L64e r i ! PB-230 350 ECONOMIC ANALYSIS OF TWELVE SELECTED PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DISTRICTS IN THE RURAL SOUTH William P. Linderman, et al Department of Housing and Urban Development Washington, D. C. 8 June 1973 lib, Lt*4 1 1 13 V BIDLIOCRAPHIC DATA 1. UV'po;i'"No. SHEET _ tfl/P-fPR' 124 4. Iitlr and Subtitle b 2 . Economic Analysis of Twelve Selected Planning and Development Districts in the Rin'al South 7. Auilior(s) William P. Lindcrman S Th o mas 11. Naylor 9. Performing ()rg.tm/..u on Name and Address The Low Income Housing Development Corp. Durham, North Carolina PB 230 350 5- Report 1 >ule dime 8, 1975 8. Performing Organization Kept. No. 10. Piojci t I .i s I U ork l ii n \ < •. 11. C ontract Cirant No. 12. Sponsoring Organization Name and Address Department of Housing f, Urban Development Office of Policy Development fi Research I0JD 2852 75 13. I ype of Report Covered Draft Washington, D. 15. Supplcmcmary Notes c. 14. 16. Abstracts Period This analysis is based on data primarily from U. S. Bureau of the Census sources and covers a twenty year period from 1950 to 1970. What emerges from this analysis is generally consistent in all the twelve states in that while the data reveal growth in these districts, the growth has been generally slow and s{X)radic. Ibwever, this analysis can only be regarded as preliminary as additional information is required to fully understand the dynamics of the economic systems under study and to properly assess the trends as served in the secondary data. 17. Ke> Words and Document Analysis. 17o. !)cscri| 17b. Idem if icrs/Opcn-Kndcd Terms 17c. COSAT! Fie Id/Group 18. Availability Statement Pcpitidlli r* i tV NATIONAL TECHNICAL information service U S 0<*j»a*!iM , nt of Co«>r. «-rce Sm.i.tffu'td va 2 ?PI 19. Si c ur ii y < lass (This Report ) INt LA SSI Ml L) 21. No. of Pages 397 70. Set urity < lass ( 1 Ins Page* \ \( I.ASSII II 1) 22. I'nic / //■'/'>' ROHM NTI5-T5 IMtV. J-7ZI uscomm f,c Digitized by the Internet Archive in 2018 with funding from University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign Alternates https://archive.org/details/economicanalysisOOIind DRAFT: 6/8/73 CONTENTS Page Preface 7 CHAPTER I Introduction 33 CHAPTER II District 1011: West Virginia 38 CHAPTER III District 1016: Kentucky 32 CHAPTER IV District 1018: Kentucky 44 CHAPTER V District 1021: Virginia 57 CHAPTER VI District 1025: Virginia 73 CHAPTER VII District 1033: Tennessee 85 CHAPTER VIII District 1034: Tennessee CHAPTER IX District 1035: Tennessee Page 2 of 206 DRAFT: 6/8/73 Page CHAPTER X District 1046: : Alabama 122 CHAPTER XI District. 3119 : Arkansas 134 CHAPTER XII District 3120 : Mississippi 147 CHAPTER XIII District 4125 : Arkansas 161 APPENDIX A: Alabama 175 APPENDIX B: ARKANSAS 179 APPENDIX C: KENTUCKY 183 APPENDIX D: MISSISSIPPI 187 APPENDIX E: TENNESSEE 191 APPENDIX F: VIRGINIA 195 APPENDIX G: WEST VIRGINIA 199 APPENDIX H: UNITED STATES 203 APPENDIX I: SOURCES 205 BIBLIOGRAPHY 206 3 DRAFT: 6/8/73 LIST OF FIGURES AND TABLES Pago FIGURES: 1.1 14 Family Income Distributio II. 1: District 1011 III.1: District 1016 IV. 1: District 1018 V. 1: District 1021 VI. 1: District 1025 VII .1: District 1033 VIII.1: District 1034 IX.1: District 1035 X. 1: District 1046 XI .1: District 3119 XII.1: District 3120 XIII. 1: District 4125 APPENDIX: Figure 1 Per C; ?.pita Income Trends A: Alabama B: Arkansas C: Kentucky D: Mississippi. E: Tennessee F: Virginia G: West Virginia 27 39 52 66 80 93 105 117 130 142 156 169 175 179 183 187 191 195 199 TABLES: 1 . Income and Income Distribution II: DistJ. ict 1011 III: Distri* 1016 IV: District 1018 V: District 1021 VI: District 1025 VIJ : District 1033 VIII: District 1034 IX: District 1035 X: District 1046 XI : District 3119 XII : District 3120 XIII : District 4125 28 40 53 67 81 94 106 118 130 143 157 170 4 DRAFT: 6/8/73 Page TABLES:(continued) 2. Employment by Industry and Occupa- tion Group; Location Q uotients II District 1011 29 III District 1016 41 IV District 1018 54 V District 1021 68 VI District 1025 82 VII District 1033 95 VIII District 1034 107 IX District 1035 119 X District 1046 131 XI District 3119 144 XII District 3120 158 XIII District 4125 171 3. Migration Patterns by Industry Group II District 1011 30 III District 1016 42 IV District 1018 55 V District 1021 69 VI District 1025 83 VII District 1033 96 VIII District 1034 108 IX District 1035 120 X District 1046 132 XI District 3119 145 XII District 3120 159 XIII District 4125 172 4. Agriculture, Industry and Commerce ; Shift-Share Ratios II Di str ict 1011 31 III Di str ict 1016 43 IV Di str ict 1018 56 V Distr ict 1021 70 VI Distr ict 1025 84 VII Di str ict 1033 97 VIII Di str ict 1034 109 IX Di str ict 1035 121 X Di str ict 1046 133 XI Di str ict 3119 146 XII Di str ict 3120 160 XIII Di str ict 4125 173 5 DRAFT: 6/8/73 TABLES: (continued) Page APPENDIX: Table 1 Incom e and Income Distributio n A: Alabama 178 B: Arkansas * 89 C: Kentucky D: Mississippi 188 E: Tennessee ^ 9 ^ F: Virginia ^ 98 G: West Virginia 200 APPENDIX: Table 2 E mploy rre nt by Industry and Occupation A: Alabama I 77 B: Arkansas * 81 C: Kentucky * 88 D: Mississippi l 89 E: Tennessee F: Virninia I 97 G: West Virginia 201 APPENDIX: Table 3 Agriculture. Industry and Commerce ; Shift-Share Rati os A: Alabama * 78 B: Arkansas * 82 C: Kentucky ^ 88 D: Mississippi 190 E: Tennessee I 94 F: Virginia I 98 G: West Virginia 202 APPENDIX H.l: UNITED STATES: Employ- 203 by Industry and Occupa¬ tion Groups H . 2 : UNITED STATES: Agricul- 204 ture, Industry and Commerce 6 >»r — -■ DRAFT: 6/8/73 PREFACE In the spring of 1972, the Office of Economic Oppor¬ tunity decided to undertake an evaluation project on rural housing, entitled "Evaluation of Housing Policies and Programs in Southern Rural Areas." The Low Income Housing Development Corporation (LIHDC) of Durham, North Carolina, put together a consortium consisting of itself and its subsidiary, Housing and Community Development Corporation (HCD); Westat Research, Inc. of Rockville, Maryland; the Center for Urban Affairs at the North Carolina State University, and Dr. Michael A. Stegman of the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. 0E0 awarded the contract to the consortium, and on July 5, 1972, it began the task outlined by 0E0: ". . .to provide information to answer the following question: How should the Federal Government spend scarce resources to improve housing of low income families in southern rural areas?" The following economic analysis represents one of the preliminary reports under the contract. It is based on Census data for the twelve planning and development dis¬ tricts selected for study. The states and counties which make up those districts are listed on the following pages. This report was prepared at the request of the Depart¬ ment of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) and is for official use only. Barbara N. Smith Project Director Rural Evaluation Project June 8, 1973 7 DRAFT: 6/8/73 STATE DISTRICT COUNT 11- S Alabama 1046 Arkansas 3119 (Southern) Arkansas 4125 (Northern) Kentucky 1016 (Northern) Cu1lman Lawrence Morgan Arkansas Ashley Bradley Chicot Cleveland Desha Drew Grant Jefferson Lincoln Cleburne Fulton Indopcndence I zard Jackson Sharp Stone Van Buren White Woodruff Anderson Boyle Bourbon Clark Estill Fayette Franklin Garrard Harrison Jessamine Lincoln Madison Mercer Nicholas Powell Scott Woodford 8 DRAFT: 6/8/73 STATE DISTRICT Kentucky 1018 (Eastern) Mississippi 3120 Tennessee 1033 (Eastern) Tennessee 1034 (Middle) COUNTIES Breathitt Knott Lee Leslie Letcher Owsley Perry Wolfe Coahoma Dc Sota Panola Quitman Tallahatchi Tate Tunica Carter Greene Hancock Hawkins Johnson Sullivan Unicoi Washington Anderson Blount Campbell Claiborne Cocke Grainger Hamblen Jefferson Knox Loudon Monroe Morgan Roane Scott Sevier Union 9 DRAFT: 0/8/73 ST ati; DISTRICT COUNTIDS Tennessee 1035 (Western) Virginia 1021 (Northern) Virginia 1025 (Southern) West Virginia 1011 Cannon Clay Ctunber land DeKalb Fentress Jackson Macon Overton Pickett Putnam Smith Van Buren Warren White Augusta Bath Highland Rockbridge Rockingham Buchanan Dickenson Russell Tazewell Fayette Mercer Monroe Raleigh Summers DRAFT: 6/8/73 CHAPTER I Introduction A. General This analysis is based on data oi.tained primarily from U. S. Bureau of the Census sources. It covers the twenty year period from 1950 to 1970. At this {>oint, the analysis can only be regarded as preliminary -- additional information is required to fully understand the dynamics of the economic system under study and to properly assess the trends observed in the secondary data. What emerges from this analysis is generally con¬ sistent with the observations made by Marshall and Christian in their article in You Can't Eat Magnolias ,^ "Human Resource Development in the South." Per capita income in the districts remains much lower than the national average, and generally lower than that of the states in which the dijtricts are located. The districts in this study were, in 1950, based either on agriculture or mining, or both. During the twenty years following, all the *Ayers, H. B., and Naylor, T. H., eds.. You Can't Eat Magnolias , New York, McGraw-Hill, 1972, pp. 231-258. 11 DRAFT: 6/8/73 districts experienced a decline in employment in these once basic industries, yet other sectors of the economies were gen rally unable to expand rapidly enough to absorb the labor thus freed for other work. Marshall and Christian observe that, in the South as a whole, "much of the region's industry has been labor-intensive and has irovided very low-wage, dead-end jobs." 2 The data on these twelve Southern rural districts are depressingly consistent with this observation. In short, while the data reveal growth in these dis¬ tricts, the growth has been generally slow and sporadic. B• Conceptual Framework The focus of this analysis is on the operation and outputs of the economic system. This system (agriculture, commerce, finance,* * and industry) does not operate in a vacuum. It is affected by (1) the endowments of the district capital, labor, natural resources, etc.; (2) policy deci ns — establishment of economic development districts, implementation of land use plans, etc.; (3) outputs from social, political, and educational systems; and (4) exogenous forces — changes occurring outside the 2 Ibid ., p. 247. * inancial activities in these districts are analyzed elsewhere. 12 DRAFT: 6/8/73 district, such as changes in demand for certain products of the district, political decisions at the state or national level, and so on. In turn, the outputs of the economic system have their effects upon the other social systems and factors involved. (See Figure 1.1) Since this report is based on secondary data, it will focus primarily on analysis of the outputs of the economic system, and on the behavior of the specific institutions within that system. Left for future analysis are the inputs to the system, the full understanding of whicn is not possible using secondary data alone. C. Method of Analysis 1* Employment by industry group is analyzed using percent-of-total, percent change, and location quotients. Location quotients are used to determine the economic base, or bases, of the various district economies. The ratio is: L. Q. = % emplo yed in Indus try "x" in District * employediliindiJstFy ,r >r 1 In - Base For this study, two bases are used, the state in which the district is located and the U. S. economy as a whole. Technically, a location quotient in excess of 1.0 indicates a basic industry group. However, factors such as local demand patterns, level of technology, etc., influence the critical value of the location quotient beyond which the 13 DRAFT: 6/8/7 3 FIGURE 1.1 -> ENDOWMENTS 1. Capital 2. Labor 3. Natural Resources 4. Transportation and Communication 5. Management and Entrepreneurship ^ 1 EXOGENOUS j“> ECONOMIC SYSTEM Agriculture OUTPUTS FROM ] OTHER SYSTEMS Commerce Finance Industry Political Social Educational /TV POLICY DECISIONS V/ OUTPUTS i Income and Income Distribution Employment Migration i — i I DRAFT: 6/8/73 the industry can truly be considered as basic.^ For this reason, we have used a rule of thumb of 1.5 as a general critical value. Employment by occupation group is analyzed using the same statistics as above, except that the location quotient is not used. 2. The analysis of specific institutions examines the percent change occurring in the number of establish¬ ments and sales (or value added) in each of the major institutions. To compare activity in the district with that in the state and U. S. economies, use is made of a shift-share ratio which is computed as: S.S.R. = % change in Activity Z in District % change in Activity Z in Base By means of this shift-share ratio, we are able to deter¬ mine whether change in the district follows the same pattern as the state (or U. S.) and whether the change is more or less rapid. D. Sources of Data Employment data was obtained directly from the decennial censuses of 1950, 1960 and 1970, as was 2 See Isard, Walter, Methods of Regional Analysis , the MIT Press, Cambridge, 1966, for further information on thir subject. 15 DRAFT: 6/8/73 income data (except where noted on individual tables in the district reports). Data for the analysis of agriculture, commerce, and industry was obtained from the 1958, 1963, and 1967 City and County Data Books ,which were based on the economic and agriculture censuses published by the Census Bureau. Data for 1967 was obtained directly from these censuses. In some districts for some years, these data suffer from the disclosure prohibition affecting these censuses; however, the effect is generally minor. Information on migration during 1960 to 1970 is based on a 1 percent sample of continuous work histories of individuals covered by social security. These data relate specifically only to a fraction of ,;he total em¬ ployed in the district and are therefore valid only for broad generalizations. E. Limitations of the Analysis Complete understanding of the economic system of a region is possible only when the analyst possesses an understanding of the complete social environment of which the economic system is only one part. Information on Endowments, Outputs from other Systems, Policy Decisions, and Exogenous Forces is not complete for all districts. 16 DRAFT: 6/0/73 As a result, this analysis provides only a skeletal view of the prospects for the future of these districts. How¬ ever, the analysis which has been completed does provide guidance for more detailed research into the factors listed above. 17 DRAFT: 6/8/7 3 CHAPTER II I istrict 1011: West Virginia A. Summary of Economic Conditions This district is heavily dominated by mining, although this dominance has weakened during the twenty-year period under analysis. The importance of mining plus the apparent stagnation of the sector provide two unfavorable indicators of the health of the district's economy. Further, manu¬ facturing does not appear to have successfully compensated for the decline in mining: although value added has been increasing, manufacturing employment has not increased much relative to other types of employment. Both agricul¬ ture and commerce have also stagnated or shown signs of only small improvement. An interesting phenomenon is the activity in wholesale tr'ide. All the indicators in this sector are positive during the sixties, and by 1970 it is the largest single employer next to government, medical, and educational services. The latter sector's performance is also in¬ teresting, showing consistent growth despite an overall decline in population. It is important to know the reasons behind the activity in these two sectors in order 18 DRAFT: 6/8/73 to fully assess the prospects for the district's future. If the growth of these two sectors reflect a true shift of the economy, then there may be a firm basis for re¬ newed growth and development. However, it is equally likely that these two sectors are merely the last to begin declining. B. Detailed Analysis 1. Output (a) Income and Income Distribution . While 1950 P er capita income data for the district in particular is not available, the state per capita income has risen from $1,065 in 1950 to $3,015 in 1970, both figures in unadjusted dollars. In 1967 dollars, the corresponding figures are $1,477 in 1950 to $2,592 in 1970. For this particular district, per capita income has increased from $1,175 in 1960 to $2,097 in 1970 (from $1,325 to $1,803 in 1967 dollars). Expressed as a percentage of the per capita income of the United States, the district has re¬ mained in the same position, and has actually fallen be¬ hind in relation to the state. In 1950, 17.8 percent of the families in District 1011 earned less than $1,000 annually, and only 1.5 percent had yearly incomes of over $10,000. But by 1970, only 4.0 per¬ cent of the district's families had incomes of less than 19 DRAFT: 6/8/73 $1,000, and almost 24 percent made more than $10,000 per year. Thus the distribution has moved from skewed at the lower end to skewed at the higher end, but this shift has been somewhat less rapid than that of the state of West Virginia. The major change in the distribution of income occurred in the period 1960-1970. Median family income in the district has increased from $2,546 in 1950 to $6,475 in 1970. When considered as a percentage of United States median income, median family income of the district has lost ground, as has the state of West Virginia as a whole. As a percentage of state median income, district median income has declined. (b) Employment Patterns . Unemployment rates in district 1011 have followed the same general pattern as the rates in the United States and in the state of West Virginia, although the district rates have been consistently higher in each of the three census years. In 1950, the largest employer in district 1011 was the mining industry, which accounted for 37.5 percent of the total employed labc : force. But by 1970, only 15.5 percent of West Virginia's employed workers worked in mining. This is a decrease of 70.8 percent in total number of persons employed. The wholesale and retail trade industries em¬ ployed 14.7 percent of the employed district population in 1950 and 20.5 percent of the working labor force in 20 DRAFT: 6/3/73 1970, but this reflects a 2.9 percent decrease in the total number of persons employed. Primary industry (agriculture, forestry, ..nd fisheries) employment declined from 7.1 per¬ cent in 1950 to 1.9 percent in 1970, but this represented a decrease of only 1.5 percent in the total employment. Manufacturing employment increased from 8.1 percent in 1950 to 12.7 percent in 1970. Medical, education, and government industries showed a very large increase from 1950 to 1970, moving from 9.1 percent to 22.3 percent, a gain in total number of persons employed of 69.2 percent. The basic industry group in this district, as determined by the location quotients, is mining; however, its location quotient showed relatively little change in the twenty-year period under consideration, ranging from 21.3 percent in 1950 to 19.5 percent in 1970. The district appears to have approached self-sufficiency (as far as the location quotients can tell) in the services area, particularly in wholesale and retail trade and in the medical, educational, and governmental groups. The district appears to still be a net importer of goods and services of other industry groups. The professional and tet inical occupations have in¬ creased their percentage of employed workers in the district 25 percent between 1950 and 1970, shifting from 6.6 percent 21 V. I DRAFT: 6/8/73 to 11.8 percent of the employed labor force. Farmers and farm managers have decreased as a percentage of those em¬ ployed, the total number of workers in these occupations having declined 87 percent between 1950 and 1970. The same pattern holds for farm laborers and foremen. Reflec¬ ting the increasing importance of the tertiary sector, the clerical and service worker categories have increased 35 percent and 55 percent respectively since 1950. The occupation structure has remained similar to that of the state as a whole during the period studied. The relative concentration of employed workers in groups including operatives, foremen, and laborers is not much greater than that in the economy of the United States. This is somewhat contrary to what might be expected be¬ cause of the high concentration of mining industries in this district, and it tends to indicate a high degree of mechanization in the mining industries. This trend ap¬ pears to have increased during the period. (c) Migration Patterns . Of those persons who came into the district between 1965 and 1970, 24.7 per¬ cent were employed in mining industries and 17.2 percent in manufacturing industries; wholesale and retail trade attracted 15.1 percent of the in-migrants, and the ser¬ vice industries brought in 14 percent. 22 DRAFT: 6/8/73 2. The Economic System (a) Agriculture The number of farms in the district declined from 9,147 in 1954 to 2,894 in 1967, a 68.4 percent de¬ crease. Total farm acreage in 1967 was only about half of what it was in 1954. This was a more rapid decrease than either the state or the rest of the nation experienced during this same period of time. The decrease in the number of farms was comparable to the same rate in West Virginia and faster than that of the United States as a whole. The value of agricultural products increased over the period, moving from $5.6 million in 1954 to $8.2 million in 1967. This growth rate is higher than West Virginia's and the national rate as well. There was no mentionable change in the composition of agricultural output during the years of analysis; livestock, dairy, and poultry products continue to dominate. (b) Industry (1) Manufacturing. The number of establish¬ ments decreased slightly between 1954 and 1967, despite an increase from 1963 until 1967 that was faster than the state and national rates. The number of paid employees also declined in the district while both the state and 23 DRAFT: 6/8/73 the nation were experiencing an increase in this cate¬ gory. The production worker/total employee ratio for the district remained fairly constant at about 75 percent, which is approximately the same as in United States manu¬ facturing as a whole. The value added by manufacturinq in this district in¬ creased during the entire period. After 1958, however, it was increasing less rapidly than value added by manu¬ facturing in the United States as a whole was, but more rapidly than in West Virginia. (2) Mining. In this category, the number of establishments decreased from 393 in 1958 to 164 in 1967. This decline was more rapid than the state and the national rate of decline. The number of employees also decreased from 10,233 to 4,900. This, too, was a more rapid decrease than the state or the nation as a whole experienced. Despite the large decreases in both mines and workers, the value of shipments decreased only $600 thousand, from $10.5 million in 1958 to $9.9 million in 1967. The state as a whole, however, was experiencing fairly large growth in value of shipments during this same period. (c) Commerce (1) Retail Trade. The number of retail trade establishments in this district decreased from 1958 to 1967 24 DRAFT: 6/8/73 more rapidly than in the state. The United States as a whole saw an increase in this same period of time. The number of employees in the district remained relatively stable, while in the state and the nation the number was growing. Total retail sales in the district decreased in the time period we are considering, but sales in the state and the nation increased. The position of this district with respect to retail trade in general has been deterio¬ rating relative to West Virginia and the United States as a whole. (2) Wholesale Trade. In the period from 1954-1967, there was little change in the number of whole¬ sale establishments in this district. The same was true for the state of West Virginia, but in the United States as a whole, there was an increase. The number of employees in this area has grown rapidly, however, faster than in the state but somewhat slower than in the nation. Sales have increased steadily throughout the period, and since 1963 the growth has been faster than in the state or the national economies. (3) Services. While the number of establish¬ ments in this category increased from 1957 to 1964 in this district, the increase has generally been much slower than 25 DRAFT: 6/8/73 the corresponding increases in the state arid in the nation. The number of employees decreased in the same period in the distric'. , while the total in the nation as a whole increased Receipts have grown much more slowly here than in the nation Since 1963, growth of receipts in West Virginia has slowed to a rate approximately equal to the districts. 26 ro r~ oo \ vo H Cn O lO CO IT) O o o —i cn u> u' r «n CO C £ * #V ** CN CM iD »• 1 • 4 r 4 u 1 % c I % • • • • • • •H O o O i % T5 LO v£> t'' 1 % (V CJ. rn CD 1 >: H H H 1 % K O o u • U-. •r> V 4 ' Q. V) U 0 u 55 o H Eh D 05 0j O U C dn s 00C‘01 666 * 6 - 000 */. 666* 9-000*0 666‘S-000‘S 666‘tj-000‘tj 666* C-000* G 666*2-000 * Z 666‘T-000‘T 000 ‘T w c .c H l/) P x: 4 -* U-* o p c K a» u cJ g o CJ o u c c £ a, 0) o V) D 6 X O —< P *o v-" U 4 ) •c a. c. a > < •H k. nfNiCDnc't^ OrHOOrHOOOO o> P O u * r. q o. OCMDift(NHOOO oh6ohhhhh ik co (O *-< »d 3 0 O 0 J 0 H cr 0 H 0 O 0 CO t" CO #-H tO CM 0 CM 0 Cm *-m 0 Cm 0 0 r-i 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 l-l O O to O' t» O CN to O O' CO 0 O' O' r-i 0 © C- to 0 3 3 n t" 0 3 to CM O 3 0 CM H Cm 3 0 r- C- O O x 0 O CD 3- 1 H 1 ro 1 •H 1 CM 1 1 r-i 0 1 1 0 Cm Cm •—< 0 cm 3 CN 1 11 1 1 <*> O CO O tO O 0 to CO CM O' CO CN 0 CD 3 0 O' 0 0 0 to O 7. 9. 6. C' 0 Cm CN O 3 CN «H CD 0 O' O to to CO *—t CN CO H 0 0 0 M CM 0 CM tn 1 1 l 1 1 1 O cn <0 t^ r* to to <0 f"~ CO 0 CD H 0 0 C*- C3 O O O O J 0 to to O* 0 Cm 0 cm H O 0 0 0 H CM H O r—t CO O to to 3 O' CN r—4 3 0 0 »H 0 CM O' O U. O* CO 0 O' 0 0 0 0 0 3 O0 O' to <0 O to O CM 0 *H C' 0 CD •—< co cc O' c- cr • r—4 OJ r* «-t to 0 0 r-i 3 0 3 CD 3 —4 3 CM 0 ?: -H H H H 13 -5 tO O' 0 3 3 0 O' 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 3 0 to rH (O tO CN 0 tr. 0 r-i 0O0 0 0 O CD tO r- CO rr »o *o 3 3 CD l' 0 r* 0 c 0 cm co 0 tO O 0 r-t tO tO rr 0 0 t/"< *—4 C. 'H 3 CM 0 fO •H ^ 0 £1 o t/> >N o —. ce -4 I c —« > o o ^ O w* c *n t. :a 3 «) *-> * r-* re U Cl *' •- l . c: n o :: o rum Cm 11 - C. to a* os o c u o i: (- :< •o u « T3 CTj - C U O.T3 •'■•COO * re u c, o a -e to c c o • »H • >: w *: c r *g r> r. L -h c: o u o r> O u. f- U-« *H O *? * o u 4. j: • la 2 1. L. 4» r u. ✓: • > •o 4) fa TJ C •H * *0 o O (4 -o c z r; ~o £ ^ 'H c o 1. T> X o O " ‘ la 1-- •3 v» 3 » o 4» X c •0 1 0 » fa CO o (• Im o rv. o i* • u O/) X -• O ^ ^ IJ o * > (.» o c . O *3 ci ’■11m.) Q « 3 . 3 < O 1 - V) w •3 O' c . *3 D to c u cc •\3 c 4) O. a < 4> O to (0 4) H 2 U 4) a. « c« o c 4> u 4> JC *» 4* 0 3 •3 a 5 A O 44 0 *-» C 4) e 4> O 1/3 r> 03 District 1011 Employment by Industry and Occupation Group; Location Quotients m r» \ co \ VO E-i lu 2 Q G 4-> •M <0 G a: T? C g o c a? u 3 (/) c o c <0 c •H u Qi u. X •H •o c o a a < 0) o l) (/) G £> 44 •H O G O. C G a, G o to n v u (4 g O o If 01 0 o o «i4 o c o F. h "5 00 Zt f'- CM CD O 00 O z* CO I I O Cn 00 • • • MHO I Cm zt 00 Cm O O O I I I M O' J O * • • • *-H O r-H ro I I I h n h CM CM O I to (D CO rH CM O I I r* Zt rH co o o i i H in io • • • fO H H I CO to to • • • rH O O J H O' • • • OHO ^ CM ^ • • • o o o H ID h • • • o o o I I CO CM lO O O O I i to GO Zt J rH O O , I t •H CM rH I • • • I oooj I I 1 c- to O I •H CO 4-» U rtf nz 00 Cm CO O' lO o zt rH o n O lO rH CTl ID rH O O CO o I I CM to O* vO to CM co o to CO z* • • • • • • * CO zt CO CM •H zr o to rH I t rH o O I o i o o''*j CO I CO CO r. to I 00 to cr* 1/ I co i ZJ- in m zt CO • • • • CO • to o CM rH • *H rH in i CM 00 »H • • • rH CM CM i i co cn rH O rH rH I h oo • • • in o N l l CN ID O • • • O fH »H I I I to o CO O #H Zt I O h O' • • • o o o I O CM CM • • • o o o to C'- co to o h cm cm co r- ZJ rH Cm CM CM I I lo r^ CM i CO CO I s - o CM CM CO I I O CO h U0 rH t I O to to • • • CM CO O *H I I rH lO tO tO 00 CM lO O CM I I Ctf to CM I I cn in o cn in to o 00 • • • • • • • • (O CO cn cn rH rH in CM CM ^4- rH rH CO to zt co • • • O O fsl JT •—i oo in • • • cm zr co 00 to CM to to • • • • • CO CO 00 CM to Zt CM rH CO CM I I rH I I I CO O CO 00 • • • • in m co co rH to i CO 00 cn J I t D O' ^ • • • in I s in i-l CN I I in zJ- r- co to 00 co cn • • • • • • • • in o in rH CO m CO in rH rH I j h in ic c> O' in ^ j o> CD ID CN H o r* •» rv r rv CM CO 00 HC- to o o o r- o o o H CO 00 h r r rv CO CM CM CO !=: zt rH 3" in zt CM rH •—1 CM Jt r o rH in to co zt CM m c* 1 g o #• Zt rv CM * in * *H CM CO r »H r co 3 •M zt to rH m in co in V »—’ K CM 3 ss Zt CO to CD cn to rH CM CO •H 1 s? CO O CO CM co cn Oh m co rH zt cn zt co | c. •* r a r rt * -< in ID rH in in CO cn ! , »H i to zt CM in cn rH to o j co cn zt cn co zt CO •H to to r- to rH c CD j O' r * #> r r* #v ' cr. in zt zt CO rH _j Zt O O tO O O »H O' CO rv rv ZT O' CT> CD CO m cm cn zt o Zt rH O rH in to Zt »H 00 cn rH r r r> rH Zf r- CM CM •H in co cn cm r- o o o •* »* * cm to zt CM cn to zt in co cn ^ CM r» r r> cm in r* co rH CO CM co in co co CO e e r> cn n* to rH O CO m rH o CM in r- Cn cn r- CM to in CO rH tk rv ** - 00 CM CM rH *H CM CM O rH CO CM to cn to in to CM C' CM CD zt cn l r» rv rv *1 in CM o rH m CM 1 rH 1 zt to cn o CO zt: rH in o to 00 r" i CM o CM C' cn o #> 0k cn CM in M « zt rH 1 rH CD cn to to CM to rH cn zt 00 O o 1 CM rH CO rH •H I rv * rv e.' 00 CM in cm; to rH l o o o »/) 4-* CJ I’d 1 10 sc. O r» c» O Or •I.* a» o •jO <*; o 0J -7 <> 0h •H n i ) o i 4 *-• u If) V) VI ■ O *' TJ tr • * c: t • *1 l-l ♦-» u »tf :n 3 cn 4-> r: o o o rH HO cn .n I < U n "j o :h c: *tH I C >"» 6 n o o o • H t: f>- :• :• io ui i vulo li • o • c jI< cn o o >> o rH f >. ^, k i CO > O Ol C O o U rH O | v/ CD O >» a> n O o C/1 r- W O, xt rH rH r | cn HO rx -1 in 0 ) . «.J •rH r D •M *-» r i r-« * •H O. M -O 01 a i-i •H ftf c; c (tf N Ci-, t: o O o ( i * rH m u> T"* it? zj- CM cn CM to CD C' C' i ' r G rH CM rH rH » H ♦ * c* r> r 4 CM c- 1 **. •H C 1 •• •• •• 1 % •H o o o u. LO o r- | • •H c; cn cn Cn u >: '—1 r-H 1 % o a, w u o u« w cc 13 o iO H o •M O •H k 4-> (/) •H Q 55 c M D CQ M a: E-« co M Q M £ o u 2 >< M k. O r- cn o to cr> o G O o c HH O in Cn •—i OP C>P o'P dP OP op o o O O O O • • • • • • o o o O o O ID in rf ro Cm *— 1 dn 3 000‘OT 666 * 6-000 ‘ L. 666*9-000*9 666*9-000*9 666*17-000*6 666‘G-G00‘C 666*2-^00*3 666*1-000* T 000‘T t/i G> r~H .a H i/> r_i to c 0) CJ 0) rG 4 J Uh o 0; U CO #» 0) o < •H k a- V r i Pi T> c Q t/5 O 4) O (- 3 O CO H N? \ V I w J cq < H ID 4-> V M 0 b- ro ^3- rH CO CO CD o CM Ci •H a> • CP P *H CM O rH o o O o •—1 CO o < 7) CQ o O CD ID in CO CD 00 CD r- CM CM • c CD • o »H CM o rH o o O o •—1 rH • p 03 O 0 LO 3- CM CM ZJ- CO CD zr in CO o CD • X rH CM o rH o o O o *H rH p O 00 rH CD 00 CD o CM zr c 0 CD rH o O o o O -H rH rH Q •H rH CP P CO o < 3 O CM rH CM CO CO o zr zr CQ O CD CD rH o rH o o rH o rH w r: •H t— o < •H CO f- P O CM rH CO CD 00 O rH r- CD p CO 03 u~> e 0 CD rH O *—1 O o rH o 0 Cj rH •H p >-4 o O CD CD CM CD CC CD CO zr rH CD zr co r- CD CM CO CM CD 3 O' i 00 CD CD CM CO CO CO zr CD CD t- co CO in in CO O 00 CO zT o in CO rH CM CD rH rH in in CD zr CD in CD O zr CM zr C in i CM rH *H rH 1 •— 1 1 rH i •H w P o o CD in CM CO in rH CO CD CD CD CD co :r CM CM zr to 03 0 < i CD CO CO o CO CO zr CD zr CD CO CO CO co CO c^- CO C X) o o ID CO 1 rH CD CM CO CO «H zr CM r- rH zr zr CM UD CM 1 co CM • r> c^P a, O CM O CM CD O o rH CD co CD CD zr rH O CO o CD 2 ID o 1 3- H in rH CO o rH CO CD CD CO o O in o CO CD r- CD p o O in CO CO i—i CD CM CD 1 zr zr CO •— 1 in CO rH m *— 1 vN CM 1 1 rH o •H c P- CO m rH CD in rH co in in m CM CO CM CO CO O P m 00 o CD •—i m co co co zr zr CO CD CM CM CO zr O CP *PJ rH CM rH CM rH rH O cs < o H u o o rH in zf CD in CD CD in in zr o co co P- co o o E- ID CD r^- o CD «n CD CO CD o o o H o m CO CD in o X> C-. rH rH r-1 •— 1 CM rH o C O 0 C^> O in * rH CO *— i CD in co o CO CO CO CD CD CO CM o o >> in P CD CD o CD CD in CM o CD 00 CD co CD O CO 00 CD in o P rH CM rH rH «H *H rH o CO rH 3 X3 3- CM •H Zf CO CD zr CD CO o CD in CO CD CM CO CD O rH CD C O CO zf CD 1 —1 CO CO zr zr O CD O •—i CD iD r- CM CD CD CD KH Q r- o m O in rH p- ID rH CO in rH zr CM LO r- O CD CO CD CD 00 ► CD *v rx r. r* * r* »N r» r r» r> * >- r-n in CM 03 CD rH CD in o CD a? CO CD o zr CD in f"- CO CO X O rH ♦H CO CO rH in CM rH CM rH CM CO rH p- p a.' rH c s: in m CM CM zr zT o CO in 00 CM CD CO CM in CO CD o 0 CP o CD ID CD o CM CO co CM co in o CO CM CD LO CM co 00 zr zT £ a'. to CO CD CM m CD CD CD CM zr CD CO zr r- rH zT CM CD o CO rH r» r r r\ rv rv r- r* r * o CP •—i CO O CO r- CO p- CO co zr zr o CO CD in rH in CM CO in CD in rH CP xi CM •—1 CM Oj rH CM rH rH rH rH rH CM rH CO E o CP 2 : ID co o rH CD in jT CD 00 CD O r- CM co in CD o CD CO o ■It o CD zr CD •—l •—l CD CD rH 00 *H CM o r- co CD CO r- n CD zr r» in o ZJ- CM »H CO CM CO o CD in rH CM zr CD CO CM zr «s zr rH CD 00 CM r- CD CO CO CD O zr CD o r- CO zr zt CD CD CO co CO »H rH rH *H rH CM rH rH rH rH CM x: w •H (m >, U 4-> W ( 1 ) Jl o Cm U DO < > U H C 0 '—t 00 *H to rj •* P • 0 bO rH X C -H 'H P U) p n> 0 o p •* *-♦ 3 O • rc bO P H3 CP V) C P in W 0 ) •H W ^ C H c c c T3 o •h o «c ^ 2 U 2 h 5 C o •r| P 3 W 0 0 • r—l > P a; to w • 3 > CQ P 0 CO to p > o LP c o to p * a> U, CP 0 p X3 C •H V) P o to O O P P CP X3 C #» *H (/) M X) 0 P XJ C •H O r» c o E 0 r0 V) P O 0 U. n: p o X* 0 P X> c •H X3 M rH O X> X P 0 o c/3 2 w 0 > •rl • P E 0 p CO u. p o X 03 Q LJ O X CP rc w x < 6 - O fc— U H < cp H 2: CP 2C >- O XJ CP >z CP 0 p 03 P 00 CP 03 0 CP X3 C 03 0 O c 03 P a to c 0 o c 03 c CP X3 c 0 CP CP < 0 0 w CO 0 X 03 o •H tp •H U 0 CP (0 p o 0- CO c 0 o 0 X p 4-i O 3 03 0 P 2 CQ 0 O P 0 E E O O u-» o p c: 0 E P P 03 CP 0 O a> o P 3 o CO DRAFT: 6/8/73 TABLE III.3 District 1016 MIGRATION PATTERNS BY INDUSTRY GRO'.'P INDUSTRIAL GROUP Percent of Total 1 Non-Mi grants Tn-MIgrants Out-Mi grant si 60-66 65-70 60-65 65-70 60-65 65-70! Unclassified 0.0 0.2 0.6 0.0 0.9 1 0.9 Agriculture 0.7 1.1 0.6 1.9 2.6 0.4 Mining 0.4 0.6 0.6 1.9 0.9 1.3 Construction 11.1 8.0 9.5 5.1 10.3 7.4 Manufacturing 30.4 33.8 17.9 34.6 20.5 31.4 Transp. , Util., 6 Sant.Serv. 1 5.2 4.9 4.6 5.1 3.5 3.1 Wholesale & Retail 20.7 15.3 13.7 23.8 24.8 17.5 *F, I, R, E 3.9 4.7 4.8 6.5 6.0 5.2 Services 19.7 20.5 32.1 17.8 20.5 25 .3 Med., Educa. , Govt. 8.1 10.9 15.5 3.3 5.1 7.4 1 Derived from U.S. Department of f’ornmorce, Bureau of the Census Tables. For Specific information, see Appendix. *F, I, R, E: Finance, Insurance and Real Estate District 1016 \ oo £ £ o c/> o n £4 -C co I ♦J u« •r4 o J w. O C; U O •H c. »XJ «r i X) C w a. a. < 0) o CO ir> v V 0 0) (0 10 c o 0 .C 4-* 44 O 3 rD a § CQ * CJ o B I o o 44 O c o 5 U o i/> o V o l/J ro m \ oo \ V£> E- tn 2 Q U CQ C H W O t-’ n ftS ID '—l O o •H k 4-* CO •H Q fO cn I LO o rj £. b C‘ ~3 r. r*i . > u •u •n. o •rH c- < o CN O in o> o in IT in CO CD CO rH CD I s * CD 00 IT CO m •H CD » • • • • • < • • • • • • • • • O »H O CN OO in CN rH CO CO *H o •—< rH O O' o rH o o o <0 CO rH IT rH rH rH (J a: CD 1 »H CN CN 1 1 4-« •H CC x: m oo i IT IT. Cn cD CN in co co o o cn h m h i i CO CM CO o Oh O CO CM CO CO CM IT CN CO CN IT O ID rH o rH o r- I I I CO CN O CN CO ID I T ^ m • • • in CN (N CO h ID I I CO IT IT » • • O rH rH co cn • • • O O rH CO h* CJ> IT rH rH O CO ID CN rH CN TOT CN O O I I I o oo CO CN rH O I I rH CO CN CN CN H H CO O T CO rH CN I l CO CO CO oo o> m in o co co oo cn co CO i—I «—I I I CO 00 ID CN O O CN 00 ID 00 cn in cn in i CO rH IT ID co in rH in O ID CN CN r- CO I CO IT OO CO I I CD T H CO O CN CO H T T cn r- co it in co co id rH CO CN CD rH C CO • • • cn in it co cn rH CD CD CO O CN CN h T H m oo oo CO CD rH IT OO CD rH *H iH t"* CO CD C rH «H CN rH CN CP O * cZ « CN CO CN in cD in • • • CO CO 'D o CN co Cn o CD rH 00 in IT CN • • • • • • • • • CN O «H O rH o rH CO rH rH rH cn • • • CN H O CN CO O rH O rH I CN CN O m m *h co rH I j CD CO cD • » • ID O OO rH CO co cD m , • • • CN OO «H CN rH I OO CO CO I co o i CO CO CN | CO CN o cn o o o O IT o o CN rH If — i CO T- o CO in o~. if C>l o o o o »H o o in T CO CD o n CD CD CN o CD CN If 04 r- co rH CN cn CD CO in CO CN m o * r r> r * * r •» co CN CO CO CN r- rH co rH o 00 CD CN If o in r* CO r- CN rH O CN ID CO in CN CN o- ID in C- oo CN if O CD in co CO it O in CD CD CO o in o cn H V cD CN CD in CD cn if CN rH rH If CO GO CN in m CN CO CD CD <0 in t'- co CN in CD rH m IT cn »H cn in ID CD rH in r* r> r< r« r» r< * * r> r> r» f J r—' CO CN CO CD ID CD o CD rH o CO cn CO CO in CN if r n CN CD CD (N CN «H CN CD rH (O CD rH CO if If CD IT in CD O CD cn O' o cn CO IT m CD CN cn in O in IT o if in rH P' CO CD in o r- if in cn r-" rH LT CD in iT CO rH CO ID If 00 r- in (D if CD co r- if r. r> r> r r. r* #* » cn co Or CD CD If CO CO CO in Cn if rH rH in in rH ID in «H in r | rH r-i 00 CO i CO CO o cn o rH IT OJ o O o CO CN O' O CO CO r- m m OO CN CO cr> o in CO in If CD 00 rH cn CN cn o CN CD CD if CO cn ID in If o if CN rH CN o r> r> r» r r« • r> * r» iT CN o in in CO i—( co CO If It If ;t •H •—i CN cn in co r—1 »H a> o rH rH CO CO rH -K 1 o (T Vi 1 o >, XJ 4-» c> c CO o col r: rH 4- r. X o 'V 1 D V) H G flj o •H o E a; .*3 r~i LI o c.» o O (0 in r, cn t s o Vi W TJ 10 7) •rH CO O l (0 Cl, •H V o ■-0 | H rH •rH O 4-J O > 4-> o r» C)1r~l 'J :< n i c: v> Q-> J»—( o o L c o O c r~4 O tH a> ■ o "J •31 O Tjj.O o >1 G o O >s r • n. Vr c. c c i G n h o r“> r O Q C'> f: l-r t "J ? 4-> o o 'O .3 [fi CO L , *- rH rH Q) x: r— 4 > —4 S'. O < > <3 4-r | OO rH •r | 1 w Q. r 4 CO 4 A t T1 '/) 7) J)l o u l 1 u u l~*< ♦-» c r-H I *H O c :W t~ H •H r- 3 •rH 4-> o r' C3 r * CJ •T’ J rH > c> •H u CO r—< f n 4 » w Hr -1 : J H Ll-O O »- •- J 1 r-H CO a- 7) M-i O 3 m H •1* J H r | l •« c» '"I XI rH r! O HJ n 4 *) H rH •H o r—' •rH -•* 4- 1 U t-0 3, O rH r-« H •-«| co i: -C T 1 O r3 x: oo r r* CM c OllO ll) V) v> Cl .Kil- < ft. I*.. , t*I u: c/. o c >: 1 1«. f/; n. M cn D. cniui u: ••-4; a; -4 •y | X j H r~1 o rr 1 “ I -o -r .** •H 1 * • o • • • i ■ < < 1 * C 5 -• » — * l< ( cn o rH CO cn! n A r-t it, X •H c a, cx < o o o a, r J) u o •J ro c o Mh O o £ ru n £ o o in o c c B £ 6 . <*; fO o o ?J ■£| <1 o u o ('1 I ! DRAFT: 6/8/73 CHAPTER IV District 1018: Kentucky A. Summary of Economic Conditions There are virtually no signs of progress in this district. Mechanization of mining, which by 1S70 was still a major source of employment, has reduced employ¬ ment opportunities while the remaining sectors of the economy failed by far to expand enough to provide an effective offset. Only the tertiary sector expanded, and this was more than likely due to the establishment of various relatively major health programs and the creation of poverty programs during the sixties. Both occurrences account for the rapid growth in the "Medical, Educational, and Government" industrial group and the "Professional, Technical and Kindred" occupation group. The increases in these groups is otherwise unexplainable in this district in which most other indicators are negative. Further research into the activity in this sector is necessary before a firm conclusion along these lines can be drawn. On the basis of the data, however, the only prognoses possible is one of continued decline or, at best, stag¬ nation, of this district's economy. 44 DRAFT: 6/8/73 B. Detailed Analysis 1. Outputs (a) Income and Income Distribution . In unadjusted dollars, the per capita income in district 1018 rose from $582 in 1950 to $1288 in 1970. Adjusted to 1967 price levels, this was an increase from $807 to $1107. As a percentage of the United States per capita income, the district slipped from 38.9 percent to 32.9 percent, and as a percentage of the state per capita income this district declined from 59.3 percent to 41.9 percent. Needless to say, this is not an encouraging indicator. Fortunately, the income distribution picture is somewhat brighter. In 1950, 38.3 percent of the families earned less than $1000 annually. Only 0.7 percent had incomes of $10,000 or more. But by 1970, only 9 percent of the families were still earning less than $1000, and 11.2 percent were then making over $10,000 per year. Median family income increased from $1424 in 1950 to $3724 in 1970. But as a percentage of state and national median family incomes, this reflects a change of from 69.S percent to 50.0 percent of the state and from 46.3 percent to 38.8 percent of the nation. Thus, although the income distribution has become somewhat more equitable, the district has experienced a fairly severe deterioration 45 DRAFT: 6/8/73 in its relative position to both the state and the nation in per capita and median incomes* Ct>) Employment Patterns . The unemployment rates for the census years 1950, 1960 and 1970 in dis¬ trict 1018 were 3.4 percent, 9.8 percent, and 7.8 percent respectively. This compares with national rates in these same years of 4.9 percent, 5.0 percent and 4.0 percent. The low district unemployment figure for 1950 can probably be attributed to underemployment in the agricul¬ tural sector of the 1950 agricultural economy. Employment in the agricultural sector has steadily decreased over the period 1950-1970. In 1950, 29.3 per¬ cent of the employed labor force in this district worked in some form of agriculture. But by 1970, only 4.4 per¬ cent of the district's workers were engaged in some form of agricultural activity. This is a decline of 91.6 percent in total number of persons employed. Employment in mining industries in 1970 has decreased 68.3 percent from its 1950 level, but even then mining activities accounted for 21.6 percent of the emp oyed persons in the district. Most cf the decline in employ¬ ment came in the 1950's. Manufacturing employment has declined 32.1 percent over the twenty-year period, but it now uses 6 percent 46 DRAFT: 6/8/73 of the employed labor force, whereas in 1950 it used only 4.9 percent. Wholesale and retail trade employment has moderately increased since 1960, but the greatest gains in employ¬ ment have come in the medical, educational and government sector. This group has had a 152 percent increase in total number of persons employed during the period 1950- 1970, and its percentage of total district workers has increased from 6.6 percent in 1950 to 30 percent in 1970. The location quotient for mining indicates that the district is even more dependent on this industry in 1970 than it was in 1950, relative to the state and the nation. There has been a decline in the importance of the primary sector. Medical, educational, and governmental services has become a strong sector of activity. No other noticeable trends were observed in the other industrial groups. The proportions of workers employed in these other groups re¬ mained below state and U. S. proportions. Employment in professional, technical, and kindred occupations increased steadily from 1950 to 1970 — a gain of 59.1 percent. However, the proportion of total workers in the district in this ^roup (12.5 percent) is still below the corresponding percentage in the U. S., but lightly above the state percentage. 47 DRAFT: 6/8/73 Primary sector occupations accounted for 29.2 per¬ cent of employment in 1950, and this had declined to only 3.4 percent in 1970 -- a loss in total employed of 93 percent during the twenty-year pe: od. In 1950, the proportion of district workers in these types of occupa¬ tion was two times as great as in the United States; by 1970, the proportions were approximately equal. Analysis of other occupation groups reflects the pattern noted above, namely a decline of the primary sector, mining almost totally carrying the secondary sector, and a rapid growth of the tertiary sector which was most noticeable in the medical, educational, and government services group. (c) Migration Patterns . Outmigration between 1950 and 1970 was particularly heavy in this district. However, of those that in-migrated between 1960 and 1965, 50 percent went into mining and 25 percent into services. In the period 1965-1570, most of the in¬ migrants (41 percent) were in manufacturing, and only 27.3 percent were in mining industries. 2. The Economic Syst em (a) Agriculture The number of farms in district 1018 steadily declined over the period 1954-1967, with most of the 48 DRAFT: 6/8/73 decline between 1954 and 1958. The decline was much faster than in eitner the state or the U. S. as a whole. Total farm acreage also declined at a faster rate than in Kentucky or the nation between 1958 and 1967. The value of agricultural products decreased from 1954-1967, except in 1963. The district's agricultural produce is mainly crop-, with the proportion between crops and livestock, dairy, and poultry remaining fairly constant. The decline in both areas has been continuous and faster than both the state anu the nation. In short, the agricultural sector has been very rapidly losing ground. (°) Industry (1) Manufacturing. The number of manu¬ facturing establisliments in thin district fell between 1954 and 1967. The decline has generally been faster than in the U. S. and in Kentucky. Because of dis¬ closure restrictions placed on the economic censuses, the employment and value added data are incomplete in 1967. Analysis of the years for which data was avail¬ able, however, reveals a decline in employment from 1954 to 1963. Value added followed the same pattern. This decline has been consistent throughout the entire period. 49 DRAFT: 6/8/73 (2) Mining. The number of establishments in this sector has declined much more rapidly than the rest of ^he nation since 1954 . The value of shipments peaked in 1963, and has remained fairly stable since that time. This is in contrast to the state of Kentucky where the value of shipments has been increas.ig since 1963. The impression which arises from this analysis is that although the number of mines has decreased, the value of shipments has remained fairly stable, so the productivity of the remaining mines has increased. (c) Commerce (1) Retail trade. The number of retail trade establishments has trended slowly upward, except for a temporary large increase in 1963. In Kentucky the number has been decreasing slightly, while the nation as a whole has had a slight upward trend. Sales have been slowly increasing at a somewhat faster rate than in the U. S. as a whole. The number of paid em¬ ployees has also increased slowly over the period. (2) Wholesale trade. Whiio the increase in the number of establishments in this category has been fairly slow, the ra^ j has been faster than the comparable one in either Kentucky or the U. S. Sales have followed much the same pattern, with a particularly big jump between 1958 and 1967. 50 J6 DRAFT: 6/8/73 (c) Services. The number of establish¬ ments has slowly increased at about the same rate as the nation as a whole and somewhat faster than in Kentucky. Receipts have trended upward, with large increases be¬ tween 1958 and 1967. In general, the service sector has exhibited slow growth during the period of study at a pace comparable to that of Kentucky and the rest of the nation. 51 co r- co \ VO lu cn *r v> \ «. C 1 % HJ •• •• •• 1 % •H o O o v XJ lD ID r- f • •H a o a i/j IN in x> c c; a. 04 c DRAFT: 6/8/73 TABLE IV.1 District 1018 Income and Income Distribution ] 1950 1960 1970 Family Income (% of families) j ■ f Less than $1,000 38.3 26.6 9. 0 $1,000 - $1,999 27.6 22.9 17.8 $2,000 - $2,999 20.4 14.5 | 14.3 1 $3,000 - $3,999 6.9 : 9.2 12.3 1 $4,000 - $4,999 2.7 7.0 8.9 $5,000 - $5,999 1.7 ! 7 1 i i 7,3 $6,000 - $6,999 0.9 I 4.0 6.3 • $7,000 - $9,999 0.9 1 1 5.7 ! 12.8 $ 10,000 and over 0.7 3.1 ' 11.2 Median Family Income $1424 $2033 $3724 1 as % of U. S. 46.3 35.9 i ; 38.8 as i of State 69.9 50.2 50.0 Per Capita Income $ 582 $ 807 i$1288 i as % of U. S. 38.9 36-4 j 32.9 as % of State 59.3 51.2 ! 41.9 | (in 1967 dollars) $ 807 $ 910 j $ 110 7 l i i Derived from U. S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census Tables. For specific information, see Appendix. 53 . District 1018 Employment by Industry and Occupation Group; Location and Quotients t" \ oo \ VO u. $ Q o» *-» OJ 4 -* W u <0 Q> C£ X3 c nj o o r ffl w c CO •X3 c I < o 0 w 10 •a o •H Uh •H O 0 ) Uu V) b o w 3 V) G 0 u © JZ 44 O 3 h U 0 o u 44 O U © o. V* z> o CO v.» V \ s I District 1018 Employment by Industry and Occupation Group; Location and Quotients m r' \ co <£> • • E-< Cm g O I Source: U. S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census. Tor specific tables, see Appendix. DRAFT: 6/8/73 TABLE IV.3 District 1018 MIGRATION PATTERNS BY INDUSTRY GROUP INDUSTRIAL GROUP Percent of Total Non-Mi grants Tr.-Mig 1 cants 0^ ’TV: fit S 60-66 ! 5-70 60-o5 65-70 60-65 f 5-70 Unclassified - - - - - Agriculture - - - - 2.4 - Mining 53.5 45.3 50.0 27.3 28.6 23.8 Construction 2.3 1.9 9.1 9.5 14.3 Manufacturing 0.0 0.0 40.9 23.8 28.6 Transp. , Util., 6 Sant.Serv. I 2.3 1.9 4.5 2.4 Wholesale 6 Retail 27.9 22.6 6.3 9.1 19.0 14.3 *r, i, r,' e 4.7 5.7 12.5 9.1 4.8 4.8 Services 9.3 20.8 25.0 7.1 14.3 Med., Educa. , Govt. 1 1.9 6.3 2.4 Derived from U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census Tables, for specific information, see Appendix. *F, I, R, E: Finance, Insurance and Real Estate District 1018 » 00 \ VO X CO X) c o ix* u < c> o 0 o ><4 3 u & a w P o u n 4* o 0 > .c c* o c. 01 r- £ o u o 03 fO u « •H .c G o o a *0 5 u u •0 c > £ o. o P 3 *0 O O O c o •H .c I VO in u & o CO % > \ ro r- oo \ VO e- £ o > u ►J CQ CO rH O O •H t, 4 -> w •H Q W O •. i 4 > n) O U fO r. u J i 4 -* CH •H jr, CD U 4 -» CM ID j 1 * H tD 4 - » • • • • • ID CO CO O CO n 13 m u 1 . 1 . HA rH O O co 0 0 OOO •*5 rO rH [U 3 <0 1 1 1 1 c; S-« CO ^ CO CN CO r» 0 ID rH CT> ro CT> 09 CO rH in id it M ID CN [ • •TJ OJ r: 1 rH f- 0 0 0 • • • • ID CN in in rH CM »H CN rH r-i 0 to moo] 00 JO 00 ID f—i 1 uo 1 1 1 • 4 J n; 1 ■M H CO x: t-o L 0 t O CM lO O CO • • • • • CO H CM to r -4 O J O' CN • • • • cm st f—i in H 0 • • • CO CO to C" CO CD . . • CN rH CN rH CM O • 4 • CO O CM 0.9 1.3 1.5 CM rH CO tO ir> 1 1 I 1 1 1 O It CO CO rH r- t". < 0 ) c° CO CT> rH CO CD CN O CO r- to co in 0 m CO to CM • • • cn r- cm • • • ni u u ft 1 j -4 tD O O O CO 00 to It in rH CN 00 rH H 0 to to CM O O ..1 x: o'* rH I l- C 0 Cf> 1 1 • r: 1 h- ' / f 4 -» 44 •r 4 Cl x: u > 00 1 -J- 3.1 - 6.1 - 2.8 56.2 - 1.2 CN O CN ID • • • • O rH rH CM 1 40.1 38.4 19.0 • 2.8 ■ 1.4 ■ 1.1 • 10.1 0.3 0.7 CM 09 CO • • • CO 09 rH It t rH rH 1 1 1 1 1 -H 1 ai j- 01 r» cn CO It ID |n ID tC I s CN CD cn CO .H 00 ! 09 CO 0 | 0 1 CO rH CO CO It CN CN CO i 0 0 ID O H CO CO CO O CO o> t CO (O H H H rH cn co r- CO *H r ’ I III 1 t 1 1 1 1 11 1 r- 1 1 1 CJ 0 CO ffi O O' id 0 CO to 09 0 09 CO Zf 0 Id ? CD 0 0 O tD CM < CO • • • • • CT> C 7 > CM CO CO •H to rH • 28 . ■ 31 . • 38 . 29 . - 11 . - 36 . 28 . rH CO tO rH CN co tf to r- 43 23 - 2 V 1 1 1 II II o'* O'* a) t' o' co h T) r- 09 r- t co CO It C 0 co to H 09 C 0 rH • • • L/ > 1 h fO H O O lD O C if! > 8 . 35 . 44 . 24 . 11 . 23 . 32 . rH CO CN rH CM CO CN CM to It CO rH 22 48 35 1 Lf) | 1 111 1 1 1 1 1 - 4 — CC> 843 332 681 913 655 /*. /-s \ r*> ft ft ft w w w 226 ,475 ,500 ,173 ,831 ,917 83 ,080 490 293 ,155 352 Li 3 >• O CO r—* CM CO CN 3- CO H H H to 43 ID C- l U ‘ 1 00 v> 303 337 277 375 398 47 410 278 749 345 ,181 ,973 rH 09 CO tD C It cm r- o> O CM CO 09 <0 O tD 329 ,758 398 I - t * r r« It it co r> rH ID CM r-* H H H r- 00 CO & P 1 | I 1 1 ! ? ♦ r 5,374 1,088 3,787 3,260 926 cd cn m co ID CD in CN in j- CM 392 8,204 56,853 1,127 58,135 1,826 77 14,269 196 230 3,849 407 ! J 1 XT to 670 814 952 107 096 72 932 826 224 OOO ,012 ,977 ,375 54 ,802 236 183 ,599 3 C 0 1 1 O' •— to co co CO #H CO rH CD rH Jt 0 rH CM 4 J-^- {/) o o c/i •h o 4 ~> r: o j? ai o| .V, o c • u :4 "J l » U) o ^ ?3 .SI ^ t.. ;< »,v #-» W O l/l| ii O rj| O o -n ^ rH j ti —*1 V) W 0 — cn I -*-» -I o U. r31 c C> ' ' >> C f j 4 - O O Tt I ~ •f) rH -H 'll) I (/9 m 3 tx, 4-’ < rHi-H n c> -nir-i -4 f.j h « m i« r»* ♦h , o -1 C~, •11 ■) • '> 'J ft' \) r* O O U « r rH 0 -♦ ’ 0 i-' 4 * O H r r rj* a; tft VJ V*. l " < (»r :• c 4 1 V 4 r 4 O S r r* • . 1 r; • •j; 1 • ( j >.l i-« 1*1. o o o »H «;> •-n */) C’ 4 * o *h o> O t.i ■ I o. o» i :: M ui cn c •c r* *- H rH •r-f ! .u H n c £ O'J •r-4 |.H o 1,0 o |2 S L* s nil oj "j rH ftf (/■ 0 d» CO TJ O <0 ££ O rH o w (0 o -a ft o o a. in r- (L- O a; x: i-j tn o r a 3 Oi o o <■< c fi c o o U -4 O O 0 0 tn w • "4 O') 0 w f= 0 > c ♦ * c 0 0 £ rH 0 Sm 0 >> u a> t/r -1 r 0 0 c/j n 0 c. x! rH rH r. r • * r ■ IT) Pm "■J C/) tn n, •H v^- •H M S: r-4 !.J . > r-4 Cl* ;.i • /; 0 ) t) .a •r 4 '.t «T 1 a; •a 0 : d) T ' f r -4 •. < »-4 4 * t; •r4 • O') r 1 V) O rp t.i t>) lx. to L) !»'. rt« u a> u O cn (a) Prohibition of disclosure prevents accurate count in this category DRAFT: 6/8/73 CHAPTER V District 1021: Virginia A. Summary of Economic Conditions The economy of this district exhibits a pattern of growth over the twenty-year analysis period; however, most of the growth appears to have occurred during the first decade. In 1950, the district was strongly agriculture-oriented — almost 30 percent of all em¬ ployed persons worked in this sector. By 1970, the economy had shifted away from agriculture toward the manufacturing and service sectors. This shift, how¬ ever, was not as rapid as that experienced in the state or national economies; in fact, the transition appears to have decelerated during the 1960-1970 decade. In spite of the shift to secondary and tertiary activities, incomes in the district have failed to keep pace with state and national increases. The indications are that the types of industries moving into the area have been low-paying and labor-using in nature. The net effect has been a lack of further stimulation of the economy; family incomes have not risen rapidly enough to provide substantial increases in savings and local capital formation. Equally as important, local 57 DRAFT: 6/8/73 retail and wholesale activities have not been able to expand due to insufficient effective demand. Encouraging, however, is the increasing pace at which secondary and tertiary employment is growing. Should higher-paying, higher-skill employment oppor¬ tunities become available as a result of this growth, overall economic activity should accelerate once again. In any event, the foundations for continued growth ap¬ pear to have been laid -- the question remains, however, as to how rapid this growth will be. Detailed informa¬ tion on the mix of manufacturing establishments plus a knowledge of policy decisions affecting growth will help to determine the answer. B. Detailed Analysis 1. Output (a) Income and Income Pistrubition . Both ad¬ justed and unadjusted per capita income increased in the period 1950-1970. Unadjusted per capita income rose only 21.6 percent between 1960 and 1970. As a percentage of U. S. per capita income, however, this district has decreased from 76.4 percent in 1950 to only 51.4 percent in 1970. As a percentage of state per capita income, however, the district has fared even worse, dropping 58 DRAFT: 6/8/73 from 93.1 percent in 1950 to approximately 56 percent in 1970. The income distribution pattern is similar. In 1950, 17.6 percent of the families in district 1021 had incomes of less than $1000, and only 2.1 percent had incomes of over $10,000. By 1970, only 2.1 percent of the families earned less than $1000, while over 35 percent had incomes of more than $10,000. Figure V.l shows that the distri¬ bution has shifted, but the shift has not been as great as the corresponding one for the state of Virginia. Median family income has risen from $2415 in 1950 to $7202 in 1970, but the district's median family income as a percentage of U. S. median family income has slipped from 82 percent to 75 percent. Similarly, the percen¬ tage of state median family income has slipped from 95.1 percent to 79.6 percent. (b) Employment Patterns . Unemployment in the dis¬ trict was below both state and national rates in each of the census years. Primary sector (agriculture, forestry, and fisheries) employment decreased by more than 52 percent from 1950 to 1970. In 1950, 29 percent of the labor force was employed in the primary industries, but by 1970 only 6.5 percent were in this industry group. Manufacturing 59 DRAFT: 6/8/73 employment grew very rapidly in the period 1950-1970. Over the twenty-year period, there was a 183 percent gain, with most of the growth occurring in the 1950's. The percentage of the labor force employed in the group moved from 25.2 percent in 1950 to 33.6 percent in 1970. The tertiary sector grew rapidly as well, with the largest growth occurring in the medical, educational, and government group where the gain for the twenty-year period was 366.2 percent. This was followed closely by business services, whose employment rose 341.8 percent. As in the manufacturing sector, most of the growth came in the decade 1950 to 1960, probably as a function of the employment multiplier effect of growth in manufacturing. The district location quotients reveal only a slight shift away from the primary sector, in spite of the gains made by the secondary and tertiary sectors of the economy. Only the primary sector has a location quotient large enough to qualify it as a basic industry (1.8 in 1970); however, the location quotient for the manufacturing industries was in excess o'; 1.0 in 1970 and is apparently growing. Agricultural occupations employed a decreasing proportion of the employed labor force during the period under examination, while the proportion engaged 60 DRAFT: 6/8/73 in tertiary activities increased. Two groups regained relatively stable, namely "Craftsmen, Foremen, and Kindred," and "Operatives and Kindred." Relative to the national occupation structure, however, there re¬ mains a greater concentration in the primary sector, but this concentration is declining (see Table V.2). (c) Migration Patterns . There appears to have been a net gain of workers due to migration in the period 1960-1970. Among in-migrants, by far the lar¬ gest percentage were employed in manufacturing indus¬ tries. Other groups receiving large numbers of in¬ migrants were wholesale and retail trade and the services industries (see Table V.3). 2. The Economic System (a) Agricultur e The number of farms in the district de¬ creased steadily from 1954-1967, averaging a 16 percent decrease per period. After 1958, the decrease in the number of farms in the district was increasingly faster than the decrease in the U. S. as a whole, bu^ it was not as rapid as was the decline in the state of Virginia. Total farm acreage decreased steadily from 1954-1967, a trend which also existed in the state. From 1954-1963, 61 DRAFT: 6/8/73 the rate of decrease in total farm acreage in the dis¬ trict was faster than that of the U. S., but after 1963 acreage in the U. S. as a whole increased, whereas in the district the trend continued downward. The value of agricultural products increased from 1958 to 1967. The increase v/as faster than in both the state and the nation; after 1963 the value of products in the U. S. decreased, whereas in the dis¬ trict it increased by 25 percent. Livestock, dairy, and poultry products heavily dominate agricultural activity in this district. The value of these products has increased from 1954-1967 faster than the comparable figure for the U. S. as a whole, but (with the exception of the 1958-1963 period) not as fast as the state of Virginia. (b) Industry The number of manufacturing establishments in district 1021 increased between 1954 and 1967, but at a somewhat slower rate than the corresponding in¬ creases in Virginia and in the U. S. as a whole. The number of people employed in manufacturing industries increased over the period, with a slight downward ten¬ dency after 1963, a trend opposite to those of Virginia and the U. S. The number of production workers follows DRAFT: 6/8/73 the same pattern, with a slight decrease after 1963. Most of the gains were made in 1954-1958. After 1963, the number of employees decreased relative to Virginia and the nation. The value added by manufacturing increased rapidly between 1954 and 1958. It continued to increase, but at a slower pace, through 1967. Over the thirteen- year period, the increase was faster than that ex¬ perienced by Virginia and the rest of the nation. (c) Commerce All of the activity in this sector follows a general pattern of rapid growth in the period 1954 to 1958, followed by a slowdown afterward. (1) Retail trad e. The number of retail trade establishments increased very rapidly between 1954 and 1958. It remained steady to 1963, and then decreased slightly after that time. The decrease was faster in district 1021 than in Virginia or in the U.S. Sales increased steadily over the period, with most of tb gains coming between 1954 and 1958. After 1963, sales in the district increased less rapidly than in the state and the rest of the nation. The number of paid employees increased steadily, with the largest 63 DRAFT: 6/8/73 increase occurring in the 1954-1958 period. The increase, however, was a slower one than in the nation as a whole. (2) Wholesale trade. The number of es¬ tablishments increased over the entire period, with the largest increase occurring in the 1954-58 period. The district's growth rate for number of establishments in wholesale trade was larger than those of the state and the nation except for the period 1958-1963. Sales increased over the period, again with most of the in¬ creases in the four years after 1953. But after 1958, sales did not grow as fast in the district as in the rest of the state and the nation. The number of paid employees in this sector increased faster in the dis¬ trict than in the state or the nation until 1963. The number has decreased 42 percent since 1963, which is a change opposite to that occurring in Virginia and the rest of the U. S. (3) Services. The number of service- related establishments has increased steadily from 1954-1967. Receipts increased very rapidly compared to Virginia and the rest of the U. S. up until 1963. Receipts have experienced a 30 percent decline since 1963, in the district, however, whereas they grew 42 DRAFT: 6/8/73 percent and 36 percent in Virginia and the U. S. respectively. The number of paid employees grew steadily over the period, except for 1958-1963. After 1963, the growth in the number of paid employees in the service industries was faster than that in Virginia and the U. S. (see Table V.4). 65 FAMILY INCOME DISTRIBUTION CO r- \ 00 V VO o G o o c HH >> in O CM O o » — { rH in O iD •H in CM O' G v r ( r S H3 v> (/> 1 C e 1 * CD CJ> 1 rH rH r H 1 o . j c o •T1 r V, O U 4 i • i r* OP ciP dP O o o o O • • • • • o o o o o ID J- CO cm *— 1 dn 3 000 ‘ 0 I 666‘6-000‘Z. 666*9-000*9 666‘G-000*6 666* 17-000 ‘tj 666‘C-OOO‘C 666*2-000*2 666‘T-000‘T 000*1 t4 O O O n to ■» «fi Airl.M^ia. ived from U. S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census Tables. For specific Appendix. DRAFT: 6/8/73 TABLE V.l District 1021 Income and Income Distribution 1950 1960 I 1970 r Family Income (% of families) 1 i f Less than $1,000 17.6 7.0 2.1 $1,000 - $1,999 20.0 9.6 i 4.1 | $2,000 - $2,999 24.0 12.7 4.9 $3,000 - $3,999 17.8 13.8 6.3 $4,000 - $4,999 9.2 ! 12.8 6.6 $5,COO - $5,999 3.2 j 11.4 : 8.i i $6,000 - $6,999 3.0 9.0 B.l $7,000 - $9,999 3.0 ! 15.2 24.3 $10,000 and over 2.1 8.7 1 35.6 Median Family Income $2514 $4550 $7202 as % of U. S. 81.8 , 80.4 75.1 as % of State 95.1 1 91.7 79.6 Per Capita Income $1143 1 $1658 $2016 as % of U. S. 76.4 74.8 51.4 as % of State 93.1 90.1 55.8 (in 1967 dollars) $1585 $1869 j I 1 $1733 Derived from U. S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census Tables. For specific information, see Appendix. 67 ***** 4. d i -i.imtt i; iih ■ n District 1021 Employment by Industry and Occupation Group; Location and Quotients 00 \ V£> lu i< c o o r- -X O £ T O 'J m < * O w o c. r- v o o .3 0 zr vo o f 0 U <7* O iJ >• 3 (2: |E juC u !cc s: coinrtocooo^ocT' .-tOr-tr-COOOr-lO CDi/^HH>COJ(NCn l O r-C *—C O O O »H O co j ^ o o to cm to r*- CM 3 3 O CO O r' CM CM l/"> m —< m j j o r~ iO CO r-4 CO i CM J H H H H CM i r-C H CM O ^ o co in 3 CO CM O O (O H CM O o 3 CM m m CO 1 CO t"- J- to 1 CM 1 VO 3 1 CM CM 3 cr> co 3 m r-C O 3 CO ID in to n o n h »n 3 >H CD d cn o , ol moo^ctooooio cct^cr , inr^2jr^incM o cMr-r-cor-ococo 3 in in ^ h h id in CM r-C «H DCDOCOOH^H C 3 nOlDiOCDOJ^ CM (Q O CD O' n J CO IT 3 CD CM O' H in CD tT» iDOcnOHOHlD 3 IT C T| •>•>*> * » o CM O' H D CO CO eHr-OlClDeHCOrf^-COCT' m cr id in 3 *-• co *-c O co to coiC'CcoiniOOMn^CD *e»f»eeee»» CCMinO'fOOC'HCOHW HOO'PffiCMCr'nHiN cocr*rocrt > '»-«omfMO^J ro o »—< to in to *h c u'’ *—c to^t :J lOCOr'^CMlDCMCO CM CT> O lOCM^n_joHJ -7 O t'- r- c j r c on cm cn O' cm m h h h ^ p- r- iD •X> * lO e'¬ en co o lO r : i IS! u. o to U) o w *a «) • n u 4-» t. r h > TJ t- C/> *-( G —< 00 to TJ 4-* • > o o » e-l fCl SjS t : g r] o') 3 -* *C f? w cj ^ o r- n - ~ c *-* »*-* V) c a- o * ■-« r 3 c -« - •' • r. r: ^ o v u • ' O r) iw* .-4 O U i. e r-. c :; i< t u u. r a. D O c>! 51 0.1 ?•! c; o TJ *4 O C W L, tC ** *u r. cu*rt c c o Z> •r* r~ U U x' */. d. o t £ c •H VI o c G £ r. »-* T} u ^ •O o (4 •o c •r* Vl «-l o ri u U O u u a i- 3 V f- •J> r* r-» E* ’*4 *TJ • • O V . ir •« u-. f • t. o l- ^ ^ a C- t. * . »J c*> *n ♦-» ~ c cx oj o C.' t/» o .* u C X t • x > o j w o> > • 0 « m f ;j t c L. *7 C ru l/J c-. .) O u V* 3 ac u j < H O !- O Q 1 o T5 C o o. o. < o V V) M V H o a £ C o o o A £ u V z 1 o o t9 Z V) c u or. u ♦ o 4-» s l 8. o Q CO 13 o £ 3 O V) 00 VO c 0 * 1 ) r- 1 CD m CO CO CO CD it O CD . H CT> H 0 r-H •H O O 0 •—1 O Cl b u: 3 jy 0 CO in r-H r—i CO it CM CD < iD • c c. 0 -* 0 H r—i 0 0 0 H O • H 1 no P •T 3 O | CO zr it O to to CM CO :o O ^ \ O CM 0 r ~i 0 0 O 0 co _J rH \ VO a 4 -* O O CO O IT) 00 CO in O r- ,'xj r: • • CO oj cr» Cm 0 '—1 •H 0 0 O 0 < f-H U 4 CQ p Q S UJ 3 0 to it O it r- CD it CO r- K H cr to • 0 < cn H 0 <—I rH 0 O 0 0 W f-* C —1 •M CO 0 c H G Lp O O CO CM CM in CM CM to •H fU tn • 4 -» O CT> CM 0 rH r—i 0 0 O 0 0 3 M •0 O CO cr- CO r—i in CM CO co C'J CD CD in lO O CD it •—< CM CO rH c 1 CM in CO CO CD 0 rH mO in CM it it O co CD r- CM CM m 0 LO o> CO 0 it co to uo in CM rH m it zt 0 to 1 CO 0 1/1 1 rH rH CM CO CO co 1 CM zt rH rH r~i r~i CM rH 0 •H ■M to 0 to CM uo CO CM CM H CM O it to CO in it CO 'N 0 it «o 7, 1 CO it to r~ m CD CD in it it f"~ O (O CM O CD CM U 3 < X 0 0 to c»; 1 1 —I 1 it CO * CM •H 0 in co 1 CO r- 1 d- co CM 1 (O it 1 CM CM • e* cc e*> 0 CO 00 IO O it it cc to co CO it CD r- CO in rH O zt CO to 3 } 0 O it r- 00 CD O CM H in 00 to CO 0 CO in CD CD O 0 CO CO 0 CO CO r- r- 00 CD CM CO 0 to CO in CM to O to 1 rH •H CM rH rH 1 r—i CM rH r i rH CM H CM O C O 0 c^> LO zT l/) to CO CM co to 00 in d- O to co 00 CM rH CD O O • r-» CD to O r- CO in in CM 00 O CM co r- CM it CO CM in O CO ■M O •P o« r—i CO rH CM r—i rH *H CM rH O rH PI CO •H O < O to # m to CD CO CO CO to to in C" co U*) O CO in in CM CM -1 O c; co o •H Q X) a a t/J 3 *o c 1-4 >s XJ CS o g o p <*» e u a UJ >• o U) a. s ix | cjc: £ §. o O MMV J Cl C zr zj- CTiOCOinjