarterly data seasonally adjusted]

Year or quarter

19481949

1950..1951195219531954 ..

195519561957. ..19581959

I9601961 . .19621963 .1964

1965196619671968.. . .1969

1970 .. ..1971197219731974

197519761977 ..19781979

198019811982"

1978:jIIIIIIV

1979:

||IIIIV

1980:

11HIIV . .

1981:I

HI ...IV ..

1982:

IIIII ..IV p

FRB series >

Totalmanufac-

turing

82.574.2

82.885 885.489280.3

87.186.483 775.281.9

80.277 481.683.585.6

89.691.186.987.186.2

79.378.483.587.683.8

72.979.581984.485.7

79.178.569.8

82.083 985 286.4

86.985985 384.4

83.477.975.979.1

79.979.879.374.8

71.670.369.767.6

Primaryprocess-

ing

87.276.2

88.590 284.989 480.6

92.189.784 775.483.4

79.877 981.683.887.8

91.191.485.787.788.5

82 982.388.292.587.8

73.781.984 086.988.1

78.578.466.4

84.086 387 989.5

89.088 288 386.9

85.576.473.179.3

81.380.379.472.7

69.166.366.164.3

Advancedprocess-

ing

80 073.3

79 883 485 989 380.1

84.384.583175.181.1

80.411181783.484.6

88.991.287.686 885.0

77 476.381.085.081.5

72.578.280883.084.3

79.478.571.6

80.982 783 784.6

85.784783 783.0

82.578.777.478 8

79.179.679.275.9

73.272.571.669.2

Commerce series2

Totalmanufac-

turing

8686848585

8180838683

7781838483

7876

84848384

84838281

80767678

78787672

727169

Durablegoods

8887838484

7878828582

7681848483

7775

84858385

85848280

80747578

77777470

706865

Non-durablegoods

8586858686

8383858684

7982828382

7978

83828283

83828282

81787878

79807875

757674

Primary-processed

goods

8988878687

8382858985

7682838484

7776

83848485

85848383

81757478

78787671

706666

Advanced-processed

goods

8585838484

7980828482

77818384827876

84848284

84838180

80767778

78787673

737471

1 For description of the series, see "Federal Reserve Measures of Capacity and Capacity Utilization," February 1978.2 Quarterly data are for last month in quarter. Annual data are averages of the four indexes, except for 1965 (December index) and1966-67 (averages of June and December indexes). For description of the series, see "Survey of Current Business," July 1974.

Sources: Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System and Department of Commerce (Bureau of Economic Analysis).

213Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 220: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

TABLE B-46.—Neiv construction activity, 1929-82

[Value put in place, billions of dollars; monthly data at seasonally adjusted annual rates]

Year or month

1929

1933

1939

19401941194219431944

19451946

New series

194719481949

19501951195219531954

19551956195719581959

19601961196219631964

19651966196719681969

19701971197219731974

19751976197719781979

19801981

Totalnew

construc-tion

10.8

2.9

8.2

8.712 014.1835.3

5.814.3

20.026126.7

33.635.436.839141.4

46.547.649150,055.4

54.756 460.264 868.0

74 176.878.587 594.3

95.2110.3124.4138 4139.2

135 9151.1173.8205.6230.4

230.7238.2

Private construction

Total

8.3

1.2

4.4

5.16.23.42.02.2

3.412.1

16.721420.5

26.726.226.027 929.7

34.834.935134.639.3

38.939.342.345.547.7

52.052.852.959 966.3

67.180.494.2

105 9100.9

951112.0135.7159.7181.6

175.7185.2

Residentialbuildings'

Total2

3.6

.5

2.7

3.0351.7

9.8

1.36.2

9.913112.4

18.115.915.816 618.2

21.920.219 019.824.3

23.023125.227 928.0

27 925.725.630633.2

31.943.354.359 750.4

46 560.581.093.499.0

87.386.6

housingunits

3.0

.3

2.3

2.63.01.4,7.6

.74.8

7.810.510.0

15.613.212.913.414.9

18.216.114.715.419.2

17.317.119.421.721.8

21.719.419.024 025.9

24.335.144.950 140.6

34 447.365.775.878.6

63.162.7

Nonresidential buildings and otherconstruction1

Total

4.7

.8

1.7

2.12.71.71.11.4

2.15.8

6.9828.0

8.610.310.211311.5

12.914.716114.815.1

15.916 217.217 619.7

24 127.127.329 333.1

35.337.240.046 250.5

48 651.454.766.282.6

88.498.7

Com-mercial 3

1.1

.1

.3

.3

.4

.2

.0

.1

.21.2

1.0141.2

1.41.51.1182.2

3.23.6363.63.9

4.2475.15.05.4

789.4

9.811.613.515 515.9

12 812.814.818.624.9

29.934.2

Indus-trial

0.9

.2

.3

.4

.8

.32

.2

.61.7

1.7141.0

1.12.12.3222.0

2.43.1362.42.1

2.9282.82S3.6

606.8

6.55.44.7627.9

807.27.7

11.015.0

13.817.0

Other*

2.6

.5

1.2

1.31.51.2.9

1.1

1.33.0

4.2555.9

6.16.76.8737.2

7.38.0908.89.0

8.98.79.29.7

10.7

15 516.9

19.020.121.824 526.7

27 831.532.236.742.7

44.747.4

Public construction

Total

2.5

1.6

3.8

3.65.8

10.76.33.1

2.42.2

3.3476.3

6.99.3

10.811211.7

11.712.714115.516.1

15.917117.919.420.4

22124.025.527 628.0

28.129.930.232 538.3

40 939.138.245.948.8

55.153.0

Federal

0.2

.5

.8

1.2389.3562.5

1.7.9

8121.5

1.63.042413.4

2.82.7303.43.7

3.6393.9403.9

404.035343.3

3.34.04.4495.3

637.07.38.48.6

19.710.0

State andlocal5

2.3

1.1

3.1

2.42.01.3.7.6

.71.4

2.5354.8

5.26.36.6718.3

8.910.011.112.112.3

12.213.314.015.416.5

18 020.022.124 224.6

24.825.925.827 633.0

34 632.130.937.540.2

45.442.9

See next page for continuation of table.

214

Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 221: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

TABLE B-46.—New construction activity, 1929-82—Continued

[Value put in place, billions of dollars; monthly data at seasonally adjusted annual rates]

Year or monthTotalnew

construc-tion

Private construction

Total

Residentialbuildings1

Total2New

housingunits

Nonresidential buildings and otherconstruction >

Total Com-mercial3

Indus-trial Other*

Public construction

Total Federal State andlocal6

1981:JanFeb....Mar....Apr....May....June...

July....Aug...,Sept...OctNov....Dec...,

1982:JanFeb....Mar...,Apr...May...June...July...,Aug...Sept..,OctNov.

255.4250.7249.4247.6240.9237.5

238.1235.9233.5230.8230.0228.8

225.1222.6224.6226.1228.7231.6

227.6228.1228.1229.1237.2

193.7191.7190.6192.1189.3185.9

186.9185.2182.4180.0178.1176.6

175.5173.0173.6175.1179.9182.7

178.7176.6177.0177.7184.4

99.596.995.895.192.389.1

87.084.180.478.276.275.8

73.769.270.072.375.575.3

73.472.171.574.178.4

73.972.472.172.269.566.8

64.160.857.153.450.449.4

51.049.251.049.651.049.8

51.552.353.152.354.2

94.294.894.897.097.096.8

99.9101.1102.0101.8102.0100.7

101.8103.9103.6102.8104.5107.4

105.3104.5105.6103.6106.0

32.833.033.634.333.533.6

34.234.334.934.635.736.4

36.236.838.438.436.838.0

37.536.137.135.737.1

15.814.915.316.415.916.7

17.818.718.518.518.416.6

17.117.216.615.917.118.4

16.416.716.617.117.2

45.546.945.946.447.646.5

47.948.248.648.647.947.7

48.549.848.648.550.650.9

51.451.751.850.951.7

61.759.058.955.451.751.7

51.250.751.150.851.952.2

49.649.651.051.048.848.9

48.951.451.151.352.8

10.710.99.8

10.310.110.1

10.19.2

10.19.89.69.8

9.29.6

10.09.89.69.5

9.910.210.510.410.6

51.048.149,145.141.541.6

41.041.441.041.042.342.4

40.440.041.041.139.239.4

39.041.240.640.942.2

1 Beginning I960, farm residential buildings included in residential buildings; prior to 1960, included in nonresidential buildings andother construction.

2 Total includes additions and alterations and nonhousekeeping units, not shown separately.3 Office buildings, warehouses, stores, restaurants, garages, etc.4 Religious, educational, hospital and institutional, miscellaneous nonresidential, farm (see also footnote 1), public utilities, and all

other private.6 Includes Federal grants-in-aid for State and local projects.Source: Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census.

215Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 222: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

TABLE B-47.—New bousing units started and authorized, 1959-82

[Thousands of units]

Year or month

New housing units started

Private and public1

Total(farm andnonfarm)

Nonfarm

Private (farm and nonfarm)»

TotalType of structure

1 unit 2 to 4units

5 unitsor more

New private housing units authorized2

Total

Type of structure

1 unit 2 to 4units

5 unitsor more

1959

196019611962..,.1963..,.1964....

1965....1966....1967....1968....1969....

1970....1971....197219731974

1975....197619771978....1979

19801981....1982"..

1981:JanFebMarAprMayJune

JulyAugSeptOctNovDec

1982:JanFebMarAprMayJune

JulyAugSeptOctNovDec P.....

1,553.7

1,296.11,365.01,492.51,634.91,561.0

1,509.71,195.81,321.91,545.41,499.5

1,469.02,084.52,378.52,057.51,352.5

1,171.41,547.62,001.72,036.11,760.0

1,312.61,100.31,070.4

85,272.5

108.9124.0110.6107.0

101.087.390.988.264.959.7

47.652.078.785.199.291.8

107.297.2

108.3111.7111.981.7

1,531.3

1,274.01,336.81,468.71,614.81,534.0

1,487.51,172.81,298.81,521.41,482.3

1,517.0

1,252.21,313.01,462.91,603.21,528.8

1,472.81,164.91,291.61,507.61,466.8

1,433.62,052.22,356.62,045.31,337.7

1,160.41,537.51,987.12,020.31,745.1

1,292.21,084.21,060.6

1,5851,2941,3181,3011,1721,046

1,040946899854860882

885945931882

1,066908

1,1931,0331,1291,1261,4041,222

1,234.0

994.7974.3991.4

1,012.4970.5

963.7778.6843.9899.4810.6

812.91,151.01,309.21,132.0

892.21,162.41,450.91,433.31,194.1

852.2705.4661.0

283.0

257.4338.7471.5590.8

108.4 450.0

86.661.171.680.985.0

84.8120.3141.3118.368.1

64.085.9

121.7125.0122.0

109.591.180.7

422.5325.1376.1527.3571.2

535.9780.9906.2795.0381.6

204.3289.2414.4462.0429.0

330.5287.7319.0

1,208.3

998.01,064.21,186.61,334.71,285.8

1,239.8971.9

1,141.01,353.41,323.7

1,351.51,924.62,218.91,819.51,074.4

939.21,296.21,690.01,800.51,551.8

1,190.6985.5992.5

938.3

746.1722.8716.2750.2720.1

709.9563.2650.6694.7625.9

646.8906.1

1,033.1882.1643.8

675.5893.6

1,126.11,182.6

981.5

710.4564.3540.0

77.1

64.667.687.1

118.9100.8

84.861.073.084.385.2

88.1132.9148.6117.064.3

63.993.1

121.3130.6125.4

114.5101.888.6

Seasonally adjusted annual rates

192.9

187,4273.8383.3465.6464.9

445.1347.7417.5574.4612.7

616.7885.7

1,037.2820.5366.2

199.8309.5442.7487.3444.8

365.7319.4363.9

974835863868776705

696614623507554550

592568621566631621

628645677701883800

1391141089710589

887662788174

708467648683

1028892647986

472345347336291252

256256214269225258

223293243252349204

463300360361442336

1,2361,1961,1721,1861,178986

941878835738743797

803792851879944929

1,062888

1,0031,1721,1921,291

712699686682659573

543505456400413454

450436460450488516

500497561651729732

139115113123112109

989181857888

6875817610291

8583968696111

385382373381407304

300282298253252255

285281310353354322

477308346435367448

1 Units in structures built by private developers for sale upon completion to local public housing authorities under the Department ofHousing and Urban Development "Turnkey" program are classified as private housing. Military housing starts, including those financedwith mortgages insured by FHA under Section 803 of the National Housing Act, are included in publicly owned starts and excluded fromtotal private starts.

2 Authorized by issuance of local building permit: in 16,000 permit-issuing places beginning 1978; in 14,000 places for 1972 77; in13,000 places for 1967=71; in 12,000 places for 1963-66; <

» Not available separately beginning January 1970.Source: Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census.

and in 10,000 places prior to 1963.

216

Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 223: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

TABLE B-48.—Nonfarm business expenditures for new plant and equipment, 1947-83

[Billions of dollars; quarterly data at seasonally adjusted annual rates]

Year or quarter

194719481949..

195019511952...19531954

19551956195719581959

I960196119S219631964..

19651966196719681969

19701971197219731974

19751976197719781979

198019811982 31983 3

1981:

||IIIIV

1982:

IIIII

1983:IsII3

Total

218025.4623.54

25.3230.83315933.5833.13

36 5844.7648.1242.1744.78

48 6347.82512853.2561.66

70 4382.2283 4288.4599.52

105 61108.53120 25137.70156.98

157.7117145198.0823124270.46

295.63321.49319.99315.69

312 24316 73328 25327.83

327 72323.22315.79315.21

31640320.00

Plant

8.4510.3510.20

10.9413.0813.1413.8214.09

15 9719.3420.9419.4119.89

20.9421.1222.1222.2324.96

27 2432.2132 2235.5140.54

44 2446.6049 3556.6664.29

65.21712080.3192 70105.73

117.55133.46

128.5713105136 40136.67

139 49137.95135.14

Pnuintquip-ment

133515.1113.34

14 3717.74184519.7619.03

20 6025.4227.1922.7624.89

27 7026.70291631.0336.70

431950.01512052.9458.99

6136619370 8981.0492.69

92 50100 25117.77138 54164.73

178.08188 04

183 67185 6819185191.17

188 23185.28180.65

Plant and equipment

Manufacturing

Total

8.739.257.32

7.7311.0712.1212.4312.00

12 5016.3317.5012.9813.76

16.3615.5316.0317.2721.23

254131.3732 2532.3436.27

36 9933.6035 4242.3753.21

54.9259 9569.2279 7298.68

115.81126.79122.67119.52

124 50125 4913011126.91

12832123.77119.46120.50

12143123.42

Dura-ble

goods

3393.542.67

3 225.125 755.715.49

5 878.198.596.216.72

8 287.437 818.6410.98

13 4917.2317 8317.9319.97

19 8016 7818 2222.7527.44

26 3328 4734.04404351.07

58.91618457.9557.35

6124631062 5860.78

60 8459.0357.1455.80

57 9058.30

Non-durablegoods

5345.714.64

4.515.956376.726.51

6 628.158.916.777.04

8.088.108.228.6310.25

119214.1514 4214.4016.31

171916.8217 2019.6225.76

28.59314735.1839 2947.61

56.9064.9564.7262.18

63 2762 4067 5366.14

67 4864.7462.3264.70

63 5465.12

Total

13.0716.2116.22

17.5919.7619.4721.1621.13

24.0828.4330.6229.1931.02

32.2832.2935.2535.9940.43

45.0250.8451.1856.1163.25

68 6274.9384 8295.33103.78

102.79111.50128.87151.52171.77

179.81194.70197.32196.16

187.74191.24198.13200.92

199.40199.46196.33194.71

194.97196.58

Min-ing

0 69.93.88

841.111211.251.29

1311.641.691.431.35

1.291.261411.261.33

1361.421381.441.77

2 022.672 883.314.62

6.107449.24102111.38

13.5116.8616.0516.45

16 20168017 5516.81

17.6016.5614.6315.56

16.1817.33

Nonmanufacturing

Transpor-tation

2 212.662.30

2 383.052 992.972.42

2 603.073.352.343.17

3.192.823.263.364.46

5 466.436346.797.04

6955.936 727.418.23

8.688.899.4010.6812.35

12.0912.0511.8011.92

11.7411.7011.6113.12

11.9912.3211.2811.82

10.6311.66

Publicutili-ties

1.642.673.28

3.423.753.964.614.23

4 264.785.955.745.46

5.405.205.125.335.80

6.497.829.3310.5211.70

13.0314.7016.2617.9719.83

19.9822.3726.7929.9533.96

35.4438.4041.6239.98

36.0537.8439.5539.74

40.1241.4043.3841.66

40.7640.30

Tradeandserv-ices1

6136.927.13

8 378.838058.949.59

114913.6413.6814.1115.40

161516.53182718.5720.38

221324.6923 0225.3128.31

29 7734.20400045.5347.79

46.2349.3056.5468.6679.26

81.7986.3386.4286.86

83.4385.8887.5588.33

87.8088.8587.3182.01

85.8785.87

Com-munication

andother2

2 403.042.63

2 583.033 253.383.60

4 425 305.965.585.63

6 256.487197.478.46

9 5810.49111112.0614.43

16 8517.43189621.1223.30

21.8023.5126.9032.0234.83

36.9941.0641.4340.96

40.3239.0241.8942.92

41.8940.3339.7343.65

41.5341.43

1 Wholesale and retail trade; finance, insurance, and real estate; and personal, business, and professional services.2 "Other" consists of construction; social services and membership organizations; and forestry, fisheries, and agricultural services.3 Planned capital expenditures reported by business in late October-December 1982, corrected for biases.Source: Department of Commerce, Bureau of Economic Analysis.

217

Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 224: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

TABLE B-49.—Sales and inventories in manufacturing and trade 1947-82

[Amounts in millions of dollars; monthly data seasonally adjusted]

Year or month

Total manufacturing andtrade

Sales1 Inven-tories* Ratio3

Manufacturing

Sales1 Inven-tories2 Ratio3

Merchant wholesalers

Sales1 Inven-tories2 Ratio3

Retail trade

Sales1 Inven-tories2

1947...1948...1949...

1950...1951...1952...1953...1954...

1955...1956...1957...1958...1959...

1960...1961...1962...1963...1964...

1965...1966...1967...1968...1969...

1970...1971...1972...1973...1974...

19751976197719781979

19801981

1981:Jan..Feb..Mar..

ftay...June....

JulyAugSeptOcfNovDec

1982:JanFebMar....

June...

July..Aug..

SfcNov...

35,26033,788

38,59643,35644,84047,98746,443

51,69454,06355,87954,20159,729

60,82761,15965,66268,99573,682

80,28387,18790,34898,104

105,003

107,448116,017130,030153,412177,625

182,230204,277229,623259,046294,573

321,504350,622

347,858348,653350,281352,855353,698356,524

355,236354,520353,725346,605344,943341,330

334,579340,571342,121339,835349,096346,126

344,603339,464339,470332,537335,938

52,50749,497

59,82270,24272,37776,12273,175

79,51687,30489,05287,09392,129

94,71395,594101,063105,480111,503

120,907136,790144,796155,697169,343

177,556187,766201,950233,237285,807

288,375318,544351,176397,090444,132

482,570519,394

485,396490,291492,399494,177497,812501,531

504,744510,099515,349518,241521,574519,394

516,256513,906513,054515,074510,517512,981

513,387514,554515,399514,224508,553

1.421.53

1.361.551.581.581.60

1.471.551.591.601.50

1.561.541.501.491.47

1.451.471.561.541.55

1.621.581.491.411.45

1.571.481.461.441.43

1.451.43

1.401.411.411.401.411.41

1.421.441.461.501.511.52

1.541.511.501.521.461.48

1.491.521.521.551.51

15,51317,31616,126

18,63421,71422,52924,84323,355

26,48027,74028,73627,24730,286

30,87930,92333,35735,05837,331

40,99544,87046,48750,22853,501

52,80555,90663,02372,93784,794

86,59598,802113,201126,953143,935

154,249166,217

163,902164,676165,936167,649168,073170,951

170,333169,274168,156163,957161,442159,614

155,023158,142157,517156,114160,828161,519

161,382158,619159,278152,473152,343

25,89728,54326,321

31,07839,30641,13643,94841,612

45,06950,64251,87150,24152,945

53,78054,88558,18660,04663,409

68,18577,95284,66490,61898,202

101,651102,658108,238124,628157,792

159,934175,193189,334210,679241,034

264,016283,152

266,798269,146271,062272,060274,196274,616

276,983279,102282,209284,386285,784283,152

281,155281,688280,065278,985276,449275,115

274,914274,302272,474271,710269,297

1.581.571.75

1.481.661.781.761.81

1.621.731.801.841.70

1.751.741.701.691.64

1.601.621.761.741.77

1.901.831.671.581.65

1.841.691.611.571.57

1.661.66

1.631.631.631.621.631.61

1.631.651.681.731.771.77

1.811.781.781.791.721.70

1.701.731.711.781.77

6,514

7,6958,5978,7829,0528,993

9,89310,51310,47510,25711,491

11,65611,98812,67413,38214,529

15,61116,98719,44820,84622,609

23,94326,25729,58438,01447,748

46,62350,69455,98765,03676,109

87,93197,839

99,85298,77698,21798,94499,26498,274

97,61197,28597,74696,23596,76895,144

94,23695,01097,36195,42797,42796,565

93,77692,34390,86689,77490,982

7,9577,706

9,2849,88610,21010,68610,637

11,67813,26012,73012,73913,879

14,12014,48814,93616,04817,000

18,31720,76524,83326,13428,624

32,03835,04538,63345,37256,948

56,69764,07872,31183,89193,870

104,441110,549

104,233105,027105,189105,149105,425106,904

105,768107,656108,764108,491110,173110,549

110,971108,823109,657112,913111,701113,515

113,534113,101113,852113,886112,669

1.131.19

1.071.161.121.171.18

1.131.191.231.241.15

1.221.201.161.151.14

1.151.151.241.231.22

1.271.271.241.111.07

1.211.191.211.211.18

1.131.09

1.041.061.071.061.061.09

1.081.111.111.131.141.16

1.181.151.131.181.151.18

1.211.221.251.271.24

10,20011,13511,149

12,26813,04613,52914,09114,095

15,32115,81116,66716,69617,951

18,29418,24919,63020,55621,823

23,67725,33024,41327,03028,893

30,70033,85337,42242,46245,082

49,01254,78160,43567,05774,529

79,32586,566

84,10485,20186,12886,26386,36187,299

87,29287,96187,82386,41386,73386,572

85,32087,41887,24288,29490,84188,042

89,44588,50289,32690,29092,613

14,24116,00715,470

19,46021,05021,03121,48820,926

22,76923,40224,45124,11325,305

26,81326,22127,94129,38631,094

34,40538,07335,29938,94542,517

43,86750,06355,07963,23771,067

71,74479,27389,530

102,520109,228

114,114125,693

114,365116,118116,148116,968118,191120,010

121,993123,341124,376125,364125,618125,693

124,131123,395123,332123,175122,367124,351

124,939127,151129,073128,628126,587

1 Monthly average for year and total for month.2 Seasonally adjusted, end of period.3 Inventory/sales ratio. For annual periods, ratio of weighted average inventories to average monthly sales; for monthly data, ratio* of

inventories at end of month to sales for month.Note.—Earlier data are not strictly comparable with data beginning 1958 for manufacturing and beginning 1967 for wholesale and

retail trade.The inventory figures in this table do not agree with the estimates of change in business inventories included in the gross national

product since these figures cover only manufacturing and trade rather than all business, and show inventories in terms of current bookvalue without adjustment for revaluation.

Source: Department of Commerce (Bureau of Economic Analysis and Bureau of the Census).

218Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 225: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

TABLE B-50.—Manufacturers' shipments and inventories, 1947-82

[Millions of dollars; monthly data seasonally adjusted]

Year ormonth

Shipments1

Total

Dura-ble

goodsindus-tries

Non-durable

indus-tries

Inventories2

Total

Durable goods industries

TotalMate-

rials andsupplies

Workin

proc-Finishedgoods

Nondurable goods industries

TotalMate-

rials andsupplies

Workin

proc-ess

Finishedgoods

194719481949

19501951195219531954

19551956195719581959

19601961196219631964

19651966196719681969

1970197119721.9731974

19751976197719781979

19801981

1981:JanFebMar

May!'"!June....

JulyAugSept....OctNovDec

1982:JanFebMar

May!!"!June....

JulyAugSept...,OctNov...

15,51317,31616,126

18,63421,71422,52924,84323,355

26,48027,74028,73627,24730,286

30,87930,92333,35735,05837,331

40,99544,87046,48750,22853,501

52,80555,90663,02372,93784,794

86,59598,802113,201126,953143,935

154,249166,217

163,902164,676165,936167,649168,073170,951

170,333169,274168,156163,957161,442159,614

155,023158,142157,517156,114160,828161,519

161,382158,619159,278152,473152,343

6,6947,5797,191

8,84510,49311,31313,34911,828

14,07114,71515,23713,56315,609

15,88315,61617,26218,28019,637

22,22124,64925,26727,65929,437

28,18829,95434,02439,68644,228

43,65650,68959,26767,84876,060

77,54083,417

81,43682,17683,51084,78485,43986,891

85,73985,22384,67181,26580,27979,133

75,55177,97678,12477,13679,51878,888

79,03677,24876,56272,34272,708

8,8199,7388,935

9,78911,22111,21611,49411,527

12,40913,02513,49913,68414,677

14,99615,30716,09516,77817,694

18,77420,22021,22022,57024,064

24,61725,95229,00033,25040,567

42,93948,11353,93459,10467,875

76,70882,800

82,46682,50082,42682,86482,63484,060

84,59484,05183,48582,69281,16380,481

79,47280,16779,39478,97881,31082,631

82,34681,37182,71680,13179,635

25,89728,54326,321

31,07839,30641,13643,94841,612

45,06950,64251,87150,24152,945

53,78054,88558,18660,04663,409

68,18577,95284,66490,61898,202

101,651102,658108,238124,628157,792

159,934175,193189,334210,679241,034

264,016283,152

266,798269,146271,062272,060274,196274,616

276,983279,102282,209284,386285,784283,152

281,155281,688280,065278,985276,449275,115

274,914274,302272,474271,710269,297

13,06114,66213,060

15,53920,99123,73125,87823,710

26,40530,44731,72830,25832,077

32,37132,54434,63235,86638,506

42,25749,92055,00558,87564,739

66,78066,28970,25081,398101,739

102,874112,581121,737138,045160,601

174,674188,429

176,632177,725178,374179,301180,010181,125

183,229185,022187,686189,461190,222188,429

187,054187,121186,063185,916184,870184,289

183,798183,550182,793181,843179,324

8,9667,894

9,19410,41710,60810,03210,776

10,35310,27910,81011,06811,970

13,32515,48916,45517,37618,693

19,18219,75920,86026,02835,151

33,92037,54840,35045,33452,805

55,31058,461

56,40956,75456,38256,75756,39457,017

58,01658,12158,90859,11759,21658,461

58,18457,99956,89756,94755,99655,643

55,78155,19154,70354,27953,624

10,7209,721

10,75612,31712,83712,38713,063

12,77213,20314,15914,87116,191

18,07521,93925,00527,33630,408

29,84828,65030,78835,54542,603

43,36946,34550,62558,69469,212

76,85182,814

78,33778,66279,15979,73380,43580,362

81,04181,63582,62183,58884,05882,814

82,21182,09781,72981,56281,28481,304

80,21680,45880,37980,56779,995

6,2066,040

6,3487,5658,1257,8398,239

9,2459,0639,6629,925

10,344

10,85412,49113,54714,16315,639

17,75117,88018,60119,82323,985

25,58628,69030,76334,01838,585

42,51347,153

41,88742,30942,83542,81243,18043,744

44,17245,26646,15846,75646,94647,153

46,65947,02647,43547,40847,59047,342

47,80147,90147,71146,99745,705

12,83613,88113,261

15,53918,31517,40518,07017,902

18,66420,19520,14319,98320,868

21,40922,34123,55424,18024,903

25,92828,03229,65931,74333,463

34,87136,36837,98843,23056,053

57,06062,61267,59872,63480,433

89,34194,723

90,16691,42192,68892,75994,18693,492

93,75494,08094,52394,92595,56194,723

94,10094,56794,00293,07091,57990,826

91,11690,75289,68189,86789,973

8,3178,167

8,5568,9718,7758,6629,080

9,0829,4939,8139,978

10,131

10,44811,15511,71512,28912,724

13,15013,68314,67618,13223,699

23,54225,83327,39729,35432,479

36,20838,015

36,82037,05036,97437,20637,30537,074

37,53137,44737,60637,72037,83438,015

37,96137,89937,31737,48637,17236,714

36,78936,44835,80035,63735,814

2,4722,440

2,5712,7212,8642,8282,944

2,9463,1103,2963,4063,511

3,8064,2044,4214,8485,122

5,2745,6655,9826,7078,175

8,8379,933

10,98911,91313,710

15,65616,196

15,81816,12616,19416,26316,50916,161

16,17416,25116,21315,91216,17416,196

15,95915,79215,62915,60115,43815,555

15,51915,52915,19214,85714,793

7,4097,415

7,6668,6228,6248,4918,845

9,3809,738

10,44410,79611,261

11,67412,67313,52314,60615,617

16,44817,01917,33018,39124,179

24,68126,84629,21231,36734,244

37,47840,511

37,52838,24539,52139,29040,37240,257

40,04840,38240,70541,29341,55540,511

40,17940,87741,05739,98338,96938,557

38,80838,77538,68939,37339,366

1 Monthly average for year and total for month.2 Book value, seasonally adjusted, end of period.Note.—Data beginning 1958 are not strictly comparable with earlier data.Source: Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census.

219Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 226: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

TABLE B-51.—Manufacturers' new and unfilled orders, 1947-82

[Amounts in millions of dollars; monthly data seasonally adjusted]

Year or month

New orders1

Total

Durable goodsindustries

Total

Capitalgoodsindus-tries,non-

defense

Non-durablegoods

industries

Unfilled orders'

TotalDurablegoods

industries

Non-durablegoods

industries

Unfitted orders—shipmentsratio3

TotalDurablegoods

industries

194719481949195019511952195319541955195619571958195919601961196219631964

196519661967196819691970197119721973197419751976197719781979

198019811981:

Jan....Feb....Mar...

May...June..

July...Aug...Sept..Oct....Nov...Dec...

1982:Jan....Feb....Mar...

fcJune..July...Aug...Sept..Oct....N o v .

15,25617,69315,61420,11023,90723,20423,58622,33527,46528,36827,55927,00230,72430,23531,10433,43635,52438,357

42,10046,40247,05650,68753,95052,03855,98364,16776,25987,26885,14999,543

115,027131,664147,354

155,738166,015

164,976165,375166,240169,422170,281171,022

172,089168,797167,728159,558159,460156,660

154,519155,984157,198154,995156,791157,058

158,588154,380156,166149,696150,362

6,3888,1266,633

10,16512,84112,06112,14710,768

14,99615,36514,11113,29016,00315,30315,75917,37418,70920,652

23,27826,17725,82528,11629,87127,38829,99835,06442,93046,85342,01951,39861,07672,41079,394

79,06083,272

82,52882,69983,86286,41087,39686,911

87,58284,81984,45677,19378,59276,421

75,06176,30977,85976,19475,71074,550

76,44672,98273,266

70,607

6,9037,6606,7387,4448,62210,97112,673

11,01112,79915,27619,44423,203

23,44924,061

25,06321,85724,45625,68724,48824,039

24,65524,86724,31222,52824,36922,130

21,71721,56022,17422,60820,33219,278

20,32218,89320,27320,18320,173

8,8689,5668,9819,94511,06611,14311,43911,56612,46913,00313,44813,71214,72014,93215,34516,06116,81517,705

18,82320,22521,23122,57124,079

24,65025,98629,10433,33040,41543,13048,14553,95159,25467,960

76,67882,743

82,44782,67782,37883,01382,88584,111

84,50783,97983,27282,36580,86880,239

79,45879,67679,33978,80381,08182,508

82,14281,39882,90080,09879,755

34,47330,73624,04541,45667,26675,85761,17848,26660,00467,37553,18347,37052,732

45,08047,40748,57754,32766,882

80,07198,401104,547109,926115,422

106,158107,147121,061161,256, 191,102173,829182,499204,880261,941303,178

320,977318,621

322,053322,749323,054324,826327,033327,105

328,861328,384327,955323,556321,574318,621

318,114315,957315,639314,521310,482306,032

303,235299,001295,883293,107291,128

28,57926,61919,62235,43563,39472,68058,63745,250

56,24163,88050,35244,55949,37342,51444,37545,96551,27063,691

76,29894,575100,576105,950111,250101,566102,119114,725153,876185,560165,930174,211196,417251,663291,883

310,051308,370

311,146311,666312,018313,642315,597315,618

317,462317,057316,841312,769311,082308,370

307,877306,211305,947305,004301,194296,866

294,272290,011286,706283,960281,861

5,8944,1174,4236,0213,8723,1772,5413,016

3,7633,4952,8312,8113,359

2,5663,0322,6123,0573,1913,7733,8263,9713,9764,1724,5925,0276,3367,380515427,8988,2888,46310,27811,295

10,92610,251

10,90711,08411,03611,18411,43611,487

11,39911,32711,11410,78710,49210,251

10,2379,7469,6929,5189,2889,166

8,9638,9909,1779,1479,267

3.423.633.873.353.093.012.782.632.692.803.103.333.813.703.853.753.653.383.313.914.19

3.803.343.303.623.89

3.793.77

3.803.773.713.703.703.66

3.683.683.703.763.763.77

3.903.783.763.863.713.69

3.673.693.633.773.72

4.124.274.554.003.693.543.373.133.243.373.723.954.554.404.654.504.394,063.904.635.034.573.993.924.264.63

4.534.59

4.564.534.454.444.434.37

4.424.424.464.554.564.59

4.764.624.614.714.524.51

4.494.554.464.664.61

1 Monthly average for year and total for month.3 Seasonally adjusted, end of period.3 Ratio of unfilled orders at end of period to shipments for period; excludes industries with no unfilled orders. Annual figures relate

to seasonally adjusted data for December.Note.—Data beginning 1958 are not strictly comparable with earlier data.Source: Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census.

220Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 227: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

PRICES

TABLE B-52.—Consumer price indexes, major expenditure classes, 1929-82

[1967^100]

Year or month

19291933 ..19391940194119421943194419451946194719481949195019511952. .1953195419551956195719581959I96019611962196319641965196619671968... .19691970197119721973.,.197419751976197719781979...198019811982..!1981:

JanFebMar ....AprMayJune 1ZJulvAugilZZSeptOctNov..Dec

1982:JanFebMar

JuneJulyAugSept

NovDec

Allitems

51.338.841.642.044148.851852.753.958.566.972.171.472.177.879.580.180.580.281484.386.687.388.789.690691.792 994.597 2

100.0104.2109.8116.31213125.3133.1147.7161.2170.5181.5195.4217.4246.8272.4289.1

260.5263.2265.1266.8269.0271.3274.4276.5279.3279.9280.7281.5

282.5283.4283.1284.3287.1290.6292.2292.8293.3294.1293.6292.4

Food andbeverages

Total*

100.0103 6108.8114.7118 3123.2139.5158.7172.1177.4188.0206 3228.5248.0267.3278.2

2614263.7265.0265.7265.4266.5268.9270.1270.7270.3269.9270.5

273.6275.8275.6276.5278.1280.2280.8279.9280.1279.6279.1279.1

Food

48.330.634.635.238 445.150349.650.758.170.676.673.574.582.884.383.082.881.682 284.988.587.188.089.189991.292 494.499.1

100.0103.6108.9114.9118.4123.5141.4161.7175.4180.8192.22114234.5254.6274.6285.7

268.6270.8272.2272.9272.5273.6276.2277.4278.0277.6277.1277.8

281.0283.3283.0283.9285.5287.8288.5287.4287.6287.0286.4286.5

Housing

Total2

52.252.453 756.256 858.159.160.665.269.870.972.877.278.780.881.782.383 686.287.788.690.290.991792.793 894.997 2

100.0104.0110.4118.2123 4128.1133.7148.8164.5174.6186.5202 8227.6263.3293.5314.7

279.1280.9282.6284.8288.5292.2297.0299.7303.7303.5304.2305.2

306.1307.3306.7309.4313.8317.5319.2320.1319.7320.7319.0316.3

Rent,resi-

dential

76 054.156.056257 258.558 558.658859.261165.168 070473.276280.383 284.385987.589.190.491.792.994 095.095996.998 2

100.0102 4105.7110.11152119.2124.3130.6137 3144.7153.5164 0176.0191.6208.2224.0

200 9201.9203.0204.2205.9206.8207.8210.3211.9213.6215.0216.5

217.8218.6219.6220.1221.8222.6224.8226.0226.9228.9230.2230.8

Homeowner-ship

75.076.377.078381.783.584.486.386.987 989.090892.796.3

100.0105.7116.0128.5133.7140.1146.7163.2181.7191.7204.9227,2262.4314.0352.7376.8

335.8335.8336.8339.3345.0350.4358.0361.8367.8366.7367.2367.8

367.5368.7365.7370.6377.4382.8384.5385.9383.0382.8379.5372.9

Fuel andother

utilities3

83.083.585.187.389.991.793.895.997.197 398.298.498.398.8

100.0101.3103.6107.6115.0120.1126.9150.2167.8182.7202.2216.0239.3278.6319.2350.8

296.7304.5308.4310.5314.9320.2325.1327.8331.1330.1329.8331.8

336.2337.1339.3339.2345.4352.2354.7356.3359.5363.4362.2364.1

Appareland

upkeep

48 536.942.442 844852.354 658.561567.578.283.380179.086.185.384.684 584.185 887.387.588.289.690.490 991.992 793.7961

100.0105.4111.5116.1119 8122.3126.8136.2142.3147.6154.2159 6166.6178.4186.9191.8

181.1182.0185.1186.4186.4185.8184.7187.4190.7191.5191.3190.5

187.3188.0191.1191.9191.5190.8189.7191.8194.9195.5195.4193.6

Trans-portation

43.042.744 248.147 947.947.850.355.561.866.468.272.577.379.578.377.478.883.386.089.689.690.692.593.094.395.997.2

100.0103.2107.2112.7118.6119.9123.8137.7150.6165.5177.2185.5212.0249.7280.0291.5

264.7270.9273.5275.3277.8279.9282.6283.7285.2287.2289.1289.8

289.9288.0285.1282.9285.6292.8296.1296.2295.3295.5295.8294.8

Medicalcare

36.736.837 038.039 941.142144.448151.152 753 756.359 361.463464.867 269.973.276.479.181.483 585.687 389.593.4

100.0106.1113.4120.6128.4132.5137.7150.5168.6184.7202.4219.4239.7265.9294.5328.7

279.5282.6284.7287.0289.0291.5295.6299.3301.7304.8308.2310.2

313.4316.2318.8321.7323.8326.4330.0333.3336.0338.7342.2344.3

Enter-tainment

100.0105.7111.0116.7122.9126.5130.0139.8152.2159.8167.7176.6188.5205.3221.4235.8

214.4216.7218.2219.2220.3220.8221.1222.3224.0225.5226.8227.3

229.2231.2232.8233.9234.4235.6236,6237.4238.3240.3239.9240.1

Othergoodsand

services

100.0105.2110.4116.8122.4127.5132.5142.0153.9162.7172.2183.3196.7214.5235.7259.9

226.2227.4228.7229.9232.2233.4234.4235.6243.0245.2245.9246.7

248.4250.3252.2253.8255.0255.8257.2258.3266.6271.2273.8276.6

Ener-gy4

90.190.391.894 294 494 795 094696 397.8

100.0101.5104.2107.0111.2114.3123.5159.7176.6189.3207.3220.4275.9361.1410.0416.1

381.7401.1409.3409.8411.3414.0415.7416.1417.1414.9414.1414.6

416.4413.0406.1395.7402.1418.6424.5424.5424.2425.0422.6419.9

1 Includes alcoholic beverages, not shown separately.* Includes other items not shown separately. Series beginning 1967 not comparable with series for earlier years.• Fuel oil, coal, and bottled gas; gas (piped) and electricity; and other utilities and public services.4 Fuel oil, coal, and bottled gas; gas (piped) and electricity; and motor fuel, motor oi l coolant, etc.Note.—Data beginning 1978 are for all urban consumers; earlier data are for urban wage earners and clerical workers.Source: Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics.

221Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 228: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

TABLE B-53.—Consumer price indexes, selected expenditure classes, 1939-82

[1967-100]

Year or month

19391940194119421943194419451946194719481949195019511952195319541955195619571958195919601961196219631964196519661967196819691970197119721973197419751976197719781979

1980198119821981;JanFebMar

t :::JuneJulyAug

S51 :-:::NovDec

1982:JanFebMarApr«&.::JuneJulyAucSeptOctNov.....Dec

Food and beverage

Total1

100.01036108.8114 7118.3123.2139 5158.71721177 4188.0206 3228.52480267.3278.2

261.4263 7265.0265.7265 4266.5268.9270.1270.7270 32699270.5

273.6275.8275.6276.5278.1280.2280.8279.92801279 62791279.1

>

Food

Total

34 635 238445150349650 758170 676 673 574 582 884 383.082 881.682.284.988 587 188.089189.991.292 494 49911000103 6108.9114 9118.4123 51414161.71754180 8192 22114234.5254 6274.6285.7

268.62708272 2272.9272 5273.6276.2277.4278.0277 62771277.8

281.0283.3283.0283 9285.5287.8288.5287.4287 6287 0286 4286.5

Athome

73 579 876777 686387.886.285.884.184.487.291088 889.690 491.092.293 295.5100 3100.0103 2108.2113 7116.4121.61414162.4175.8179 5190.2210 2232.9251.5269.9279.2

265.6267.3268.6268.7267 7268.7271.6272.8273.227212710271.7

275.3278.0277.1277.9279.8282.6282.8280.8280.6279.4278 3277.8

Awayfromhome

68.970.170.872.274.977.279 381.483.285.487.388.990.995.1100.0105.2lll.G119.9126.1131.1141.4159.4174.3186.1200.3218.4242.9267.0291.0306.5

280.9284.7286.1288.2289 3290.6292.4293.7294.82962297 2297.7

299.8301.2302.4303 6304.8305.9307.6308.7309.8310 73114312.6

Homeownersliip

Total

75.076.377.078.381.783.584486.386.987.989.090 892.796 3100.0105.7116.0128.5133.7140.1146 7163.2181.71917204.9227.2262.4314.0352.7376.8

335.8335.8336.8339.3345 0350.4358.0361.8367.8366 7367 2367.8

367.5368.7365.7370.6377.4382.8384.5385.9383.0382.8379.5372.9

Homepur-chase

86.587.187.387.690.091.391391.892.393.294.295 797.098 6100.0102 8109.5118 3124.8130.0132 7142.7160.3168 4179.5196.7223.1254.3267.7281.6

266.2263.0261.1260.7263 0266.6271.4272.6274.5272 5270 2270.5

269.3270.4269.2272.3279.3285.6287.7287.9286.8289.9290.4290.9

Financ-ing,taxes,andinsur-ance

100.01083123.7142 3143.5150.8160 6181.1201.9212 8227.2257.8308.9396.0472.5511.4

435.2437.1441.1447.1458 3467.2480.0488.3501.85018505 6506.3

506.0507.2500.9508.4516.2521.8524.3527.3519.9514.3504.8486.2

Mainte-nanceandrepair

71.272.474.177.280.581.883.284.685.986.587.789.591.395.2100.0106.1115.0124.0133.7140.7151.0171.6187.6199.6214.7233.0256.4285.7314.4334.1

296.8302.8306.1309.3312.9315.5319.3320.5321.6320.8322.8324.1

326.7328.2327.2331.6334.5336.1334.7335.9338.4339.4339.0337.8

Total

83.083.585.187.389.991.793.895.997.197.398.298.498.398.8100.0101.3103.6107.6115.0120.1126.9150.2167.8182.7202,2216.0239.3278.6319.2350.8

296.7304.5308.4310.5314.9320.2325.1327.8331.1330.1329.8331.8

336.2337.1339.3339.2345.4352.2354.7356.3359.5363.4362.2364.1

Fuel and other utilities

Household fuels

Total

100.0101.4103.4107.9115.3120.1128.4160.7183.8202.3228.6247.4286.4349,4407.0446.2

375.4387.4393.7396.5403.3411.7417.2419.5422.4419.0417 6420.0

426.9427.6430.5428.2438.0448.4452.0454.0458.5464.5461.9464.0

Fuel

coal,andbot-tledgas

37.138.240.543.145.247.148.051.358.468.670.372.776.578.081.581.282.385.990.388.789.8

89.291.091.593.292.794.697.0100.0103.1105.6110.1117.5118.5136.0214.6235.3250.8283.4298.3403.1556.0675.9667.9

625.9675.6693.4690.6685.8682.0677.9674.6673.4672.7676.1682.5

686.0683.1664.0641.3644.6656.6659.9659.9662.8677.2691.3688.5

Gas(piped)andelec-tricity

82.982.181.481.080.680.379.677.477.179.181.081.281.582.684.285.387.588.489.392.494.798.699.499.499.499.499.499.6100.0100.9102.8107.3114.7120.5126.4145.8169.6189.0213.4232.6257.8301.8345.9393.8

318.5322 9326.7330.6339.6350.2357.6360.8364.5360.6358.3359.9

367.4368.7375.9377.8389.0398.9402.1404.4409.2413.4407.6410.6

Otherutili-tiesand

publicserv-ices

100.0101.2104.0107.4114.7120.6124.1130.31371145.4152.0158.3159.5165.2181.0200.2

171.9173.6174.0175.1176.2177.1180.61837187.4189.4190.7191.9

192.7193.9195.0197.7198.9200.4201.4202.4203.6204.5205.1206.6

See next page for continuation of table.

222

Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 229: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

TABLE B-53.—Consumer price indexes, selected expenditure classes, 1939-82—Continued

[1967=100]

Year or month

1939194019411942194319441945194619471948 ....19491950195119521953 ...195419551956195719581959196019611962196319641965196619671968 ....196919701971197219731974197519761977 .197819791980198119821981:JanFebMarAormr»jur&iir: ::::::::::::::JulyAusSeptOctNovDec

1982:JanFebMarAprNBWJune

JulyAuo ...

Sept :OctNovDec

Transportation

Total

43.042.744.248.147.947.947.850.355.561.866.468.272.577.379.578.377.478.883.386 089.6

89.690.692.593.094.395.997.2100.0103 2107.2

112 7118.6119.9123.8137.7150.6165.5177 2185.5212.0249 7280 0291.5

264.72709273 5275 3277.8279.9

282.6283 7285 2287 2289.1289.8

289 92880285.1282.9285 6292.8

296.1296.2295.3295 5295 8294.8

Private transportation

Total

44.2

43.645.952.351.451.451.354.361.568.272.3

72.575.880.882.480.378.980.184.787 491.1

90.691.393.093.494.796.397.5100.01030106.5

1111116.6117.5121.5136.6149.8164.61766185.0212.3

249 2277 5287.5

262.9269 4271.7273 4276.0277.9

279.6280 52819283 9285.8286.5

286 6284 5281.3278.8281.5288.9

292.3292.4291.129112914290.4

Newcars

43.2

43.346.6

69.275682.8

83.487.494.995894.390 993.59841015105.9

104.5104 5104.1103.5103.2100999.1100.0102 8104.4

107 6112.01110111.1117 5127.6135 71429153.8166.0

179 3190 2197.6

185 3184 8182 91861190.9192.2

192 519191913192 5195.3197.0

197 4195 5194.4196 0197 5198.1

198.6198 7197 7197 7199 0200.1

Usedcars

89.2*75.971.869.177.480 289.5

83.686994.896.0100.199497.0100.0(3)

103.1

104 3110.2110 5117.6122 6146.4167,9182 8186.5201.02081256 9296.4

234.0234 3235 42391245.2252.9

260 3266 9272 8278 2281.4281.9

280.5279 7280.9285.12914298.2

302.4304.4304.6306 7310 5312.6

Motorfuel ̂

49.0

48.150.553.454.054.253.854.962.270.472.3

71.873.975.880.382.583.686.590.088 889.9

92.591.491.991.891.494 997.0100.01014104.7

105 6106.3107.6118.1159 9170.8177.9188 2196.3265.6

3691410 9389.4

385.2410.8420 7419 3416.5414.4

412.9411.7

2411 1409 9409.5408.4

4061399 2384.1366.9370.6392.4

400.2398.4394.2390.73883381.7

Auto-mobilemainte-nanceandrepair

43.1

43.044.948.849.450.050.452.056.459.661.1

62.367.068.672.374.876.579.582.483 785.5

87.289.390.491.692.894.596.2100.0105 5112.2

120.6129.2135.1142.2156.8176.6189.7203 7220.6242.6

268 3293 6315.8

282.7285.4287.7289 0290.8291.9

293.5295.5298.73013302.8304.1

305.5307 7310.2311.9313.6316.0

318.0319.2320.6321.9322.3323.1

Other

103.41097

119.2128.4129.1127.8132.4141.2163.1177.3184.6198.6

222 62413257.8

232.4234.2234.7236.3238.9241.0

242.9243.0244.2247 5249.5250.6

253.3253 4254.5255.1255.7258.7

260.8260.8260.0261.4260.7259.6

Publictranspor-tation

33.133.133.133.333.433.533.534.436.040.745.248.954.057.561.365.567.470.011176178.3

81.084.687.488.590.191.995.2100.0104.6112.7

128.5137.7143.4144.8148.0158.6174.2182.4187.8200.3

251.6312 0346.0

286.4288.1293.9297.2297.7303.9

323.1326.5329.1330.8333.2333.8

334.9336.8336.7339.3342.1345.6

347.2348.1353.3356.3356.0355.6

Medical car

Total

36.7

36.837.038039.941142.144 448.151152.7

53.756359.361463.464 867.269973 276.4

79.181.483.585.687.389.593.4100.01061113.4

1206128.4132 5137.71505168.6184.7202 4219.4239.7

265 9294 5328.7

279.5282.6284.7287 0289.0291.5

295.6299.3301.7304 8308.2310.2

313.4316 2318.8321.7323.8326.4

330.0333.3336.0338.7342.2344.3

Medicalcarecom-

modities

71.1

70.871.473 073.574 374.876 281.886187.4

88.591091.892693.794 796.799 3102 8104.4

104.5103.3101.7100.8100.5100.2100.5100.0100 2101.3

1036105.4105.6105.9109 6118.8126.01341143.5153.8

1681186 5205.7

176.7179.2180.7182.4184.7186.3

187.7189.4190.8192.1193.1194.9

195.9197.7200.0202.4204.1205.6

206.5208.2209.9211.6212.9213.7

Medi-calcareserv-ices

32.5

32.532.733 735.436 937.940143.546 448.1

49.251755.057 058.760 462.865568772.0

74.977.780.282.684.687.392.0100.0107.3116.0

124 2133.3138.2144.3159.1179.1197.1216 7235.4258.3

287 4318 2356.0

302.1305.2307.5309.8311.7314.4

319.2323.4326.1329.7333.7335.7

339.4342.4345.1348.0350.2353.0

357.3361.0364.0366.9371.0373.4

1 Includes alcoholic beverages, not shown separately.2 Includes direct pricing of diesel fuel and gasohol beginning September 1981.3 Not available.Note.—Data beginning 1978 are for all urban consumers; earlier data are for urban wage earners and clerical workers.Source: Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics.

Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 230: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

TABLE B-54.—Consumer price indexes, commodities, services, and special groups, 1939-82

[1967-100]

Year ormonth

1939

1940194119421943194419451946194719481949

1950195119521953195419551956195719581959

I96019611962196319641965 ....1966196719681969 „

1970197119721973197419751976197719781979

198019811982

1981:JanFebMarAprMayJune

JulyAugSeptOctNov .Dec

1982:JanFebMar

June

JulyAugSeptOct.NovD€C

Allitems

41.6

42044.148851.852 753.958 566.972171.4

72177.879 580180580 281.484 386.687.3

88.789.690.691.792.994.597.2

100 0104.2109.8

116.3121.3125.3133.1147.7161.2170 5181.5195.4217.4

246.8272.4289.1

2605283.2265.1266.8269.0271.3

274.4276.5279.3279 9280.7281.5

282.528342831284.3287.1290.6

292,2292.8293.3294.1293.6292.4

Commodities

Allcom-

modities

40.2

40 643.349.654.054.756.362 475.080478.3

78885.987 086.785985.185.988.690.690.7

91.592.092.893.694.695.798.2

100.0103.7108.4

113.5117.4120.9129.9145.5158.4165.2174.7187.1208.4

233.9253.6263.8

245.4248.3249.8250.8251.9253.2

255.0256.2257.7257.9258.0258.4

258.8259.5258.8258.9261.5265.1

266.5266.4266.6267.5267.8267.7

Food

34.6

35238.445150.349650.758170.676 673.5

74 582.884 383.082881.682.284.988.587.188.089.189.991.292.494.499.1

100.0103.6108.9

114.9118.4123.5141.4161.7175.41808192.2211.4234.5

254.6274.6285.7

268.6270.8272.2272.9272.5273.6

276.2277.4278,0277 6277.1277.8

281.0283 3283 0283.9285.5287.8

288.5287.4287.6287.0286.4286.5

Commodities less food

All

47.7

48 050.456.058.461.664.168476.882.781.5

81.487.588 388.587 586.987.890.591.592.7

93.193.494.194.895.696.297.5

100.0103.7108.1

112.5116.8119.4123.5136.6149.11566165.1174.7195.1

222.0241.2250.9

232.4

238.0239.6241.1

242.6243.8245.5245.9246.2246.5

245.9246 0245.2245.0247.8251,9

253.5253.8253.9255.4256.0255.8

Durable

48.5

48151.458460.365 970.974180.386,287.4

88495.196495.793 391.591.594 495.997.3

96.796.697.697.998.898.498.5

100 0103.1107.0

111.8116.5118.9121.9130.6145.5154 3163.2173.9191.1

210.4227.1241.1

2210220.3219.8221.1223.9226.6

229.6230.9232.6232 9233.2233.7

233.4233 72335235.8239.8243.2

244.7244.6244.1246.0246.6247.3

Non-durable

44.3

44 746.751653.856 658.662972.277 876.3

76282.082483.183 583 585.387688.289.3

90791.291.892.793.594.897.0

1000104.1108.8

113.1117.0119.8124.8140.9151.7158 3166.5174.3198.7

235.2257.5261.6

2453253.2257.5258.1258.2258.0

257.5258.4260.3260 7261.1261.1

260.22601258 4255.0256.2261.2

263.0263.6264.6265.7266.1264.7

Services

Allservices

43.5

43 644.245646.447 548.249151.154 356.9

58.761.864567.369 570.972.775.678.580.8

83.585.286.888.590.292.295.8

100 0105.2112.5

121.6128.4133.3139.1152.1166.6180 4194.3210.9234.2

270.3305.7333.3

287,7290.1292.5295.4299.6303.5

308.8312.2317.3318 6320.6321.8

323.9325 3325 5328.4331.8334.9

337.0338.9339.7340.3338.6335.6

Rent

56.0

56.257.258.558.558.658.859.261.165.168.0

70.473.276 280.383 284 385.987.589.190.491.792.994.095.095.996.998.2

100 0102.4105.7

110.1115.2119.2124.3130.6137.3144 7153.5164.0176.0

191.6208.2224.0

2009201.9203.0204.2205.9206.8

207.8210.3211.92136215.0216.5

217.82186219 6220.1221.8222.6

224.8226.0226.9228.9230.2230.8

Serv-iceslessrent

38.1

38,138,640.342.144.245.146749.051.954.5

56.059.362 264.866768.270.173.376.479.081.983.985.587.389.291.595.3

100.0105.7113.8

123.7130.8135.9141.8156.0171.9186 8201.6219.4244.9

285.1324.3354.2

304.2306.9309.5312.8317.4321.9

328.1331.7337.5338 7340.8342.0

344.2345.7345.7349.1352.8356.5

358.5360.5361.3361.6359.3355.5

Allitemslessfood

47.2

47 348.752153.655 756.959 464.969670.3

71175.777 579.079 579.781.183.885.787.3

88.889.790.892.093.294.596.7

100.0104.4110.1

116.7122.1125.8130.7143.7157.1167 5178.4191.2213.0

244.0270.6288.4

257.6260.4262.3264.2267.0269.5

272.7274.9278.22790280.1280.8

281.42821281 7282.9286.0289.7

291.5292.5292.9294.0293.6292.1

Special indexes

Allitemsless

energy

83.986.387.0

83.389.390.491.692.994.397.3

100.0104.4110.3

117.0122.0126.1133.8146.9160.2169.2179.8193.8213.1

238.0261.7279.3

251.2252.5

260.2

263.5265.6268.6269 4270.4271.1

272.1273.4273.6275.7278.3280.7

282.0282.7283.1284.0283.6282.5

Allitemslessfoodand

ener-gy

83 385.287.0

88389.390.591.693.094.396.6

100 0104.6110.7

117.6123.1126.9131.3142.2155.3165 5175.8188.7207.0

232.8257.1276.1

245.7246.8248.1

255.6

259.0261.3264.82659267.2267.9

268.5269.5269.8272.2274.9277.3

278.7279,8280.4281.5281,2279.9

Ener-gy1

90.190.391.8

94.294.494.795.094.696.397.8

100.0101.5104.2

107,0111.2114.3123.5159.7176.6189.3207.3220.4275.9

361.1410.0416.1

381.7401.1409.3409,8411.3414.0

415.7416.1417.1414.9414,1414.6

416.4413.0406.1395.7402.1418.6

424.5424.5424.2425.0422.6419.9

1 fuel oil, coal, and bottled gas; gas (piped) and electricity; and motor fuel, motor oil, coolant, etc.Note.—Data beginning 1978 are for all urban consumers; earlier data are for urban wage earners and clerical workers.Source: Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics.

224

Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 231: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

TABLE B-55.—Changes in consumer price indexes, commodities and services, 1948-82

[Percent change]

Year or month

194819491950195119521953195419551956195719581959I960. .1961196219631964 .196519661967196819691970197119721973197419751976197719781979198019811982

1981:JanFebMarADrIvTayJune .JulyAusSeptOctNovDec

1982:JanFebMar.AprMayJuneJulvAugSeptOctNovDec

Alt items

Dec.to

Dec.1

27185.85.9

.9

.6- . 5

.42.9301.81.51.5

71.2161.21.93.43.04.76.1553.4348.8

12.27.0486.89.0

13.312 48.93.9

Yearto

year

7.8101.07.92.2

.8

.5- . 41.53.62.7

.81.61.01.11.21.31.72.92.94.25.4594.3336.2

11.09.15.86.57.7

11.313 510.46.1

Unad-justed

0.81.0

7.6.8.9

1.18

1.0.2.3.3

4.3

- . 1.4

101.2

6.2.2.3

_ 2- .4

Sea-sonally

ad-justed

0.81.0.6.4.8.7

1.1.8

1.1.4.5,4

3.2

- . 3

1.01.0

6.3.2.5

3

Commodities

Total

Dec.to

Dec.1

1.7417.75.9

-.6-1 .4_ .42.62.61.3.6

1.1o1.014.8

1.62.52.53.85.5402.934

10.412.76.3336.189

13.01116.03.6

Unad-justed

0.71.2

6.4.4..5,75

.6

!o,2

2.3

~\o101.4

5- . 0

'.3

- .0

Yearto

year

7.2- 2 6

.69.01.3

- . 9- . 9

.93.12.3

.1

.9

.5

.9

.91.11.22.61.83.74.54.73.43.07.4

12.08.94.35.87.1

11.412.28.44.0

Sea-sonally

ad-Justed

0.61.1,4

0

A.8.6

A2.3

.1

- i s19

1.36.0.2.6.3

Food

Dec.to

Dec.1

- 0 . 8- 3 7

9.67.4

- 1 . 1- 1 . 3- 1 . 6- . 93.12.82.2

- . 83.1

= 91.5191.43.43.91.24.37.22.24.347

20.112.26.5

68.0

11.810.210.24.33.1

Yearto

year

8.5401.4

11.11.8

- 1 . 5- . 2

- 1 . 4.7

3.34.2

- 1 . 61.01.3.9

1.41.32.25.0

.93.65.15.53.04.3

14.514.48.53.16.3

10.010.98.67.94.0

Commoditiesless food

Dec.to

Dec1

5.3485.74.6

~.2- 1 . 4

02.52.2.8

1.5- . 3

.6

.71.2

.71.93.13.74.54.82.32.55.0

13.26.25.14.97.7

14.311.56.73.8

Change from preceding

Unad-justed

0.8

5

~XA

1.04.2

- . 1- . 2

12.8

- . 1

.e

.82

- . 4.1

-2.0

Sea-sonally

ad-justed

0.4.6.3

\\2.7.5

.3

.1

.1

7.6

- . 4.3.8.6.13

.2

.11

Unad-justed

0.61.3

7.4.7.6.65

.2

.1

.1

- 2.0

- . 3- . 11.11.7

6.1.0.6.2

- .1

Yearto

year

7715

- . 17.5.9.2

- 1 . 1_ 71.0311.11.3.43.77.8.6

142.6374.24 13.8223.4

10.69.2505.458

11.713 88.64.0

month

Sea-sonally

ad-justed

0.712

51

.5

.586.8.4.2.4

10

- . 5- . 5

.91.5

8.2.2.8.3.2

Services

Dec.to

Dec.1

613,63.65.24.64.21.9233.14.52.73.72.7191.7231.82.64.94.06.17.4824.1366.2

11.38.17.37.99.3

13.7\A213.04.3

Yearto

year

63483.2534.4433.3202.5403.82.93.3201.9201.92.2394.45.26.9815.6384.49.39.5837.78.5

11.015.413.19.0

Unad-justed

1.188

1.01.41.31.7111.6.4.6,4

7.4.1.9

1.0.9.6.6.2.2

— 5-.9

Sea-sonally

ad-justed

1.188

1.01.31.117121.5.5.9.5

5

!o.9.9.86.6.1.2

- . 1- .8

Energy 2

Dec.to

Dec.1

- 0 . 74.31.5

- 1 12.1

- 8-22.01.81.41.73.14 53.12.8

16.821.611.66.97.28.0

37.418.111.91.3

Yearto

year

0.21.72.6

2.33

- .41.81.62.21.52.72.73.92.88.0

29.310.67.29.56.3

25.230.913.51.5

Unad-justed

3.15.120

!4.7.41.2

2.1

4- . 8

- 1 . 7= 2.6

1.64.11.40

- . 1.2

- . 6- .6

Sea-sonally

ad-justed

1 Changes from December to December are based on unadjusted indexes.2 Fuel oil, coal, and bottled gas; gas (piped) and electricity; and motor fuel, motor oil, coolant, etc.Note—Data beginning 1978 are for all urban consumers; earlier data are for urban wage earners and clerical workers.Source: Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics.

225

Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 232: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

TABLE B-56.—Changes in special consumer price indexes, 1938-82

[Percent change]

Year or month

1958195919601961196219631964196519661967196819691970197119721973197419751976197719781979

198019811982

1981;JanFebMarAprMayJuneJulyAug...::::::::::::..Sept .........OctNovDec

1982:JanFebMarApr(Jay..: 7JuneJulyAugSeptOct

Dec

All items

Dec.to

Dec.1

181.5157

121612193.430476.15.53.43.48.8

12.27.0486.890

13.3

12.4893.9

Unad-justed

0.810

s.8.9

1.1.8

10

.'3

.3

.4

.3

.4101.2.6.223

= 2= .4

Yearto

Year

27.8

1610111213172.9294.25.45.94,33.36.2

11.09.1586.577

11.3

13.51046.1

Sea-sonally

ad-justed

0.810.64.87

1.1.8

11.4.5

.3

.2- 3

.2101.0

.6

251

All items lessfood

Dec.to

Dec.1

162.3101.1121.6101.63.33.54.95.76.53.13.05.6

12.27.16.26.38.5

14.0

12.99.94.0

Unad-justed

0.811

71.1.9

1.2.8

12

.4

.2

.2

.2- . 1

1*11.3.6

4— 1= .5

Yearto

Year

2.31.9171.0121.3131.42.33.44.45.56.04.63.03.99.99.36.66.57,2

11.4

14.610.96.6

Sea-sonally

ad-justed

0.91075.9.8

1.3.8

12

.6

.2

.2-2

101.27.4.151

•=.3

All items lessenergy

Dec.to

Dec.1

191.414.8

121.8131.93.5314.96.45.63.33.58.3

11.56.74.66.89.2

11.1

11.7864.2

Yearto

Year

29.8

1511121.314153.2284.45.76.14.33.46.19.89.1566.37.8

10.0

11.710 06.7

All items lessfood andenergy

Dec.to

Dec.1

182.2

81.5111.812153.3395.16.16.63.13.04.7

11.36.7616.485

11.3

12.1964.5

Yearto

Year

2.32.1151.11.31.21.51.42.43.54.65.86.24.73.13.58.39.26.66.27.39.7

12.510.47.4

Change from preceding month

Unad-justed

0.65.5

.99

1.3.8

11.3.4.3

.4

.5

.89.9.5.2

3- 1

Sea-sonally

justed

Unad-justed

0.54

.81.21.01.3.9

13.4.5.3

.2

.4

.1

.910.9.5.4,2.4

- .1=.5

Sea-sonally

ad-justed

0.6.4

.61.01.11.41.01.1.5.4

.3

0.8.9.9.6

.0

.4

- .1

All iterfood,<

andpurcha

fina

Dec.to

Dec.1

4.65.25.73,42.94.0

11.16.36.85.56.97.5

9.99.46.0

Unad-justed

0.5.8

.'9

.8

.9

.81.1

7.4

,3,4.67.6.6.4.4.8.6.3

ns lessJnergy,homeseandice1

Yearto

Year

4.54.95.25.0273.37.88.76.86.16,07.3

9.09.57.6

Sea-sonally

ad-justed

0.6.8.6.87.8

1.0.8.9.8.6.7

.5

.4

.5

.6

.6

.4

.472.5

All items

Dec.to

Dec.1

3.95.24.53.53.38.5

11.16.6516.379

10.8

10.88.55.0

Unad-justed

0.913.8.6.6.6.87.8

.4

.4

.5

.2

71.07.2.5.4.1

Yearto

Year

3.74.4494.33.16.2

10.18.3576.4689.6

11.2956.1

Sea-sonally

ad-justed

0.710.8.4

.5

.8

76

.6

.4

.1

„, 2

1.08.3

64.3

1 Changes from December to December are based on unadjusted indexes.2 All items less food, energy, and home purchase and financing, taxes, and insurance; estimated series.3 An experimental measure using a rental equivalence approach for homeownership costs. Effective with data for January 1983, the

consumer price index for all urban consumers will incorporate a rental equivalence measure.Note.—Data beginning 1978 are for all urban consumers; earlier data are for urban wage earners and clerical workers.Source: Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics.

226

Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 233: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

TABLE B-57.—Producer price indexes by stage of processing, 1947-82

[1967=100]

Year or month

19471948..1949

19501951195219531954

19551956195719581959

I9601961196219631964

19651966196719681969

1970197119721973.1974

19751976197719781979

198019811982 *

1981:JanFebMarAor

Sri™:::: :::::::;:::::"::::::June.

July

SectOctNovDec

1982: >JanFebMarAprMay :..::.: ::.:.:June

July .".Aug......

OctNovDec

Finished goods

Totalfinishedgoods

74.079977.6

79 086.586 085.185.3

85 587.991193.293.0

93.793 794 093.7941

95.798.8100 0102.8106.6

110.3113 7117.2127 9147.5

163 4170.61817195.9217.7

247.0269 8280.6

260.9263 3266 0268.5269.6270 5

2718271 52715274 3274.7275.4

277.9277.9277 3277 3277 8279.9

2817282 328142841284 9285.1

Consumer foods

Total

82.890 483.1

84 795.294389.488.7

86.586.389 394.590.1

92.191792.591.491.9

95.4101.6100 0103.6110.0

113.5115 3121.7146 4166.9

1810180.4189 9207.2226.2

239.5253 6259.3

251.02513252 6251.9252.8253 8

257 6256 3256 2254 0252.7252.9

256.4258.225712600262 3263.4

260.6259 7259 9257 8257 6258.2

Crude

99.4107.1101.3

92.2105.9112.8105.294.7

98.898.797.4103.594.3100.696.197.095.598.2

98.6104.8100.0107.5116.0

116.3115.8121.21607180.8

1812193.9201.0216.8233.1

237.2263.8252.5

257.9265.6279 7279.3263.1258.9

262.7256 9253 5253 8260.0273.9

280.6282.5263.3266.6259.9254.7

241.0239.2227.8232.0235.6247.2

Proc-essed

80.287.680.1

83.493.291.386.787.6

84.484.387.993.189.5

90.790.991.790.790.8

94.9101.0100.0103.0108.9

113.1115.1121.7143 9164.6

1813177.8187 3204.6223.8

237.8250.6257.7

248.4247.92481247.4249.8251.3

255.0254 2254 4252 0249.9249.0

252.1254.0254.5257.3260.3262.0

260.2259.4260.6258.0257.4257.1

Finished goods excluding consumer foods

Total

100.0102.6105.4

109.1113.1115.4120.1139.3

156 2166.1177 7190.7213.3

247.8273.3285.7

262.4265.5268 7272,1273.3274.1

274.7274.6274 72791280.0280.9

283.0282.4281.9281.1281.0283.4

286.7287.9286.6290.8291.9292.0

Consumer goods

Total

79.084.082.2

83.589.588.389.189.4

90.192.394.694.795.9

96.396.296.096.095.9

96.698.1100.0102.1104.6

107.7111.4113.5118.6138.6

1531162.6174 3186.7211.5

250.8276.5287.8

265.1268.5272 5276.1277.0277.7

277.9277.7277 92816282.4283.2

285.2284.9284.0282.3281.8284.8

288.8290.2289.1293.3294.6294.3

Durable

74.679.781.8

82.788.288.989.690.391.294.397.198.499.6

99.298 898.397.898.2

97.998.5100.0102.2104.0

106.9110.8113.3115.4125.9

138 2144.5152.8166.9183.2

206.2218.6226.7

214.9215.1214 0216.6218.1218.2

218.1218.3215 8224 5224.7225.4

226.2224.0223.9224.1225.0225.9

226.7227.5223.2231.1230.8231.5

Non-durable

80.785.882.3

83 690.087 888.688.9

89.491.193.292.694.094.794 794.895.194.895.997.81000102.2105.0

108.3111.7113.6120.5146.8

163 0174.8189.3200.0231.3

283.9319.6333.5

302.7308.4316 0320.4321.0322.0

322.5322.1324 2324 3325.4326.3

329.3330.3328.8325.7324.3328.7

335.3337.2338.4339.7342.4341.4

Capitalequipment

55.460 463.4

64971.272 473.674.576 782.487 589.891.591.791892.292.493.3

94.496.8100 0103.5106.9

112.0116.6119.5123.5141.0

162 5173.4184.6199.2216.5

239.8264.3279.6

254.6

258 1260.8262.5263.8

265.4265.8265 32715273.0274.1

276.2275.0275.8277.2278.1279.2

280.2280.7279.5283.8284.0285.1

finishedconsumergoods

80.586582.5

83 991.890 789.289.1

88.589.892.494.493.6

94.594394.694.194.3

96.199.4100 0102.7106.6

109.9112.9116.6129.2149.3

163.6169.7180.7194.9217.9

248.9271.3280.9

262.5265.0268.2270.6271.5272.3

273.5273.0273.12751275.2275.8

278.3278.6nil277.3217.1280.1

282.1282.8282.0284.2285.2285.1

See next page for continuation of table.

227

Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 234: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

TABLE B-57.—Producer price indexes by stage of processing, 1947-82—Continued

[1967-100]

Year or month

194719481949

19501951195219531954

19551956195719581959

I960196119621963::.:..:1964

1966:::::::::::::::::::196719681969

19701971197219731974

19751976197719781979

198019811982 l

1981:JanFebMarAprMayJune

JulyAugSept

NovDec

1982:»Jan .FebMarAprMayJune::;::::::::::::

July

SentOctNovDec.

Intermediate materials, supplies, and components

Total

72.478.375.2

78.688.135.586.086.5

88.192.094.194.395.6

95.695.094.995.295.5

96.899.2

100.0102.3105.8

109.9114.1118.7131.6162.9

180.0189.1201.5215.6243.2

280.3306.0310.4

296.1298.3302.0305.8306.7307.2

308.5310.1309.7309.4309.0309.4

311.0311.1310.6309.9309.8309.9

311.1310.8310.7310.0310.1310.2

Foodsand

feeds3

:::::::::::::

100099.4

102.7

1091111.7118.51684200.2

195.31853190.5203.1226.1

252.6250,3239.6

2709261.3255.6254.9253.1253.2

251.1250.2243.5239.3235 2235.2

238.8239.4237.7240.92450245.1

243.6240.2238 4234 8234.6235.4

Other

70.076174.2

77 787.084 385.385.7

88.392.695.094.896.4

96.895.595.395.095.6

96.998.9

100 0102.5106.1

109 9114.3118.91281159.5

178.61894202.3216.5244.4

282 3310.1315.7

298 0301.0305.4309.5310.7311.2

312.7314.5314.6314.6314 5314.9

316.4316.4316.0315.1314 6314.7

316.1316.0316 0315 5315.7315.7

Materials andcomponents

Formanufac-

turing

72.177 874.5

78188.584 886.286.3

88.492.694.895.296.5

96.595.394.794.995.9

97.499.3

1000102.2105.8

1100112.8117.0127 7162.2

178.7185 4195.4208.7234.4

265 7286.1290.1

279 6280.3281.6284.1285.1285.8

287.9289.8290.2290.2289 5289.3

290.4290.9290.4290.62914289.8

289.2288.7290 2289 5288.9288.7

Forcon-

struction

66.073.173.2

77 084.383 785.185.5

88.993.594.094.096.6

95.994,694.294.595.4

96.298.8

100 0105.0110.8

112,6119.7126.2136 7161.6

176.4188.4203.4224.7247.4

268 3287.6293.5

279 2280.3282.7288.0288.5289.6

290.4290.7290.0290.1290.2291.1

292.0293.0293.3294.0293 7294.5

294.3293.5293.4293 2293.0294.5

Proc-essedfirolc

andlubri-cants

85.596.988.2

89.993.992 893.493.3

93.396.2

101.996.095.6

98.299.499.098.196.0

97.499.2

100097.698.5

105.0115.2118.91315199.1

233.02501282.5295.3364.8

503 0595.4591.8

5519569.8598.3608.5608.7605.7

602.0607.8601.4596.9595.1598.1

604.4596.8593.0579.9570.9581.1

600.7603.8593.2590 2594.3593.6

tainers

66.869.870.1

72.084.579.980.081.5

82.688.692.594.794.2

95.594.795.994.794.0

95.898.4

100 0102.4106.3

111.4116.6121.91292152.2

171.4180 2188.3202.8226.8

254 5276,1285.5

264.6268.2270.9274.3276.4277.2

278.8280.3280.6280.9280.6280.2

282.5285.5286.3287.0287.0286.5

286.3285.4285.5285.1284.7284.6

Supplies

77.581076.3

78 988.888 884.386.3

84.887.188.090.091.2

90.791.893.895.294.3

95.299.4

100 0101.0102.8

1080111.011561406154.5

168.11790188.7198.5218.2

244 5263.8272.2

257 8257.8258.9262.4264.0264.6

266.0266.1

267 2268.3

269.8270.4270,6272.12734273.4

273.1272.6272 5272 3273.0273.2

Crude materials for further processing

Total

101.2110996.0

104 6120.1110 3101.9101.0

97.197.699.8

102.099.4

97.096.597.595.494.5

99.3105.71000101.6108.4

1123115.1127.6174 0196.1

196.9202 7209.2234.4274.3

304 6329.0319.5

328 0336.5334.2336.3334.4335.4

337.3333.0327.4319 9313 9311.5

318.4321.6320.0322.6328 3325.6

323.4319.8316 3312 2313.4312.6

Food-stuffsand

feed-stuffs

111.7120 8100.3

107 6124.5117 2104.9104.9

95.193.197.2

103.096.2

95.193.895.792.990.8

97.1105.9100 0101.3109.3

1120114.2127.5180 0189.4

191.8190,2192.1216.2247.9

259.2257.4247.8

270 7267,1262,1263.5260.6264.3

267.2261.8253.4245.7238 3233.7

242.6248.3247.9254.4262 6259.9

255.5249.6242.9236 3236.3237.0

Total

:;;:::;::;:::

100 0102.2106.8

112.7117.0128.0162 5208.9

206.9228.5245.0272.3330.0

401.0482.3474.0

450.1484.9488.4492.1492.4487.4

487.2485.3486.0479.2476.3478.6

481.5479.3475.2469.9470 2467.7

469.8471.0474.3475 4479.0475.0

Other

Fuel

66.678778.3

77 979.479 982.779.0

78.884.489.290.391.9

92.892.692.193.292.8

93.596.3

100.0102.3106.6

122.6139.0148.7164 5219.4

271.5305.3372.1426.6507.6

615.0751.2866.3

677.4697.7703.6716.673B.4759,2

781.2766.7788.7779.0792.5813.0

812.9824.5839.7851.28648C83.9

901.3906.9926.3919.4955.3949.5

Other

90.6100791.6

104 7120.7104 6100.198.2

103.8107.6106.2102.2105.8

101.4102.5102.0100.7102.4

104.5106.71000102.1106.9

109.8110.7121.91615205.4

188.3206.7212.2233.1284.5

346.1413.7376.9

391.0427.9430,9432.5428.3418.1

413.1413.9410.2404.1397.8396.2

399.53918387.1378.8376 6370.0

369.2369.5369.6372.2369.5366.0

1 Data have been revised through August 1982 to reflect the availability of late reports and corrections by respondents. All data aresubject to revision 4 months after original publication.

* Intermediate materials for food manufacturing and feeds.Source: Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics.

228Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 235: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

TABLE B-58.—Producer price indexes by stage of processing, special groups, 1974-82

[1967=100]

Year or month

197419751976197719781979

198019811982 2

1981:JanFebMarAprMayJune

JulyAugSeptOctNovDec

1982:2

JanFeb..MarApr«h» ::JuneJulyAugSeptOctNov...Dec

Finished goods

Total

147.5163 4170.6181.7195.9217.7

247.0269.8280.6

260.9263.3266.0268 5269.6270.5

271.82715271.5274.3274 7275.4

277.9277 9277.3277.3277.8279.9

281.7282.32814284.1284 9285.1

Food

166.9181.0180.4189.9207.2226.2

239.5253.6259.3

251.0251.3252.62519252.8253.8

257.6256.3256.2254.0252.7252.9

256.4258.2257.1260.0262.3263.4

260.6259.72599257.8257.6258.2

Ener-gy

215.2252 4282.3326.7347.7469.9

701.3835.4823.4

758.1790.2838.78539854.2857.3

852.4842 0847.1841.6842 2846.6

842.3832 6814.0775.3758.2789.8

834.7844 3846 6841.7855 3845.9

Excluding food andenergy

Total

133.3148 5156.8166.3178.7194.7

216.4235.1248.5

228.2229.5230.2232 8234.0234.7

235.5236.1235.8240.72416242.3

244.7244 6245.2246.4247.3248.1

248.8249.52480252.7253 0253.7

Capi-tal

equip-ment

141.0162 5173.4184.6199.2216.5

239.8264.3279.6

254.6256.7258.1260 8262.5263.8

265.4265.8265.3271:5273.0274.1

276.2275 0275.8277.2278.1279.2

280.2280.7279 5283.8284 0285.1

Con-sumergoodsexclud-edand

energy

129.1141.0148.1156.6168.0183.3

204.2220.1232.5

214.4215.4215.82183219.3219.7

220.3220.9220.7225.0225.7226.2

228.6229.0229.5230.6231.5232.1

232.6233.3232 0236.7237.0237.4

Intermediate materials, supplies,and components

Total

162.9180 0189.1201.5215.6243.2

280.3306.0310.4 .

296.1298.3302.03058306.7307.2

308.53101309.7309.4309 0309.4

311.03111310.6309.9309.8309.9

311.1310.8310 7310.03101310.2

Foodsand

feeds1

200.2195.3185.3190.5203.1226.1

252.6250.3239.6

270.9261.3255.6254.9253.1253.2

251.1250.2243.5239.3235.2235.2

238.8239.4237.7240.9245.0245.1

243.6240.2238.4234.8234.6235.4

Ener-gy

188.72208236.8267.3280.3348.6

484.9573.6570.9

532.0548.8575.4585 3586.0583.4

580.6585.9579.7575.7574 0576.8

582.6575.7572.2560.2552.0561.4

579.3582.2572 4569.2572.4571.2

Other

156.7174.7185.0196.1210.4234.2

261.8283.4290.1

274.3275.9277.82813282.6283.4

285.5287.0287.7288.2288 2288.4

289.4290.2290.2290.7291.1290.1

289.6289.2290.3290.1290.0290.2

Crude materials for furprocessing

Total

196.1196.9202.7209.2234.4274.3

304.6329.0319.5

328.0336.5334.2336,3334.4335.4

337.3333.0327.4319.9313.9311.5

318.4321.6320.0322.6328.3325.6

323.4319.8316.3312.2313.4312.6

Food-stuffsand

feed-stuffs

189.4191.8190.2192.1216.2247.9

259.2257.4247.8

270.7267.1262.1263.5260.6264.3

267.2261.8253.4245.7238.3233.7

242.6248.3247.9254.4262.6259.9

255.5249.6242.9236.3236.3237.0

Ener-gy

223.02669283.1323.5362.5439.9

586.1783.4801.7

696.0782.67851790 5798,2793.5

793.6786.4795.7786.87912800.6

801.57969788.8778.5784.0792.0

799.4801.7810.0816.7830.2820.1

ther

Other

198.3165.0191.0190.1209.2253.0

269.4266.0238.2

274.1271.1275 5277 9272 7267.5

267.0269.0263.3257.8249 3?4fi?

?%!249 9248.5246.8243.7?34 3

232.9?m233.2?30fi227.5227.6

1 Intermediate materials for food manufacturing and feeds.2 Data have been revised through August 1982 to reflect the availability of late reports and corrections by respondents. All data aresubject to revision 4 months after original publication.

Source-. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics.

229Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 236: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

TABLE B-59.—Producer price indexes for major commodity groups, 1940-82

[1967 = 100]

Year or month

194019411942194319441945194619471948194919501951 ...19521953195419551956195719581959 ,I96019611962196319641965196619671968196919701971197219731974197519761977 . .19781979198019811982 •1981:

Jan ,.FebMar...AprMayJuneJulyAug

OctNovDec

1982: *JanFebMarAprMayJuneJulyAug , ,SeptOctNovDec

Farm products and processedfoods and feeds

Total

94.3101.589.693.9

106 9102.796 095.791290.693.798.193.593.793.794.793.893.297.1

103 5100.0102 4108.01117113.9122.4159.1177.4184.2183.1188 8206.6229.8244.7251.5248.9

257.9255.1253 5253.8252.9254.3256.8254 2250 3246.0242.5241.0

246.0248.4247.5251.6255 8255.3252.4249.6247.5243.9244.0244.8

Farmproducts

41.450.364.875.075.578.5909

1094117.5101.6106.7124 2117.2106 2104.798 296.999 5

103.997.597.296.398 096.094.698.7

105 9100.0102 5109.11110112.9125.0176.3187 7186.7191.0192 5212.5241.4249.4254 9242.3

264.5262.4260 7263.3259.6260.7263 3257 92511243.1237.4234.6

242.2247.1244.72506256 5252.7246.6240.8234.4229.1230.6232.5

Processedfoods and

feeds

82 988.780.683.492 791.687 488.985.084.987 491.889.489.591.091.992.592 395.5

1012100.0102 2107.31121114 5120.8148.11709182.6178.01861202 6222.5241.2248 7251.5

253.3250.2248 5247.6248.2249.9252 22512248 9246.6244 3243.6

247.1248.1248.125112544255.8254.6253.5253.6251.0250 4250.6

Industrial commodities

Total

44.047 350.751.552.353.058070 876.975.378.086184.184 885.086 990.893 393.695.395.394.894.894.795296.498 5

100.0102 5106.011001141117.9125.9153 8171.5182.41951209.4236.5274.83041312.3

291.5295.7299 6303.5304.7305.1306 2307 2307 4309.0309 3310.0

311.8311.63110309 9309 6310.6312.8313.2312.9314.4315.1315.0

Textileproducts

andapparel

103.6108.198.9

102.7114.6103.4100.898.698.798.798.897,098.499.597.798.698.599.299.8

100.1100.0103.7106.0107.1109.0113.6123.8139.1137.9148.2154.0159.8168.7183.5199.7204.3

193.1193.9195.2197.6199.2200.1201.3202.4202.9204.0203.6203.4

205.0205.6

2054205.4205.0204.1204.2203.8202.6203.5202.4

Hides,skins,

leather,and

relatedproducts

45.248.452.852.752.252.961183.384.279.986.399.180.181.377.677.381.982.082.994.290.891.792.790.090.394.3

103.4100.0103.2108.9110.3114.1131.3143.1145.1148.5167.8179.3200.0252.4248.9260.9263.0

258.2257.7261.2263.5263.7261.6261.1261.3261.7260.0259.8260.7

261.8261.6260.6263.4263.2261.8263.1262.0264.8264.7264.3265.2

Fuels andrelated

products,and

power»

51.454.656.257.859.560.164 476.990.586.287.190.390.192.691.391.294.099.195.395.396.197.296.796.393.795.597.8

100.098.9

100.9106 2115.2118.6134.3208.3245.1265.6302.2322.5408.1574,0694.5693.4

634.6667.5696.5707.2709.0707.6704.9704.3703.5698.1698.1702.5

705.1697.8689.7670.6662.2677.3701.1705.6701.8699.6707.3702.6

Chemicalsand alliedproducts *

52.457.063.364.164.865.270 593.795.987.688.9

101796.597 798.998.599.1

101.2102.0101.6101.8100.799.197.998.399.099.4

100.099.899.9

102 2104.1104.2110.0146.8181.3187.2192.8198.8222,3260.3287.6292.4

274.3277.6280.4286.0288.6290.5291.3293 3293 3292.4292.0291.8

292.9293.6294.6294.3295.0293.3291.6291.6291.4290.4290.5289.3

See next page for continuation of table.

230

Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 237: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

TABLE B-59.—Producer price indexes for major commodity groups, 1940-82—Continued

Year or month

1940194119421943194419451946194719481949

1950195119521953195419551956195719581959

I9601961196219631964 . . .1965196619671968...1969

1970197119721973197419751976197719781979

1980198119822

1981:JanFebMarAprIVfayJ u n ' e :

JulyAiigSeotOcitNovDec

1982: 2

JanFebMarAprMayJune

JulyAug

OctNovDec

Rubberand

plasticproducts

57 161571673.611170.570 870.572 870.5

85.9105.495.589.190.4

102.4103 8103.4103 3102.9

103199.296 396.895 595.997 8

100.01034105.3

108 31091109.31124136.2150 2159.2167 6174 8194.3

217 4232 6241.6

224.8226.4228 4230 82318233.4

23212341235 7237 3238.0238 3

237 3239.3240.824112421242.5

242.0242.6243 3243 0242 6243.0

Lumberand

woodproducts

27.432 735.637.740.641.247.273.484.077.7

89.397.294.494.392.697.198.593.592.498.8

95.391.091.693.595.495.9

100.2100.0113.3125.3

113.6127 3144.3177.2183.6176.9205.6236.3276 0300.4

288.9292.8284.7

296.5294.7294.4299.4298 4298.1

296.5294.5289.3284.3282.1285.4

285.5285.2285.3286.5284.6289.0

288.6284.2283.0279.6279.9284.8

[1967

Pulp,paper,

andallied

products

72.575.772.4

74.388.085.785.585.587.893.695.496.497.3

98.195.296 395.695 496.298.8

100.0101.1104.0

108.21101113.41221151.7170.4179.4186.4195 6219.0

249 2273.8288.6

264.4267.2269.027142721272.9

274.9275.9277 8279 2280.4281.0

285 5286.3287.4288.5289 6289.5

289.1289.3289.2289.2289.6289.5

= 100]

Industrial commodities—Continued

Metalsand

metalproducts

37 838 539.139.039 039.644.354.962.563.0

66.373.873.976.376.982.189 291.090.492.3

92 491.991291.393 896.498 8

100.0102.6108.5

1166118 7123.5132 8171.9185 6195.9209.02271259.3

286.4300 4301.8

294.0294.0296.4298 82991298.4

302.0304.1304 9305 3304.2303.3

304 7304.2302.9303.1302 8299.3

299.5299.2301.8302.13010300.9

Machineryand

equipment

41.442142.842.442.142.246.453.758.261.0

63.170.570.672.273.475.781.887.689.491.3

92.091.992.092.292.893.996.8

100.0103.2106.5

111.4115 5117.9121.7139.4161.4171.0181.7196.1213.9

239.8263.3278.7

253.3255.3257.5259.6260.7262.1

264.8266.2268.1269.3270.4272.0

274.1275.4276.2277.6278.2278.6

279.6279.9280.3280.9281.3281.8

Furnitureand

householddurables

53 857 261.861.463163.267.177.081.682.9

84.791.890.191.992.993.395 898.399.199.3

99.098.497 797.097 496.998.0

100.0102.8104.9

107.5110 0111.4115.2127.9139.7145.6151.51604171.3

187.7198.5206.8

194.0195.2195.8196.4197 4197.3

199.5199.6201.0201.3202.1202.9

203.5204.6205.5206.0206.5207.0

206.8208.1207.7208.4208.3208.6

Non-metallicmineral

products

49150 252 352.453 555.759 366.371673.5

75.480.180.183.385.187.591394.895.897.0

97 297.697 697.197 397.598 4

100.0103.7107.7

112.9122 4126.1130.2153.2174.0186.3200.5222 8248.6

283.0309.5320.2

296.6297.9300.9310.8312.0313.6

314.3314.1313.2313.3313.7313.5

315.6319.0319.9320.2321.2320.9

321.1320.5320.2321.2321.5320.9

Transpor-tationequip-ment:Motor

vehiclesand

equip-ment3

40.443 247.247.247 548.356.064.170.875.7

75.379.484.083.683.886.391295.198.1

100.3

98.898.698.697.898.398.598.6

100.0102.8104.8

108.7114.9118.0119.2129.2144.6153.8163.7176.0190.5

208.8237.6251.3

229.0230.9229.5233.9236.0236.7

237.4238.4232.8247.8248.9249.5

250.8246.8246.8247.2249.2251.1

252.0252.8245.0258.1257.5257.9

Miscella-neous

products

73.576 578.0

79.283 983.485 686.486 587 690.292 092.2

93 093.393 794.595 295.997 7

100.0102.2105.2

109.9112 9114.6119.7133.1147.7153.7164.3184.3208.7

258.8265.7276.6

264.3264.9264.0266.0266.9266.3

263.2262.6267.0268.5267.5267.6

268.3273.5272.7273.2272.2271.5

273.4272.0280.3285.9285.7290.3

1 Prices for some items in this grouping are lagged and refer to 1 month earlier than the index month.2 Data have been revised through August 1982 to reflect the availability of late reports and corrections by respondents. All data are

subject to revision 4 months after original publication.3 Index for total transportation equipment is not shown but is available beginning December 1968.Source: Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics.

231Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 238: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

TABLE B-60.—Changes in producer price indexes for finished goods, 1950-82

[Percent change]

Year or month

19501951195219531954

19551956195719581959I9601961196219631964

19651966196719681969

19701971197219731974

19751976197719781979198019811982 •

1981:JanFebMar

June

July

SeptOct

Dec:....:::..:::..1982:»

JanFebMarAprMay'::::::::::.::.June

JulyAugsept'::.::OctNovDec

Totalfinishedgoods

Dec.to

Dec.1

10.42.9

= 2 . 2.5

= .1

124.23.2

= .4

1 8- . 5

.1—• 2

3322163.14.82.23.238

11818.3

663.76.99.2

12.811.87.13.5

Unad-justed

1.4.9

1.0.9

.5

o1.0

.9

o_ 20.2.8.6

1.0

Yearto

year

1.89.5

- . 6= 1.0

22.83.62.3

80

=13.4

1732122.83.7

3.53.13191

15.310 84.46.57.8

11.1

13.59.24.0

Sea-son-

3justed

1.2

A.9

.43.2.6

.5— 2„ 1

To.5

- l l.5

Finishedconsumer

foods

Dec.to

Dec.1

13,35.3

-5 .9«2.2-1 .9

293.65.3

4=3.7

52= 1.8

.4

911.4

44.88.2

=2.55.980

22 513.055

- 2 56.9

1177.4

7.51.42.1

Unad-justed

0.7.1.5

- . 3

1.55

=-.0= .9- . 5

.1

1.474

1.1.9

-1 .1

— 8

Yearto

year

1.912.4= . 9

- 5 . 2= . 8

- 2 5- . 23.558

-4.722

.9-1 .2

.5386.5163.66.23.21.656

20 314.0

84— 35.39.19.25.95.92.2

Sea-son-

3justed

0.6- . 1

22.5.81

-2=.7

1.15

- 11.7.6.5

-1 .6

- I s- . 2- . 2

.1

Finished goods excluding consumer foods

Total

Oec.to

Dec.1

2.43.44.32.12 166

21.2726.26.98.3

14.813.38.84.0

Yearto

year

2.62.7

3.53.72041

16.0

1216.37.07.3

11.9

16.210.34.5

Consumergoods

Dec.to

Dec.1

8.2.9

-1 .11.6.3

172.51.7

2.84

= .3

:ii9

1.72.12.02.9

3.92.02074

20.5

67606.78.5

17,514.28.53.9

Yearto

year

1.67.2

- 1 . 3.9

82.42.5

.11.3

4- . 1- . 2

0_ l

.71.61 92.12.43.03.41 945

16.910 56.27.27.1

13.3

18.610.24.1

Capequip

Dec.to

Dec.1

10.33.4

.82.31.1568.34.31.31.0.1.2.3

.9

1.53.93,13.04.64.92.42053

22.6

8.26.47.37.98.8

11.49.24.0

talment

Yearto

year

2.49.71.71.71.2

307.46.22.61.9

2.1.4.2

1.0

1.22.53.33.53.3

4.84.12533

14.215.26.76.57.98.7

10.810.25.8

Percent change from preceding month

Unad-justed

1.61.21.21.3.4.3

.2

.01.6.3.3

.7

= 2- . 3- . 0

.91.2

1.5.4.0

Sea-son-

3justed

1.41.01.21.2.2.6.2

.8

.8

.4

.4

= .1= .4

1111.2

- l o:9.i

Unad-justed

1.61.31.51.3.3.3.1

_ i.1

1.3.3

J- .1- .3—6- . 21.11.4.5

- . 41.5.4

- . 1

Sea-son-allyad-

justed

1.41.11.41.2.0.5.12.5.8.9

.4- .3- 4—.7

1.4.8

.81.1

- . 1

Unad-justed

1.5.8

llo.7.5.6

22.3

.6

.4

.8- .4

.3

13.4.4.2

- . 41.5

.1

.4

Sea-son-allyad-

justed

1.2.9

>

.6

1.0.7.6

.5= .4

.5

.3

.4

.7

.4

.7=.1

.2

.3

.6

Finishedenergygoods

Dec.to

Dec.1

16.411.512.18.5

58.0

27.814.1

Unad-justed

2.24.26.11.8.0.4

.61.2.6

.5

=.5-1 .2-2 .2=4.8-2 .2

4.25.71.2.3

- i l l

Yearto

year

17.311.815.76.4

35.1

49.219.1

- 1 . 4

Sea-son-

3justed

1.93.8S.81.3

- . 8.4

- . 5= 11

=-.11.4.9

- . 9- 1 . 6- 2 . 6= 5 . 2- 3 . 0

4.25.71.2

.4- . 1

-' .7

Finished goodsexcluding food

and energy

Dec.to

Dec.1

6.15.66.38.39.4

10.77.84.7

Unad-justed

1.5.6

Is

.3

.3

.12.1

.'3

1.0= .0

A.3

.3

1.9

Yearto

year

11.45.66.17.59.0

11.18.65.7

Sea-son-allyad-

justed

1.2.5

i l l.4.6.4.6.3

1.0

.2

.7- .1

.3.5.2.6.4.6

— 1

Is

1 Changes from December to December are based on unadjusted indexes.zOata7iave been revised through August 1982 to reflect the availability of late reports and corrections by respondents. All data are

subject to revision 4 months after original publication.Source: Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics.

232

Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 239: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

MONEY STOCK, CREDIT, AND FINANCE

TABLE B-61.—Money stock measures and liquid assets, 1959-82

[Averages of daily figures; billions of dollars, seasonally adjusted]

Year and month

Ml

Sum ofcurrency,demanddeposits,travelers'

checks, andother

checkabledeposits<OCD) *

M2

Ml plusovernight RPs

andEurodollars,

MMMFbalances(genera!

purpose andbroker/

dealer), andsavings andsmalltimedeposits2

M3

NI2 plus largetime deposits,term RPs, andinstitution-only

MMMFbalances

M3 plus otherliquid assets

Percent change from year or 6months earlier3

Ml M2 M3

December:1959

19601961196219631964

19651966196719681969

19701971197219731974

19751976197719781979

198019811982"

1981:JanFebMarAprMayJune

JulyAugSept:OctNovDec

1982:JanFebMarAprMayJune

JulyAugSeptOctNovDec"

140.9

141.9146.5149.2154.7161.9

169.5173.7185.1199.4205.8

216.5230.6251.9265.8277.4

291.0310.4335.5363.2389.0

414.5440.9478.5

417.9419.4424.4433.3429.2428.4

429.4431.1431.2432.9436.4440.9

448.6447.3448.3452.4451.5451.4

451.3455.2460.5468.4475.0478.5

297.7

312.3335.5362.8393.4425.1

459.5481.3526.6569.4591.3

628.6713.6806.4863.2911.2

1,026.91,171.21,297.71,403.91,518.9

1,656.21,822.71,999.1

1,665.71,678.21,701.11,723.21,732.41,740.9

1,753.71,772.41,778.31,789.51,809.91,822.7

1,841.31,848.11,865.31,880.91,897.71,908.2

1,923.81,946.81,955.01,968.21,987.21,999.1

298.9

314.3339.4369.7404.1440.2

480.7504.9558.6608.4614.1

675.2773.7882.8981.4

1,064.3

1,166.21,305.01,464.61,629.01,779.4

1,963.12,188.12,403.7

1,984.22,001.92,024.02,046.32,065.22,082.1

2,102.52,126.02,138.12,151.12,174.72,188.1

2,204.32,215.12,235.92,258.32,279.52,296.2

2,320.62,356.42,364.22,382.12,401.22,403.7

388.4

403.4430.5465.9503.7540.5

584.5616.5670.1733.9765.2

816.5903.2

1,023.61,143.81,249.8

1,376.61,531.41,724.31,938.92,153.9

2,370.42,642.8

2,397.32,418.22,438.02,455.52,483.12,506.6

2,530.42,559.72,577.22,600.02,629.32,642.8

2,667.92,690.52,717.22,744.22,774.42,799.5

2,831.92,858.2

0.73.21.83.74.7

4.72.56.67.73.2

5.26.59.25.54.4

4.96.78.18.37.1

6.66.48.5

10.37.26.88.85.76.8

5.65.73.2

- . 23.45.9

9.17.78.19.27.04.8

1.23.65.57.2

10.712.4

4.97.48.18.48.1

8.14.79.48.13.8

6.313.513.07.05.6

12.714.110.88,28.2

9.010.19.7

8.67.69.0

10.49.4

10.5

10.811.59.37.89.19.6

10.28.7

10.010.59.99.6

9.211.09.89.59.79.8

5.28.08.99.38.9

9.25.0

10.68.9

.9

9.914.614.111.28.4

9.611.912.211.29.2

10.311.59.9

11.710.811.812.311.912.5

12.312.811.610.510.910.4

9.98.69.4

10.29.9

10.1

10.813.211.811.311.09.6

1 Net of demand deposits due to foreign commercial banks and official institutions.2 M2 will differ from the sum of components shown in Table 8-62 by a consolidation adjustment that represents the estimated

amount of demand deposits and vault cash held by thrift institutions to service time and savings deposits.3 Monthly percent changes are from 6 months earlier at a compound annual rate.

Note.—See Table B-62 for components, except travelers checks not shown separately.

Source: Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System.

233Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 240: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

TABLE B-62,—Components of money stock measures and liquid assets, 1959-82

[Averages of daily figures; billions of dollars, seasonally adjusted, except as noted]

Period

December:1959

I9601961196219631964

19651966196719681969

19701971197219731974

19751976197719781979

198019811982"

1981:JanFeb .MarAprMavJune

JulyAugSept ....OctNovDec

1982:JanFebMarAprMayJune

JutyAugiNovDec"

Cur-rency

28.9

?9 029.6W fi32.534.3

36.3

40 443.446.1

491WIVift61 567.8

73 880 688 697 4

106.1

116?123.1132.6

116?117?117.81191119.4119.7

120.51?0 7121.1121.3121.8123.1

123.8124.6125.1126.31?7 4128.4

128.8I?*)1)

no 5W ?Wfi132.6

De-manddepos-

its1

111.6

112 5116.5118.1121.7127.0

132.5134.6143.9155.1158.8

166.3176.8193.6202.5207.4

2141224.42396253.9262.2

267 2236.4240.2

254.1244 8243.0243.5240.4237.7

236.7236.6234.7235.7235.7236.4

239.3234.5233.0233.02327231.0

230.6231.1232 6236.22383240.2

Othercheck-

ablede-

posits

0.0

0.00

.1

1

2

.4

9?7428.4

16.9

26977.0

101.3

43 253359.566565.266.7

68.169 571.271.674 777.0

81.183.885.888.687087.5

87.490293 096 5

1007101.3

Over-nightrepur-chaseagree-ments(RPs)(net)

NSA

0.0

0.00.0.0

.0

111.62.5

142.5316.87.2

7513717 822122,7

30531.439.5

30 630431.931834.536.5

35.435 332.730.230 431.4

35.735.636.734.635 836.0

36.437 636839 740639.5

Over-nightEuro-

dollars

NSA

0.0

o.0.0.0.0

.0

.0

.0

.0

.0

o.0o.0.0

o.0

102.03.6

456.76.1

52494.6506.56.4

6.9786.95.9656.7

7.57.36.35.8707.0

7.0696562666.1

Moneymarket

mutual fund(MMMF)balances

Gen-eralpur-poseandbro-ker/deal-

erNSA

0.0

n.0

n.0.0

.0nn

.0

.0

nooi

2.1

i??8?971

34.4

819151.2177.5

6S87S?85.4

%n98.8102.9

112.81???130.6137.3144 9151.2

154.9156.1159.4162.1164 6168.9

171.7180 618? 51841186 6177.5

Insti-tutiononly

NSA

0.0

o.0o.0.0

•f).0.0.0

onon

469

319.3

13933.743.1

15017 320.221319.520.1

21.623 326.629.432 033.7

32.530.531.531.532833.7

36.743143 944 845343.1

Sav-ingsde-

posits

146.0

1587175.0194.3213.9234.8

256.5?5?K263.3268.5263.2

259.3?908320 21?S9337.6

387 74*tl7490 4479.9421.7

3989343.6400.3

384 5378 5378.53788373.5366.8

361.03509343.1339.6340 9343.6

348.8348.6350.7350.53509349.9

344.0342 0342 43526362 3400.3

Smalldenom-ination

timede-

posits 2

11.8

12 915.220726.229.9

35.255.9790

101.9121.7

153 6192.0233 9267.6290.0

3409396545415339652.6

7517854.7904.2

76817757782.07841795.8805.5

814.08308839,7849.8856.6854.7

852.3859.4869.9881.6894.1900.9

919.7930.6932.6923.8923 0904.2

Largedenom-ination

timede-

posits2

1.2

203.96.9

10.715.2

21.223.131.037.420.4

45 057.673 2

111.2144.4

1298118.21452194 6221.8

257 9300.3332.6

267.52717269.8267.6278.3285.6

293.1299 8302.3302.2300.6300.3

302.6308.0312.6317.23216328.3

335.8339 6339 3342 53404332.6

Termrepur-chaseagree-ments(RPs)

NSA

0.0

0.00

!c.0

101.52.4

142.5337.18.4

9015.021027 530.2

37 835.433.6

39238136.136 737.738.8

37.233433.833.435 635.4

32.532.531.534.232631.2

29.332130 531333 533.6

TermEuro-

dollars(net)

NSA

0.7

81.41.61.92.4

1.72.12.12.92.7

2.22.73.65.48.0

9.713.118729.942.9

48.466.7

50.252252.152.657.057.9

58.761.061.263.465.566.7

69.973.874.478.583 384.8

84.281.5

Sav-ings

bonds

46.1

45746.546948.149,0

49.6SO?51251.851.7

52 0VH57 660 463.2

67 271776480.379.6

72367.7

71771070.670370.069.7

69.468968.467.967 767.7

67.867.867.767.767 767.8

67.767 6

Short-term

Treas-ury

secu-rities

38.6

36 737.039 840.738.5

40.743?38.746.159.5

49 2W341150 053.6

77.1811899

128.5

1567176.5

161.1163 6161.9157.6158.2160.3

161.8164.1168.1176.0179.9176.5

180.3186.4191.0191.71919194.8

199.9200.5

Bank-ers'

accept-ances

0.5

81.010

n1.2

1.51.61.72.23.2

3.33.53.34.7

10.6

8.48.8

11.821.426.5

31.839.7

32.432.533.334.535.636.4

37.137.337.637.138.139.7

40.2

37338.339.940.3

40.840.2

Com-mercialpaper

3.6

515.2687.79.1

10.214.417822.534.0

34 532.735241.950.1

48051.762979.297.0

981104.2

97.797 096.194.297.1

100.3

100.8102.4103.8104.4103.7104.2

105.5108.4110.3109.71121115.7

118.7112.0

'Demand deposits at all commercial banks other than those due to domestic banks, the U.S. Government, and foreign banks andofficial institutions less cash items in the process of collection and Federal Reserve float.2 Small denomination and large denomination deposits are those issued in amounts of less than $100,000 and more than $100,000,respectively.

Note, NSA indicates data are not seasonally adjusted.Travelers checks are a component of money stock but are not shown here.See also Table B-61.Source: Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System.

234

Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 241: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

TABLE B-63.—Commercial bank loans and investments, 1939-82

[Billions of dollars]

Year and month

End of month >1939- Dec

1940- Dec1941- Dec1942- Dec1943- Dec1944- Dec

1945- Dec1946- Dec1947: Dec1948: Dec

1948- Dec1949- Dec

1950- Dec1951- Dec.1952: Dec1953- Dec1954: Dec

1955: Dec1956- Dec1957: Dec1958- Dec1959- Dec

I960- Dec1961- Dec1962- Dec1963: Dec1964: Dec

1965: Dec1966- Dec1967: Dec1968: Dec1969- Dec

1970: Dec1971: Dec1972- DecAverage for

month2

1972- Dec1973- Dec1974- Dec

1975- Dec1976: Dec1977: Dec1978- Dec1979- Dec.1980: Dec1981- Dec1982- Dec

1982:JanFebMar

June

JulvAUgSeptOctNovDec

Total loansand

investments

40.7

43950 767.4851

105.5

124 0114 0116.3114.3

Loans

Total

17.2

18 821.719.219.121.6

26131.138.142.5

Commercialand

industrial

Investments

US.Treasurysecurities

16.3

17 821841.459877.6

90674 869.262.6

Othersecurities

7.1

74726.86.16.3

738.19.09.2

Seasonally adjusted

113.0118.7

124.7130 2139.11431153.1

157.61616166.41812188.7

197 4212.82312250.2272.3

300.13161352.0390.2401.7

435.5485.7558.0

572 6647 8713.6

745 2804.6891.5

1,013.51,135.9

1,239.61316 31,412.4

132011332 41342 51,352.51,362.01,368.813761138311,389.41397 51398 51,412.4

41.542.0

51.156.562.866.269.1

80.688.191.595.6

110.5116.7123.6137.3153.7172,9

198.2213.9231.3258.2279.4

292.0320.9378.9

390 5460.5520.1517.4555.0632.5747.0849.9

915.1973.9

1,042.3

974.5985.2995.0

1,002.01,010.81,017.1

1 023.71028 31,033.51,038.11 036.41,042.3

39.4

42143.947 652.158.4

69.578 686.295.9

105.7110.0116.2130.4

137 5165 4196.9

1896190.9210.9245.9291.2

326.8358 0392.4

360.3365.53700373.1378.9383.4

386.7387 9392.5394.8392.0392.4

62.366.461.160.462.262 267.660.357.256.965157.7

59 965.364.761.560.7

57.153.559.460.751.2

57.860.662.6

65 858.553.682.2

100.899.893.894.5

110.0111.0130.9

114.1115.1114.4116.6116.3115.8116.5117.8118.2122.3126.4130.9

9.210.312.413.414.214 716.4

16.816.317.920.520.5

20.823.929.235.038.7

44.848.761.371.371.1

85.7104.2116.5

116.3128.8139.9145.6148.8159.3172.8191.5214.4231.4239.2

231.5232.0233.1234.0234.9235.9

235.9237.1237.6237.2235.8239.2

Loans plusloans soldto bankaffiliates

283.3294.7323.7381.5

393.1464.8524.8

521.8558.7637.1750.7852.9917.8976.7

1,045.2

977.4988.0997.8

1,004.81,013.51,020.11,026.51,031.11,036.41,040.91,039.31,045.2

1 Data are for December 31 call dates.2 Data are prorated averages of Wednesday figures for domestically chartered banks and averages of current and previous month-enddata for foreign-related institutions. Lease financing receivables are included in total loans and investments and in total loans.

—Beginning December 1981, levels have been reduced because of shifts from U.S. banking offices to International Banking« <IB?s).

Source: Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System.

Note,Facilities

235Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 242: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

TABLE B-64,—Total funds raised in credit markets by nonfinancial sectors, 1974-82

[Billions of dollars; quarterly data at seasonally adjusted annual rates]

Item 1974 1975 1976 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981

Total funds raised by nonfinancial sectors

U.S. Government

Foreign

Private domestic nonfinancial sectors

Corporate equities

Debt instruments

Debt capital instruments

State and local government obligations.Corporate bondsMortgages

HomeMulti-family residentialCommercialFarm

Other debt instruments

Consumer creditBank loans n.e.cOpen-market paperOther

By borrowing sector: Total

State and local governmentsHouseholdsNonfinanciai business

FarmNonfarm noncorporateCorporate

Debt instruments

Equities

Total funds supplied to nonfinancial sectors

Financed directly or indirectly by:

Private domestic nonfinancial sectors

Deposits and currency

Checkable deposits and currencyTime and savings depositsMoney market fund sharesSecurity repurchase agreementsForeign deposits

Credit market instruments

Corporate equities

Foreign funds

At banksCredit and equity instruments ,

U.S. Government-related loans, net „.,U.S. Government cash balancesPrivate insurance and pension reservesOther sources.. ,

See next page for continuation of table.

193.9

11.8

14.8

167.4

4.1163.3

100.6

16.519.764.4

37.36.9

15.15.0

62.7

9.932.6

6.613.5

167.4

15.553.998.0

7.820.269.9

65.94.1

193.9

123.5

73.7

8.565.3

2.4- 2 . 2

- . 2

50.4

- . 6

21.8

10.111.7

19.1- 4 . 633.4

.8

214.4

85.4

11.5

117.5

9.9107.5100.9

16.127.257.6

42.0- . 011.04.6

6.6

9.6-10.5

-2 .610.1

117.5

13.752.151.6

8.512.530.7

20.89.9

214.4

148.1

101.2

15.683.3

1.3.2

50.7

- 3 . 8

2.1

-=-8.710.8

23.22.8

39.7- 1 . 6

273.5

69.0

19.6

184.9

10.5174.3

123.6

15.722.885.1

63.93.9

11.65.7

50.7

25.44.44.0

16.9

184.9

15.289.580.2

10.215.454.5

44.010.5

273.5

173.5

133.4

17.8111.7

= .02.31.7

44,7

- 4 . 6

13.2

- 4 J17.9

20.43.0

47.715.7

334.3

56.8

13.9

263.6

2.7

260.9

169.8

21.921.0

126.994.3

7.118.47.1

91.1

40.226.72.9

21.3

263.6

15.4137.3110.9

12.328.370.4

67.62.7

334.3

184.0

148.5

25.5119.3

.22.2

1.3

39.0

- 3 . 5

43.51.2

42.3

17.6.9

60.727.5

401.7

53.7

33.2

314.8

3 R 9

198.7

28.420.1

150.2

112.19.2

21.77.2

116.2

48.837.1

5.225.1

314.8

19.1169.3126.3

14.632.479.3

79.4- . 1

401.7

219.7

152.3

25.6110.3

6.97.52.0

72.5

= 5.1

46.7

6.340.5

27.23.7

66.637.8

402.0

37.4

21.0

343.6

- 7 . 8351.5216.0

29.822.5

163.7

120.17.8

23.911.8

135.5

45.449.211.129.7

343.6

20.2176.5146.9

21.434.491.2

99.0- 7 . 8

402.0

258.9

151.9

27.282.234.46.61.5

122.9

- 1 5 . 9

22.7

25.6=2.9

31.8.5

60.028.1

397.1

79.2

29.3

288.7

12.9275.8

204.1

35.933.2

135.1

96.78.8

20.29.3

71.7

4.935.4

6.624.9

288.7

27.3117.5143.9

14.433.895.7

82.812.9

397.1

271.1

179.2

14.5127.829.26.5

1.1

89.7

2.1

5.6-23.0

28.6

29.0- 3 . 680.814.2

406.9

87.4

27.3

292.3

-11.5303.7175.0

32.923.9

118.3

78.64.6

25.39.8

128.8

25.351.119.233.1

292.3

22.3120.4149.5

16.440.592.6

104.1-11.5

406.9

291.3

221.0

27.882.9

107.52.5

101.9

-31.6

13.6

- 8 . 822.3

34.2

88.5- 2 0 . 8

236Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 243: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

TABLE B-64.—Total funds raised in credit markets by nonfinancial sectors, 1974-82—Continued

[Billions of dollars; quarterly data at seasonally adjusted annual rates]

Item1981

I II III IV

1982

I

Total funds raised by nonfinancial sectors

U.S. Government

Foreign

Private domestic nonfinancial sectors

Corporate equities

Debt instruments

Debt capital instruments

State and local government obligations....Corporate bondsMortgages

HomeMulti-family residentialCommercialFarm

Other debt instruments

Consumer creditBank loans n.e.cOpen-market paperOther

By borrowing sector: Total

State and local governmentsHouseholdsNonfinancial business

FarmNonfarm noncorporateCorporate

Debt instruments

Equities

Total funds supplied to nonfinancial sectors

Financed directly or indirectly by:

Private domestic nonfinancial sectors

Deposits and currency

Checkable deposits and currencyTime and savings depositsMoney market fund sharesSecurity repurchase agreementsForeign deposits

Credit market instruments

Corporate equities

Foreign funds

At banksCredit and equity instruments

U.S. Government-related loans, netU.S. Government cash balancesPrivate insurance and pension reserves

. Other sources

Source: Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System.

431.9

111.3

33.6

287.0

5.2281.8

192.7

36.025.0

131.8

93.44.4

25.38.5

89.1

26.522.811.328.5

287.0

27.1135.0125.0

19.237.168.7

63.55.2

431.9

309.3

284.0

69.739.2

148.416.99.7

40.9

-15 .5

21.8

-25 .447.227.214.179.3

-19.7

444.5

52.5

35.7

356.3

- 3 . 4359.7

200.3

34.224.5

141.6

96.95.7

29.49.5

159.4

32.272.610.144.5

356.3

23.1147.1186.1

20.546.5

119.1

122.5- 3 . 4

444.5

278.3

153.2

- 5 . 2108.359.9

- 1 . 6- 8 . 2

154.2

-29.0

55.0

24.031.0

23.3- 2 . 594.7

- 4 . 3

380.8

62.7

18.9

299.2

-24.6323.8

156.9

26.319.5

111.1

72.54.1

23.710.8

166.8

34.266.032.933.8

299.2

14.8128.1156.4

16.140.1

100.2

124.8-24 .6

380.8

285.5

217.5

- 6 . 6103.8137.3

-13 .8- 3 . 2

123.0

-55.0

3.2

11.9- 8 . 7

37.4- 7 . 295.0

-33.0

370.6

123.0

20.9

226.7

-23 .0249.7

150.0

35.026.488.6

51.64.2

22.610.2

99.6

8.343.222.325.9

226.7

24.371.7

130.7

9.638.582.5

105.5-23.0

370.6

291.9

229.2

53.280.284.38.62.8

89.5

-26.8

-25.7

-45.619.9

49.0- 3 . 885.3

-26.1

361.8

94.8

15.5

251.5

- 5 . 3256.8

159.7

38.320.3

101.2

67.26.2

20.57.3

97.1

6.669.912.28.4

251.5

25.682.1

143.8

5.628.0

110.2

115.5- 5 . 3

361.8

242.6

205.3

27.3148.237.6

.3

- 8 . 1

48.3

-11.0

-32 .9-46 .0

13.0

10.023.284.234.7

399.5

101.4

16.5

281.6

5.0276.6

153.6

57.516.779.4

51.83.9

20.13.6

123.0

25.486.6

- 5 . 316.4

281.6

46.997.2

137.4

11.332.893.3

88.35.0

399.5

296.5

149.7

-9 .5112.141.2

1.7

4.1

151.2

- 4 . 4

23.7-16 .3

40.0

10.1-29.6

99.1- . 4

479.7

221.2

1.3

257.2

.0257.2

172.9

54.342.576.2

51.47.1

11.06.6

84.3

8.246.6- . 930.4

257.2

39.281.6

136.5

12.525.998.0

98.0.0

479.7

329.9

204.6

-5 .8123.586.57.6

- 7 . 2

137.8

-12 .5

-40 .8-61.7

20.9

53.242.385.49.7

237Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 244: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

TABLE B-65.—Federal Reserve Bank credit and member bank reserves, 1929-82

[Averages of daily figures; millions of dollars]

Year and month

Reserve Bank credit outstanding

Total

U.S.Governmentand Federal

agencysecurities

Member bankborrowings

Total SeasonalOther

Member bank reserves1

Total Required

1929: Dec.1933: Dec.1939: Dec.

1940: Dec.1941: Dec.1942: Dec.1943: Dec.1944: Dec.1945: Dec.1946: Dec.1947: Dec.1948: Dec.1949: Dec.

1950: Dec.1951: Dec.1952: Dec.1953: Dec.1954: Dec.1955: Dec.1956: Dec.1957: Dec.1958: Dec.1959: Dec.

I960: Dec1961: Dec1962: Dec1963: Dec1964: Dec1965: Dec1966: Dec1967: Dec1968: Dec1969: Dec

1970: Dec1971: Dec1972: Dec1973: Dec....1974: Dec1975: Dec1976: Dec1977: Dec1978: Dec1979: Dec

1980: Dec1981: Dec1982: Dec...

1982:Jan..Feb..,Mar..

fcJune..JulyAugSept....OctNovDec P....

1,6432,6692,612

2,3052,4046,03511,91419,61224,74424,74622,85823,97819,012

21,60625,44627,29927,10726,31726,85327,15626,18628,41229,435

29,06031,21733,21836,61039,87343,85346,86451,26856,61064,100

66,70874,25576,85185,64293,96799,651

107,632116,382129,330139,896

143,250151,920159,968

152,297150,554146,815150,361151,333152,140

153,468153,903153,324153,666156,151159,968

4462,4322,510

2,1882,2195,54911,16618,69323,70823,76721,90523,00218,287

20,34523,40924,40025,63924,91724,60224,76523,98226,31227,036

27,24829,09830,54633,72937,12640,88543,76048,89152,52957,500

61,68869,15871,09479,70186,67992,108100,328107,948117,344126,276

127,895137,796146,358

136,657136,050133,635136,649138,809139,814

141,623141,791140,962141,443143,442146,358

801953

35490265334157224134118

142657

1,593441246839688710557906

87149304327243454557238765

1,086

321107

1,0491,29870312762558874

1,473

1,617642699

1,5261,7131,6111,5811,1051,205

510976455579

413213125413482

1165333

75132174167237239

225119102864733

39614299

114180482658654702822729842607

1,1191,3801,3061,0271,1541,4121,7031,4941,5431,493

1,7251,9702,3682,5542,5042,5142,5472,1393,3165,514

4,6994,9904,7084,6436,5857,4167,2427,876

11,11212,147

13,73813,48212,911

14,11412,79111,56912,13111,41911,121

11,17611,60211,38611,76812,13012,911

2,3952,588

11,473

14,04912,81213,15212,74914,16816,02716,51717,26119,99016,291

17,39120,31021,18019,92019,27919,24019,53519,42018,89918,932

19,28320,11820,04020,74621,60922,71923,83025,26027,22128,031

29,26531,32931,35335,06836,94134,98935,13636,47141,57243,972

3 40,09741,91842,172

43,21041,28039,23039,55839,55239,567

39,86440,17739,96340,58741,19942,172

2,347* 1,822

6,462

7,4039,422

10,77611,70112,88414,53615,61716,27519,19315,488

16,36419,48420,45719,22718,57618,64618,88318,84318,38318,450

18,51419,55019,46820,21021,19822,26723,43824,91526,76627,774

28,99331,16431,13434,80636,60234,72734,96436,29741,44743,578

40,06741,60641,354

42,78540,98138,87339,28439,19239,257

39,57339,86639,57940,18340,79741,354

1 Beginning December 1959, part of currency and cash held by member banks allowed as reserves; beginning November 1960 all suchcurrency and cash allowed.

Beginning November 1972, includes reserve deficiencies on which Federal Reserve Banks were allowed to waive penalties for atransition period In connection with bank adaptation to Regulation J as amended effective November 9, 1972. Transition period endedafter second quarter 1974.

Effective November 1975, includes reserve deficiencies on which penalties are waived over a 24-month period when a nonmemberbank merges into an existing member bank, or when a nonmember bank joins the Federal Reserve System.2 Data are for licensed banks only.3 Includes all reserve balances of depository institutions plus vault cash at institutions with required reserve balances plus vault cashequal to required reserves at other institutions.4 Reserve balances with Federal Reserve Banks plus vault cash used to satisfy reserve requirements less required reserves. (Thismeasure of excess reserves is comparable to the old excess reserves concept published historically.)

Source: Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System.

238Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 245: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

TABLE B-66.—Aggregate reserves of depository institutions and monetary base, J959-82

[Averages of daily figures; billions of dollars]

Year and month

1959- Dec .

I960- Dec1961- Dec1962- Dec1963- Dec1964- Dec

1965- Dec1966: Decig67- Dec1968- Dec .. .1969- Dec

1970- Dec1971- Dec1972: Dec1973- Dec . .1974- Dec

1975- Dec1976* Dec1977- Dec1978- Dec1979* Dec

1980- Dec1981* Dec1982- Dec"

1981:Jan .FebMar

MavJune

July

SeDtOctNovDec

1982:Jan ....FebMar . .AprMayJune

JulyAucSeDtOctNov0ecp

Adjusted for changes in reserve requirements'

Seasonally adjusted

Reserves of depository institutions

Total*

14.94

15.1315.6716.0416.4617.07

17.7717.8319.5120.7021.01

22.1323.5826.3227 6329.25

29.2929.8631.1732.8234.26

36.4637.9940.91

36 5236.5236 8537.02371837.20

37 2837 3437.7237 6037 6237.99

38.7138 2638 3638 4338.5038.58

38 5238 8039.5739.8840.4640.91

Nonbor-rowed

13.99

15.0615.5415.7816.1316.80

17.3317.3019.2819.9619.89

21.8023.4525.27263328.52

29.1629.8130.6031.9532.79

34.7737.3540.28

351235.2235 8535.6834 9535.17

35 60359236.2736 42369537.35

37.2036 4736 8036 8737.3937.37

37 8338 2938.6339.4039.8440.28

Required

14.43

14.3915.0915.4715.9716.66

17.3517.4919.1420.2820.72

21.8823.3926.0327 3328.99

29.0229.5930.9832.5933.93

35.9537.6740.39

361436.1736 5736.8536 9236.86

36.9437 0537.3137 3337 2737.67

38.3037 9637 99381638.1538.27

38 2138 4939.1839.4740.0640.39

Mone-tary

base3

44.3

44.545.747.149.451.9

54.756.860.564.867.9

72.077.184.290.398.3

104.5112.0121.4132.2142.5

155.0162.7175.1

155.4156.0156.7158.0158.5158.9

159.61600160.6160.81612162.7

164.3164.7165.2166 5167.7168.8

169.2170.1171.9172.8173.7175.1

Not seasonally adjusted

Reserves of depository institutions

Total2

15.22

15.4215.9616.3116.7117.32

18.0618.1619.8220.7221.00

22.1423.6326.3527.8529.59

29.7030.2731.6733.3734.83

37.1138.6641.59

38.0136.2836.2436.8836.8936.68

37.2437.0637.5237.7037 7838.66

40.0438.0537.8038 3338.1938.07

38.4338.5139.3540.0040.6841.59

Nonbor-rowed

14.28

15.3415.8216.0516.3817.06

17.6217.6319.5919.9719.88

21.8123 5125.3026 5528.86

29.5730.2231.1132.5033.35

35.4238.0340.96

36.6234.9735.2435.5434.6634.65

35.56356436.0636.5237.1238.03

38.5236.2636.2436.7637.0736.86

37.7438.0038.4239.5240.0640.96

Required

14.72

14.6715.3715 7416.2216.92

17 6417.82194520.2920.72

21.8923 4526.0627 5529.33

29.4330.00314833.1334.50

36.5938.3441.07

37 6435.9335.9636.7136.6336.35

36.9036 7737.1137.4237 4438.34

39.6237.7537.4438.0637.8337.76

38.1238.2038.9739.5940.2841.07

Mone-tary

base3

45.2

45 546.748150.452.9

55857961865.868.8

73.078285.4917

100.0

106 3114.1123 7134.8145.4

158 0165.8178.4

156 5154.3154 9157.0157.9158.4

160 5160 3160.2160 8162 6165.8

165.3162.9163.3165 6167.1168.2

170.0170 4171.4172.9175.1178.4

Reserve aggregates include required reserves of member banks and Edge Act corporations and other depository institutions.Discontinuities associated with the implementation of the Monetary Control Act, the inclusion of Edge Act corporation reserves, andother changes in Regulation D have been removed. Beginning with the week ended December 23, 1981, reserves aggregates have beenreduced by shifts of resemble liabilities to international banking facilities (IBFS), On the basis of reports of liabilities transferred toIBFS by U.S. commercial banks and U.S. agencies and branches OT foreign banks, it is estimated that required reserves were lowered onaverage by $10 to $20 million in December 1981 and $40 to $70 million in January 1982.

2 Reserve balances with Federal Reserve Banks (which exclude required clearing balances) plus vault cash at institutions with requiredreserve balances plus vault cash equal to required reserves at other institutions.

3 Includes reserve balances and required clearing balances at Federal Reserve Banks in the current week plus vault cash held twoweeks earlier used to satisfy reserve requirements at all depository institutions plus currency outside the U.S. Treasury, Federal ReserveBanks, the vaults of depository institutions, and surplus vault cash at depository institutions.

Source: Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System.

239

Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 246: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

TABLE B-67.—Bond yields and interest rates, 1929-82

[Percent per annum]

Year ormonth

U.S. Treasury securities

(new

3-month 6-month

Constantmaturities2

years years

Corporatebonds

(Moody's)

Aaa Baa

High-grade

munici-pal

bonds(Stand-ard &

Poor's)

Primecom-

mercial

months

Prime ratecharged by

banks *

Discountrate,

Federal

Bank ofNew York*

Federalfundsrate*

1929..

1933..

1939..

1940..1941..1942..1943..1944..

1945..1946..1947..1948..1949..

1950..1951..1952..1953..1954..

1955..1956..195719581959

19601961196219631964

1965..1966..1967..1968..1969..

1970..1971..1972..1973..1974..

1975..1976..1977..1978..1979..

1980..1981..1982..

0.515

.023

.014

.103

.326

.373

.375

.375

.375

.5941.0401.102

1.2181.5521.7661.931.953

1.7532.6583.2671.8393.405

2.9282.3782.7783.1573.549

3.9544.8814.3215.3396.677

6.4584.3484.0717.0417.886

5.8384.9895.2657.221

10.041

11.50614.07710.686

3.832

3.2472.6052.9083.2533.686

4.0555.0824.6305.4706.853

6.5624.5114.4667.1787.926

6.1225.2665.5107.572

10.017

11.37413.81111.084

2.471.63

2.473.193.982.844.46

3.983.543.473.674.03

4.225.235.035.687.02

7.295.655.726.957.82

7.496.776.698.299.72

11.5514.4412.92

2.852.40

2.823.183.653.324.33

4.123.883.954.004.19

4.284.925.075.656.67

7.356.166.216.847.56

7.997.617.428.419.44

11.4613.9113.00

4.73

4.49

3.01

2.842.772.832.732.72

2.622.532.612.822.66

2.622.862.963.202.90

3.063.363.893.794.38

4.414.354.334.264.40

4.495.135.516.187.03

8.047.397.217.448.57

8.838.438.028.739.63

11.9414.1713.79

5.90

7.76

4.96

4.754.334.283.913.61

3.293.053.243.473.42

3.243.413.523.743.51

3.533.884.714.735.05

5.195.085.024.864.83

4.875.676.236.947.81

9.118.568.168.249.50

10.619.758.979.49

10.69

13.6716.0416.11

4.27

4.71

ZM

2.502.102.362.061.86

1.671.642.012.402.21

1.982.002.192.722.37

2.532.933.603.563.95

3.733.463.183.233.22

3.273.823.984.515.81

6.515.705.275.186.09

6.896.495.565.906.39

8.5111.2311.57

5.895.82

5.816.256.466.977.80

8.457.747.607.968.92

9.009.009.029.56

10.78

12.6614.7015.14

5.85

1.73

.59

.56

.53

.66

.69

.73

.75

.811.031.441.49

1.452.16

• 2.332.521.58

2.183.313.812.463.97

3.852.973.263.553.97

4.385.555.105.907.83

7.715.114.738.159.84

6.325.345.617.99

710.91

12.2914.7611.89

5.50-6.00

1.50-4.00

1.50

1.501.501.501.501.50

1.501.50

1.50-1.751.75-2.00

2.00

2.072.563.003.173.05

3.163.774.203.834.48

4.824.504.504.504.50

4.545.635.616.307.96

7.915.725.258.03

10.81

7.866.846.839.06

12.67

15.2718.8714.86

5.16

2.56

1.00

1.001.00

M.00•1.0081.00

•1.00•1.00

1.001.341.50

1.591.751.751.991.60

1.892.773.122.153.36

3.533.003.003.233.55

4.044.504.195.165.87

5.954.884.506.447.83

6.255.505.467.46

10.28

11.7713.4211.02

1.782.733.111.573.30

3.221.962.683.183.50

4.075.114.225.668.20

7.184.664.438.73

10.50

5.825.045.547.93

11.19

13.3616.3812.26

See next page for continuation of table.

240

Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 247: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

TABLE B-67 .—Bond yields and interest rates, 1929-82—Continued

[Percent per annum]

Year ormonth

1980:JanFebMarApr.;;;;May....June...

July....Aug....Sept...OctNov

...

...

...

Dec

1981:JanFebMar

tzz:June

JulyAugSeptOctNovDec

1982:JanFebMar....ApeMay,...June...

July....Aug....Sept...OctNovDec

U.S. Treasury securities

Bills(new

issues)1

3-month

12.03612.81415.52614.0039.1506.995

8.1269.259

10.32111.58013.88815.661

14.72414.90513.47813.63516.29514.557

14.69915.61214.95113.87311.26910.926

12.41213.78012.49312.82112.14812.108

11.9149.0068.1967.7508.0428.013

6-month

11.85112.72115.10013.6189.1497.218

8.1019.443

10.54611.56613.61214.770

13.88314.13412.98313.43415.33413.947

14.40215.54815.05714.01311.53011.471

12.93013.70912.62112.86112.22012.310

12.23610,1059.5398.2998.3196.225

Constantmaturities2

3years

10.8812.8414.0512.029.448.91

9.2710.6311.5712.0113.3113.65

13.0113.6513.5114.0915.0814.29

15.1516.0016.2215.5013.1113.66

14.6414.7314.1314.1813.7714.48

14.0012.6212.0310.629.989.88

10years

10.8012.4112.7511.4710.189.78

10.2511.1011.5111.7512.6812.84

12.5713.1913.1213.6814.1013.47

14.2814.9415.3215.1513.3913.72

14.5914.4313.8613.8713.6214.30

13.9513.0612.3410.9110.5510.54

Corporatebonds

(Moody's)

Aaa

11.0912.3812.9612.0410.9910.58

11.0711.6412.0212.3112.9713.21

12.8113.3513.3313.8814.3213.75

14.3814.8915.4915.4014.2214.23

15.1815.2714.5814.4614.2614.81

14.6113.7112.9412.1211.6811.83

Baa

12.4213.5714.4514.1913.1712.71

12.6513.1513.7014.2314.6415.14

15.0315.3715.3415.5615.9515.80

16.1716.3416.9217.1116.3916.55

17.1017.1816.8216.7816.6416.92

16.8016.3215.6314.7314.3014.14

High-grade

munici-pal

bonds(Stand-ard&

Poor's)

7.218.049.098.407.377.60

8.088.628.959.119.55

10.09

9.6510.0310.1210.5510.7310.56

11.0312.1312.8612.6711.7112.77

13.1612.8112.7212.4511.9912.42

12.1111.1210.619.599.979.91

New-home

mortgageviews

(FHLBB)3

11.8711.9312.6213.0313.6812.66

12.4812.2512.3512.6113.0413.28

13.2613.5414.0214.1514.1014.67

14.7215.2715.2915.6516.3815.87

15.2515.1215.6715.8415.8915.40

15.7015.6814.9814.4113.8113.70

Primecom-

mercialpaper.

months

12.6613.6016.5014.939.298.03

8.299.61

11.0412.3214.7316.49

15.1014.8713.5914.1716.6615.22

16.0916.6215.9314.7211.9612.14

13.3514.2713.4713.6413.0213.79

13.0010.8010.869.218.728.50

Prime ratecharged by

banks(high-low)4

15.25-15.2516.75-15.2519.50-16.7520.00-19.5019.00-14,0014.00-12.00

12.00-11.0011.50-11.0013.00-11.5014.50-13.5017.75-14.5021.50-17.75

21.50-20.0020.00-19.0019.00-17.5018.00-17.0020.50-18.0020.50-20.00

20.50-20.0020.50-20.5020.50-19.5019.50-18.0018.00-16.0015.75-15.75

15.75-15.7517.00-15.7516.50-16.5016.50-16.5016.50-16.5016.50-16.50

16.50-15.5015.50-13.5013.50-13.5013.50-12.0012.00-11.5011.50-11.50

Discountrate,

FederalReserveBank of

New York(high-low)*

12.00-12.0013.00-12.0013.00-13.0013.00-13.0013.00-12.0012.00-11.00

11.00-10.0010.00-10.0011.00-10.0011.00-11.0012.00-11.0013.00-12.00

13.00-13.0013.00-13.0013.00-13.0013.00-13.0014.00-13.0014.00-14.00

14.00-14.0014.00-14.0014.00-14.0014.00-14.0014.00-13.0013.00-12.00

12.00-12.0012.00-12.0012.00-12.0012.00-12.0012.00-12.0012.00-12.00

12.00-11.5011.50-10.0010.00-10.0010.00-9.509.50-9.009.00-8.50

Federalfundsrate5

13.8214.1317.1917.6110.989.47

9.039.61

10.8712.8115.8518.90

19.0815.9314.7015.7218.5219.10

19.0417.8215.8715.0813.3112.37

13.2214.7814.6814.9414.4514.15

12.5910.1210.319.719.208.95

1 Rate on new issues within period; bank-discount basis.3 Yields on the more actively traded issues adjusted to constant maturities by the Treasury Department.'Effective rate (in the primary market) on conventional mortgages, reflecting fees and charges as well as contract rate and

assuming on the average, repayment at end of 10 years. Rates beginning January 1973 not strictly comparable with prior rates.«For monthly data, high and low for the period. Prime rate for 1929-33 and 1947-48 are ranges of the rate in effect during the

period.6 Since July 19, 1975, the daily effective rate is an average of the rates on a given day weighted by the volume of transactions at

these rates. Prior to that date, the daily effective rate was the rate considered most representative of the day's transactions, usuallythe one at which most transactions occurred.

8 From October 30, 1942, to April 24, 1946, a preferential rate of 0.50 percent was in effect for advances secured by Governmentsecurities maturing in 1 year or less.

7 Beginning November 1979, data are for 6-months paper.

Sources: Department of the Treasury, Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, Federal Home Loan Bank Board (FHLBB),Moody's Investors Service, and Standard & Poor's Corporation.

241Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 248: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

TABLE B-68.—Consumer credit outstanding and net change, 1930-82

[Millions of dollars]

Year and month

Amount outstanding (end of month)

Total

Installment credit l

Total Auto-mobile

Revolv-ing 2 Mobile

home8 Other

Nonin-stallmentcredit4

Net change from preceding period

Total

Installmentcredit»

Total Auto-mobile

Nonin-stallmentcredit4

1950: Dec1951: Dec1952: Dec1953: Dec1954: Dec1955: Dec1956: Dec1957: Dec1958: Dec1959: Dec

I960: Dec1961: Dec1962: Dec1963: Dec1964: Dec1965: Dec1966: Dec1967: Dec1968: Dec1969: Dec

1970: Dec1971: Dec1972: Dec1973: Dec1974: Dec1975: Dec1976: Dec1977: Dec1978: Dec...1979: Dec

1980: Dec.1981: Dec

1981:JanFebMar....

%~June...

July...,Aug....Sept...OctNovDec

1982:JanFebMar...,AprMay....June...

July....Aug....Sept...OctNov

25,64127,26832,55136,73638,19245,34849,26852,19152,70260,741

65,10467,63573,91782,80592,591

103,207109,749115,430126,949137,742

143,113157,795177,639203,077213,427223,140248,916289,133337,917383,363

388,239413,544

384,847383,232385,685388,857391,077394,531

397,210401,449406,234406,670407,970413,544

409,444406,682406,520408,109409,500412,599

413,366415,140417,624417,422419,768

15,50316,22020,47024,25424,89130,26933,17135,44335,33941,123

45,05146,02750,99457,82965,57273,88179,33983,14891,681101,161

105,528118,255133,173155,108164,594171,996193,525230,564273,645312,024

313,472333,375

310,760309,385311,071313,669315,679318,792

320,656324,161328,187328,652329,053333,375

330,135327,435327,131328,363329,338331,851

332,471333,808335,948334,977336,991

6,0155,9587,6359,6859,747

13,47114,48415,47214,25816,632

18,08317,59919,92422,84225,81729,35530,99231,13134,34836,946

36,32540,51947,86253,77254,26657,24267,70782,911

101,647116,362

116,838126,431

115,778116,195118,049119,076119,582120,400

121,476123,481125,703126,344126,385126,431

125,525125,294125,559126,201127,220128,415

128,359128,281129,085128,619129,594

2,1053,720

5,1288,5289,700

11,70913,68115,01917,18939,27448,30956,937

58,35263,049

57,55656,04755,35655,71655,82056,798

56,76457,28058,31858,45158,92363,049

61,43359,51458,49158,64158,64759,302

59,82460,47560,93260,91761,500

2,4617,2269,52613,58014,64214,43414,57314,94515,23516,838

17,32218,486

17,20217,11317,16217,34217,57617,704

17,76017,95918,12418,30018,38018,486

18,39718,34318,36318,40218,47918,543

18,60118,74118,77818,81418,821

9,48810,26212,83514,56915,14416,79a18,68719,97121,08124,491

26,96828,42831,07034,98739,75544,52648,34752,01755,22860,495

61,61461,98266,08576,04782,00585,30194,05693,434108,454121,887

120,960125,409

120,224120,030120,504121,535122,701123,890

124,656125,441126,042125,557125,365125,409

124,780124,284124,718125,119124,992125,591

125,687126,311127,153126,627127,076

10,13811,04812,08112,48213,30115,07916,09716,74817,36319,618

20,05321,60822,92324,97627,01929,32630,41032,28235,26836,581

37,58539,54044,46647,96948,83351,14455,39158,56964,27171,339

74,76780,169

74,08773,84774,61475,18875,39875,739

76,55477,28878,04778,01878,91780,169

79,30979.24779,38979,74680,16280,748

80,89581,33281,67682,44582,777

4,7891,6275,2834,1851,4567,1563,9202,923

5118,039

4,3632,5316,2828,8889,786

10,6166,5425,681

11,51910,793

5,37114,68219,84425,43810,3509,713

25,77640,21748,78445,446

3,271717

4,2503,784

6375,3782,9022,272-1045,784

3,928976

4,9676,8357,7438,3095,4583,8098,5339,480

4,36712,72714,91821,9359,4867,402

21,52937,03943,08138,379

1,537- 5 7

1,6772,050

623,7241,013

988-1,214

2,374

1,451- 4 8 42,3252,9182,9753,5381,637

1393,2172,598

-6214,1947,3435,910494

2,97610,46515,20418,73614,715

4,876 1,448 47625,305 19,903 9,593

Seasonally adjusteds

1,7041,9623,2083,5182,0782,708

2,7912,5573,430

5841,212

432

1,620-516

5542,0582,0012,279

992-1491,138

542,656

1,2061,8452,9712,7221,5712,031

1,5512,4282,9751,002600-33

44375990

1,1751,3991,349

57066

1,092-3242,523

31831

1,526648

-114149

1,0561,8592,0791,02456468

-121-56-28233959655

61-402505-781,816

1,518910

1,033401819

1,7781,018651615

2,255

4351,5551,3152,0532,0432,3071,0841,8722,9861,313

1,00419554,9263,503864

2,3114,2473,1785,7037,067

3,4285,402

498117237796507677

1,240129455

- 4 1 8612465

1,177-591- 4 3 6

883602930

422- 2 1 5

46378133

1 Installment credit covers most short* and intermediate-term credit extended to individuals through regular business channels,usually to finance the purchase of consumer goods and services or to refinance debts incurred for such purposes, and scheduled to berepaid (or with the option of repayment) in two or more installments. Credit secured by real estate is generally excluded.

a Consists of credit cards at retailers, gasoline companies, and commercial banks, and check credit at commercial banks. Prior to1968, included in "other," except gasoline companies, included in noninstallment credit prior to 1971. Beginning 1977, includes open-end credit at retailers, previously included in other. Also beginning 1977, some retail credit was reclassified from commercial intoconsumer credit.

4 Because of inconsistencies in the data and infrequent benchmarking, series on noninstallment credit is no longer published by theFederal Reserve Board on a regular basis. Data are shown here as a general indication of trends.

o For installment credit, computed as the difference between extensions and liquidations (both seasonally adjusted); see also TableB-69. For noninstallment credit, computed as the change from one month to another in the seasonally adjusted amount outstanding.

Source: Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System.

242

Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 249: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

TABLE B-69.—Consumer installment credit extended and liquidated, 1950-82

[Millions of dollars; monthly data seasonally adjusted]

Year or monthTotal

Ex-tended

Liqui-dated

Automobile

Ex-tended

Liqui-dated

Revolving *

Ex-tended

Liqui-dated

Mobile home2

Ex-tended

Liqui-dated

Other

Ex-tended

Liqui-dated

1950...1951...1952...1953...1954...,1955....1956....1957....1958....1959...,

1960...1961....1962...1963...1964...1965...1966...,1967...,1968....1969...,

1970...,1971...,1972...1973....1974...,1975...,1976...,1977...,1978...,1979...

1980...,1931...,

1981:Jan..,Feb..Mar.,

feJune,July.Aug.SeptOct..Nov.Dec.

1982:Jan..Feb..Mar.Apr..May.JuneJuly.Aug.SeptOct..Nov.

22,13024,58330,61632,57932,26540,26340,88643,10140,95649,134

50,82750,59857,56264,66072,44579,91883,82189,058

101,426109,422

115,007138,046152,275173,035172,765180,083210,740257,600297,668324,777

306,076336,341

27,46628,68229,37029,27128,37729,223

28,29028.32329,40626,83627,37026,656

26,88827,15027,46228,68429,19729,737

27,51427,57928,26828,06231,610

18,86123,86726,35528,79431,62534,88237,89940,75941,29043,395

47,02249,73552,60157,82264,61671,61678,36585,19492,07599,945

110,352127,789136,787152,817163,276172,675189,179222,138254,589286,396

304,628316,447

26,26026,83726,39926,54926,80627,192

26,73925,89526,43125,83426,77026,689

26,44527,07526,47227,50927,79828,388

26,94427,51327,17628,38629,087

8,4458,951

11,61012,74011,74116,73215,57216,55414,28718,008

18,11216,47720,16422,61724,79227,91327,84427,62332,22833,686

30,85736,70643,70249,60646,51452,42063,74375,64187,98193,901

83,45494,404

7,3438,2298,4997,4597,3847,515

8,0598,3969,0007,4908,0737,352

7,4747,2837,1837,8718,4298,182

7,3327,1127,5467,97010,329

6,9069,0089,93210,68911,67913,00814,55915,56715,50115,638

16,66116,96017,84019,69921,81524,38626,20627,48229,01331.090

31,41432,51238,08143,69646,01949,44453,27860,43769,24579,186

82,97784,809

7,3127,3986,9736,8117,4987,366

7,0036,5376,9216,4667,5097,284

7,5957,3397,2117,6387,4707.5277,2717,5147,0418,0488,513

3,4816,182

8,68921,86224,65928,70233,21336,95643,93487,596105,125120,174

128,068140,135

11,53511,73811,62012,38311,87612,658

11,70611,66312,26311,75311,37911,592

11,07011,73012,14312,41612,52813,361

12,55112,49712,46412,34012,489

2,7264,567

7,27820,81823,48526,69931,24335,61641,76481,34896,090111,546

126,653135,438

10.94411,41911,11011,44311,52011,651

11,59011,48611,69211,42911,35811,533

11,26611,88511,83611,91711,99112,85411,93912,35412,25412,23212,382

6122,5215,1217,0615,7884,3264,8595,7125,4126,471

5,0936,028

392405616593620509

445520532475479508

434364411544478459

441581452476484

4781,7542,9754,1844,7204,5364,7205,3415,1264,868

4,6104,867

451492552410372399

386364375353404365

460408396493408392

378440442480444

13,68515,63219,00619,83920,52423,53125,31426,54726,66931,126

32,71534,12137,39842,04347,65352,00555,97761,43565,71769,554

74,84976,95778,79387,66687,25086,38198,20488,65199,150104,231

89,46195,774

8,1968,3108,6358,8368,4978,541

7,7447,6117,1187,4397,204

7,9107,7737,7257,8537,7627,735

7,1907,3897,8067,2768,308

11,95514,85916,42318,10519,94621,87423,34025,19225,78927,757

30,36132,77534,76138,12342,80147,23052,15957,71260,33664,288

71,18872,70572,24678,23881,29483,07989,41775,01284,12890,796

90,38891,333

7,5537,5287,7647,8857,4167,776

7,7607,5087,4437,5867,4997,507

7,1247,4437,0297,4617,9297,615

7,3567,2057,4397,6267,748

1 Consists of credit cards at retailers, gasoline companies, 2nd commercial banks, and check credit at commercial banks. Prior to1968, included in "other," except gasoline companies, included in noninstallment credit prior to 1971. Beginning 1977, includes open-end credit at retailers, previously included in ''other/' Also beginning 1977, some retail credit was reclassified from commercial intoconsumer credit.

2 Not reported separately prior to July 1970.Note.—Installment credit covers most short- and intermediate-term credit extended to individuals through regular business channels,

usually to finance the purchase of consumer goods and services or to refinance debts incurred for such purposes, and scheduled to berepaid (or with the option of repayment) in two or more installments. Credit secured by real estate is generally excluded.

Liquidated credit includes repayments, chargeoffs, 2nd other credit.See also Table 6-68.Source: Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System.

243Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 250: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

TABLE B-70.—Mortgage debt outstanding by type of property and of financing, 1939-82

[Billions of dollars]

End of yearor quarter

Allproper-

ties

35.5

36.537.636.735.334.7

35.541.848.956.262.7

72.882.391.4

101.3113.7

129.9144.5156.5171.8190.8

207.5228.0251.4278.5305.9

333.3356.5381.2410.9441.4

474.2526.5603.4681.6744.3

806.1893.0

1,022.61,173.61,337.7

1,471.81,583.5

1,371.11,398.11,435.51,471.8

1,497.61,533.21,561.61,583.5

1,602.81,624.21,635.8

Farmproper-

ties

6.6

6.56.46.05.44.9

4.84.95.15.35.6

6.16.77.2778.2

9.09.8

10.411.112.1

12.813.915.216.818.9

21.223.125.127.429.2

30.332.235.841.346.3

51.156.663.670.882.7

92.0101.7

86.089.090.692.0

94.597.5

100.0101.7

103.6105.5106.7

Nonfarm properties

Total

28.9

30.031.230.829.929.7

30.836.943.950.957.1

66.775.684.293.6

105.4

120.9134.6146.1160.7178.7

194.7214.1236.2261.7287.0

312.1333.4356.1383.5412.2

443.8494.3567.7640.3698.0

755.0836.4958.9

1,102.81,255.1

1,379.81,481.8

1,285.11,309.01,344.91,379.8

1,403.11,435.71,461.61,481.8

1,499.21,518.71,529.1

1- to 4-familyhouses

16.3

17.418.418.217.817.9

18.623.028.233.337.6

45.251.758.566.175.7

88.299.0

107.6117.7130.9

141.9154.6169.3186.4203.4

220.5232.9247.3264.8283.2

298.1328.3372.2415.5451.2

495.0560.7657.8770.6891.1

987.01,060.5

914.3931.6960.7987.0

1,004.01,028.31,047.61,060.5

1,071.91,085.21.092.3

Multi-familyproper-

ties

5.6

5.75.95.85.85.6

5.76.16.67.58.6

10.111.512.312.913.5

14.314.915.316.818.7

20.323.025.829.033.6

37.240.343.947.352.2

60.170.1B2.S93.1

100.0

100.6104.5111.5120.7128.4

137.1141.4

130.0132.4134.6137.1

138.1139.3140.2141.4

142.9143.8144.7

Com-mercialproper-ties1

7.0

6.97.06.76.36.2

6.47.79.1

10.210.8

11.512.513.414.516.3

18.320.723.226.129.2

32.436.541.146.250.0

54.560.164.871.476.9

85.695.9

1127131.7146.9

159.3171.2189.6211.4235.6

255.7279.9

240.9245.1249.6255.7

261.0268.1273.7279.9

284.4289.7292.2

Nonfarm properties by type of mortgage

Government underwritten

Total2

1.8

2.33.03.74.14.2

4.36.39.8

13.617.1

22.126.629.332.136.2

42.947.851.655.259.3

62.365.669.473.477.2

81.284.188.293.4

100.2

109.2120.7131.1135.0140.2

147.0154.1161.7176.4199.0

225.1239.0

207.5211.6218.9225.1

229.1233.6237.0239.0

240.6

1- to 4-family houses

Total

1.8

2.33.0374.14.2

4.36.19.3

12.515.0

18.822.925.428.132.1

38.943.947.250.153.8

56.459.162.265.969.2

73.176.179.984.490.2

97.3105.2113.0116.2121.3

1277133.5141.6153.4172.9

195.2207.6

180.8184.1190.0195.2

198.8202.7205.9207.6

209.0

FHAinsured

1.8

2.33.03.74.14.2

4.1373.85.36.9

8.597

10.812.012.8

14.315.516.519.723.8

26729.532.335.038.3

42.044.847.450.654.5

59.965.768.266.265.1

66.166.568.071.481.0

93.6101.3

86.087.490.693.6

95.798.1

100.0101.3

102.0

VAguar-

anteed

I0.22.45.57.28.1

10.313,214.616.119.3

24.628.430.730.430,0

29.729.629.930.930.9

31.131.332.533.835.7

37.339.544.750.056.2

61.667.073.682.092.0

101.6106,2

94.896799.4

101.6

103.1104.6105.9106.2

107.0

Conventional3

Total

27.1

27.728.227.125.825.5

26.530.634.137.340.0

44.749.154.961.569.3

78.086.894.6

105.5119.4

132.3148.5166.9188.2209.8

231.0249.3267.9290.1312.0

334.6373.5436.5505.3557.8

608.0682.3797.2926.4

1,056.1

1,154.71,242.8

1,077.61,097.41,126.01,1547

1,174.01,202.01,224.61,242.8

1,258.6

1- to 4-familyhouses

14.5

15.115.414.5137137

14.316.918.920.822.6

26.328.933.238.043.6

49.355.160.467.677.0

85.595.5

107.1120.5134.1

147.4156.9167.4180.4193.0

200.8223.1259.2299.2329.9

367.3427.1516.2617.3718.1

791.8852.9

733.4747.5770.7791.8

805.2825.68417852.9

862.9

1939

1940..,..1941194219431944

19451946194719481949

19501951195219531954

19551956195719581959

19601961196219631964

19651966196719681969

19701971197219731974

19751976197719781979

19801981

1980:IIIIllIV

1981:|II .."IIIIIV

1982:

in""!!!;

1 Includes negligible amount of farm loans held by savings and loan associations.2 Includes FHA insured multifamily properties, not shown separately.8 Derived figures. Total includes multifamily and commercial properties, not shown separately.Source: Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, based on data from various Government and private organizations.

244

Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 251: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

TABLE B-71-—Mortgage debt outstanding by bolder, 1939-82

[Billions of dollars]

End of yearor quarter

1939

19401941194219431944

19451946194719481949

19501951195219531954

19551956195719581959

19601961196219631964

19651966196719681969

19701971197219731974

19751976197719781979

19801981

1980:I.||IllIV

1981:IIIIllIV

1982:

||HI

Total

35.5

36.537.636 735.334.7

35.541.848 956.262.7

72.882 3914

101.3113.7

129 9144.515651718190.8

207 5228.0251.4278 5305.9

333 3356.5381.24109441.4

474 2526 5603.4681.6744 3

806.1893 0

1,022.61,173.61,337.7

1,471.81,583.5

1,371.11,398.11,435 51,471.8

1,497.61,533.21,561.61,583.5

1,602.81,624.21,635.8

Major financial institutions

Total

18.6

19.520.720.720.220.2

21.026.031.837.842.9

51.759.566.975.185.7

99.3111.2119.7131.5145.5

157.6172.6192.5217.1241.0

264.6280.8298.8319.9339.1

355.9394.2450.0505.4542.6

581.2647.5745.0848.2938.6

997.21,040.6

951.2958.8977.5997.2

1,006.91,023.11,033.81,040.6

1,041.51,042.71,028.8

Savingsand loanassocia-

tions

3.8

4.14.64.64.64.8

5.47.18.9

10.311.6

13.715.618.422.026.1

31435.740.045.653.1

60168.878.890.9

101.3

110 3114.4121.8130.8140.2

150.3174.3206.2231.7249.3

278.6323.0381.2432.8475.7

503.2518.4

479.0481.1492.1503.2

507.6515.3518.8518.4

515.9512.7495.4

Mutualsavingsbanks

4.8

4.94.84.64.44.3

4.24.44.95.86.7

8.39.9

11.412.915.0

17.519.721.223.325.0

26.929.132.336.240.6

44.647.350.553.556.1

57.962.067.673.274.9

77,281.688.195.298.9

99.9100.0

99.299.299.399.9

99.7100.010O.O100.0

97.596.394.2

Commer-cial

banks i

4.3

4.64.94.74.54.4

4.87.29.4

10.911.6

13.714.715.916.918.6

21.022.723.325.528.1

28.830.434.539.444.0

49.754.459.065.770.7

73.382.599.3

119.1132.1

136.2151.3179.0214.0245.2

263.0284.5

250.7253.0258.0263.0

266.7273.2279.0284.5

289.4294.0298.3

Lifeinsur-ancecom-

panies

5.7

6.06.46.76.76.7

6.67.28.7

10.812.9

16.119.321.323.326.0

29.433.035.237.139.2

41.844.246.950.555.2

60.064.667.570.072.0

74.475.576.981.486.2

89.291.696.8

106.2118.8

131.1137.7

122.4125.6128.1131.1

132.9134.7136.0137.7

138.8139.5140.8

Other holders

Federaland

relatedagen-cies2

5.0

4.94.74.33.63.0

2.42.01.81.82.3

2.83.54.14.64.8

5.36.27.78.0

10.2

11.512.212.611.812.2

13.517.520.925.131.1

38.346.454.664.882.1

101.0116.6f40.3170.4215.7

256.6289.1

228.6238.2247.1256.6

263.5271.4279.9289.1

301.0315.1333.2

Individ-uals andothers

11.9

12.012.211.711.511.5

12.113.815.316.617.5

18.419.320.421.723.2

25.327.129.132.335.1

38.443.146.349.552.7

55.258.261.465.971.2

79.985.998.9

111.4119.7

123.8128.9137.2155.0183.4

218.1253.8

191.4201.1210.9218.1

227.2238.6247.9253.8

260.3266.4273.8

1 Includes loans held by nondeposit trust companies, but not by bank trust departments.2 Includes former Federal National Mortgage Association (FNMA) and new Government National Mortgage Association (GNMA), as well

as Federal Housing Administration, Veterans Administration, Public Housing Administration, Farmers Home Administration, and in earlieryears Reconstruction Finance Corporation, Homeowners Loan Corporation, and Federal Farm Mortgage Corporation. A!so includes GNMAPools and U.S.-sponsored agencies such as new FNMA, Federal Land Banks, and Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation. Other U.S.agencies (amounts small or current separate data not readily available) included with "individuals and others.

Source: Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, based on data from various Government and private organizations.

245Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 252: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

GOVERNMENT FINANCE

TABLE B-72.—Federal budget receipts, outlays, and debt, fiscal years 1973-84

[Millions of dollars; fiscal years]

Description

BUDGET RECEIPTS AND OUTLAYS:

Total receipts

Federal fundsTrust funds

Interfund transactions

Total outlays

Federal fundsTrust funds

Interf und transactions

Total surplus or deficit ( - )

Federal funds

Trust funds

OUTSTANDING DEBT, END OF PERIOD:

Gross Federal debt

Held by Government agenciesHeld by the public

Federal Reserve SystemOther

BUDGET RECEIPTSIndividual income taxesCorporation income taxesSocial insurance taxes and contribu-

tionsExcise taxesEstate and gift taxesCustoms dutiesMiscellaneous receipts:

Deposits of earnings by FederalReserve System

AH otherBUDGET OUTLAYS

National defenseInternational affairsGeneral science, space, and technol-, ogyEnergyNatural resources and environmentAgricultureCommerce and housing creditTransportation...Community and regional development..Education, training, employment, and

social servicesHealthIncome securityVeterans benefits and servicesAdministration of justiceGeneral governmentGeneral purpose fiscal assistanceNet interestAllowancesUndistributed offsetting receipts

Composition of undistributed offset-tine receipts:

Employer share, employee retire-ment

Rents and royalties on the OuterContinental Shelf

1973

230,799

161,35790,76621,325

245,647

186,95180,021

-21,325

= 14,849

=25,59310,745

468,426

125,381343,045

75,181267,863

230,799

103,24636,153

63,11516,2604,9173,188

3,495425

245,647

74,5414,066

4,0301.1794,7634,852

9249,0654,595

12,73517,40572,96512,0132,1312,5687351

17,346

-6,882

-2,927

-3,956

1974

263,224

181,219103,138

-21,133

267,912

199,91889,126

= 21,133

-4,688

14,011

486,247

140,194346,053

80,648265,405

263,224

118,95238,620

75,07116,8445,0353,334

4,845523

267,912

-10,068

=3,319

-6,748

1975

279,090

187,505116,683-25,098

324,245

240,081109,261-25,098

-=45,154

-52,5767,422

544,131

147,225396,906

84,993311,913

279,090

122,38640,621

84,53416,5514,6113,676

5,777935

324,245

77,7815,681

3,977837

5,6702,2273,9259,1724,134

12,34420,36484,43713,3862,4623,2436,890

21,449

85,5526,922

3,989

MS1,6595,607

10,3883,738

15,87025,742

108,57616,5972,9423,1337,187

23,244

=6,408

-3,980

-2.428

Actual^

1976

298,060

201.099131,750-34,789

364,473

269,921129,341-=34,789

= 66,413

-68,8222,409

631,866

151,566480,300

94,714385,586

298,060

131,60341,409

90,76916,9635,2164,074

5,4512,576

364,473

89,4305,554

4,3703,1278,124215023,792

13,4354,767

18,73731,503127,39018,4323,3202,9487,235

26,711

^6,904

-4,242

=2,662

Transitionquarter

81,232

54,08531,530-4,383

94,188

65,08833,482-4,383

-12,956

-11,004-=1,952

646,379

148,052498,327

96,702401,625

81,232

38,8018,460

25,2194,4731,4551,212

1,500111

94,188

22,3072,191

1,161794

2,532584

1,3923,3041,340

5,1628,181

32,7973,962859883

2,0926,946

-2,296

=985

-1,311

1977

355,559

241,312150,560= 36,313

400,506

295,756141,063-36,313

=44,948

=54,4449,496

709,138

157,295551,843

105,004446,839

355,559

157,62654,892

106,48517,5487,3275,150

5,908623

400,506

97,5014,819

-6,922

-4,548

-2,374

1978

399,561

270,490165,568=36,498

448,368

331,991152,874-36,498

=48,807

=61,50112,694

780,425

169,477610,948

115,480495,468

399,561

180,98859,952

120,96718,3765,2856,573

6,641778

448,368

105,1865,922

4,6774,172

10,0005,526

9814,6366,348

20,98536,582

137,90018,0383,6003,1699,499

29,877

4,7425,861

10,9257,7313,331

15,44511,070

26,46341,232

146,18018,9743,8023,7069,601

35,435

- 7,242

-4,983

=2,259

See next page for continuation of table.

246Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 253: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

TABLE B-72.—Federal budget receipts, outlays, and debt, fiscal years 1973-84—Continued

[Millions of dollars; fiscal years]

DescriptionActual

1979 1980 1981 1982

Estimates

1983 1984

BUDGET RECEIPTS AND OUTLAYS:

Total receipts

Federal fundsTrust fundsInterfund transactions..

Total outlays..

Federal fundsTrust fundsInterf und transactions....

Total surplus or deficit ( - ) . .

Federal funds...Trust funds

OUTSTANDING DEBT, END OF PERIOD:

Gross Federal debt

Held by Government agencies..Held by the public

Federal Reserve System..Other

463,302

316,366186,988-40,052

490,997

362,396168,653-40,052

-27,694

-46,03018,335

833,751

189,162644,589

115,594528,996

517,112

350,856210,930-44,674

576,675

419,220202,129-44,674

-59,563

-68,3648,801

914,317

199,212715,105

120,846594,259

599,272

410,422239,413-50,563

657,204

475,171232,596-50,563

-57,932

-64,7496,817

1,003,941

209,507794,434

124,466669,968

617,766

409,253268,407-59,894

728,375

526,113262,155-59,894

-110,609

-116,8606,252

1,146,987

217,560929,427

134,497794,929

597,494

376,945314,755-94,206

805,202

603,047296,361-94,206

-207,708

-226,10218,393

1,383,744

239,3171,144,427

659,702

404,745330,210-75,253

848,483

610,467313,269

-75,253

-188,781

-205,72116,941

1,606,339

258,9121,347,427

BUDGET RECEIPTS...

Individual income taxesCorporation income taxesSocial insurance taxes and contributionsExcise taxesEstate and gift taxesCustoms dutiesMiscellaneous receipts:

Deposits of earnings by Federal ReserveSystem

Allother

BUDGET OUTLAYS..

National defenseInternational affairsGeneral science, space, and technologyEnergy .\Natural resources and environmentAgricultureCommerce and housing creditTransportationCommunity and regional developmentEducation, training, employment, and social serv-

ices ,HealthIncome securityVeterans benefits and servicesAdministration of justiceGeneral governmentGeneral purpose fiscal assistanceNet interestAllowancesUndistributed offsetting receipts

463,302

217,84165,677

138,93918,7455,4117439

8,327925

490,997

117,6816,0915,0416,856

12,0916,2382,579

17,4599,542

29,68546,962

160,15919,9284,1534,0938,372

42,606

517,112

244,06964,600

157,80324,3296,3897,174

11,767981

576,675

135,85610,7335,7226,313

13,8124,7627,788

21,12010,068

30,76755,220

193,10021,1834,5704,5058,584

52,458

599,272

285,91761,137182,72040,8396,7878,083

12,834956

657,204

159,76511,1306,35910,27713,5255,5723,946

23,3819,394

31,40265,982

225,10122,9884,6964,6146,856

68,726

617,766

297,74449,207

201,49836,3117,9918,854

15,186975

728,375

187,4189,9827,0704,67412,93414,8753,865

20,5607,165

26,30074,017

248,34323,9554,6714,7266,393

84,697

597,494

285,19435,286

210,31337,2576,1148,819

13,4061,105

805,202

214,76911,9397,7594,506

12,08721,0751,928

21,8767,373

26,67682,362

282,47224,4115,2735,7946,38288,936

Composition of undistributed offsetting receipts:Employer share, employee retirementRents and royalties on the Outer Continental

Shelf

- 8 , 5 3 8

-5,271

-3,267

-9,887

-5,787

-4,101

-16,509

-6,371

-10,138

-13,270

-7,020

-6,250

-20,414

-8,214

-11,793

659,702

295,58951,770

242,93740,353

5,9029,137

12,8191,195

848,483

245,30513,2508,2503,3069,832

12,150413

25,1456,951

25,25690,647

282,42225,7245,4915,9936,968

103,180949

-22,750

-9,853

-11,895

Note.—Under provisions of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974,1 . . . , . . . . . . . .fiscal year 1977. Through fiscal year 1976, the fiscal year was on a July 1-June 30 basis. Beginning October 1976 (fiscal year 1977).the fiscal year is on an October 1-September 30 basis. The period July 1,1976 through September 30, 1976 is a separate fiscal periodknown as the transition quarter.

Refunds of receipts are excluded from receipts and outlays.See "Budget of the United States Government, Fiscal Year 1984" for additional information.Sources: Department of the Treasury and Office of Management and Budget.

247Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 254: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

TABLE B-73.—Federal budget receipts and outlays, off-budget outlays, and debt, fiscal years 1929-84

[Billions of dollars]

Fiscal year

1929

1933

1939

19401941194219431944

19451946 . . .194719481949

19501951195219531954

19551956195719581959

I9601961196219631964

1965196B196719681969

19701971197219731974

19751976Transition quarter..197719781979

1980198119821983*1984*

Budget

Receipts

3.9

2.0

5.0

6.48.6

14.423.644.3

45.239.338.441.839.4

39.551.666.269.669.7

65.574.580.079 679.2

92 594,499.7

106.6112.7

116 81309148 9153.0186.9

192 81871207.3230.8263.2

279.1298181.2

3556399.6463.3

517.1599.3617.8597 5659.7

Outlays

3.1

4.6

8.8

9.513.635.178.591.3

92.755.234.529.838.8

42.645.567.776.170.9

68.570.576.782.692.1

92 297.8

106.8111.3118.6

118 4134 7157 6178.1183.6

1957210.2230.7245.6267.9

324.2364.594.2

4005448.4491.0

576.7657.2728.4805.2848.5

Surplus ordeficit( ->

.7

=2.6

-3 .9

31-5 .0

-20.8-54.9

47 0

-47.5-15.9

3.912 0

.6

316.1

= 15=6.5-1 .2

= 3 04.13.2

=-2 9-12.9

3=3.4- 7 1

48-5 .9

16- 3 8

87-25.2

3.2

2823 0

-23.4-14.8=4.7

=45.266413.0449

-48.827.7

-59,6-57.9110 6207 7

-188.8

Off-budgetoutlays

0.11.4

8.1731.887

10.412.5

14.221.017.317.014.0

Budgetand off-budget

surplus ordeficit( ->

-14.9=6.1

-53.2=73.7= 14.7= 536= 59.2

40.2

-73.878.9

-127.9=224.8=202.8

Gross Feder.ofpe

Total

U6.9

*22.5

48.2

50.757.579.2

142.6204.1

2601271.0257.1252 0252.6

256.9255.32591266.0270.8

274 4272.8272.42797287.8

290 9292.9303.3310.8316.8

323 2329 53413369.8367.1

3826409.5437.3468.4486.2

544.1631.9646.47091780.4833.8

914.31,003.91,147.01,383.71,606.3

il debt (endrlnA\

Held bythe public

41.4

42.848.267.8

127.8184.8

235.2241.9224.3216 3214.3

219.0214.3214 8218.4224.5

226.6222.2219.4226 4235.0

237.2238.6248.4254.5257.6

2616264.7267 5290.6279.5

284 9304 3323.8343.0346.1

396.9480.3498.35518610.9644.6

715.1794.4929.4

1,144.41,347.4

1 Not strictly comparable with later data.* Estimates.Note.—Under provisions of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974, the fiscal year for the Federal Government shifted beginning with

fiscal year 1977. Through fiscal year 1976, the fiscal year was on a July 1-June 30 basis; beginning October 1976 (fiscal year 1977),the fiscal year is on an October 1-September 30 basis. The 3-month period from July 1, 1976 through September 30, 1976 is aseparate fiscal period known as the transition quarter.

Data for 1929-39 are according to the administrative budget and those beginning 1940 according to the unified budget.Refunds of receipts are excluded from receipts and outlays.See "Budget of the United States Government, Fiscal Year 1984" for additional information.Sources: Department of the Treasury and Office of Management and Budget.

248

Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 255: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

TABLE B-74.—Relation of Federal Government receipts and expenditures in the national income and

product accounts to the unified budget, fiscal years 1982-84

[Billions of dollars; fiscal years]

Receipts and expenditures 1982

Estimate

1983

RECEIPTSTotal budget receipts....

Government contribution for employee retirement (grossing)..Other netting and grossingAdjustment to accrualsGeographic exclusions ...Other

Federal sector, national income and product accounts, receipts

EXPENDITURESTotal budget outlays

Lending and financial transactionsGovernment contribution for employee retirement (grossing)...Defense timing adjustmentBonuses on Outer Continental Shelf land leases..Geographic exclusionsOther

Federal sector, national income and product accounts, expenditures..

617.8

10.79.3

-18 .2- 1 . 6

.2

618.2

728.4

739.7

597.5

12.211.78.2

- 1 . 7.0

627.9

805.2

829.0

659.7

14.013.9- . 3

-1 . 9.2

685.6

848.5

- 5 . 310.79.3

- 1 . 22.7

- 4 . 6- .3

- 3 . 812.211.7

- 1 . 78.3

- 4 . 81.9

- 3 . 814.013.9

- 2 . 57.9

- 4 . 94.2

877.3

Note.-See Note, Table B-73.See Special Analysis B, "Special Analyses, Budget of the United States Government, Fiscal Year 1984" for description of these

categories.Sources: Department of Commerce (Bureau of Economic Analysis), Department of the Treasury, and Office of Management and

Budget.

249

Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 256: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

TABLE B-75.—Government receipts and expenditures, national income and product accounts, 1929-82

[Billions of dollars; quarterly data at seasonally adjusted annual rates]

Calendar year or quarter

1929

1933

1939

1940194119421943194419451946194719481949

1950195119521953195419551956195719581959

I96019611962 ,1963196419651966196719681969

1970197119721973197419751976197719781979

198019811982p

1980:1

IllIV

1981:

||IIIIV

1982:

||IllIV

Total government

Receipts

11.3

9.3

15.4

17.725.032.649.251.253.251.056.958955.9

69.085 290.194 689.9

1011109.7116 2115.0129.4

139.5144.8156.7168.5174.0188.3212 3228.22631296.7

302.8322.6368 3413.1455 2470.5538.4605 46819765,1

838.0957.3968.4

814.6809.2842.8885.2

939.8951.5974.3963.6

951.1966.2972 2

Expendi-tures

10.3

10.7

17.6

18.428.864.093.3

103 092.745 642.550559.3

61.079 293.9

101697.098 0

104.51152127.6131.0

136.4149.1160.5167.8176.3187.8213 6242.42691286.8

313.4342.03716405.3460 0534.3574.9623 36811750.8

871.2985.5

1,084.5

825.2853.4888 8917.4

948.1959.1998 7

1,036.1

1,041.81053.71095 91,146.7

Surplus ordeficit

nationalincome

andproductaccounts

1.0

- 1 . 4

-2 .2

=.7=3.8

=31.4=44.1= 51.8= 39.5

5414.484

=3.4

8.061

- 3 . 8- 6 9-7.1315.2

9= 12.6

'••-1.6

3.1=4.3= 3.8

- 2 . 3

-1*3-14.2=60

9.9

= 10.6= 19.4

7.8= 4 7

=63.8=36.5- 4 7 8

814.3

=33.2-28.2116.1

-=10.6=44.2=45 9

32 2

- 8 . 3- 7 . 6

=24 5- 7 2 5

90.7-87.5123 7

Federal Government

Receipts

3.8

2.7

6.7

8.615.422.939.341.042.539.143.243,238.7

50.064367.370 063.772 678.081978.789.8

96.198.1

106.2114.4114.9124.31418150.5174 4196.9

191.9198.6227 5258.6287 8287.3331.8375 24316493.6

540.7628.2614.7

525.7520.2542.4574.6

620.0627.0640.2625.7

609.9617.0613.7

Expendi-tures

2.6

4.0

8.9

10.020.556.185.895.584.635.629.834.941.3

40.857 871.177169.868171.979 688.991.0

93.1101.9110.4114.2118.2123.8143 6163.7180.5188.4

204.3220.6244 3264.2299 3356.6384.842114610509.7

602.1688.2762.6

565.4587.7615.4639.9

659.7667.5698.2727.4

728.3736.6769.7815.9

Surplus ordeficit

nationalincome

andproduct

accounts

1.2

= 1.3

=2.2

= 1.3= 5.1

= 33.146.6

-54.54213.5

13.48.3

=2.6

9.265

-3 .7-7 .1=6,0

4.46.12.3

-10.3= 1.1

3.0=3.9=4.2

= 3.3

= 1.8= 13.2- 6 . 0

8.4

= 12.4=22.0-16.8

=5.6= 11.5=69.3=53.1-45.9- 2 9 5

16.1

=61.4-60.0

-147.9

-39.7-67.5-73.1=65.2

-39.7-40.5

58.0-101.7

-118.4-119.6-156.0

State and localgovernment

Receipts

7.6

7.2

9.6

10.010.410.610.911.111.613.015.417.719.5

21.323425.427.429.031.735.038.542.046.4

49.954.058.563.269.575.184.893.6

107.3120,2

135.4153.0178.3195.0211.4237.7267.8297.7m385.9416.8437.3

374.5376.6389.3403.3

410.0415.2420.3421.5

424.2434.3440.5

Expendi-tures

7.8

7.2

9.6

9.39.18.88.48.59.0

11.114.417.620.2

22.523925.527.330.232.935.939.844.346.9

49.854.458.062.868.5

.75.184.394.7

107.2118.7

133.5150.4164.8181.6204.6232.2251.2269.7297.3321.5

357.8385.0405.4

345.3353.3362.2370.3

378.6382.2386.9392.4

396.5402.2408.2414.9

Surplus ordeficit

nationalincome

andproduct

accounts

- 0 . 2

=,1

.0

.61.31.82.52.72.61.9l.C

= .7

= 1.2= 4= .0

.1

1.3= 9

=1.4=2.4

=.4

.1

.5

1.0=.C

= 1.1

1.5

1.92.6

13.513.46.85.5

16.628.030.330.4

28.231.731.9

29.123.327.133.0

31.332.933.529.1

27.732.132.3

Note.—Federaf grants-fn-aid to State and local governments are reflected in Federal expenditures and State and local receipts. Totalgovernment receipts and expenditures have been adjusted to eliminate this duplication.

Source: Department of Commerce, Bureau of Economic Analysis.

250

Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 257: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

TABLE B-76.—Federal Government receipts and expenditures, national income and product accounts,

1958-84

[Billions of dollars; quarterly data at seasonally adjusted annual rates]

Year or quarter

Fiscal year:2

19581959196019611962196319641965196619671968196919701971197219731974197519761977197819791980198119821983 3

1984 3 ZCalendar year:

19581959I9601961196219631964196519661967196819691970197119721973197419751976197719781979198019811982 p,

1981:

IIIIIIV

1982:IIllIVP

Receipts

Total

78.185494 895.0

104 0110.01156120.0132 7146.0159 9189.8194 8192.4213.4240.727162834314.9365.9414 3480.85251614 7618.2627.9685.6

78 789.896.1981

106.2114 4114 9124 31418150.5174.4196.91919198 6227.5258.6287 8287 33318375.2431.64936540.7628 2614.7

620.0627 0640 2625.7

609.9617.0613 7

Personaltax andnontaxreceipts

36.338.242 543.647 349.650.751.457.564.471.490.294.087.9

100.5107.4122.7127 5137.2166.3186.5222.625012917303.0293.1304.1

36 839.943.644748.651.548 653.961767.579.795.192.690 3

108.2114.7131.3125 8147 3170.1194.9230.6257.52981300.1

286.4297.0307.9300.9

2999305.8295.6299.3

Corpo-rate

profitstax

accruals

17.921422 320.022 723.325 727.130 830.333136.832 931.934.241.243.441852.558.967 376.170070 950.150.559.4

18 022.521.421522.524 626128931430.036.136130 633 536.643.345143 654 661.671.374 270.367 348.1

76.165 668 459.1

46.545.249.8

Indirectbusinesstax andnontax

accruals

11.612.013 213.314.215.015.616.915.515.817.118.619.220.019.920.721.422 224.324.527.229.134 755750.755.259.3

11512.513.413 614.615.316 216.515 616.318.019.019 320 420.021.221.723.923 425.028.129.438.958 550.0

57.561.557.857.2

48.749.850.850.7

Contri-butions

forsocialinsur-ance

12.313.916.718.119.922.123.624.528.935.538.344.248.852.658.971.584.291.9

101.0116.2133.3153.1170.3196 3214.4229.1262.8

12 414.917.618.320.523.124 025.033136.740.746.749.354462.779.589.894.1

106.5118.5137.2159.5174.1204.3216.5

199.9202.8206.1208.4

214.9216.2217.5217.4

Expenditures

Total1

82.891.291398.1

106.2111.7117.2118.5132.7154.9172.2184.6195.5212.9232.7255.7278.2328 8370.7411.2450.4495.6577 0666 5739.7829.0877.3

88 991.093.1

1019110.4114.2118 2123.8143 6163.7180.5188.4204.3220 6244.3264.2299.3356.6384 8421.1461.0509.7602.1688.2762.6

659.7667.5698.2727.4

728.3736.6769.7815.9

Pur-chases

of goodsand

services

51.154.852 955.861.063.765.964.672.486.095.098.097.194.9

100.6101.1104.5117 9125.1139.8150.4164.1189.82181250.1279.0302.5

53 953.953.757 463.764.665 267.378 890.998.097.695.796 2

101.7102.0111.0122.7129.2143.4153.6168.3197.2228.9257.3

217.0218.2230.0250.5

249.7244.3259.0276.1

Transferpayments

Topersons

17.819.920 623.625126.527.428.431.837.242.748.755 067.776.187.2

101.81314153.8166.6178.7197.8234 62734304.8342.2350.9

19 620.121.625 025.627.027 930.333 540.146.050.661372 780.593.3

114.5146.3158.8169.6181.8205.0246.2280.9315.7

268.8271.9289.0294.0

297.2307.0321.8337.0

Toforeign-

ers

1.71.8182.12.12.12.22.22.32.22.12.22.02.32.82.73.0313.03.23.54.14.8576.06.46.5

1.81.81.92.12.22.22.22.2232.22.12.12.22.62.72.63.23.13.23.33.84.25.25.76.1

5.24.86.16.6

6.05.85.67.0

Grants-in-aid to

Stateandlocal

govern-ments

4.76.2696.97.68.39.8

10.912.714.817.819.222.626.832.640.441.648.457.566.374.779.186.790.183.486.990.1

5.66.86.57.28.09.1

10.411.114.415.918.620.324.429.037.540.643.954.661.167.577.380.588.787.783.6

90.290.686.383.6

83.085.082.084.2

Netinter-estpaid

5.45.6686.46.47.1778.28.79.6

10.411.913 514.014.015.719.621725.228.4

40.6SO 666 282.592.4

106.6

5.26.26.86.268

8.084929.8

in14.113.814 4180?0 7

26.8

35?4? 453.171.984.8

66 358374 079.0

79 68? 888 788.2

Subsi-diesless

currentsurplus

ofgovern-

mententer-prises

2.425243.3414.0414.3485.24 14.755

• 7.06.59.276606.26.99.79.9

10 513112.822.120.7

282.12.64 04.23.9454.6554.74.55.26.5637.97.85.56.95.88.29.59.2

11.713.115.1

12,213.713.013.6

12.711.612.623.4

Surplusor

deficit

nationalincome

andproduct

accounts

-4 .7- 5 8

34- 3 . 1- 2 2- 1 . 7- 1 5

1.40

-8 .9- 1 2 3

5.2

-20.5-19.2-14.9

- 6 . 6- 4 5 4-55.8-45.3-36.1-14,8-51.9- 5 1 9

-121.5-201.1-191.7

- 1 0 3- 1 . 1

3.0- 3 . 9- 4 . 2

.3- 3 3

- 1 8-13.2

- 6 . 08.4

-12.4-22.0-16.8- 5 . 6

-11.5-69.3-53.1-45.9-29.5

-61.4-60.0

-147.9

-39.7=-40.5-58.0

-101 .7

-118.4-119.6-156.0

1 Includes an item for the difference between wage accruals and disbursements, not shown separately.2 Under provisions of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974, the fiscal year for the Federal Government shifted beginning with -fiscalyear 1977. Through fiscal year 1976, the fiscal year was on a July 1-June 30 basis; beginning October 1976 (fiscal year 1977), thefiscal year is on an October 1-September 30 basis. The 3-month period from July 1, 1976 through September 30, 1976 is a separatefiscal period known as the transition quarter.3 Estimates.Sources: Department of Commerce (Bureau of Economic Analysis) and Office of Management and Budget.

251

Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 258: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

TABLE B-77.—State and local government receipts and expenditures, national income and product accounts,1946-82

[Billions of dollars; quarterly data at seasonally adjusted annual rates]

Calendar yearor quarter

Receipts

TotalPersonaltax andnontax

receipts

Corpo-rate

profitstax

accruals

Indirectbusinesstax andnontax

accruals

Contribu-tions for

socialinsurance

Federalgrants-in-

aid

Expenditures

Total1

Pur-chases

ofgoods

andservices

Trans-fer

pay-ments

toper-sons

Netinterest

paidlessdivi-

dendsreceived

Subsi-diesless

currentsurplus

ofgovern-mententer-prises

1946194719481949

19501951195219531954

19551956195719581959

19601961196219631964

19651966196719681969

19701971197219731974

197519761977 ....19781979

198019811982 *

1980:I||

III ;.:IV

1981:• ii ;*" ;;*

IILZI:;iv

1982:ItIllIV*

13.015.417.719.521.323.425.427.429.0

31.735.038.542.046.4

49.954.058.563.269.5

75.184.893.6

107.3120.2

135.4153.0178.3195.0211.4

237.7267.8297.7327.6352.0

385.9416.8437.3

374.5376.6389.3403.3

410.0415.2420.3421.5

424.2434.3440.5

1.51.72.12,4

2.52.83.03.23.5

3.94.55.05.46.1

677.48.28.8

10.0

10.912.814.617.520.6

23.226.432.836.039.0

43.149.656.363.870.4

78.888.697.1

75.577.379.682.7

84.887.290.392.3

93.695.498.8

100.5

1.01.01.01.01,2

1.21.31.51.71.8

2.02.22,53.13.4

3.54.15.05.86.5

7.19.3

11.111.913.4

14.413.9107

15.912.514.215.0

15.413.614.012.5

10.110,211.2

9.310.712.213.3

14.615.917.418.819.9

21.623.825.727.229.3

32.034.437.039.442.6

46.149.754.060.967.6

75.083.391.599.7

107.4

116.2128.3140.7150.0160.2

174.1192.8208.8

168.8170.5176.1181.2

187.1190.4195.5198.0

201.5206.9210.9215.8

0.6.7.8.9

1.11.41.61.72.0

2.12.32.62.83.1

3,43.73.94.24.7

5.05.76.77.28.3

9.210.211.513.014.6

16.819.522.124.727.4

29.933.837.2

28.728.830.631.6

32.533,434.235.1

36.036.937.738.4

1.11.72.02.2

2.32.52.62.82.9

3.13.34.25.66.8

6.57.28.09.1

10.4

11.114.415.918.620.3

24.429.037.540.643.9

54.661.167.577.380.588.787.783.6

85.5»7.688.992.7

90.290.686.383.6

83.085.082.084.2

11.114.417.620.2

22.523.925.527.330.232.935.939.844.346,9

49.854.458.062.868.5

75.184.394.7

107.21187

133.5150.4164.8181.6204.6

232.2251.2269.7297.3321.5

357.8385.0405.4

345.3353.3362.2370.3

378.6382.2386.9392.4

396.5402.2408.2414.9

9.912.815.318.0

19.821.823.225.027.8

30.633.537.141.143.7

46.550.854.359.064.6

71.179.889.3

101.0111.2

124.4138.7151.4168.5193.1

217.2232.9250.4278.3306.0

341.2368.0389.8

329.6337.2345.2352.8

361.1365.0370.1375.7

380.4386.6392.7399.6

1.72.33.03.0

3.63.13.33.53.6

3.83.94.34.85.1

5.45.86.06.46.9

7.38.19.4

10.512.2

14717.319.320.720.9

24.627.629.732.835.0

39.643.045.1

37738.940.541.4

42.042.843.343,9

44.344745.446.0

0.2.1.1.1

.1

.0

.0

.0,1

- . 3- 7- . 9

-1 .1-1 .4

-2 .0-1 .7= 1.9-3 .3-5 .0

-5 .1-4 .5-5 .3-7 .9

-13.8

-16.9-19.5^227

-16.1-16.7-17.3-177

-18.1-19.1-20.1=20.7

=21.5-22.4-23.2=23.8

=-07

- . 9- 1 . 0-1 .1-1 .2-1 .3

-1 .5-1 .6-1 .7-1 .7-2 .0

=2,2=2.3- 2 . 5- 2 . 8- 2 . 8

-3 .0-3 .0-3 ,1-3 .2-3 .3

- 3 . 6- 3 . 7=4.2- 4 . 3

-4 .5-4 .8-5 .1-5 .7-5 .9

-6 .2-6 .5-6 .8

-6.0-6.1-6.2-6.3

=6,4-6.4

6.5=6.6

- 6 . 66 76.7

- 6 8-6,9

1 Includes an item for the difference between wage accruals and disbursements, not shown separately.Source: Department of Commerce, Bureau of Economic Analysis.

252

Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 259: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

TABLE B-78.—State and local government revenues and expenditures, selected fiscal years, 1927-81

[Millions of dollars]

Fiscal year l

General revenues by source2

Total Propertytaxes

Salesand

grossre-

ceiptstaxes

Individu-

mcometaxes

Corpo-ration

netincometaxes

Revenuefrom

FederalGovern-

ment

Allother3

General expenditures by function2

Total Education High-ways

Publicwelfare

Altother4

1927

1932193419361938

19401942194419461948

1950195219531954

19551956195719581959

1960196119621963

1962-63 6..1963-64*..1964-65S..

1965-665...1966-67 5..,1967-68 5..1968-69 5..1969-70*..,

1970-716...1971-72"...1972-735...1973-74 5..1974-75 s..

1975-76 5..1976-77 s..1977-78°..1978-79s..1979-80 5...

1980-81s..

7,271

7,2677,6788,3959,228

9,60910,41810,90812,35617,250

20,91125,18127,30729,012

31,07334,66738,16441,21945,306

50,50554,03758,25262,890

62,26968,44374,000

83,03691,197101,264114,550130,756

144,927166,352190,214207,670228,171

256,176285,796315,960343,278382,322423,404

4,730

4,4874,0764,0934,440

4,4304,5374,6044,9866,126

7,3498,6529,3759,967

10,73511,74912,86414,04714,983

16,40518,00219,05420,089

19,83321,24122,583

24,67026,04727,74730,67334,054

37,85242,13345,28347,70551,491

57,00162,53566,42264,94468,49974,969

470

7521,0081,4841,794

1,9822,3512,2892,9864,442

5,1546,3576,9277,276

7,6438,6919,4679,82910,437

11,84912,46313,49414,456

14,44615,76217,118

19,08520,53022,91126,51930,322

33,23337,48842,04746.09849,815

54,54760,59567,59674,24779,92785,971

70

7480153218

224276342422543

788998

1,0651,127

1,2371,5381,7541,7591,994

2,4632,6133,0373,269

3,2673,7914,090

4,7605,8267,3088,90810,812

11,90015,23717,99419.49121,454

24.57529,24533,17636,93242,08046,426

92

7949113165

156272451447592

593846817778

744890984

1,0181,001

1,1801,2661,3081,505

1,5051,6951,929

2,0382,2272,5183,1803,738

3,4244,4165,4256,0156,642

7,2739,17410,73812,12813,32114,143

116

2321,016948800

945858954855

1,861

2,4862,5662,8702,966

3,1313,3353,8434,8656,377

6,9747,1317,8718,722

8,66310,00211,029

13,21415,37017,18119,15321,857

26,14631,25339,25641,82047,034

55,58962,57569,59275,16483,029

90,294

1,793

1,6431,4491,6041,811

1,8722,1232,2692,6613,685

4,5415,7636,2526,897

7,5848,4659,2509,699

10,516

11,63412,56313,48914,850

14,55615,95117,250

19,26921,19723,59826,11829,971

32,37435,82640,21046,54151,735

57,19161,67368,43679,86495,466

.11,599

7,210

7,7657,1817,644.8,757

9,2299,1908,86311,02817,684

22,78726,09827,91030,701

33,72436,71140,37544,85148,887

51,87656,20160,20664,816

63,97769,30274,546

82,84393,350102,411116,728131,332

150,674166,873181,227«8959

2,235

2,3111,8312,1772,491

2,6382,5862,7933,3565,379

7,1778,3189,390

10,557

11,90713,22014,13415,91917,283

18,71920,57422,21623,776

23,72926,28628,563

33,28737,91941,15847,23852,718

59,41364,88669,71475,83387,858

97,216102,805110,758119,448133,211145,784

1,809

1,7411,5091,4251,650

1,5731,4901,2001,6723,036

3,8034,6504,9875,527

6,4526,9537,8168,5679,592

9,4289,844

10,35711,136

11,15011,66412,221

12,77013,93214,48115,41716,427

18,09519,01018,61519.94622,528

23,90723,10524,60928,44033,311

34,603

151

444889827

1,069

1,1561,2251,1331,4092,099

2,9402,7882,9143,060

3,1683,1393,4853,8184,136

4,4044,7205,0845,481

5,4205,7666,315

6,7578,2189,857

12,11014,679

18,22621,07023,58225,08528,155

32,60435,94139,14041,89847,288

54,121

3,015

3,2692,9523,2153,547

3,8623,8893,7374,5917,170

8,86710,34210,61911,557

12,19713,39914,94016,54717,876

19,32521,06322,54924,423

23,67825,58627,447

30,02933,28136,91541,96347,508

54,94061,90769,31678,09692,180

103,004112,537122,476137,731155,277172,941

1 Fiscal years not the same for all governments. See footnote 5.2 Excludes revenues or expenditures of publicly owned utilities and liquor stores, and of insurance-trust activities. Intergovernmentalreceipts and payments between State and local governments are also excluded.3 Includes licenses and other taxes and charges and miscellaneous revenues.4 Includes expenditures for health, hospitals, police, local fire protection, natural resources, sanitation, housing and urban renewal,local parks and recreation, general control, financial administration, interest on general debt, and unallocable expenditures.6 Data for fiscal year ending in the 12-month period through June 30. Data for 1963 and earlier years include local governmentamounts grouped in terms of fiscal years ended during the particular calendar year.

Note.—Data are not available for intervening years.Source: Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census.

253Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 260: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

TABLE B-79.—Interest-bearing public debt securities by kind of obligation, 1967-82

[Millions of dollars]

End of yearor month

Totalinterest-bearingpublicdebt

securities

Marketable

Total Treasury Treasurynotes

Treasurybonds'

Nonmarketable

TotalU.S.

savingsbonds

Foreigngovern-mentandpublicseries2

Govern-ment

accountseries

Other*

Fiscal year:196)19681969

19701971197219731974

19751976197719781979

198019811982

1981:JanFebMarAprMayJune

JulyAugSeptOctNovDec

1982:JanFebMar

June

JulyAugSept....OtiNovDec

322,286344,401351,729

369,026396,289425,360456,353473,238

532,122619,254697,629766,971819,007

906,402996,495

1,140,883

929,825946,455963,207962,779964,792969,921

972,053978,920996,495999,451

1,011,9361.027,300

1,032,6781,042,1981,059,8151,064,5381,066,4101,078,431

1,083,2961,108,1311,140,8831,136,8261,160,4891,195,496

* 210,672226,592226,107

232,599245,473257,202262,971266,575

315,606392,581443,508485,155506,693

594,506683,209824,422

628,482642,905661,142657,906656,185660,769

666,405673,765683,209689,578704,819720,293

726,542737,532752,620755,833755,688763,995

774,077801,427824,422824,662852,463881,476

58,53564,44068,356

76,15486,67794,648100,061105,019

128,569161,198156,091160,936161,378

199,832223,388277,900

220,423228,972235,315225,849224,514218,786

217,532219,854223,388229,061233,905245,015

250,562254,037256,212254,880256,114256,007

262,009273,066277,900283,923293,531311,820

49,10871,07378,946

93,489104,807113,419117,840128,419

150,257191,758241,692267,865274,242

310,903363,643442,890

321,176324,540336,505341,052338,419348,788

354,005357,603363,643362,649370,794375,332

374,357382,070395,042399,700398,408406,925

411,070427,426442,890438,068454,229465,030

97,41891,07978,805

62,95653,98949,13545,07133,137

36,77939,62645,72456,35571,073

83,77296,178103,631

86,88389,39389,32391,00693,25293,196

94,86896,30896,17897,867100,11999,946

101,623101,426101,366101,253101,166101,063

100,998100,935103,631102,672104,702104,627

111,614117,808125,623

136,426150,816168,158193,382206,663

216,516226,673254,121281,816312,314

311,896313,286316,461

301,343303,550302,065304,873308,608309,152

305,647305,155313,286309,874307,117307,007

306,136304,666307,195308,705310,722314,436

309,218306,704316,461312,164308,026314,020

51,21351,71251,711

51,28153,00355,92159,41861,921

65,48269,73375,41179,79880,440

72,72768,01767,274

71,05770,44370,05769,51869,22968,934

68,71968,35568,01767,71867,73967,837

67,58167,37867,16367,03467,08267,122

67,13267,14867,27467,51467,80167,719

1,5143,7414,070

4,7559,27018,98528,52425,011

23,21621,50021,79921,68028,115

25,15820,49914,641

23,80423,98624,16224,41124,78923,514

21,94321,43120,49920,47120,30919,025

18,92018,38419,64119,44618,39517,457

16,64315,60614,64114,62714,86314,691

56,15559,52666,790

76,32382,784

101,738115,442

124,173130,557140,113153,271176,360

189,848201,052210,462

182,197185,020183,833186,979190,839192,962

191,647192,060201,052198,053195,541196,665

196,393195,722196,707198,538201,290205,954

201,502199,896210,462205,717199,903205,427

2,7312,8283,051

4,0685,7593,6543,7014,289

3,6444,88316,79727,06727,400

24,16423,71824,085

24,28724,10224,01523,96523,75023,741

23,33923,31023,71823,63223,52923,480

23,24323,18223,68423,68723,95523,902

23,94124,05424,08524,30525,45926,183

1 Includes Treasury bonds and minor amounts of Panama Canal and postal savings bonds.3 Nonmarketable certificates of indebtedness, notes, bonds, and bills in the Treasury foreign series of dollar-denominated and foreign-

currency denominated issues.3 Includes depository bonds, retirement plan bonds, Rural Electrification Administration bonds, State and local bonds, and specialissues held only by U.S. Government agencies and trust funds and the Federal home loan banks.

4 Includes $5,610 million in certificates not shown separately.Note.—Through fiscal year 1976, the fiscal year was on a July 1-June 30 basis; beginning October 1976 (fiscal year 1977) the fiscal

year is on an October 1-September 30 basis.Source: Department of the Treasury.

254Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 261: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

TABLE B-80.—Estimated ownership of public debt securities, 1967-82

[Par values;' billions of dollars]

End of year or month

Fiscal year:196719681969

19701971197219731974

19751976197719781979 .. .

198019811982

1981:JanFebMarAprMayJune . .

JulyAugSept ....OctNovDec

1982:JanFebMarAprMayJune

JulyAug ..sept ..::::;•;OctNovDec

Total2

322.9345.4352.9

370.1397.3426.4457.3474.2

533.2620.4698.8771.5826.5

907.7997.9

1,142.0

- 934.1950.5964.5964.0968.5971.2

973.3980.2997.9

1,005.01,013.31,028.7

1,038.41048.21 061.31 065.71 071.71,079.6

1,089.61,109.21,142.01,142.81,161.71,197.1

Held byGovern-

mentaccounts

71.876.184.8

95.2102.9111.5123.4138.2

145.3149.6155.5167.9187.7

197.7208.1216.4

189.5192.0190.9193.9197.8199.9

198.6199.0208.1204.9202.1203.3

202.82011202.5204.3206 7211.7

206.3206.5216.4211.0203.9209.4

Held byFederalReserveBanks

46.752.254.1

57.765.571.475.080.5

84.794.4

104.7115.3115.5

120.7124.3134.4

117.2118.9119.0119 7118.3120.0

123.4124 5124.3123.0126.5129.9

128 3126 2125 6134 3129 8127.0

133.8132.9134.4132.1137.7139.9

1'ublic debt securities

Held by private investors

Total3

204.4217.0214.0

217.2228.9243.6258.9255.6

303.2376.4438.6488.3523.4

589.2665.4791.2

627.4639.6654.6650.4652.3651.2

651.3656.7665.4677.2684.6694.5

707.3720 8733.3727.1735.2740.9

749.6769.8791.2799.7820.1849.4

Com-mercialbanks4

55.559.755.3

52.661.060.958.853.2

69.092.599.894.492.5

109.7112.2

117.2116.4117.5113.5113.2113.3

114.2115.0112.2111.3110.0109.4

111.41118114.3110.1109.4117.0

110.0

Mutualsavingsbanksand

insur-ancecom-

panies

13.212.511.6

10.410.310.29.68.5

10.616.020.521.221.5

24.326.2

25.525.323.723.725.324.0

25.426.126.224.724.624.3

24.924 125.626.827.227.9

28.2

Corpora-tions6

11.012.011.1

8.57.49.39.8

10.8

13.824.721.218.122.1

25.937.8

30.435.240.040.438.838.7

37.838.037.838.638.337.8

37.937.537.536.538.838.9

39.9

State andlocal

govern-ments6

23.625.126.4

29.025.926.928.828.3

31.739.348.263.866.5

77.086.2

77.380.482.383.685.183.0

86.086.286.288.387.585.6

86.288.288.388.591.891.2

88.7

Indi-viduals7

70.474.277.3

81.875.473.275.980.7

86.896.2

106.5113.9115.5

123.0140.3

134.2136.2138.6138.2139.9139.6

139.5140.2140.3141.0141.6143.7

144.1144.7146.5145.7146.2146.2

146.4

Miscel-laneousinves-

tors3 8

30.733.432.3

35.049.163.276.074.2

91.3107.7142.4176.9205.3

229.3262.7

242.8246.1252.5251.0250.0252.6

248.4251.2262.7273.3282.6293.7

302.8314.5321.1319.5321.8319.7

336.4

1 U.S. savings bonds, series A-F and J, and U.S. savings notes are included at current redemption value.2 As of July 31, 1974, public debt outstanding has been adjusted to exclude the notes of the International Monetary Fund to conform

with the Budget presentation. This adjustment applies to the 1967-82 data in this table.3 For comparability with 1975-82 published data, published data for 1967-74 have been adjusted to exclude notes of the

International Monetary Fund. These adjustments amounted to $3.3 billion in 1967, $2.2 billion in 1968, and $0.8 billion in each year1969 through 1974. These adjustments were necessary in order to add to the total public debt figures as published by the Departmentof the Treasury. The Treasury Survey of Ownership on which private investor group estimates were based was discontinued in July 1982.

4 Includes commercial banks, trust companies, and stock savings banks in the United States and Territories and island possessions;figures exclude securities held in trust departments.

5 Exclusive of banks and insurance companies.8 Includes trust, sinking, and investment funds of State and local governments and their agencies, and of Territories and possessions.7 Includes partnerships and personal trust accounts.6 Includes savings and loan associations, nonprofit institutions, corporate pension trust funds, dealers and brokers, certajn

government deposit accounts and government-sponsored agencies, and investments of foreign balances and international accounts inthe United States.

Note.—Through fiscal year 1976, the fiscal year was on a July 1—June 30 basis; beginning October 1976 (fiscal year 1977), thefiscal year is on an October 1—September 30 basis.

Source: Department of the Treasury.

255

Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 262: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

TABLE B-81.—Maturity distribution and average length of marketable interest-bearing public debt securitiesheld by private investors, 1967-82

End of year or month

Amountout-

standing,privately

held

Maturity class

Withinlyear

I t o 5years

5 to 10years

10 to 20years

20 yearsand over

Average length

Millions of dollars

Fiscal year:196719681969

19701971197219731974

19751976197719781979

198019811982

1981:JanFebMar

May"!!"!!!June

JulyAugSeptOctNovDec

1982:JanFebMar

MayJune

JulyAugSeptOctNovDec

150,321159,671156,008

157,910161,863165,978167,869164,862

210,382279,782326,674356,501380,530

463,717549,863682,043

502,248515,178532,800528,992529,057531,525

533,778540,228549,863558,169569,534580,670

590,139604,671619,030613,576618,699628,997

634,556660,583682,043685,969708,769736,148

56,56166,74669,311

76,44374,80379,50984,04187,150

115,677151,723161,329163,819181.883

220,084256,187314,436

247,958256,007263,208254,533258,101252,489

251,307251,533256,187263,717266,163275,322

284,171290,697295,476289,000290,476293,266

295,118309,446314,436321,081327,565346,321

53,58452,29550,182

57,03558,55757,15754,13950,103

65,85289,151113,319132,993127,574

156,244182,237221,783

156,845160,163167,226167,570167,865172,784

171,504180,669182,237177,834189,570188,422

183,843194,457200,544199,278203,612207,106

206,380217,258221,783218,673235,443239,262

21,05721,85018,078

8,28614,50316,03316,38514,197

15,38524,16933,06733,50032,279

38,80948,74375,749

43,96943,38246,78649,61643,84247,032

50,24245,29748,74352,20147,61550,851

54,37049,12052,61255,32954,36158,425

63,02266,34775,74975,94472,64477,570

6,1536,1106,097

7,8766,3576,3588,7419,930

8,8578,0878,42811,38318,489

25,90132,56933,017

27,24128,69028,66228,58730,29630,268

30,17232,60232,56932,53634,16434,055

34,06935,81935,82235,56535,70135,651

35,58333.09733,01733,06535,75035,677

12,96812,67012,337

8,2727,6456,9224,5643,481

4,6116,652

10,53114,80520,304

22,67930,12737,058

26,23526,93626,91828,68528,95328,952

30,55330,12730,12731,88132,02232,020

33,68634,57834,57634,40434,54934,549

34,45334,43537,05837,20637,36737,318

Years Months

544

33332

22233

343

333333

444444

444444

433333

152

863111

871137

9011

9109101111

010010

010010

01111101110

Note.—All issues classified to final maturity.Through fiscal year 1976, the fiscal year was on a July 1—June 30 basis; beginning October 1976 (fiscal year 1977), the fiscal year

is on an October 1—September 30 basis.Source: Department of the Treasury.

256Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 263: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

CORPORATE PROFITS AND FINANCE

TABLE B-82.—Corporate profits with inventory valuation and capital consumption adjustments, 1929-82

[Billions of dollars; quarterly data at seasonally adjusted annual rates]

Year or quarter

1929

1933

1939

19401941194219431944

19451946194719481949

19501951195219531954

19551956195719581959

19601961196219631964

19651966196719681969

197019711972 .19731974

19751976197719781979

198019811982*

1980:1III l l(V

1981:111tilIV

1982:j||t||

Corporateprofits withinventoryvaluation

and capitalconsumptionadjustments

9.0

- 1 . 7

5.3

8.614.119.323.523.6

19.016 622.329427.1

33.938.736.136.335.2

45 543.743 338.549.6

47 648.656.662169.2

80 085.182 489 185.1

71.483.296.6

108.394.9

110.5138.1167.3192.4194 8

181.6190.6161.1

195 3172.2177.8181.2

200 318511931183.9

157 1155.4166.2

Corporateprofits tax

liability

1.4

.5

1.4

2.87.6

11.414.112.9

10.791

11.312.410.2

17.922.619.420.317.6

22 022.021419.023.6

22 722.824.026 228.0

30 933.732 539 239.5

34.237.541.649.051.6

50.663.872.783.287.6

84.781.258.8

95.373.382.287.8

91.579.282.471.6

56.755.360.9

Profits after tax with inventory valuation andcapital consumption adjustments

Total

7.7

- 2 . 3

3.9

586.57.99.5

10.7

8.475

11.017.016.9

16.016.116.716.017.5

23.421.821.819.526.0

24.925.832.635941.2

49151.449.950.045.6

37.245.755.059.343.3

59.974.394.6

109.1107.2

97.0109.5102.3

100.098.995.693.3

108.9105.9110,7112.3

100.4100.0105.3

Dividends

5.8

2.0

3.8

4 04.4434.44.6

4.65 66.37.07.2

8.88.58.58.89.1

10.311.111.511.312.2

12.913.314.415.517.3

19.119.420.222.022.5

22.522.924.427.029.9

30.837.440.847.052.7

58.165.170.3

56.257.858.759.6

61.564.066.868.1

68.869.370.5

Undistributedprofits with

inventoryvaluation

and capitalconsumptionadjustments

1.9

- 4 . 3

.1

182.1365.06.1

3.8194.7

10 09.7

7.27.68.27.28.4

13110.710.38.2

13.8

12.112.518.220.423.9

30.032.029.727.923.1

14.822.830.532.313.4

29.136.953.762.254.5

38.944.432.1

43.941.036.933.7

47.342.043.944.3

31.630.734.8

Source: Department of Commerce, Bureau of Economic Analysis.

257Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 264: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

TABLE B-83.—Corporate profits by industry, 1929-82

[Billions of dollars; quarterly data at seasonally adjusted annual rates]

Year orquarter

1929

1933

1939

194019411942194319441945 ..1946194719481949

1950195119521953195419551956195719581959

1960196119621963196419651966196719681969

19701971197219731974..19751976197719781979

198019811982"

1980:1II.HIIV

1981:1||IllIV

1982:|.||Ill

Corporate profits with inventory valuation adjustment and without capital consumption adjustment

Total

10.5

- 1 . 2

6.5

9.815.420.524.524.019.319.625.933.431.1

37.943.340.640.238.447.546.946.641.652.3

49.750.055.159 766.076.080.978.184.980.8

68.982.094.0

105.696.7

120.6151.6178.5205.1209.6

199.4207.5166.0

211,0189.4197.0200.4

217.6202.6210.3199.4

167.2162.2170.0

Total

10.2

- 1 . 2

6.1

9.615.020.124.123.518.918.924.932.229.9

36.741.538.738.436.445.144,143.539.149.6

46,746.851.555.861.871.576.773.779.774.6

62474.985 392.080.4

107.6137.4163 4185.4179.0

169.1184.6149.6

175.9157.8167.5175.5

193 8181.7189.3173.7

150.3144.1153.7

Total

1.3

.3

.8

1.01.11.21.31.61.72.11.72.63.1

3.13.64.04.54.64.85.05.25.76.8

7.27.07.3686.97.5859.0

10.411.1

12114.115315.915.011.817.123131.030.3

29.222.722.5

31.528.627.229.4

26 822.720 820.4

20.022.224.2

Financial >

FederalRe-

servebanks

0.0

.0

.0

.0

.0

.0

.01111

.2

.2

.2

.3,4.4.3.3.5.6.6.7

1.0.8.9

101.11.4172.02.53.1

363.3344.55.75.76.0627.79.6

11.914.515.7

11.612.511.412.2

13 214.215 215.6

16.116.015.8

Other

1.3

.3

.3

.91.01.21.31.61.62.01.62.32.9

3.03.33.74.14.34.54.54.65,16.0

6.26.36.4585.86.2687.07.98.0

8610.711911.49.36.2

11.116 923.320.7

17.28.16.8

19.916.115.817.1

13 68.6554.8

3.96.28.4

Domestic industries

Total

8.9

- 1 . 5

5.3

8.614.018.922.821.917.316.823.229.626.8

33.537.934.733.931.840.339.138.333.542.9

39.539.844.249 054.964.068 264.869.363.5

50260.870076.065.495.8

120.3140 3154.4148.6

140.0162.0127.1

144.4129.2140.3146.1

167 0159.0168 5153.3

130.4121,9129.5

Manufac-turing2

5.2

- .4

3.3

5.59.5

11.813.813.29.79.0

13.617.616.2

20.924.621.722.019926.024.724.019.426.4

23.623.326.029 332.339.341938.541.236.6

26634.140 745.539.052.669.278 386.985.6

74.586.359.8

85.264.770.078.1

90 388.992 273.7

57.756.662.7

Nonfinancial

Trans-portation

andpublic

utilities

1.8

.0

1.0

1,32.03.44.43.92.71.82.23.03.0

4.04.64.95.0475.65.95.85.97.0

7.47.88.493

10.011.011810710.810.3

828.5908.76.1

10.014.517 820.615.9

17.419.1187

16.813.921.517.5

20115.619621.2

18.818,519.2

Whole-safeand

retailtrade

1,0

- .5

7

1.21.42.23.03.23.33.84.65.54.5

5.05.04.83.8385.04.54.44.65.9

4.95.05.8597,58.1829.1

10.410.5

9511,713 413.912.521.322.426 626.927.1

24.633.428.1

19.727.124.427.3

33 032.1330357

31.926.827.4

Other

0.9

= 7

.3

.61.11.51.61.61.52.12.93.63.1

3.63.73.33.1343.64.14.03.63.6

3.63.73.9445.15.6636.56.96.1

596.5698.07.9

11.914.217 620.020.1

23.423.120.6

22723.524.323.3

23622.523 722.7

21.920.020.3

not.+Kesi

of theworld

0.2

.0

.3

.3

.4

.4

.4

.4

.37

1.01.31.1

1.3171.91.8202.42.83.12.527

3.03.23.6394.24.5424.45.26.1

657.186

13.716.313.014,315119.730.6

30.322.816.4

35.131729.624.9

2382Q.B210257

16.918.216.3

1 Consists of the following industries: Banking; credit agencies other than banks; security and commodity brokers, dealers, andservices; insurance carriers; regulated investment companies; small business investment companies; and real estate investment trusts.

' See Table B-84 for industry detail.Note.—The industry classification is on a company basis and is based on the 1972 Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) beginning

1948, and on the 1942 SIC prior to 1948.

Source: Department of Commerce, Bureau of Economic Analysis,

258Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 265: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

TABLE B-84.—Corporate profits of manufacturing industries, 2929-82

[Billions of dollars; quarterly data at seasonally adjusted annual rates]

Year or quarter

1929

1933

1939

1940194119421943194419451946194719481949

19501951 . . . .19521953195419551956195719581959

19601961196219631964 . .19651966196719681969

1970197119721973197419751976197719781979

1980 . . .19811982"

1980:

||IIIIV

1981:

II .HIIV

1982:ItlMl

Totalmanufac-

turing

5.2

4

3.3

5.595

11.813.813 29.790

13.617.616.2

20.924.621722.019926.024 724.019426.4

23 623.326.029.332.339341.938.541.236.6

26 634.140.745.539.052.669.278.386.985.6

74.586.359.8

85.264.770.078.1

90.388.992.273.7

57 756.662.7

Corporate profits with inventory valuation adjustment and without capital consumption adjustment

Durable goods

Total

2.6

4

1.7

3.1647.28.1744.5245.87.58.1

12.013.211711.910 514.312 813.39 3

13.7

11611.414.016.317.923023.820.922.218.9

10 216.322.424.313.218.930.438.144.337.1

20.728.411.4

25.512.418.226.5

32.135.227.418.9

9112.712.2

Pri-marymetalindus-tries

1.61.5

2.33.1192.5172.9303.0192.3

201.6162.02.5313.62.71.91.4

8

1.62.25.42.92.11.13.53.5

2.94.1

-5 .1

4.72.6,1

42

7.04.74.1.7

- 3 1-6 .5-5 .4

Fabri-catedmetalprod-ucts

.8

1.11.3101.0

91.0111.1

91.1

81.0111.31.4202.42.42.32.0

111.52.12.51.63.03.84.44.95.2

4.44.94.4

5.42.84.35.0

4.76.05.43.4

4.43.84.7

Machin-ery,

exceptelectri-

cal

1.21.3

1.62.3231.9171.72 12.0142.1

181.9232.53.3394.54.14.13.7

292.94.34.62.94.76.38.89.48.9

7.29.35.1

7.27.07.47.2

8.49.29.69.9

8.34.83.7

Electricandelec-tronicequip-ment

.7

.8

1.21.31.51.41.21.11.21.51.31.7

131.31.51.61.72.73.02.92.82.3

1.21.92.83.0

2.13.45.66.55.1

4.45.13.5

5.23.54.34.5

6.24.94.84.3

3.63.73.2

Motorvehicles

andequip-ment

1.42.1

3.12.4242.62.14.12.22.6

.93.0

3 02.54.04.94.7625.13.95.54.7

1.25.05.95.7

1.97.29.48.94.7

- 5 . 0- 1 . 1

1.1

- 3 . 7-10.6

- 4 . 1- 1 . 4

- 2 . 62.6

- 2 . 8- 1 . 8

- 4 . 13.33.2

Other

1.81.7

2.62.8262.62.93.53.23.12.93.5

273.1354.04.45.15.24.95.74.9

2.94.35.76.22.94.37.68.8

11.09.8

6.86.22.3

6.77.16.37.1

8.47.86.32.4

.03.52.7

Nondurable goods

Total

2.6

o17

2.4314.65.7595.26.67.8

10.08.1

8.911.499

10.19.4

11.811910.710012.7

12.011.912.013.114.416.318.117.619.117.7

16.517.818.321.225.833.638.840.242.648.4

53.857.948.4

59.652.351.851.6

58.253.764.854.7

48.643.950.5

Foodand

kindredprod-ucts

1.91.6

1.61.4171.8162.2181.8212.4

222.32.32.72.72.83.23.23.23.0

3.23.52.92.42.88.66.96.86.05.7

6.28.76.5

6.65.54.97.6

10.48.57.78.1

6.76.37.0

Chemi-calsand

alliedprod-ucts

1.71.8

2.32.82.32.22.23.02.82.82.53.5

3.13.23.23.64.04.64.94.35.24.5

3.94.45.26.05.66.58.37.98.37.1

6.78.25.7

7.45.56.67.4

9.47.58.07.8

6.55.85.1

Petro-leumandcoalprod-ucts

2.81.92.32.7232.82.73.03.32.62.12.5

2.52.22.22.12.42.93.23.93.73.2

3.53.53.05.0

10.59.6

12.611.613.820.7

28.026.624.4

31.529.127.723.5

23.523.335.124.7

25.420.425.9

Other

3.72.8

2.74.4363.32.93.64.13.63.34.3

4.24.14.34.65.36.06.86.37.06.9

5.96.47.27.86.68.9

11.013.814.514.8

13.014.411.7

14.112.212.712.9

14.914.414.114.1

10.011.412.5

Note.—The industry classification is on a company basis and is based on the 1972 Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) beginning1948, and on the 1942 SIC prior to 1948.

Source: Department of Commerce, Bureau of Economic Analysis.

259Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 266: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

TABLE B-85.—Sates, profits, and stockholders1 equity, all manufacturing corporations, 1950-82

[Billions of dollars]

Year orquarter

All manufacturing corporations

Sales(net)

Profits

Beforeincometaxes1

Afterincometaxes

Stock-holders'equity*

Durable goods industries

Sales(net)

Profits

Beforeincometaxes'

Afterincometaxes

Stock-holders'equity8

Nondurable goods industries

Sales(net)

Profits

Beforeincometaxes>

Afterincometaxes

Stock-holders'equity"

1950..1951..1952.,1953.,1954,,

1955.,1956.,1957.,19581959

19601961196219631964

19651966196719681969

1970197119721973

1973: IV

New series:1973: IV

1974

1975..1976..1977..1978..1979..

1980..1981..

1979:IIIIII...,IV....

1980:III

IV

1981:

n'Z!IllIV

1982:

"Z

181.9245.0250.2265.9248.5

278.4307.3320.0305.3338.0

345.7356.4389.4412.7443.1

492.2554.2575.4631.9694.6

708,8751.1849.5

1,017.2

275.1

236.6

1,060.6

1,065.21,203.21,328.11,496.41,741.8

1,912.82,144.7

406.6436.4437.5461.2

465.7466.3464.2516.6

520.8549.6539.9534.4

501.0520.1507.1

23.227.422.924.420.9

28.629.828.222.729.7

27.527.531.934.939.6

46.551.847.855.458.1

48.152.963.281.4

21.4

20.6

92.1

79.9104.9115.1132.5154.2

145.8158.5

36.542.638.236.8

39.535.933.237.2

39.045.640.034.0

28.930.927.8

12.911.910.711.311.2

15.116.215.412.716.3

15.215.317.719.523.2

27.530.929.032.133.2

28.631.036.548.1

13.0

13.2

58.7

49.164.570.481.198.7

92.6101.3

22.726.824.724.5

24.822.421.024.4

24.428.925.222.9

19.020.017.8

83.398.3

103.7108.2113.1

120.1131.6141.1147.4157.1

165.4172.6181.4189.7199.8

211.7230.3247.6265.9289.9

306.8320.8343.4374.1

386.4

368.0

395.0

423.4462.7496.7540.5600.5

668.1743.4

576.2592.5609.2624.0

643.9658.1670.5699.7

718.4739.4753.5762.3

756.5764.1774.3

116.8122.0137.9122.8

142.1159.5166.0148.6169.4

173.9175.2195.3209.0226.3

257.0291.7300.6335.5366.5

363.1381.8435.8527.3

140.1

122.7

529.0

521.1589.6657.3760.7865.7

889.1979.5

207.5222.6213.6221.9

219.8218.7212.6238.0

234.1257.2245.1243.0

226.4240.3225.3

12.915.412.914.011.4

16.516.515.811.415.8

14.013.616.818.521.2

26.229.225.730.631.5

23.026.533.643.610.8

10.1

41.1

35.350.757.969.672.4

57.467.2

18.821.616.415.7

15.813.511.916.2

16.720.716.413.4

10.812.78.5

6.76.15.55.85.6

8.18.37.95.88.1

7.06.98.69.5

11.6

14.516.414.616.516.9

12.914.518.424.8

6.3

6.2

24.7

21.430.834.841.845.2

35.641.7

11.413.310.310.1

9.78.27.2

10.4

10.112.710.38.5

6.88.25.3

39.947.249.852.454.958.865.270.572.877.9

82.384.989.193.398.5

105.4115.2125.0135.6147.6

155.1160.4171.4188.7

194.7

185.8

196.0

208.1224.3239.9262.6292.5

317.7350.4

281.9289.3296.5302.1

308.0312.6317.2332.8

339.4349.7354.2358.3

353.0356.5360.1

95.1128.1128.0128.0125.7

136.3147.8154.1156.7168.5

171.8181.2194.1203.6216.8

235.2262.4274.8296.4328.1

345.7369.3413.7489.9

135.0

113.9

531.6

544.1613.7670.8735.7876.1

1,023.71,165.2

199.1213.8223.9239.3

245.9247.6251.6278.6

286.7292.4294.8291.3

274.6279.8281.8

10.312.110,010.49.6

12.113.212.411.313.9

13.513.915.116.418.3

20.322.622.024.826.625.226.529.637.810.6

10.5

51.0

44.654.357.262.981.8

88.491.3

17.721.121.921.2

23.722.421.321.0

22.324.923.520.6

18.118.219.3

6.15.75.25.55.6

7.07.87.56.98.3

8.28.59.2

10.011.6

13.014.614.415.516.4

15.716.518.023.3

6.7

7.0

34.1

27.733.735.539.353.5

56.959.6

11.213.514.414.4

15,114.213,714.0

14.216.214.914.3

12.211.812.5

43.551.153.955.758.2

61.366.470.674.679,2

83.187.792.396.3

101.3

106.3115.1122.6130.3142.3

151.7160.5172.0185.4

191.7

182.1

199.0

215.3238.4256.8277.9308.0

350.4393.0

294.3303.2312.6321.9

335.9345.5353.3366.9

379.1389,7399,4404.0

403.5407.6414.2

1 In the old series, "income taxes" refers to Federal income taxes only, as State and local income taxes had already been deducted.In the new series, no income taxes have been deducted.

1 Annual data are average equity for the year (using four end-of-quarter figures).Note.—Data are not necessarily comparable from one period to another due to changes in accounting procedures, industry

classifications, sampling procedures, etc. For explanatory notes concerning compilation of the series, see "Quarterly Financial Report forManufacturing, Mining, and Trade Corporations, Federal Trade Commission.

Source: Federal Trade Commission.

260

Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 267: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

TABLE B-86.—Relation of profits after taxes to stockholders' equity and to sales, all manufacturingcorporations, 1947-82

Year or quarter

19471948 ..1949

19501951 „ .19521953 ..1954

1955 .19561957 ..19581959 „

I960 .. .19611962 ..19631964 ..

1965 „19661967 ..19681969 .. .

1970 ..19711972 ..1973

1973- IV

New series:1973: IV

1974 ..

19751976 ..19771978 ..1979

1980 .1981

1979:|11 .HIIV

1980:IIIHIIV ..

1981:

||IllIV ..

1982:1 ,||III

Ratio of profits after income taxes (annualrate) to stockholders' equity—percent *

Allmanufacturingcorporations

15.616.011.6

15.412110.310.59.9

12 612.310 98.6

10.4928.998

10.311.6

13 013.411712.111.5

939.7

10612.8

13.4

14.3

14.9

11613 914.215 016.4

13 913.6

15 718116.315.7

15 413 612.514.0

13.615.613.412.0

10110 59.2

Durablegoods

industries

14.415.712.1

16.913.011.11 U10.3

13.812.811.38.0

10.4

8.58.19.6

10.111.7

13.814.211.712.211.4

8.39.0

10.813.1

12.9

13.3

12.6

10.313 714.516 015.4

11211.9

16.218 414.013.4

12.610 69.1

12.6

12.014.611.69.5

7.79.25.9

Nondurablegoods

industries

16.616.211.2

14.111.29.79.99.6

11.411.810.69.2

10.4

9.89.69.9

10.411.5

12.212.711.811.911.5

10.310.310.512.6

14.0

15.3

17.1

12.914.213.814.217.4

16.315.2

15.317.818.417.9

18.016.415.615.2

15.016.614.914.2

12.111.612.1

Profits after income taxes per dollar ofsales—cents

At!manufacturingcorporations

6.77.05.8

7.1494.34.34.5

545.3484.24.8

444.3454.75.2

5.65.65.05.14.8

404.14.34.7

4.7

5.6

5.5

4.65.45.35.45.7

4.84.7

5.66.15.75.3

5.34.84.54.7

4.75.34.74.3

3.83.93.5

DurableRoods

industries

6.77.16.4

7.7534.54.24.6

575.24.83.94.8

403.9444.55.1

5.75.64.84.94.6

3,53.84.24.7

4.5

5.0

4.7

4.15.25.35.55.2

4.04.3

5.56.04.84.6

4.43.83.44.4

4.34.94.23.5

3.03.42.4

Nondurable" goodsindustries

6.76.85.4

6.5454.14.34.4

5 15.3494.44.9

484.7474.95.4

555.6535.25.0

454.54.44.8

5.0

6.1

6.4

5.1555.35.36.1

5.65.1

5.66.36.46.0

6.15.75.55.0

5.05.55.14.9

4.44.24.4

1 Annual ratios based on average equity for the year (using four end-of-quarter figures). Quarterly ratios based on equity at end ofquarter only.

Note—Based on data in millions of dollars.See Note, Table B-85.Source: Federal Trade Commission.

261

Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 268: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

TABLE B-87.—Relation of profits after taxes to stockholders' equity and to sales, all manufacturingcorporations, by industry group, 1981-82

Industry

Ratio of profits after income taxes (annualrate) to stockholders' equity—percentl

1981 1982

Profits after income taxes per dollarof sales—cents

1981 1982

All manufacturing corporations....

Durable goods industries ,

Stone, cfay, and glass productsPrimary metal industries

Iron and steelNonferrous metals

Fabricated metal productsMachinery, except electricalElectrical and electronic equip-

ment,.,,...,....,Transportation equipment1

Motor vehicles and equipmentAircraft, guided missiles, and

parts

Instruments and related products...Other durable manufacturing

products

Nondurable goods industries

Food and kindred products. ...Tobacco manufacturesTextile mill productsPaper and allied productsPrinting and publishingChemicals and allied products*...

Industrial chemicals and syn-thetics

Drugs

Petroleum and coal productsRubber and miscellaneous plastics

productsOther nondurable manufacturing

products

13,4

U.6

11.913.9

18.46.3

14.114.1

12.91.9

-6 .9

13.9

17.7

9.8

14.9

13.819.49.99,7

15.613.9

11.916.1

17.4

11.4

14,4

12.0

9.5

5,83.0

9.415.5

12.33.8

- 1 . 6

11.7

14.9

5.9

14.2

14.618.66.5

12,515,513.3

11.418.6

15.4

9.1

15.0

10.1

7.7

- 3 . 7

L8

9.811.8

12.64.3

.0

10.8

13.3

2,4

12.1

12.618.42.66.29.7

13.0

8.920.8

13.9

8.7

7.0

10.5

9.2

4.6- 3 . 4

- 6 . 21,0

9,910.8

12.611.6

11.8

U.6

15.3

8.3

U.6

12.321.34.96.5

13.812.2

7.717.6

U.6

10.4

9.6

9.2

5.9

7.3- 8 . 3

-13.2- . 9

5.17,3

11.44.6

- . 2

12.6

14.7

6.9

12.1

11.920.88.46.1

13.510.7

5.618.9

13.8

9,0

12.0

4.7

4.2

4.64.9

5.92.6

4.26.3

4.5.6

- 2 . 2

4.1

9.4

2.8

3.2U.32.63.95.26.5

5,310.2

6.4

3.3

3.3

4.3

3.5

2.51.2

.03.6

2.96.8

4.31.1

- . 5

3.1

7.9

1.8

4.9

3.310.9

1.75.45.16.7

5.612.4

5.8

2.8

3.3

3.8

3,0

18

3,25.7

4.71.3

.0

3.2

7,6

,8

4.4

3.111.4

.82.83.46.4

4.313.6

5.7

2.7

1.7

3,9

3.4

1.9»1.3

- 2 . 3.4

3.15.2

4.63.2

3.2

3.2

8.3

2.5

4.2

2.912.5

1.42.84.76.0

4.011.8

4.9

3.1

2.4

3.5

2.4

2.9- 3 . 7

- 5 . 5- . 5

1.73.8

4.41.4

- . 1

3.7

7.9

2.1

4.4

2.812.22.52.74.55.3

2.812.3

6.0

2.9

2.7

1 Ratios based on equity at end of quarter.* Includes other industries not shown separately.Source: Federal Trade Commission.

262Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 269: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

TABLE B-88.—Determinants of business fixed investment 1955-82

[Percent, except as noted]

Year

1955195619571958...1959

19601961. .19621963....1964

19651966196719681969 .. ..

1970 .1971197219731974

19751976197719781979

198019811982*

Realinvest-ment

aspercentof real

GNP

9.39.79.78.78.8

9.18.89.09.09.4

10 511.010 410.310 7

10.510.010.211.010.9

9.79.7

10.211.011.5

11.311411.2

ityutili-

zation

manu-factur-

ing1

87.186.483.775.281.9

80.277.481.683.585.6

89 691.186 987.186.2

79.378.483.587.683.8

72.979.581.984.485.7

79.178.569.8

Nonfmancial corporations

Cashflow aspercent

ofGNP2

9.38.98.98.69.3

8.98.89.49.7

10.1

10610.310 09.48.6

7.88.38.68.07.0

9.09.39.79.58.9

8.7959.6

Rate of rdepreciab

Beforetax

19.816.815.212.816.4

15.015.117.418.820.2

22121.819.318.916.5

12.813.514.314.311.0

11.912.913.913.712.1

10.511.09.5

eturn one assets3

Aftertax

9.8797.46.58.5

8.08.2

10.311.212.5

14 013.712 411.39.7

7.98.59.18.76.1

7.77.98.78.67.4

6.6777.5

Rate of return onstockholders'

equity*

Beforetax

13.111610.58.4

10.5

9.99.5

11.212.113.3

15 515.213413.812.5

8.89.9

10.512.811.2

8.58.6

10.210.710.2

8.47.7<fl)

Aftertax

6.2545.0395.1

5.04.66.16.77.8

9 69.2828.071

4.75.76.28.37.3

5.24.86.36.86.6

5.551(6)

Ratio ofmarketvalue to

mentcost of

netassets6

1.11211041.01810411.252

1.22213501.28214191.521

1621146614801.5231353

10911.17612581.157

827

.811

.911

.797

.761

.709

.666694.690

1 Federal Reserve Board index.2 Cash flow calculated as after-tax profits plus capitaj consumption allowance plus inventory valuation adjustment.3 Profits plus capital consumption adjustment and inventory valuation adjustment plus net interest paid divided by the stock of

depreciable assets valued at current replacement cost.4 Profits corrected for inflation effects divided by net worth (physical capital component valued at current replacement cost).5 Equity plus interest-bearing debt divided by current replacement cost of net assets.« Not available.

Sources: Department of Commerce (Bureau of Economic Analysis), Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, and Council ofEconomic Advisers.

263Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 270: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

TABLE B-89.—Sources and uses of funds, nonfarm nonfinancial corporate business, 1946-82

[Billions of dollars; quarterly data at seasonally adjusted annual rates]

Year orquarter

Sources

Total Internal'

External

Total

Credit market funds

TotalSecuri-

ties andmort-gages

Loansand

short-term

Other2

Uses

TotalCapita)

expendi-tures 3

Increasein

financialassets

Discrep-ancy

(sourcesless uses)

194619471948..1949

19501951195219531954

1955..195619571958..1959

19601961196219631964

19651966196719681969

1970197119721973,.1974

1975..1976197719781979

1980

1981

1980:

\\'ZIllIV

1981:IIIIllIV

1982:

H'ZIll*.

18.727.028.919.9

42.136.429.927.829.6

52.744.943.441.956.3

48.656.360.168.473.9

91.897.694.7

113.5115.5

102.3125.3151.6192.4190.1

156.9210.8252.2315.4346.3

333.7352.2

363.2263.4326.4381.9

333.6381.2348.9345.0

297.7348.2371.7

8.112.919.119.5

18.020.221.921.723.9

29.529.531.530.336.0

35.436.542.846.551.8

58.562.663.665.064.4

61.873.585.091.785.6

119.7134.2157.4175.7188.8

197.5231.1

192.6197.4199.3200.8

222.4225.4235.2241.4

232.6234.3240.3

10.614.19.7

.4

24.016.28.06.15.7

23.215.411.911.720.2

13.219.817.322.022.1

33.335.031.148.551.1

40.551.866.6

100.7104.4

37.276.694.9

139.7157.5

136.2121.1

170.666.0

127.2181.1

111.3155.8113.7103.6

65.0113.9131.3

6.98.46.53.1

8.110.59.55.76.5

10.212.812.310.512.3

12.112.912.812.514.1

18.523.827.827.732.3

35.337.243.456.769.9

30J54.570.479.391.2

95.792.6

114.762.686.6

118.7

68.7119.1100.282.5

110.293.398.0

3.65.46.74.9

4.26.48.06.06.7

6.47.5

10.410.58.1

7.510.79.48.47.8

7.614.319.115.014.6

26.332.82 M20.726.3

38.738.233.931.925.9

57.523.1

46.158.663.761.7

41.634.83.2

12.7

30.633.159.3

3.33.0

- . 2= 1.8

3.94.11.4

- . 4- . 2

3.75.31.9

- . 04.2

4.62.23.44.06.2

11.09.58.7

12.617.7

9.04.4

16.936.043.6

-8 .016.336.547.46!).3

38.269.6

68.64.0

22.957.1

27.184.397.069.9

79.760.338.7

3.75.83.3

-2.7

15.95.7

- 1 . 5.5

- . 8

13.12.5

- . 41.27.9

1.26.94.69.58.0

14.811.23.3

20.918.8

5.314.623.244.034.5

6.522.124.560.466.3

40.628.5

55.93.4

40.562.4

42.636.713.521.1

-45.220.533.3

16.825.625.318.3

40.437.629.228.027.8

49.140.839.138.551.2

41.451.055.560.464.9

82.791.388.5

106.0115.3

98.7122.7149.1191.9190.1

150.9201.8237.6294.2347.1

317.9314.8

341.2248.7314.2367.5

318.2352.2304.6284.0

225.3304.9328.5

18.117.320.314.8

24.030.224.625.722.9

32.636.834.927.737.0

37.536.743.244.750.1

61.074.772.275.483.7

80.086.099.0

121.5137.9

109.7148.3175.1202.2219.8

220.5260.9

231.3215.6209.9225.2

233.5260.0284.6265.5

241.9248.5264.2

- 1 . 48.45.03.5

16.47.44.62.34.9

16.54.04.2

10.814.2

3.914.212.315,714.8

21.816.616.330.631.6

18.736.750.170.552.2

41.253.562.592.0

127.3

97.453.9

103.933.1

104.3142.3

84.792.220.018.5

-16.656.464.3

1.91.43.61.6

1.7^1.2

.6=.11.8

3.54.14.33.45.0

7.25.34.68.09.0

9.16.46.27.5

.2

3.62.62.4

.5

.0

6.09.0

14.721.2

15.837.4

22.014.712.214.4

15.429.044.261.0

72.343.343.1

1 Undistributed profits (after inventory valuation and capital consumption adjustments), capital consumption allowances, and foreignbranch profits, dividends, and subsidiaries' earnings retained abroad.

1 Consists of tax liabilities, trade debt, and direct foreign investment in the United States.3 Plant and equipment, residential structures, inventory investment, and mineral rights from U.S. Government.Source: Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System.

264Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 271: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

TABLE B-9Q.~Current assets and liabilities of U.S. corporations, 1939-82

[Billions of dollars]

End of yearor quarter

SEC series:5

1939

1940194119421943194419451946194719481949

1950195119521953195419551956195719581959

I9601961

SEC series:5

196119621963196419651966196719661969

19701971197219731974

FTC-FRB series:7

197419751976197719781979

19801981

1981:1ItIllIV

1982:

It

Current assets

Total

54.5

60.372 983.693 897.297 4

108.1123 6133.0133.1

161.51791186.2190 6194 6224.0237 9244.7255 3277.3

289.0306.8

Cash1

10.8

13.113917.621621.621.722.825.025.326.5

28.130 030.831.133 434.634.834.937.436.3

37.241.1

U.S.Govern-

mentsecurities2

2.2

2.040

10.116420.921115.314114.816.8

19.720719.921.519 223.519118.618 822.8

20.120.0

Notesand

accountsreceiv-able

22.1

24.028 027.326.926.525.930.738.342.443.0

56.861.567.468.573 688.997.7

102.2109.7120.6

129.2139.2

Inven-tories

Othercurrentassets

All corporation

18.0

19.825 627.327 626.826 337.644 648.945.3

55.164 965.867 265 372.880482.281988,4

91.895.2

1.4

1.5141.3131.4241.7161.61.4

1.7212.424314.2596.7759.1

10.611.4

Current liabilities

Total

s*

30.0

32.840 747.351651.745 851.961.564.460.7

79.892 696.198.999 7

121.0130.5133.1136.6153.1

160.4171.2

Notesand

accountspayable

21.9

23.226 426.026 326.825 731.637 639.337.5

48 354 959.359 561776.183 986.690 4

101.0

106.8114.6

Othercurrentliabil-ities

8.1

9.614 321.325324.920120.323 925.023.3

31.637 836.839 438 045.046 646.546 252.0

53.656.6

Networkingcapital

24.5

27.532 336.342145.651.656.262.168.672.4

81.686 590.191894 9

103.0107 4111.6118.7124.2

128.6135.6

Currentratio3

1.817

1.83817911.7671.8181.8802.1272.0832.0102.0652.193

2.02419341.9381.92719521.8511.8231.8381.8691.811

1.8021.792

Nonfinancial corporations6

254.7269.7288 2305.6336 0364.0386 2426.5473.6

492 3529.6599.3697.8790.7

735.4759.0827 4912 7

1043 71,218.2

1.333.51.427.1

1,374.51,388.31,410.91,427.1

1,423.61,419.4

34.837.139 840.542.841.945.548.247.9

50 253.359.066.371.1

73.282.188.297 2

105 5118.0

127.1131.7

126.6126.2125.1131.7

121.3123.4

16.516.816 715.814 413.010311.510.6

7711.010.612.812.3

11.119.023 518 217 317.0

19.317.9

19.219.918.017.9

17.117.4

97.9103.2110 5119.91341146.6155.3173.9197.0

2061221.1248.2288.5322.1

265.8272.1292 9330 3388 0461.1

510.6536.7

528.0533.1542.4536.7

537.8534.4

95.0100 5106 8113.1126 6142.81531166.0186.4

1933200.4225.7263.9313.6

319.5315.9342 5376 94316505.5

543.7587.1

560.2565.3577.0587.1

593.8589.2

10.512.114 416.318119.722 026.931.6

35 043.855.866.471.7

65.969.980.3901

1013116.7

132.7153.6

140.5143.8148.3153.6

153.6155.0

123.7132.4145 5156.6178 8199.4211.3244.1287.8

304 9326.0375.6450.9530.4

453.4451.6495.1557.1669 3807.8

890.9980.0

923.2931.5967.2980.0

985.7982.6

84.488.797 0

104.91215137.5147.1168.8199.2

2113220.5282.9340.3402.3

269.8264.2282.1317 6382 9461.2

515.2562,9

520.3525.9549.5562.9

555.0554.9

39.343.748 551.757.361.964.275.388.6

93 6105.592.7

110.7128.1

183.6187.4213.0239 6286 4346.6

375.7417.1

402.9405.5417.7417.1

430.8427.8

131.0137.3142 7149.0157.2164.6174.9182.4185.7

187.4203.6223.7246.9260.3

282.0307.4332.4355.5374.4410.5

442.6447.1

451.3456.8443.7447.1

437.9436.8

2.0592.0371.9811.9511.8791.8251.8281.7471.646

1.6151.6251.5951.5481.491

1.6221.6811.6711.6381.5591.508

1.4971.456

1.4891.4901.4591.456

1.4441.445

1 Includes time certificates of deposit.2 Includes Federat agency issues.3 Total current assets divided by total current liabilities.4 Excludes banks, savings and loan associations, and insurance companies.5 Based on data from 'Statistics of Income," Department of the Treasury.6 Excludes banks, savings and loan associations, insurance companies, investment companies, finance companies (personal and

commercial), real estate companies, and security and commodity brokers, dealers, and exchanges.7 Based on data from "Quarterly financial Report for Manufacturing, Mining, and Trade Corporations," Federal Trade Commission. See

"Federal Reserve Bulletin," July 1978, for details regarding the series.Note.—SEC series not available after 1974.Sources: Board of Governors of the federat Reserve System, Federal Trade Commission, and Securities and Exchange Commission.

265Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 272: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

TABLE B-91.—State and municipal and corporate securities offered, 1934-82

[Millions of dollars]

Year or quarter

Stateand

municipalsecurities

offeredfor cash(princi-

palamounts)

Corporate securities offered for cash

Totalcorporateofferings

Type of corporate security

stockPreferred

stockBondsand

notes

Industry of corporate issuer

Manufac-turing l

Electric,gas, andwater2

Transpor-tation 3 Communi-

cation Other

1934....

1939....

1940....1941....1942....1943....1944....

1945....1946....1947....1948....1949....

1950....1951....1952....1953....1954....

1955....1956....1957....1958....1959....

1960....1961....1962....1963....1964....1965....1966....1967....1968....1969....

1970....1971....197219731974

19751976197719781979

198019811982; First 3quarters

1981:

II...,III...IV...

1982:

II...III..

939

1,128

1,238956524435661

7951,1572,3242,6902,907

3,5323,1894,4015,5586,969

5,9775,4466,9587,4497,681

7,2308,3608,55810,10710,544

11,14811,08914,28816,37411,460

17,76224,37022,94122,95322,824

29,32633,84545,06046,21542,261

47,13346,13449,231

9,15913,3619,88213,732

12,77017,62718,834

397

2,164

2,6772,6671,0621,1703,202

6,0116,9006,5777,0786,052

6,3627,7419,5348,8989,516

10,24010,93912,88411,5589,748

10,15413,16510,70512,21113,957

14,78217,38524,01421,26125,997

37,45143,22939,70531,68037,820

53,63253,31454,22948,21253,093

78,89672,50354,587

16,68123,75811,52920,535

15,57215,96023,055

87

1081103456163

397891779614736

8111,2121,3691,3261,213

2,1852,3012,5161,3342,027

1,6643,2941,3141,0112,679

1,4731,9011,9273,8857,6407,0379,485

10,7077,6424,050

7,4148,3058,0477,9378,706

18,99625,107

14,993

5,0119,6475,0935,356

4,6575,8004,536

183167112124369

7581,127762492425

631838564489816

635636411571531

409450422343412

724580881636691

1,3903,6833,3713,3412,273

3,4592,8033,9162,8323,530

3,6351,788

3,497

437267280

5821,1261,789

372

1,979

2,3862,389917990

2,670

4,8554,8825,0365,9734,890

67

604

992848539510

1,0612,0263,7012,7422,2261,414

4,9205,6917,6017,0837,488

7,4208,0029,9579,6537,190

8,0819,4208,969

10,85610,865

1,2003,1224,0392,2542,268

2,9943,6474,2343,5152,073

2,1524,0773,2493,5143,046

12,58514,90421,20616,74017,666

29,02330,06125,62820,70031,497

42,75942,20642,26637,44340,857

56,26545,606

36,097

10,86513,6746,168

14,899

10,3339,034

16,730

5,4147,056

11,0696,9586,346

10,64711,6516,3984,832

10,511

18,65215,49613,75711,06211,563

24,39817,395

9,847

5,5776,0441,8623,912

2,3481,7715,728

133

1,271

1,2031,357

472477

1,422

2,3192,1583,2572,1872,320

2,6492,4552,6753,0293,713

2,4642,5293,9383,8043,258

2,8513,0322,8252,6772,760

2,9343,6664,9355,2936,715

11,00911,72111,31410,26912,836

15,89314,41813,70412,25313,736

15,94014,495

13,127

3,2694,5162,9863,724

4,2694,3724,486

176

186

32436648161609

1,454711286755800

813494992595778

893724824824967

718694567957982

7021,4941,6391,5641,779

1,2531,148860811

1,005

3,6374,6493,2182,6963,297

3,7272,779

1,310

8581,211410300

399280631

902571

399612760882720

1,1321,4191,4621,424717

1,0501,8341,3031,1052,189

9452,0031,9751,7752.172

5,2915,8404,8364,8723,932

4,4663,5624,4433,6404,694

7,4016,158

1,765

1,3542,2941,807703

519556690

21

103

15996

21109

211329293

1,008946

1,3001,0581,0682,1382,037

2,7572,6192,4261,9912,733

3,3833,5272,7613,9574,980

4,7873,1674,3965,6718,985

9,25212,86716,29810,8979,632

10,98315,19419,11318,56519,803

27,42931,676

28,535

5,6239,6934,464

11,896

8,0378,978

11,520

1 Prior to 1948, also includes extractive, radio broadcasting, airline companies, commercial, and miscellaneous company issues.2 Prior to 1948, also includes telephone, street railway, and bus company issues.3 Prior to 1948, includes railroad issues only.Note.—Covers substantially all new issues of State, municipal, and corporate securities offered for cash sale in the United States in

amounts ovsr $100,000 and with terms to maturity of more than 1 year; excludes notes issued exclusively to commercial banks,intercorporate transactions, and issues to be sold over an extended period, such as employee-purchase plans. Closed-end investmentcompany Issues are included beginning 1973.

Sources: Securities and Exchange Commission, "The Commercial and Financial Chronicle," and "The Bond Buyer."

266Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 273: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

TABLE B-92.—Common stock prices and yields, 1949-82

Year or month

1949 ..

1950 ..195119521953 ..195419551956 ..195719581959 ..

19601961 ..1962196319641965 ..196619671968 ..1969

1970 ..19711972 .19731974197519761977 .. . .19781979 ..

1980 ..19811982

1981:Jan..FebMarApr..MayJune

JulyAug..Sept.OctNovDec

1982:JanFebMarAor

3»June:::::::;:::::::::::::::.:::::::

July..AugSeptOctNovDec

Common stock prices1

New York Stock Exchange indexes (De

Composite

9 02

10 8713.0813.8113.6716.1921.5424.4023.6724 5630.73

300135.3733 4937 5143 7647.3946.1550.7755.3754.67

45.7254.2260 2957.4243.8445.7354.4653.6953.7058.32

681074.0268.93

762473.5276.4677.6076.2876.80

74.98 <75.2468.3769 40714971.81

67 91661663.8666.9767.0763.10

62 8262 9170 2176.1079.7580.30

Industrial

46.1851.9758.0057.44

48.0357.9265.7363.0848.0850.5260.4457.8658.2364.76

78.7085.4478.18

89.2385.7489.3990.5788.7888.63

86.6486.7278.0778 9380 8681.70

76.8574 7871.5175.5975.9771.59

71.3770 9880 0886.6790.7692.00

Transpor-tation

50.2653.5150.5846.96

32.1444.35501737.7431.8931.1039.57410943.5047.34

60 6172.6160.41

74 4372.7677.0980.6376.7876.71

74.4273.2763 6765 6567 6868.27

62 0459 0955.1957.9156.8453.07

53 4053 98613966.6471.9273.40

;. 31, 1965

Utility

45.4145.4344.1942.80

37.2439.5338.4837.6929.7931.5036,9740 9239.2238.20

37 3538.9139.75

38 5337.5937.8238.3438.2739.23

38.9040.2238.1738 8740 7340.22

39 3038 3238.5739.2039.4037.34

37 20381940 3642.6743.4642.93

= 50)8

Finance

44.4549.8265.8570.49

60.0070.3878.3570.1249.6747.1452.9455.2556.6561.42

64.2573.5271.99

70.0468.4872.8274.5974.6579.79

74.9773.7669.3872.5676 4774.74

70.9970 5069.0871.4469.1663.19

61.5962 8469 6680.5988.6686.22

DowJones

industrialaverage3

179.48

216.31257.64270.76275 97333.94442.72493.01475.71491.66632.12

618.04691.55639.76714.81834.05910.88873.60879.12906.00876.72

753.19884.76950 71923.88759.37802.49974.92894.63820.23844.40

89141932.92884.36

962.13945.50987.18

1,004.86979.52996.27

947.94926.25853.38853 25860 44878.28

853 4183315812.33844.96846.72804.37

818 4183211917 27988.71

1,027.761,033.08

Standard& Poor's

compositeindex

(1941-43=10) 4

15.23

18.4022.3424.5024.7329.6940.4946.6244.3846.2457.38

55.8566.2762.3869.8781.3788.1785.2691.9398.7097.84

83.2298.29

109.20107.4382.8586.16

102.0198.2096.02

103.01

118.78128.05119.71

132.97128.40133.19134.43131.73132.28

129.13129.63118.27119.80122.92123.79

117.28114 50110.84116.31116.35109.70

109.38109 65122 43132.66138.10139.37

Common stock yields(percent)5

Dividend-priceratio6

6.59

6.576.135.805.804.954.084.094.353.973.23

3.472.983.373.173.013.003.403.203.073.24

3.833.142.843.064.474.313.774.625.285.47

5.265.205.81

4.805.004.884.864.985.03

5.185.165.695.655.545.57

5.956.066.285.995.976.28

6.316.325 635.124.924.93

Earnings-priceratio7

15,48

13 9911.829.47

10.268,577.957.557.896.235,78

5.904.625.825.505.325.596.635.735.67.6.08

6.455.415.507.12

11.599.158.90

10.7912.0313.46

12.6611.96

10.72

11.44

13.13

12.53

13.23

12.93

1 Averages of daily closing prices, except New York Stock Exchange data through May 1964 are averages of weekly closing prices.2 Includes all the stocks (more than 1,500) listed on the New York Stock Exchange.3 Includes 30 stocks.4 Includes 500 stocks.5 Standard & Poor's series, based on 500 stocks in the composite index.6 Aggregate cash dividends (based on latest known annual rate) divided by aggregate market value based on Wednesday closing

prices. Monthly data are averages of weekly figures; annual data are averages of monthly figures.7 Quarterly data are ratio of earnings (after taxes) for 4 quarters ending with particular quarter to price index for last day of that

quarter. Annual ratios are averages of quarterly ratios.Note.—All data relate to stocks listed on the New York Stock Exchange.Sources: New York Stock Exchange, Dow Jones & Co., Inc., and Standard & Poor's Corporation.

267

Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 274: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

TABLE B-93.—Business formation and business failures, 1929-82

Year or month

Indexof net

businessformation(1967=

100)

businessincorpor-

ations(number)

Business failures1

Businessfailurerate2

Number of failures

TotalLiability size class

Under$100,000

$100,000and over

Amount of current liabilities(millions of dollars)

TotalLiability size class

Under$100,000

$100,000and over

19291933 s1939"

1940194119421943194419451946194719481949

1950195119521953195419551956195719581959

1960196119621963196419651966196719681969

197019711972197319741975...1976197719781979

1980...1981...

104.886.4

90.890.194.592.490.898.295.491.491.198.1

94.591.192.894.798.099.598.9100.0107.6113.5

107.1109.5115.5115.5111.2108.8117.2126.5132.9131.7

121.1113.5

132,916112,89796,34685,640

93,09283,77892,946102,706117,411139,915141,163137,112150,781193,067

182,713181,535182,057186,404197,724203,897200,010206,569233,635274,267

264,209287,577316,601329,358319,149326,345375,766436,170478,019524,565

533,520581,242

103.9100.369.6

63.054.444.616.46.54.25.214.320.434.4

34.330.728.733.242.041.648.051.755.951.8

57.064.460.856.353.253.351.649.038.637.3

43.841.738.336.438.442.634.828.423.927.8

42.161.3

Seasonally adjusted

1981:Jan..,Feb..Mar..,

&

July..,Aug..,Sept,Oct...Nov...Dec,

1982: <Jan...Feb...Mar...

fcJune.July...Aug...Sept.

118.1117.1117.7118.0115.4114.6

113.1113.6111.5107.6108.8106.2

46,03948,58847,97249,41348,99749,172

49,03848,63148,45047,94749,41347,556

43,33047,23446,89946,87646,99545,936

44,52546,98145,552

48.647.847.661.862.060.8

65.953.387.069.465.772.2

22,90919,85914,768

13,61911,8489,4053,2211,222809

1,1293,4745,2509,246

9,1628,0587,6118,862

11,08610,96912,68613,73914,96414,053

15,44517,07515,78214,37413,50113,51413,06112,3649,6369,154

10,74810,3269,5669,3459,915

11,4329,6287,9196,6197,564

11,74216,794

1,1091,1331,2121,5571,4641,408

1,4321,1721,7771,6041,3681,558

8

22,165

14,541

13,40011,6859,2823,1551,176759

1,0033,1034,8538,708

8,7467,6267,0818,07510,226

5,6828,233

559546572736730711

739576879768655762

744979227

219163123664650126371397538

416432530787

10,11311,61512,547L3.49912,707

13,650L5.00613,77212,19211,346L1.34010,83310,1447,8297,192

8,0197,6117,0406,6276,7337,5046,1764,8613,7123,930

8561,0711,1921,4651,346

1,7952,0692,0102,1822,1552,1742,2282,2201,8071,962

2,7292,7152,5262,7183,1823,9283,4523,0582,9073,634

6,0608,561

550587640821734697

596898836713796

8

483.3457.5182.5

166.7136.1100.845.331.730.267.3

204.6234.6308.1248.3259.5283.3394.2462.6449.4562.7615.3728.3692.8

938.61,090.11,213.61,352.61,329.21,321.71,385.71,265.2

941.01,142.1

1,887.81,916.92,000.22,298.63,053.14,380.23,011.33,095.32,656.02,667.4

4,635.16,955.2

341.4789.2485.3536.9428.2408.5

619.5450.4752.3897.9618.8626.7

261.5215.5132.9

119.910O.780.330.214.511.415.763.793.9

161.4

151.2131.6131.9167.5211.4206.4239.8267.1297.6278.9

327.2370.1346.5321.0313.6321.7321.5297.9241.1231.3

269.3271.3258.8235.6256.9298.6257.8208.3164.7179.9

272.5405.8

27.625.728.044.835.132.3

37.727.542.636.730.737.2

221.8242.0

49.7

46.835.420.515.117.118.851.6

140.9140.7146.7

97.1128.0151.4226.6251.2243.0322.9348.2430.7413.9

611.4720.0867.1

1,031.61,015.61,000.01,064.1

967.3699.9910.8

1,618.41,645.61,741.52,063.02,796.34,081.62,753.42,887.02,491.32,487.5

4,362.66,549.3

313.8763.5457.3492.1393.1376.3

581.8422.9709.7861.2588.1589.5

81 Commercial and industrial failures only. Excludes failures of banks and railroads and, beginning 1933, of real estate, insurance,

holding, and financial companies, steamship lines, travel agencies, etc.2 Failure rate per 10,000 listed enterprises.3 Series revised; not strictly comparable with earlier data.4 Not available.Sources: Department of Commerce (Bureau of Economic Analysis) and Dun & Bradstreet, Inc.

268Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 275: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

AGRICULTURE

TABLE B-94.—Farm income, 1929-82

[Billions of dollars; quarterly data at seasonally adjusted annual rates]

Year or quarter

192919331939

1940194119421943194419451946194719481949

19501951 ....19521953195419551956195719581959

19601961196219631964196519661967..19681969

1970197119721973197419751976197719781979

1980 . ...19811982"

1980:1||IllIV

1981.1IIIllIV

1982:|| | ...HIIV

Income of farm operators from

Gross farm income

Total1

13.86.9

10.7

11.314.319 923 324.025.429.632 436 530.8

33.138.337.834 434.233.534.034 839 037.9

38 940 542.343.442.346.550 550 551.856,4

58.762 071.098.898.0

1010101.9108.6127 3151.3

150 6166.8163.7

148.6145 2153 2155.4

161.8164 71715168.8

162.0163 0161.6168.1

Cash marketing receipts

Total

11.35.37.9

8.411.115.619.620.521.724.829.630.227.8

28.532.932.531.029.829.530.429.733.533.6

34.235.236.537.537.339.443.442.844.248,2

50.552.761.186.992.488.995.496.2

112.5131.7

139.5143.5142.9

135.3134.3143.6144.8

142.5142.3146 7142.5

143.4144.4143.2140.6

Livestockand

products

6.22.84.5

4.96.59.0

11.511.412.013.816.517.115.4

16.119.618.216.916.316.016.417.419.218.9

19.019.520.220.019.921.925.024.425.528.6

29.530.535.645.841.343.146.347.658.868.6

67.868.569.0

66.764.469.370.8

67.969.471.065.7

67.470.170.468.1

Crops

5.12.53.3

3.54.6658.19.29.7

11.013113112.4

12.413.214.314.113.613.514.012 314.214.7

15315716.317.417.417.518 418.418.719.6

21.022 325.541.151.145 849.048.653 763.1

71775.073.9

68.669 974 374.0

74.672 975 776.8

76.074 372.872.5

Value ofinventorychanges"

- 0 . 1- . 2

.1

.3

.41.1

- . 1- . 4- . 4

.0- 1 . 8

1.7- . 9

.81.2

.9- . 6

.5

.2

~.s.8.0

.4

.3

.6

.6- . 81.0

- . 1.7.1.1

.01.4.9

3.4- 1 . 6

3.4- 2 . 4

1.01.15.6

- 4 . 35.5

- . 2

- 1 . 4- 4 . 2- 6 . 0- 5 . 6

2.55.37.27.0

- 1 . 0- . 5

.0

.5

arming

Produc-tion

expenses

7.74.46.3

6.97.8

10.011.612.313.114.517 018.818.0

19.522.322.821.521.822.222.723.725.827.2

27.428.630.331.631.833.736.538.239.542.1

44,447.252.165.472.075.883.390.2

100.6119.0

130.5141.6144.2

125.7128.7132.0135.4

139.0141.0143.2143.2

143.7144.2144.3144.6

Net farm income

Currentdollars

6.22.64.4

4.56.599

11.711.712.315.115 417.712,8

13.615.915.013.012.411.311.311.113.210.7

11.512.012.111.810.512.914.012.312.314.3

14.214.818.933.426.025.218.718.426.732.4

20.125.119.5

22.916.521.220.0

22.823.728.325.6

18.318.817.323.5

1967dollars3

12.06.6

10.6

10.714.720 222 722.222.825.823 024 517.9

18.920.518.816.215.414.113.813.115.212.3

13 013 313.312.811.313.714.412.311.813.0

12.212.215.125.117.615.611.010.213.614.9

8.29.26.7

9.56.88.57.8

8.68.8

10.29.1

6.56.65.98.0

JCash marketing receipts and inventory changes plus Government payments, other farm cash income, and nonmoney incomefurnished by farms.

2 Physical changes in end-of-period inventory of crop and livestock commodities valued at average prices during the period.3 Income in current dollars divided by the consumer price index (Department of Labor).

Source: Department of Agriculture, except as noted.

269

Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 276: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

TABLE B-95.—Farm output and productivity indexes, 1929-82

[1977 = 100]

Year

Farm output

Total *

44

42

48

5052585759

5860586362

6163666666

6969677374

7676778079

8279838585

8492919388

100104111

103115117

Crops2

Total8

48

43

49

5152585558

5659566461

5960626261

6363626968

7270717472

7673777980

7786879284

9392100102113

101116120

Feedgrains

38

35

40

4144514749

4751395750

5147504951

5454586466

6962626859

7070797578

71928891749196100108116

97121124

Foodgrains

39

27

36

4045484151

5355646253

4949635751

4850476955

6660565965

6767768074

698177869110810710093108

121143140

Oilcrops

6

5

14

1616232320

2019222726

2626262628

3034333936

3843444646

5355566465

6668748771

8674100105129

99114103

Live-stockandprod-ucts*

50

54

56

5760677269

6866656467

7073747477

7979787983

8286868991

8991949495

9910010199100

9599100101104

106108107

Productivity indicators

r«.mrarmoutputper

unit oftotalInput

45

45.

50

5253585657

5860586360

6061636464

6768687474

7778798281

8583858788

8794949590

9997100102106

100112114

Cropproduc-tionper

acre*

48

43

51

5354595558

5760576460

5959626261

6364657372

7778818381

8583868991

889€999988

9694100105113

99113118

Farm output per

Total

9

9

11

1213141414

1516161819

1920222324

2628293335

3739414547

5253586263

6674788179

8994100109119

112129131

Id 111) WVIP

Crops

10

10

12

1314151516

1618182020

2222242526

2830333837

4142454749

5659636668

7079848780

8991100105118

104121126

hour of

Live-stockandprod-ucts

14

13

14

1415161616

1617171818

1920212223

2425262831

3235374043

4549535559

6468737682

8593100109118

129138137

1929...

1933...

1939...

1940...1941...,1942....1943...,1944...,

1945...,1946...,1947....1948....1949....

1950....1951....1952....1953....1954....

1955....1956....1957....1958....1959....

I960....1961..,.1962....1963....1964....

1965....1966....1967....1968....1969....

1970....1971....1972....1973....1974....

1975...1976....1977....1978....1979....

1980....1981....1982",.

1 Farm output measures the annual volume of net farm production available for eventual human use through sales from farms orconsumption in farm households.1 Gross production.

3 Includes items not included in groups shown.* Computed from variable weights for individual crops produced each year.Source: Department of Agriculture.

270Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 277: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

TABLE B-96.—Farm input use, selected inputs, 1929-82

Year

Farm populationApril1

Num-ber

(thou-sands)

Asper-cent

oftotalpopu-

lation2

Farm employment(thousands)3

TotalFam-

ilywork-

ers

Hiredwork-

ers

Cropshar-

vested(mil-

lions ofacres)*

Selected indexes of input use (1977=100)

Total Farmlabor

Farmreal

estate

Me-chanicalpower

andmachin-

ery

culturalchemi-cals8

Feed,seed,andlive-

stockpur-

chases8

1929..

1933..

1939..

1940....1941..,.19421943....1944

1945....1946....1947....1948....1949....

1950..1951..1952..1953..1954..

1955....1956....195719581959

I960..1961..1962..1963..1964..

1965..1966..1967..1968..1969..

1970..1971..1972..1973..1974..

1975..1976..1977..1978..1979..

198019811982 "...

30,580

32,393

30,840

30,54730,11828,91426,18624,815

24,42025,40325,82924,38324,194

23,04821,89021,74819,87419,019

19,07818,71217,65617,12816,592

15,63514,80314,31313,36712,954

12,36311,59510,87510,45410,307

9,7129,4259,6109,4729,264

8,8648,253

'6,1946.5016,241

'6,051'5,790

25.1

25.8

23.5

23.122.621.419.217.9

17.518.017.916.616.2

15.214.213.912.511.7

11.511.110.39.89.3

8.78.17.77.16.7

6.45.95.55.25.1

4.74.54.64.54.3

4.13.8

'2 .8'2.97 2.8

'2 .7'2.5

12,763

12,739

11,338

10,97910,66910,50410,44610,219

10,00010,29510,38210,3639,964

9,9269,5469,1498,8648,651

8,3817,8527,6007,5037,342

7,0576,9196,7006,5186,110

5,6105,2144,9034,7494,596

4f5234,4364,3734,3374,389

4,3424,3744,1553,9573,774

3,7058 3,816

3,700

9,360

9,874

8,611

8,3008,0177,9498,0107,988

7,8818,1068,1158,0267,712

7,5977,3107,0056,7756,570

6,3455,9005,6605,5215,390

5,1725,0294,8734,7384,506

4,1283,8543,6503.5353,419

3,3483,2753,2283,1693,075

3,0262,9972,8592,6892,501

2,4022,4562,405

3,403

2,865

2,727

2,6792,6522,5552,4362,231

2,1192,1892,2672,3372,252

2,3292,2362,1442,0892,081

2,0361,9521,9401,9821,952

1,8851,8901,8271,7801,604

1,4821,3601,2531,2131,176

1,1751,1611,1461,1681,314

1,3171,3771,2961,2681,273

1,3031,3601,295

365

340

331

341344348357362

354352355356360

345344349348346

340324324324324

324302295298298

298294306300290

293305294321328

336337345338349

352366365

100

94

96

9798101102103

1019999100103

102105105104103

1031019998100

9898989898

9696989897

9798989898

9799100101104

103103

469

457

419

417411421416412

386371351342329

310310296285274

264249231222216

207198189183174

156147143138133

126123117115112

1071031009593

9290

106

99

104

106104102101100

101105105106107

108108107107107

107105104103104

102102103103103

102101103102101

10410210110098

9798100100100

101101

82868786

8687879093

9698100104107

105105

9101113

1314151618

1921232424

2627272832

3235384346

4956666973

7581869092

8396100107118

120123

28

26

37

3942444848

5049515256

5862636365

6669687377

7781838385

8689928993

9610210410799

93101100104111

108106

'Farm population as defined by Department of Agriculture and Department of Commerce, i.e., civilian population living on farms inrural areas, regardless of occupation. See also footnote 7.

2 Total population of United States including Armed Forces overseas, as of July 1.3 Includes persons doing farmwork on all farms. These data, published by the Department of Agriculture, differ from those on

agricultural employment by the Department of Labor (see Table B-31) because of differences in the method of approach, in concepts ofemployment, and in time of month for which the data are collected.4Acreage harvested plus acreages in fruits, tree nuts, and farm gardens.5 Fertilizer, lime, and pesticides.

sNonfarm constant dollar value of feed, seed, and livestock purchases.'Based on new definition of a farm. Under old definition of a farm, farm population (in thousands and as percent of total

population) for 1977, 1978, 1979, 1980 and 1981 is 7,806 and 3.5; 8,005 and 3.6; 7,553 and 3.4; 7,241 and 3.2; and 6,942 and 3.0,respectively.8 Previous basis for farm employment series has been discontinued. Employment after 1980 is estimated.

Note.—Population includes Alaska and Hawaii beginning 1960.Sources.- Department of Agriculture and Department of Commerce (Bureau of the Census).

271Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 278: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

TABLE B-97.—Indexes of prices received and prices paid by farmers, 1940-82[1977-100]

Year or month

1940194119421943194419451946194719481949

1950195119521953195419551956195719581959

I96019611962196319641965 .. ..1966196719681969

1970197119721973197419751976197719781979

198019811982"1981:

JanFebMarAprMay......:..:::::::::::::::::JuneJulyAug ,Septoct I.::..:::::::::::::::;.NovDec

1982:JanFebMarApr|£yJune:::::::: ::::::::::::::::JulyAugSeptOctNovDec*

Prices received by farmers

Allfarmprod-ucts

22273542434552606355566663565451505155535253535352545855565960626998105101102100115132134138133

145144143143142142142138133130130128

132133133135139137136133136128129127

Crops

21253443464753615952546162555653545252515152545555535552525052566091117105102100105116125134122

144144145143142138138130120120121122

126123120123125125124119125114118116

Live-stockandprod-ucts

2329364141445060655658706456524947515753535253514954605760676767771049498101100124147144143144

146145141144143147147146145140138133

137142145147151149148147146142140138

Prices paid by farmers

Allcommod-ities,

services,interest,taxes,andwageratesl

18192225262830353836374142404040404243434444454545474949515355586271818995100108123

138150155

147148149150150150150151151150150150

153153154154155156156156156155156155

Production items

Total2

21222628303033394341424747444443434446464646474747485050505254576173839197100108125

138148150

146146147149149150148148148147147145

148148150150150151151151150149149149

Tractorsandself-pro-pelledmachin-ery

394042444749515458688291100109122136152165

142142146146146155155155159159159159

159159161161161167167167168168168168

Fertil-izer

3737414444454550555654575959595857585857575858575757565552484850525692120102100100108134144144

136136145145147147147147147144144143

143143147147146146146146146141141139

Fuelsand

energy

494950505152535457798893100105137188213211

201212216217216215214214214214214214

217215207200202212214213213212213209

Wagerates

781014171920222322222526272727282930323333343536384144485357596369798593100107117127136136

140140140135135135135135135135135135

136136136136136136136136136136136136

Adden-dum:Aver-agefarmreal

estatevalueper

acre3

777891011131414141618181819192122232425262729313335384042434753667586100109125145158157

158

157

1 Includes items used for family living, not shown separately.* Includes other items not shown separately.3 Average for 48 States. Annual data are for March 1 of each year through 1975, for February 1 for 1976 through 1981, and for April 1,

for 1982. Monthly data are for first of month.Source: Department of Agriculture.

272Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 279: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

TABLE B-98.—U.S. exports and imports of agricultural commodities, 1940-82

[Billions of dollars]

Year

19401941194219431944

19451946194719481949

1950195119521953 . .1954

19551956195719581959

I960.. ..1961196219631964

19651966196719681969

197019711972.19731974

197519761977 _19781979

19801981

Jan-Nov:19811982.

Exports

Total»

0.5.7

1.22.12.1

2.33.14.03.53.6

294.0342.83.1

3.24.24.53.94.0

4.8505.05.66.3

6.26.96.46.36.0

737.794

17.721.9

21.923 023.629.434.7

41.243.3

39.733.7

Feedgrains

(*4444

.1

.3

2.3

.3

.3

.4

.3

.6

.55.8.8.9

1.11.3

.9

.9

111.0153.54.6

5.2604.95.97.7

9.89.4

8.75.9

Foodgrains2

( ' l.4.7

1.41.51.1

61.111

'.5

.61.01.0.8.9

1.2141.31.51.7

1.41.81.51.41.2

141.31.84.75.4

6.2473.65.56.3

7.99.6

8.97.4

Oil-seedsand

prod-ucts

t*4

4(n

.2

.3

2

2.2.3

.4

.5

.5

.6

.6

.6

'.B1.0

1.21.21.31.3

. 1.3

192.22.44.35.7

4.5516.68.28.9

9.49.6

8.78.3

Cot-ton

0.2.1

.2

.3

!9

1.01.1

9

[B

.5

l.Q.7.4

1.0.9

'.B

.5

.4

.5

.5

.3

4.6.5.9

1.3

1.0101.51.72.2

2.92.3

2.01.8

To-bacco

.2

.2

.4

.3

'.3

.3

2

.3

.4

.3

.4

.4

.3

.4

.4

.4

.4

.4

.4

.5

.5

.5

.6

.5

7.7.8

.99

1.11.41.2

1.31.5

1.31.4

Ani-malsand

prod-ucts

0.1.3.8

1.21.3

.9

.9

.7,5.4

.3

.3A.5

.6

.7

.7

.5

.6

.6

.6

.6

'.B

.8

7.7.8

91.01.11.61.8

1.7242.73.03.8

3.84.2

3.93.6

Total *

1.31.71.31.51.8

1.7232.83.12.9

4.05.24.54.24.0

4.04.04.03.94.1

3.83.73.94.04.1

4.14.54.55.05.0

5.85.86.58.4

10.2

9.311013.414.816.7

17.416.8

15.414.0

Crops,fruits,and

vege-tabfes3

( 4I.1

.1

'.2

.2

,2

.2

.2

.2

'.2

1

.2

.3

.3

.4

.4

.5

.5

.5

.6

.7

.8

.8

.8

.91.21.51.7

1.72.0

1.92.2

mports

Ani-malsand

prod-ucts

0.2.3

A.3

.4

.4

.4

.6

.4

.71.1

J.6.5

.5

.4

7.8

.6

.9

.9

.8

.91.21.11.31.4

1.61.51.82.62.2

1.82.32.33.13.9

3.83.5

3.23.3

Cof-fee

0.1.2

!3

.3

'6

'.&

1.11.41.41.51.5

1.41.41.41.21.1

1.01.01.01.01.2

1.11.11.01.2.9

1.21.21.31.71.6

1.72.94.24.04.2

4.22.9

2.62.6

Cocoabeansand

prod-ucts

4

4444

Ki.1

.2

'.3

.2

.2

.2

.2

.2

.2

.2

.1

.1

.2

2

.3

.2

.2

.3

.5

.61.01.41.2

.9

.9

.9

Agri-culturatrade

balance

- 0 . 8- 1 0- . 1

6.3

.5

.81.2.37

- 1 1-1 .1- 1 1-1 .3- . 9

- . 8.2.6

(4)- 1

1.0131.21.62.3

2.12.41.91.31.1

151.9299.3

117

12.612 010.214.618.0

23.926.6

24.319.7

1 Total includes items not shown separately.2 Rice, wheat, and wheat flour.3 Includes nuts, fruits, and vegetable preparations.Hess than $50 million.Note.—Data derived from official estimates released by the Bureau of the Census, Department of Commerce. Agricultural commodities

are defined as (1) nonmarine food products and (2) other products of agriculture which have not passed through complex processes ofmanufacture. Export value, at U.S. port of exportation, is based on the selling price and includes inland freight, insurance, and othercharges to the port. Import value, defined generally as the market value in the foreign country, excludes import duties, ocean freight,and marine insurance.

Source: Department of Agriculture.

273Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 280: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

TABLE B-99.—Balance sheet of the farming sector, 1929-83

[Billions of dollars]

Beginning ofyear

Assets

Total Realestate

Live-stock »

Other physical assets

Machin-ery andmotor

vehiclesCropss

House-hold

equip-mentand

furnish-ings

Financial assets

Depos-its

andcur-

rency

U.S.savingsbonds

Invest-ments incooper-atives

Claims

TotalReal

estatedebt

Otherdebt

Propri-etors'

equities

1929... 48.0 6.6 3.2 9.8

1933...

1939...

30.8

34.1

19401941194219431944

19451946194719481949

19501951195219531954

1955..,.1956195719581959....

19601961196219631964

19651966196719681969

19701971197219731974

1975 3

197619771978 ..1979

1980..,.1981....1982....1983*.

53.054.862.973.684.0

93.8102.9115.9127.4134.6

134.5154.3170.1167.6164.5

168.9173.6182.8191.3207.6

210.2210.9219.3227.6235.8

243.8260.8274.3288.0302.8

314.9326.0351.8394.8478.6

502.6576.3664.2736.3873.4

1,004.81,091.01.091.81.070.0

33.634.437.541.648.2

53.961.068.573.776.6

77.689.598.5

100.198.7

102.2107.5115.7121.8131.1

137.2138.5144.5150.2158.6

167.5179.2189.1199.7209.2

215.8223.2239.6267.3327.8

359.7418.1496.4554.7655.0

755.9830.0823,8789.1

5.15.37.19.69.7

9.09.7

11.913.314.4

12.917.119.514.811.7

11.210.611.013.917.7

15.215.616.417.315.9

14.517.619.018.820.2

23.523.727.334.142.4

24.529.429.031.951.3

61.460.853.658.3

3.13.34.04.95.4

6.55.45,37.4

10.1

12.214.116.717.418.4

18.719.320.220.121.8

22.722.222.523.523.9

24.826.027.429.831.3

32.334.436.639.344.2

54.764.071.077.085.1

96.7102.8111.4115.3

2.73.03.85.16.1

6.76.37.19.08.6

7.67.98.89.09.1

9.68.38.37.69.3

7.78:08.89.39.8

9.29.7

10.09.6

10.6

10.910.711.814.522.0

23.321.322.124.828.0

33.535.936.537.5

4.24.14.84.84.7

5.25.67.28.18.9

8.49.6

10.19.69.5

9.710.09.69.69.4

9.28.78.98.88.8

8.48.48.38.89.4

9.610.010.811.912.3

11.211.712.113.816.0

17.219.421.722.4

3.23.54.25.46.6

7.99.4

10.29.99.6

9.19.19.49.49.4

9.49.59.49.5

10.0

9.28.78.89.29.2

9.610.010.310.911.5

11.912.413.214.014.9

14.014.514.815.215.5

15.916.216.817.3

0.2.4.5

1.12.2

3.44.24.24.44.6

4.74.74.74.64.7

5.05.25.15,15.2

4.74.64.54.44.2

4.24.13.93.83.8

3.73.63.74.04.1

3.83.93.83.94.2

4.03,83.63.5

0.8.9.9

1.01.1

1.21.41.51.71.9

2.12.32.52.72.9

3.03.23.53.73.9

4.24.54.85.05.4

5.65.96.26.56.8

7.28.0

10.9

11.413,414.915.218.3

20.222.224.426.6

53.054.862.973.684.0

93.8102.9115.9127.4134.6

134.5154.3170.1167.6164.5

168.9173.6182.8191.3207.6

210.2210.9219.3227.6235.8

243.8260.8274.3288.0302.8

314.9326.0351.8394.8478.6

502.6576.3664.2736.3873.4

1,004.81,091.01,091.81,070.0

8.5

6.8

6.66.56.46.05.4

4.94.84.95.15.3

5.66.16.77.27.7

8.29.09.8

10.411.1

12.012.813.915.216.8

18.921.223.125.127.4

29.230.332,235.139.5

44.649.655.263.371.4

85.495.5

105.6110.0

3.44.04.13.93.5

3.43.13.54.16.1

6.97.07.98.99.2

9.59.89.5

10.012.6

12.713.414.616.217.6

17.919.520.922.323.1

23.824.127.429.833.8

37.041.948.759.469.4

80.486.496.1

105.0

43.044.352.563.875.1

85.495.0

107.5118.1123.3

122.1141.3155.5151.5147.6

151.2154.9163.4170.8183.9

185.4184.7190.9196.2201.4

207.0220.1230.2240.6252.3

261.9271.5292.2329.9405.3

421.0484.8560.3613.6732.6

839.0909.0890.1855.0

1 Beginning with 1961, horses and mules are excluded.3 Includes all crops held on farms and crops held off farms by farmers as security for Commodity Credit Corporation loans.9 Beginning 1975, data are for farms included in the new .farm definition, that is, places with sates of $1,000 or more annually.4 Forecast.Note.—Beginning I960, data include Alaska and Hawaii.Source: Department of Agriculture.

274Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 281: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

INTERNATIONAL STATISTICS

TABLE B-100.—Exchange rates, 1967-82

[Cents per unit of foreign currency, except as noted]

Year and month

March 1973

196719681969

19701971197219731974

19751976197719781979

198019811982

1981:III. ..IllIV

1982:1IIIllIV

March 1973

1967...19681969

19701971 .1972 .19731974

19751976197719781979

198019811982

1981:1IIIffIV

1982:

flIll(V

Belgian franc

2.5378

2.01252.00261.9942

2.01392.05982.27162.57612.5713

2.72532.59212.79113.18093.4098

3.42472.70072.1844

2.96332.68992.51572.6465

2.41662.22162.10172.0529

Netherlandsguilder

34.834

27.75927.62627.592

27.65128.65031.15335.97737.267

39.63237.84640.75246.28449.843

50.36940.19137.427

43.86439.56737.05740.500

38.83637.92036.60936.526

Canadiandollar

100.333

92.68992.80192.855

95.80299.021100.93799.977102.257

98.297101.41094.11287.72985.386

85.53083.40881.011

83.78483.42782.54783.918

87.72180.36680.02281.199

Swedish krona

22.582

19.37319.34919.342

19.28219.59221.02222.97022.563

24.14122.95722.38322.13923.323

23.64719.86015.914

21.97620.52018.86618.096

17.43216.92916.22913.660

French franc

22.191

20.32320.19119.302

18.08718.14819.82522.53620.805

23.35420.94220.34422.21823.504

23.69418.48915.199

20.60918.48417.24717.682

16.68615.94914.39614.143

Swiss franc

31.084

23.10423.W923.186

23.19924.32521.19331.70033.688

38.74340.01341.71456.28360.121

59.69751.02549.196

52.81849.09847.75754.726

53.35850.12447.27246.739

German mark

35.548

25.08425.04825.491

27.42428.76831.36437.75838.723

40.72939.73743.07949.86754.561

55.08944.36241.186

48.00843.95841.170. 44.508

42.63042.04840.26839.998

United Kingdompound

247.24

275.04239.35239.01

239.59244.42250.08245.10234.03

222.16180.48174.49191.84212.24

232.58202.43174.80

230.96207.91183.62188.22

184.61177.95172.41164.81

Italian lira

0.17604

.16022

.16042

.15940

.15945

.16174

.17132

.17192

.15372

.15338

.12044

.11328

.11782

.12035

.11694

.08842

.07386

.09995

.08827

.08232

.08352

.07932

.07575

.07169

.06968

Japanese yen

0.38190

.27613

.27735

.27903

.27921

.28779

.32995,36915.34302

.33705

.33741

.37342

.47981

.45834

.44311

.45432

.40151

.48644

.45491

.43172

.44572

.42821

.41003

.38614

.38697

Multilateral trade-weighted value ofthe U.S. dollar (March 1973=100)

Nominal

100.0

12O.0122.1122.4

121.1117.8109.199.1101.4

98.5105.6103.392.488.1

87.4102.9116.6

94.5103.1110.0105.4

109.9114.0119.8122.2

Real1

100.0

98.899.2

93.997.393.184.283.2

84.8100.8111.7

92.3100.3108.0102.7

106.0109.2115.3116.2

•Adjusted by the consumer price index for all urban consumers.Source: Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System.

275Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 282: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

TABLE B-101.—£7.5. international transactions, 1946-82

[Millions of dollars; quarterly data seasonally adjusted, except as noted. Credits ( + )• debits ( }]

Year orquarter

Merchandise12

Exports Imports Net

Investment income3

Receipts Payments Net

Netmilitarytransac-

tions

Nettraveland

transpor-tation

receipts

Otherserv-ices,net a

Balanceon goods

andservices *A

Remit-tances,

pensions,and otherunilateraltransfers'

Balanceon

currentac-

count l *

1946..1947..1948..1949..

1950..1951..1952..1953..1954..

1955..1956..1957..1958..1959..

I960..1961..1962..1963..1964..

1965..1966..1967..1968..1969..

1970..1971..1972..1973..1974..

1975,.1976..1977..1978..1979..

1980....1981....

1980:I

IV

1981:I

IV

1982:

II111*..

11,76416,09713,26512,213

10,20314,24313,44912,41212,929

14,42417,55619,56216,41416,458

19,65020,10820,78122,27225,501

26,46129,31030,66633,62636,414

42,46943,31949,38171,41098,306

107,088114,745120,816142,054184,473

224,237236,254

54,75255,84355,78657,856

60,68360,28457,69457,593

55,78055,17452,480

^5,067^5,973-7,557-6,874

-9,081-11,176-10,838-10,975-10,353

-11,527= 12,803-13,291= 12,952-15,310

= 14,758= 14,537= 16,260-17,048-18,700

=21,510=25,493-26,866-32,991-35,807

- 39,866=45,579-55,797-70,499

-103,649

-98,041=-124,051= 151,689475,813

-211.819

-249,575264,143

-64,431-62,363-59,735=63,046

-64,995-66,831-65,539-66,778

-61,653- 60,869=64,938

6,69710,1245,7085,339

1,1223,0672,61114372,576

2,8974,7536,2713,4621,148

4,8925,5714,5215,2246,801

4,9513,8173,800

635607

2,603-2,260-6,416

911-5,343

9,047-9,306

-30,873-33,759-27,346

-25,338-27,889

-9,679-6,520-3,949-5,190

-4,312-6,547=7,845-9,185

-5,873-5,695

-12,458

7721,1021,9211,831

2,0682,6332,7512,7362,929

3,4063,8374,1803,7904,132

4,6164,9995,6186,1576,824

7,4377,5288,0209,368

10,912

11,74712,70714,76421,80827,587

25,35129,28632,17942,24564,129

72,68685,945

19,94416,01617,84818,877

20,52821,64222,04821,727

20,89022,56221,880

-212- 2 4 5-437=476

- 5 5 9- 5 8 3- 5 5 5- 6 2 4- 5 8 2

- 6 7 6- 7 3 5- 7 9 6- 8 2 5

-1,061

-1,237-1,245-1,324-1,561-1,784

-2,088-2 ,481-2,747-3,378-4,869

-5,516-5,436-6,572-9,655

-12,084

-12,564-13,311-14,217-21,680-32,914

-42,776-52,908

= 10,505-10,268-10,485-11,519

-12,405-13,441-13,865-13,198

-14,029-14,874-14,462

560857

1,4841,355

1,5092,0502,1962,1122,347

2,7303,1023,3842,9653,071

3,3793,7544,2944,5965,040

5,3495,0475,2735,9906,043

6,2317,2718,192

12,15315,503

12,78715,97517,96220,56531,215

29,91033,037

9,4395,7487,3637,358

8,1238,2018,1838,529

6,8617,6887,418

-493-455^799-621

-576-1,270-2,054-2,423-2,460

-2,701-2,788-2,841-3,135=-2,805

-2,752-2,596-2,449-2,304-2,133

-2,122-2,935-3,226-3,143=3,328

-3,354-2,893-3,420-2,070-1,653

-746559

1,528621

-2,035

-2,471-1,541

•=931-514-286-742

=-48758761

-528

167247527

733946374230

-12029883

-238-269

-297-361-189-633-821

-964-978

-1,152-1,309-1,146

-1,280-1,331-1,750-1,548-1,763

-2,038-2,345-3,063-3,158-3,184

-2,792-2,558-3,293-3,125-2,429

-940-231

-436= 216-114-174

-495-139200203

-66-=319-201

310145175208

242254309307305

299447482486573

579594809960

1,041

1,3871,3651,6121,6301,833

2,1802,4952,7663,1843,986

4,5984,7115,2245,9555,690

7,1447,702

1,6441,8081,8101,879

1.8381,9811,9601,924

2,0342,0502.140

7,80711,6176,9426,511

2,1774,3993,1451,1952,499

2,9285,1537,1073,1451,166

5,1326,3466,0257,1679,604

8,2855,9635,7083,5633,393

5,6252,269

= 1,94111,0219,309

22,8939,382

-9,451-9,743

5,095

8,30311,079

37306

4,8243,131

4,6672,9092,559

943

3,1233,9712,574

=2,922=2,625-4,525= 5,638

=4,017= 3,515-2,531-2,481-2,280

-2,498-2,423-2,345=2,361=2,448

-2,308-2,524-2,638=2,754-2,781

-2,854-2,932-3,125-2,952-2,994

-3,294-3,701-3,854-3,881

8 -7 ,186

=4,613-4,998-4,617-5,030-5,561

=6,783-6,608

= 1,837-1,306-1,444-2,195

-1,422-1,510-1,808= 1,870

-2,048-1,740-1,653

4,8858,9922,417

873

-1,840884614

= 1,286219

4302,7304,762

784-1,282

2,8243,8223,3874,4146,823

5,4323,0312,583

611399

2,331-1,433-5,795

7,1402,124

18,2804,384

-14,068-14,773

466

1,5204,471

-1,800-1,000

3,380936

3,2451,399

751-927

1,0752,231

-4,227

1 Excludes military.8 Adjusted from Census data for differences in valuation, coverage, and timing.o Fees and royalties from U.S. direct investments abroad or from foreign direct investments in the United States are excluded from

investment income and included in other services, net.4 In concept balance on goods and services is equal to net exports and imports in the national income and product accounts (and

the sum of balance on current account and allocations of special drawing rights is equal to net foreign investment in the accounts),although the series differ because of different handling of certain items (gold, extraordinary military shipments, etc.), revisions, etc.

6 Includes extraordinary U.S. Government transactions with India.See next page for continuation of table.

276Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 283: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

TABLE B-101.—U.S. international transactions, 1946-82—Continued

[Millions of dollars; quarterly data seasonally adjusted, except as noted]

Year orquarter

1946194719481949

19501951195219531954

19551956195719581959

19601961196219631964

19651966196719681969

19701971197219731974

19751976197719781979

19801981

1980:

IIIIIIV

1981:1IIIllIV

1982:1II| | | p

U.S. assets abroad, net[increase/capital outflow < - ) ]

Total

-4,099-5,538-4,174-7,270-9,560

-5,716-7,321-9.757

-10.977-11,585

-9,337-12,475-14,497-22,874-34,745

-39,703-51,269-34,785-61,130-64.344

-86,026-109,294

-12,916-24,962-19,635-28,512

-22,796-21,566-17,257-47,677

-31,201-37,790-26,364

U.S.officialreserveassets6

- 6 2 33 315

-1,736266

1,758- 3 3415

1,256480

182869

-1,1652,2921,035

2,145607

1,535378171

1,22557053

- 8 7 0-1,179

2,4812,349

158-1,467

- 8 4 9-2,558

- 3 7 5732

-1,133

-8,155-5,175

-3,268502

-1,109-4,279

-4,529- 9 0 5

262

-1,089-1,132

- 7 9 4

OtherU.S.

Govern-ment

assets

-1,100- 9 1 0

-1,085-1,662-1,680

-1,605-1,543-2,423-2,274-2,200

-1,589-1,884-1,568-2,644

«366

-3,474-4,214-3,693-4,660- 3 > 4 3

-5,126-5,137

-1,438-1,143-1,390-1,154

-1,375-1,518-1,257

- 9 8 7

- 9 0 4-1,547-2,418

U.S.privateassets

5,144-5,235

4,623-5,986

8,050

5,336-6,347-7,386-7,833-8,206

10,22912,940

-12,92520,388

-33,643

-35,38044,498

-30,717-57,202

59,469

-72,74698,982

-8,21024,32117,136

-23,079

16,892-19,143-15,996-46,952

-29,20835,111

-23,152

Foreign assets in the U.S., net[increase/capital inflow ( + )]

Total

2,2942,7051,9113,2173,643

7423,6617,3799,928

12,702

6,35922,97021,46118,38834,241

15,67036,51851,31964,03638,460

54,48477,921

7,8658,616

12,64725,356

8,47013,46416,88039,107

25,08029,61916,054

Foreignofficialassets

1,473765

1,2701,9861,660

134- 6 7 23,451- 7 7 4

-1,301

6,90826,87910,4756,026

10,546

7,02717,69336,81633,678

-13,697

15,4424,785

7,4217,6447,5417,678

5,361-2,861-5,835

8,119

-3,1221,9982,102

Otherforeignassets

8211,939

6411,2311,983

6074,3333,928

10,70314,002

- 5 5 0-3,90910,98612,36223,696

8,64318,82614,50330,35852,157

39,04273,136

15,286972

5,10617,677

3,10916,32422,71530,988

28,20227,62113,952

Alloca-tions ofspecialdrawingrights(SDRs)

867717710

1,1*39"

1,1521,093

1,152

1.093

Statisticaldiscrepancy

Total(sum of

the itemswith signreversed)

- 1 0 1 9- 9 8 9

-1,124- 3 6 0- 9 0 7

- 4 5 8629

- 2 0 5438

-1,516

- 2 1 9-9,779-1,879-2,654-1,620

5,75310,367

-2,46511,86625,212

28,87025,809

5,70017,3463,6082,219

9,9886,703- 3 7 49,497

5,0455,940

14,537

Of which:Seasonaladjust-ment

discrep-ancy

- 6 4 3795

-2,7542,605

-=829503

-2,1442,474

- 8 9 9574

-1,973

e Consists of gold, special drawing rights, convertible currencies, and the U.S. reserve position in the International Monetary Fund(ItVlrJ.

Note.—Quarterly data for U.S. official reserve assets and foreign assets in the United States are not seasonally adjusted.Source: Department of Commerce, Bureau of Economic Analysis.

277Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 284: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

TABLE B-102,—U.S. merchandise exports and imports by principal end-use category, 1965-82

[Millions of dollars; quarterly data seasonally adjusted]

Year or quarter

1965 .. .1966196719681969

19701971197219731974

19751976197719781979

19801981

1980:1||IllIV

1981:|||IIIIV

1982:III|[|P

Exports

Total

26,46129,31030,66633,62636,414

42,46943,31949,38171,41098,306

107.088114,745120,816142,054184,473

224,237236.254

54,75255.84355,78657.856

60,68360,28457,69457,593

55,78055,17452,480

Agricul-tural

6.3056,9496,4536,2976,096

7,3747,8319,513

17.97822,412

22,24223,38124,33129,90235,594

42,15644,264

10,15910,15910,70611,132

12,57511,1519,947

10,591

10,51010.6738,496

Nonagricultural

Total

20,15622,36124,21327,32930,318

35,09535,48839,86853,43275,894

84,84691,36496,485

112,152148,879

182,081191,990

44,59345,68445,08046,724

48,10849,13347,74747,002

45,27044,50143,984

Capitalgoodsexceptauto-

motive

8,0528,9079,934

11,11112,369

14,65915,37216,91421,99930,878

36,63939,11239,76746,47058,842

74,17881,666

17,07018,45818,96519,685

20,12221,10720,23620,201

19,35419,31018,571

Othergoods

12,10413,45414,27916,21817,949

20,43620,11622,95431,43345,016

48,20752,25256,71865,68290,037

107,903110,324

27,52327,22626,11527,039

27,98628,02627,51126,801

25,91625,19125,413

Imports

Total

21,51025,49326,86632,99135,807

39,86645,57955,79770,499

103,649

98,041124,051151,689175,813211,819

249,575264,143

64,43162,36359,73563,046

64,99566,83165,53966.778

61,65360,86964,938

Petro-leumand

products

2.0342,0782,0912,3842,649

2,9273,6504,6508,415

26,609

27,01734,57344,98342,31260,482

79,41477,579

21,04920,83417,73519,796

20,53320,79818,15818,091

15,65213,41616,453

Nonpetroleurr

Total

19,47623,41524,77530,60733,158

36,93941,92951,14762,08477,040

71,02489,478

106,706133,501151,337

170,161186,564

43,38241,52942,00043,250

44,46246,03447,38248,687

46,00147,45348,485

Indus-trial

suppliesand

materi-als

9,12310,2359,956

12,02711,798

12,41613,79416,30819,63627.819

24.01329,75935,67042,54249,880

55,63260,281

15,33113,62413,16713,510

14,47415,20515,49815,102

14,23013,42213,485

Othergoods

10,35313,18014,81918,58021,360

24,52328,13534,83942,44849,221

47,01159,71971,03690,959

101,457

114,529126.283

28,05127,90528,83329,740

29,98830,82931,88433,585

31,77134,03135,000

Note, - Data are on an international transactions basis and exclude military shipments.Source: Department of Commerce, Bureau of Economic Analysts.

278Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 285: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

TABLE B-103.—U.S. merchandise exports and imports by area, 1973-82

[Millions of dollars]

Item 1973 1974 1975 1976 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981

1982 first3 quartersat annual

rate*

Exports

Industrial countries

CanadaJapanWestern EuropeAustralia, New Zealand,

and South Africa

Other countries, exceptEastern Europe

OPEC2...Other3..

Eastern Europe

Imports

Industrial countries...

CanadaJapanWestern EuropeAustralia, New Zealand,

and South Africa

Other countries, exceptEastern Europe...

OPEC 2...Other'...

71,410

48,529

16,7108,356

21,216

2,247

20,834

3,41417,420

2,047

70,499

48,985

17,6949,665

19,774

1,852

20,913

5,09715,816

98,306

64,487

21,84210,72428,164

3,757

32,082

6,21925,863

1,737

103,649

61,092

22,39212,41424,267

2,019

41,580

17,23424,346

107,088

66,496

23,5379,567

29,884

3,508

37,343

9,95627,387

3,249

98,041

55,973

21,71011,25720,764

2,242

41,334

18,89722,437

114,745

72,335

26,33610,19631,883

3,920

38,287

11,56126,726

4,123

* 124,051

67,488

26,47515,53123,003

2,479

55,379

27,40927,970

120,816

76,970

28,53310,56634,094

3,777

40,951

12,877

28,074

2,895

451,689

79,228

29,64518,56528,226

2,792

70,680

35,77834,902

142,054

87,948

31,22912,96039,546

4,213

50,213

14,84635,367

3,893

'175,813

99,151

33,55224,54136,618

4,440

74,402

33,28641,116

184,473

115,930

38,69017,62954,177

5,434

62,630

14,53748,093

5,913

'211,819

112,600

39,02026,26141,826

5,493

96,137

45,03951,098

224,237

137,152

41,62620,80667,603

7,117

82,942

17,36465,578

4,143

1249,575

127,702

42,69731,21747,255

6,533

119,142

55,60263,540

236,254

141,134

45,25021,79665,090

8,998

90,636

21,09369,543

4,461

•264,143

143,395

47,31637,59852,873

5,608

119,196

49,93469,262

Eastern Europe... 601 977 734 875 1,127 1,508 1,896 1,444 1,552

217,912

130,069

40,09920,83960,952

8,180

83,820

21,10362,717

4,023

-•249,947

145,681

48,86338,77552,955

5,089

103,102

32,43370,669

1,132

1 Preliminary; seasonally adjusted.2 Algeria, Ecuador, Gabon, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Kuwait, Libya, Nigeria, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, United Arab Emirates, and Venezuela.3 Latin American Republics, other Western Hemisphere, and other countries in Asia and Africa, less members of OPEC.4 Trade with international organizations is included in totals for 1976-82, but not in area detail. This includes imports ofnonmonetary gold from International Monetary Fund in 1976-80; an export of tin to International Tin Council (ITC) in 1981; and animport of tin from ITC in 1982.

Note.—Data are on an international transactions basis and exclude military.Source: Department of Commerce, Bureau of Economic Analysis.

279Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 286: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

TABLE B-104.—U.S. merchandise exports and imports by commodity groups, 1960-82[Millions of dollars; monthly data seasonally adjusted]

Year ormonth

Totaldomes-tic andforeign

exports3

Merchandise exports1

Domestic exports

T o t a l 2 3

Food,

andtobacco

Crudemateri-als andfuels4

Manu-facturedgoods

Merchandise imports

General imports"

Total3

Food,bever-ages,and

tobacco

Crudemateri-als andfuels*

Manufacturedgoods

Total,elf.

value7

Merchandise trade balance

Exportsless

imports,customs

value

Exportsless

imports,f.a.s.

Exportsless

imports,elf.

F.a.s. value8 Customs value

I960..1961..1962..1963..1964..

1965..1966..1967..1968..1969..

1970..1971..1972..1973..1974..

1974*1975*1976*1977*1978*1979*1980

198119821981:

JanFebMar....

June..July...Aug.,.Sept..oeSNov...Dec...

1982:JanFebMar...

tpJune..July...Aug...Sept..OclNov...Dec...,

19,65920,22620,98622,46725,832

26,74229,49031,03034,06337,33242,65943,54949,19970,82397,998

98,092107,652115,223121,232143,681181,860220,630

233,677212,193

18,90219,78821,27819,78618,89919,750

19,28919,03119,55119,16319,15318,885

18,73718,70418,60217,84318,21818,822

18,02717,49817,38716,69815,69316,335

19,45919,98220,71722,18225,479

26,39929,05430,64633,62636,788

42.02542,91148,39969,73096,634

96,679106,161113,549119,024141,142178,633

216,515

228,899207,076

18,53619,46520,84319,37718,52819,340

18,91918,72019,10818,73318,75118,377

18,35018,34118,12717,44117,80718,386

17,63817,17716,65116,31015,31715,902

3,1673,4663,7434,1884,637

4,5195,1864,7104,5924,446

5,0585,0766,56912,93815,233

15,23316,79317,23415,96320,60424,587

30,407

33,20626,977

2,9342,9433,3042,8912,6672,573

2,5492,4702,7722,9202,6752,515

2,2792,4822,6732,5062,4782,4211,8962,1621,9092,1322,0861,943

3,9423,8643,3563,7754,337

4,2734,4044,7264,8655,006

6,6926,4417,091

10,73515,802

15,80215,19716,09518,57920,95728,22233,719

33,02233,518

2,8152,9583,2192,5302,5262,342

2,4302,6622,7952,8632,8722,934

3,0763,4343,1512,8982,9122,797

2,6172,6422,8322,6652,3612,420

12,58312,78413,66814.29716,529

17,43319,21820,84423,81826,785

29,34430,44333,74044,73163,523

15,07314,76116,46417,20718,749

21,42725,61826,88933,22636,043

39,95145,56355,58369,476

101,394

3,3923,4553,6743,8634,022

4,0134,5904,7015,3655,308

6,2306,4047,3799,235

10,701

4,4184,3344,6914,7555,029

5,4405,7185,3676,0316,3916,5427,2688,838

13,44631,842

6,8636,5377,6498,0709,106

11,24414,44615,75620,62423,01125,90730,41437,76745,00156,202

F.a.s. value 8

63,52370,95177,24180,15194,473116,587

143,891

154,283139,716

12,06512,81313,55813,27612,61913,456

13,06012,99112,94712,45812,59012,318

12,46311,87611,82211,42811,83712,563

12,59011,88211,33410,98710,36910,660

102,55998,503123,477150,390174,757209,458

244,871

10,7099,92311,89114,22715,74317,735

32,06432,59641,47453,55451,90171,390

18,551 93,973 125,122

55,22351,08064,77576,554100,317112,226

Customs value

260,982243,952

22,61621,91621,02922,24921,23222,005

20,11423,24221,27423,07722,50819,746

22,82919,09020,34917,38720,55821,310

19,55923,49420,64421,09618,93718,865

18,35017,817

1,7361,5891,6121,4711,6651,472

1,3901,4791,3931,5831,4131,542

1,3401,1541,5291,4351,5691,567

1,3891,6171,5811,6671,4981,469

92,87374,404

8,9769,0997,4718,8787,1468,249

6,5767,7797,4117,6427,4686,174

8,2695,8455,7175,0334,9066,198

6,6457,1685,9686,7115,7706,181

142,475.144,022

11,27810,75011,37911,32511,81611,645

11,62213,36111,97113,12712,82611,414

12,58411,52712,40210,33713,21912,89910,98214,11112,43412,02811,03810,621

28,74535,32038,241

42,42948,34258,86273,573

108,392

110,875105,880132,498160,411186,045222,228

256,984

273^352254,885

23,67922,91721,98323,26622,24823,033

21,07424,39822,31724,19423,56820,699

23,87019,90021,23718,16521,50922,259

20,44924,57821,58022,02419,78319,701

4,5865,4654,5225,2607,083

5,3113,8724,141

8371,289

2,708-2,014-6,384

1,348-3,396

-4,4679,149

-8,254-29,158-31,076-27,599=24,241

27,30531,759

-3,714-2,127

249-2,463-2,333-2,255

- 8 2 5-4,212-1,724-3,914-3,356

- 8 6 1

41,747

4562,3402,4881,5325,9963,2574,3983,2442,529

2,283-1,257

- 9 0 9230

-4,793-9,663

2,752-10,395

-12,7831,772

-17,274-39,179-42,364-40,368

=36,354

=39,675=42,691

-4,777=3,129

-7053,480

-3,349-3,283

-1,784=5,367= 2,766-5,031=4,415-1,814

= 5.134-1,197= 2,635

-322=3,291-3,437

=2,422-7,080-4,192=5,326-4,090-3,366

1 Beginning 1960, data have been adjusted for comparability with the revised commodity classifications effective in 1965.2 Department of Defense shipments of grant-aid military supplies and equipment under the Military Assistance Program are excludedfrom total exports.

9 Total includes commodities and transactions not classified according to kind.4 Includes fats and oils.5 Includes machinery, transportation equipment, chemicals, metals, and other manufactures. Export data for these items include

military grant-aid shipments through 1977 and exclude them thereafter.8 Total arrivals of imported goods other than intransit shipments.7 C.i.f. {cost, insurance, and freight) import value at first port of entry into United States. Data for 1967-73 are estimates.6 F.a.s. (free alongside ship) value basis at U.S. port of exportation for exports and at foreign port of exportation for imports.

Trade in gold is included beginning 1974. Export statistics cover all merchandise shipped from the U.S. customs area, except suppliesfor the US. Armed Forces. Exports include shipments under Agency for International Development and Food for Peace programs as wellas other private relief shipments.

Data for 1980 and 1981 include trade of the U.S. Virgin Islands, except that for 1980 Virgin Islands exports are reflected only in thefigures for domestic and foreign exports combined, total domestic exports, and trade balance.

*Data for 1974=79 for domestic and foreign exports combined, total domestic exports, total general imports, and trade balanceInclude trade of the Virgin Islands.

Source: Department of Commerce (Bureau of the Census and International Trade Administration, Office of Trade Investment andAnalysis, Trade Performance Division).

280Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 287: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

TABLE B-105.—International investment position of the United States at year-end, selected years, 1970-81

[Billions of dollars]

Type of investment 1970 1972 1974 1976 1978 1979 1980 1981

Net international investment position of the United States..U.S. assets abroad

U.S. official reserve assets..GoldSpecial drawing rights (SDRs)Reserve position in the International Monetary

Fund (IMF)Foreign currency reserves

Other U.S. Government assets..U.S. loans and other long-term assetsU.S. short-term assets other than reserves

U.S. private assetsDirect investments abroad (book value)Foreign securitiesClaims on foreigners reported by U.S. banks, not

included elsewhereClaims on unaffiliated foreigners reported by

U.S. nonbanksForeign assets in the United States-

Foreign official assetsU.S. Government securitiesl

Other U.S. Government liabilitiesLiabilities reported by U.S. banks, not included

elsewhereOther official assets

Other foreign assetsDirect investments in the United States (book

value)Liabilities reported by U.S. banks, not included

elsewhereU.S. Treasury securitiesOther U.S. securities2

Liabilities to unaffiliated foreigners reported byU.S. nonbanks

58.6165.5

14.5

11.1.9

1.9.6

32.1

29.72.5

118.8

75.521.0

13.8

8.5

106.8

26.1

17.71.7

6.7.0

80.7

13.3

22.71.2

34.7

8.8

37.1

199.0

13.2

10.52.0

.5

.236.1

34.12.0

149.7

89.927.6

20.7

11.4

161.8

63.2

52.91.6

8.5.2

98.7

14.9

21.21.2

50.7

10.7

58.8

255.7

15.9

11.72.4

1.9.0

38.4

36.32.1

201.5

110.128.2

46.2

17.0

196.9

79.8

58.12.6

18.4.6

117.1

25.1

41.81.7

34.9

13.6

83.8

347.2

18.7

11.62.4

4.4.3

46.044.1

1.9

282.4136.844.2

81.1

20.3

263.4

104.2

72.68.8

17.25.6

159.1

30.8

53.57.0

54.9

13.0

76.2

447.9

18.7

11.71.6

1.04.4

54.252.3

1.9

375.0162.753.4

130.8

28.1

371.6

173.0

128.512.7

23.38.5

198.7

42.5

77.78.9

53.6

16.0

94.9

510.6

19.0

11.22.7

1.33.8

58.456.5

1.9

433.2187.9

56.8

157.0

31.5415.7159.7

106.612.6

30.59.9

256.0

54.5

110.314.258.6

18.4

121.6

606.9

26.8

11.22.6

2.910.1

63.561.9

1.7

516.6

215.662.5

203.9

34.7

485.3

175.8

118.213.1

30.414.1

309.4

68.4

121.116.174.1

29.8

160.3

717.4

30.1

11.24.1

5.19.8

68.5

67.21.3

618.8

227.362.9

293.5

35.0

557.1

180.1

125.113.1

26.315.6

377.1

89.8

164.718.575.3

28.9

1 Includes Treasury and agency issues of securities.2 Corporate and other bonds and corporate stocks.Source: Department of Commerce, Bureau of Economic Analysis.

281Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 288: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

TABLE B-106.— World trade: Exports and imports, 1965, 1970, 1975, and 1979-82

[Billions of U.S. dollars]

Area and country

Developed countries'.

United StatesCanadaJapan

European Community4

FranceWest GermanyItalyUnited Kingdom..,

Other developed countries..

Developing countries

Oil exporting countries8

Other

Communist countries0..

U.S.S.REastern Europe....China

TOTAL...

Developed countries3..

United States..CanadaJapan

European Community4

FranceWest GermanyItalyUnited Kingdom

Other developed countries..

Developing countries

Oil exporting countries8

Other

Communist countries0..

U.S.S.REastern Europe..China

TOTAL..

1965 1970 1975 1979 1980 1981

130.1

27.58.48.5

65.2

10.217.97.2

13.8

20.5

40.2

10.529.6

23.2

8.211.82.0

193.5

137.5

23.28.78.2

70.5

10.417.67.4

16.1

27.0

43.5

6.437.2

22.5

8.011.61.8

203.5

Exports, f.o.b. *

226.7

43.216.719.3

113.6

18.134.213.219.6

33.7

61.7

17.544.2

34.9

12.818.22.2

323.3

585.7

108.134.155.7

300.6

53.190.234.844.5

87.1

226.5

113.6113.0

90.5

33.445.37.3

902.7

1,085.7

182.058.3

102.3

577.2

100.7171.872.286.4

165.8

452.8

214.3238.5

170.4

64.977.913.5

1,708.9

1.283.9

220.867.7

130.4

665.8

116.0192.977.7

110.1

199.1

608.8

301.2307.6

203.1

76.487.518.9

2,095.8

1.258.9

233.772.6

151.5

612.8

106.4176.175.3

102.7

188.2

606.1

276.4329.6

213.2

79.491.121.4

2,078.2

Imports, c.i.f.7

237.8

42.714.318.9

118.9

19.129.915.022.0

43.1

67.8

9.957.9

34.1

11.718.52.2

339.7

618.1

105.936.257.8

306.4

54.074.938.453.3

111.8

221.6

52.8168.9

100.8

37.151.37.4

940.5

1,182.7

222.257.0

109.8

611.1

107.0159.677.999.6

182.6

408.0

100.1307.8

170.9

58.083.015.7

1,761.6

1,427.1

257.062.8

141.3

729.2

134.9188.099.5

115.8

236.8

540.1

137.2402.9

202.8

$8.593.120.9

2,170.0

1,358.3

273.470.0

142.9

644.2

121.0163.991.1

102.0

227.9

595.2

162.0433.2

211.2

73.297.319.6

2,164.7

1982 l

1,199.7

212.971.1

140.3

599.3

96.4175.777.395.5

176.1

525.9

212.8313.1

215.6

80.990.123.0

1,941.2

1,290.4

261.460.8

132.0

628.1

116.6154.990.5

100.1

208.1

562.4

163.9398,5

209.3

80.189.219.1

2,062.1

1 Preliminary estimates.2 Free-cn-board ship value.3 Includes the OECD countries, South Africa, and non-OECD Europe.4 Includes Belgium-Luxembourg, Denmark, Greece, Ireland, and the Netherlands, not shown separately.6 Includes Algeria, Ecuador, Gabon, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Kuwait, Libya, Nigeria, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, United Arab Emirates, and

Venezuela.•Includes North Korea. Vietnam, Albania, Cuba, Mongolia, and Yugoslavia, not shown separately.'Cost, insurance, and freight value; except Eastern Europe (except Hungary) and U.S.S.R., which are f.o.b (free on board).Sources: International Monetary Fund, Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, and Council of Economic Advisers.

282Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 289: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

TABLE B-107.— World trade balance and current account balances, 1965, 1970, 1975, and 1979-82

[Billions of U.S. dollars]

Area and country 1965 1970 1975 1979 1980 1981 1982»

Developed countries3

United States....CanadaJapan

European Community4

FranceWest GermanyItalyUnited Kingdom....

Other developed countries

Developing countries

Oil-exporting countries5

Other ..

Communist countries6..

U.S.S.REastern Europe..China

TOTAL7...

Developed countries3..

United States..CanadaJapan

European Community4

FranceWest GermanyItalyUnited Kingdom....

Other developed countries ,

Developing countries

Oil exporting countries5..Other.. *

Communist cour

U.S.S.REastern Europe..China

TOTAL..

- 7 . 4

4.3- . 2

- 5 . 3

- . 2

-2-2.3

- 6 . 4

- 3 . 3

4.2- 7 . 5

.2

'2

-10.0

3.2

5.4-1,1

.4-1 .6

2.2- . 1

- 2 . 9

World trade balance2

-11.2

is

-5 .2

-1 .04.3

-1 .8-2 .4

- 9 . 4

-6 .1

7.6-13.6

1.1

~!o-16.4

-32.5

2.2-2 .1-2 .1

-5 .7

152-3 .6-8 .8

-24.7

4.9

60.8-55.9

-10.3

-3 .7-6 .0

-37.8

-97.1

-40.21.3

-7 .5

-33.9

-6 .312.2

-5 .7-13.2

-16.8

44.8

114.2-69.4

- .5

6.9-5 .1-2 .2

-52.7

-143.2

-36.24.9

-10.9

-63.3

-18.94.9

-21.8-5 .7

-37.7

68.6

164.0-95.4

.3

7.9-5 .6-2 .0

-74.2

-99.4

-39.62.68.6

-31.4

-14.512.2

-15.8

-39.7

10.8

114.4-103.6

2.0

6.2-6 .1

1.8

-86.5

Current account balances8

4.7

2.3

2!o

2.8

- . 1.9.9

2.0

-3 .1

-1 ,8

- .1

- 2 . 7

18.3-4 .7- . 6

2.5

1.64.0

- . 6

-3 .4

-18.2

-16.519.4

-35.9

-11.2

-4 .7-6 .4

- 3 0 . 4

-29.8

-A2-8 .7

- 8 . 7

5.2-6 .1

5.4-1 .7

-7 .7

-18.3

27.9-46.2

-4 .9

3.8-7 .6-1 .1

- 5 3 . 0

- 7 0 . 6

1.5- . 9

-10.7

- 3 7 . 3

- 3 . 6-16.4

- 9 . 8

6.9

-23.2

-1 .372.1

-73.4

- 3 . 0

3.5-5 .5-1 .0

- 7 4 . 9

-40.1

4.2-4 .4

5.1

-14.2

-3 .0-7 .1-8 .512.4

- 3 0 . 7

- 2 5 . 0

56.5-81.5

2.7

2.7-3 .5

3.5

- 6 2 . 4

-90.7

- 4 8 . 510.38.3

- 2 8 . 8

-20.220.8

-13.2

-4 .6

-32.0

-36.548.9

- 8 5 . 4

6.3

.8

.83.9

-120.9

- 4 3 . 8

-8 .81.06.5

-17.0

-11.5

-"sis4,5

-25.5

-61.02.0

-63.0

6.7

3.1- 2 . 0

5.6

-98.1

1 Preliminary estimates.2 Exports f.o.b. (free-on-board ship value) less imports c.i.f. (cost, insurance, and freight).3 Includes the OECD countries. South Africa, and non-OECO Europe.4 Includes Belgium-Luxembourg, Denmark, Greece, Ireland, and the Netherlands, not shown separately.* Includes Afgeria, Ecuador, Gabon, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Kuwait, Libya, Nigeria, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, United Arab Emirates, and

Venezuela.• Includes North Korea, Vietnam, Albania, Cuba, Mongolia, and Yugoslavia, not shown separately.7 Asymmetries arise in global payments aggregations because of discrepancies in coverage, classification, timing, and valuation in the

recording of transactions by the countries involved.8 OECD basis.Sources: International Monetary Fund, Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, and Council of Economic Advisers.

283

Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 290: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

TABLE B-108.—International reserves, selected years, 1952-82

[Millions of SDRs; end of period]

Area and country

All countries *.

Industrial countries3

United States....CanadaAustraliaJapanNew Zealand

AustriaBelgiumDenmark...FinlandFrance

GermanyIcelandIrelandItalyNetherlands

NorwaySpainSwedenSwitzerlandUnited Kingdom..

Oil-exporting countries..

AlgeriaIndonesiaIranIraqKuwait

LibyaNigeriaOmanQatarSaudi Arabia..

United Arab Emirates..Venezuela

Non-oil developing countries..

AfricaAsiaEuropeMiddle EastWestern Hemisphere..

1952

a 49,391

38,582

24,7141,944

9201,101

183

1161,133

150132686

9608

318722953

164134504

1,6671,956

1,699

31417713150

500

443

8,576

1,2023,407

966825

2,175

1962

62,851

52,535

17,2202,5611,1682,021

251

1,0811,753

256237

4,049

6,95832

3594,0681,943

3041,045

8022,9193,308

2,030

18610821119397

96289

268

583

8,171

1,6352,5501,346

9401,700

1972

147,443

110,282

12,1125,5725,65616,916

767

2,5053,564787664

9,224

21,90878

1,0385,6054,407

1,2204,6181,4536,9615,201

10,071

454531885720335

2,69434614956

2,303

1,595

26,132

3,1686,6406,4282,4027,494

1979

306,995

180,775

15,1702,9511,359

15,667344

3,8325,3072,5141,204

16,212

43,225125

1,69316,1497,301

3,24110,5502,88015,39115,626

56,318

2,2143,093

11,682

2,268

4,9024,235

445228

14,790

1,1075,958

68,703

4,28623,2057,4007,442

26,370

1980

358,706

211,490

21,4793,1591,603

20,164277

4,8797,3302,7121,501

24,301

40,976138

2,25520,47710,669

4,7839,8132,893

15,19016,851

73,601

3,1534,311

3,169

10,3728,049

692286

18,536

1,6005,579

71,776

4,44424,9478,0608,311

26,014

1981

375,793

212,732

25,5023,7551,713

25,083580

5,2795,4512,2461.319

21,991

40,892199

2,29019,6319,562

5,4149,7943,30614,92513,757

81,428

3,3704,416

3,583

7,8603,371988339

27,855

2,7757,415

75,303

4,17527,4418,1599,001

26.527

1982

Novem-ber

364,589

207,396

30,4153,3965,539

22,150523

5,1575,0862,0041,254

15,230

43,580132

2,15114,60510,056

6,808* 7,675

3,49915,44812,770

76,989

2,5113,041

5,263

6,2391,128

• 1,049

26,929

* 2,9576,721

73,035

4,21832,628

6,9728,753

20,464

1 Includes Taiwan, not shown in area detail.8 Includes Cuba.3 Includes Luxembourg.4 Data are for October 1982.Note.—International reserves is comprised of monetary authorities' holdings of gold, special drawing rights (SDRs), reserve positions

in the International Monetary Fund, and foreign exchange. Data exclude U.S.S.R., other Eastern European countries, and Cuba (after1960).

U.S. dollars per SDR (end of period) are: 1952 and 1962—1.00000; 1972—1.08571; 1977—1.21471; 1978—1.30279; 1979—1.31733; 1980=1.27541; 1981-1.6396; and November 1982-1.07953.

Source: International Monetary Fund, "International financial Statistics,"

284

Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 291: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

TABLE B-109.—Growth rates in real gross national product, 1960-82

[Percent change]

Area and country1960-73annualaverage

1974-81annualaverage

1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 iU.S. dollarvalue in

1981(billions)2

Developed countries3..

United States..Canada

European Community 4

FranceWest Germany....ItalyUnited Kingdom..

Other developed countries..

Developing countries

Oil exporting countries8

Other

Communist countries7..

U.S.S.REastern Europe..China

TOTAL..

5.1

4.15.6

10.4

4.7

5.84.75.23.1

5.1

5.8

5.2

5.24.16.5

5.2

2.7

2.72.64.4

1.9

2.52.22.1

.9

1.9

4.4

3.74.6

2.7

2.31.85.9

2.9

4.1

4.83.75.1

3.1

3.73.62.73.3

2.1

4.3

6.73.3

4.2

3.43.0

12.3

3.8

3.5

3.23.05.6

3.4

3.54.34.91.4

-1.7

4.1

3.24.51.6

1.36.9

2.8

1.2

- . 2.0

4.2

1.3

1.61.84.0

-1 .7

4.0

4.52.05.6

1.9

1.5.4

6.9

1.8

1.4

2.03.02.9

- . 4

.3- . 3- . 2- . 8

5.2

2.7

- . 53.1

1.2

1.8-1 .0

3.0

1.8

- . 5

- 1 . 8- 5 . 0

2.5

.3

1.5- 1 . 3

.8

.5

1.2

1.4

1.6

2

7,020

2,926280

1,150

2,420

577687299502

245

1,965

5401,425

2,740

1,587671328

11,725

1 Preliminary estimates.2 Estimates based on conversion at average rates of exchange for 1980, except for those of the Communist countries, which wereconverted at U.S. purchasing power equivalents.

3 Includes the OECD countries, South Africa, and non-OECD Europe.4 Includes Belgium-Luxembourg, Denmark, Greece, Ireland, and the Netherlands, not shown separately.• Not available .6 Includes Algeria, Ecuador, Gabon, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Kuwait, Libya, Nigeria, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, United Arab Emirates, and

Venezuela.7 Includes North Korea, Vietnam, Albania, Cuba, Mongolia, and Yugoslavia, not shown separately.Sources: Department of Commerce, International Monetary Fund, Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), and

Council of Economic Advisers.

285Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 292: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

TABLE B-110.—Industrial production and consumer prices, major industrial countries, 1960-82

[1967-100]

Year or quarter

I9601961 • ...196219631964

19651966196719681969

19701971197219731974

19751976197719781979

198019811982 p

1981:IIIIllIV

1982:|IIHI .IV »

UnitedStates

66.266.772.276.581.7

89.897.8

100.0106.3111.1

107.8109.6119 7129.8129.3

117.8130.5138.2146.1152.5

147.0151.0138.6

151.8152.5153.0146.3

141.8139 4138.2135.1

Canada

63.165.671.275.782.6

89.796.2

100.0106.4113.7

115.3121.5130.7144.6149.2

140.3148.5152.2157.8167.4

164.6167.3

167.8172.8168.1160.7

156.1151.9147.7

Japan

43.051.255.461.771.4

74.283.8

100.0115.2133.4

151.8155.7167.0190.5183.1

163.9182.0189.7201.1217.7

232.5239.5

235.4236.1241.1245.9

243.6239 7243.5

EuropeanCommu-

nity1France

Industrial production2

74.778.181.384.891.0

94.798.4

100.0107.4117.6

123.3126.1131.7141.4142.3

132.8142.6145.9149.7156.8

155.6152.3

151.5152.1152.1151.8

151.9151.5148.6

7073788690

9398

100104114

120128135145148

139149152155163

160157

158160161161

158159151

WestGermany

78.482.886.188.996.6

102.1103.0100.0109.2123.2

131.1133.6138.7147.7145.1

137.1149.1152.0154.1161.8

162.3159.9

162160161160

162159154

Italy

59.265.571.978.479.2

82.893.3

100.0106.4110.5

117.6117.5122.7134.6140.6

127.6143.5145.1147.9157.6

166.5162.7

157.7160.1152.3159.8

161.0158.6146.6

UnitedKingdom

84.484.385,188.195.0

97.799.2

100.0106.7110.3

110.9110.6113.2123.0120.0

114.3117.4122.9126.9132.2

123.6118.8

117.8118.5118.6120.0

119.2119.8119.8

Consumer prices

i9601961196219631964

1965....1966....1967....19681969

19701971197219731974

19751976197719781979

198019811982

1981:I

IV

1982:

ll'ZIIIIIV

88.789.690.691.792.9

94.597.2

100.0104.2109.8

116.3121.3125.3133.1147.7

161.2170.5181.5195.4217.4

246.8272.4289.1

262.9269.0276.7280.7

283.0287.3292.8293.4

85.986.787.789.290.9

93.196.5

100.0104.0108.8

112.4115.6121.2130.3144.5

160.1172.1185.9202.5221.0

243.5273.9303.4

262.0270.2278.2285.0

292.2301.2307.6312.6

68.371.876.782.585.8

91.696.3

100.0105.3110.9

119.3126.5132.3147.9184.0

205.8224.9243.0252.3261.3

282.2296.2

291.4296.3296.9300.1

30O.3303.5304.8

77.081.184.587.690.8

94.297.5

100.0103.7108.0

113.3120.3127.6138.3156.4

176.7195.2214.7229.9250.7

281.6314.1

300.7310.4317.8326.3

333.9344.3348.2

3 78.03 80.6

85.489.592.5

94.897.4

100.0104.5111.3

117.1123.5131.1140.7160.0

178.9196.1214.5233.9259.1

294.2332.7

315.7326.1338.9349.9

359.8371.0376.0

82.984.887.489.992.0

95.098.4

100.0101.6103.5

107.1112.7119.0127.2136.1

144.2150.4155.9160.2166.8

175.9186.3

182.2185.5187.8190.0

192.7195.4197.6

74.175.779.285.190.1

94.296.4

100.0101.4104.1

109.2114.4121.0134.0159.7

186.8218.1255.2286.2328.5

398.0472.4

448.4468.0482.1504.9

523.7539.6562.7

79.081.685.186.889.6

93.997.6

100.0104.8110.3

117.4128.5137.7150.2174.3

216.5252.4292.4316.6359.0

423.6473.9514.7

450.4472.3480.5492.3

500.5516.6518.9522.7

1 Consists of Belgium-Luxembourg, Denmark, France, Greece, Ireland, Italy, Netherlands, United Kingdom, and West Germany Industrialproduction prior to July 1981 excludes data for Greece, which joined the EC in 1981.8 All data exclude construction. Quarterly data are seasonally adjusted.

» Data for 1960 and 1961 are for Paris only.Sources: Department of Commerce (International Trade Administration, Office of Trade Investment and Analysis, Trade Performance

Division) and Department of labor (Bureau of Labor Statistics).

286Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 293: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

TABLE B-lll.—Unemployment rate, and hourly compensation, major industrial countries, 1960-82

[Quarterly data seasonally adjusted]

Year or quarter

I9601961196219631964

19651966196719681969

197019711972 . ..19731974

19751976197719781979

198019811982

1981:

II „IllIV

1982:|||IIIIV

I9601961196219631964

1965 .. .1966196719681969

19701971197219731974

19751976197719781979

198019811982

UnitedStates Canada Japan France West

Germany Italy UnitedKingdom

Unemployment rate (percent)1

5.56.75.55.75.2

4.53.83.83.63.5

4.95.95.64.95.6

8.57.77.16.15.8

7.17.69.7

7.47.47.48.3

8.89.4

10.010.7

36.737.739.140.342.0

42 844.847.050.453.9

57.661.164.469.076.3

85.492.3

100.0108.3118.9

132 8146.4158.8

707.15.95.54.7

3.93.43.84.54.4

5.76.2625.55.3

6.97.1818.47.5

7.57.6

11.0

7.37.27.68.4

8610.212.112.7

29.929428.729.430.6

32134.637.340.043.0

47.853.158.163 475.0

82.497.1

100.099.4

106.6

116 4126.1

171.51.31.31.2

1.21.41.31.21.1

1.21.3141.31.4

192.0202.32,1

2.02.2

2.22.42.22.2

232.42.4

161.4131.21.3

141.81.82.42.2

2.42.7282.72.9

424.6505.46.1

6.57.7

7.07.77.97.9

838.68.7

Hourly compensation (1

6.6778.89.8

11.0

12 413.615.317.921.3

25.430.340.155 067.1

77.182.3

100.0136.1138.5

142 6157.0

16.217 819.621.723.3

25126.728.932.632.3

33.938.046.260 066.2

88.590.6

100.01231148.2

174 2158.3

11.6.6

A

.3

131.1.6

'.B.7

1.6

3.53.53.53.43.0

3.04.2

3.53.94.44.9

5.35.86.2

977 = 100)2

10.512.313.914.9 -16.1

17.619.020.121.323.6

29.534.742.056.967.1

79.483.5

100.0125.6147.5

161.7139.9

383.2282.42.6

353.83.43.43.3

3.13.1363.42.8

323.6363.73.9

3.94.24.6

3.94.34.14.5

4.64.64.54.5

11.913.115.518.320.4

21822.825.427.130.7

36.843.152.366.474.0

95.089.5

100.0119.1143.1

164.8152.4

2 11.9273.32.4

212.2323.23.0

3.139423.23.1

466.0646.35.7

7311.3

10.311.111.512.5

12.812.913.0

24.926.828.329.531.6

34 737.638.235.638.8

44.351.860.065.578.2

96.591.8

100.0128.1168.5

228.2230.8

'Unemployment rates, approximating U.S. concepts. Data for United Kingdom exclude Northern Ireland. Quarterly data for France.West Germany, and United Kingdom should be viewed as less precise indicators of unemployment under U.S. concepts than the annualdata. Beginning 1977, changes in the Italian survey resulted in a large increase in persons enumerated as unemployed. However, manyalso reported that they had not actively sought work in the past 30 days. Such persons have been provisionally excluded forcomparability with U.S. concepts; their inclusion would more than double the rates shown for Italy.

2 Hourly compensation in manufacturing, U.S. dollar basis. Data relate to all employed persons (wage and salary earners and the self-employed) in the United States and Canada, and to all employees (wage and salary earners) in the other countries. For France andUnited Kingdom compensation adjusted to include changes in employment taxes that are not compensation to employees, but are laborcosts to employers.Source: Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics.

287Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 294: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 295: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page 296: Digitized for FRASER Federal ... · from one industry to another at the cost of increasing the Federal budget deficit. Although programs to help the structurally unemployed are impor-

Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis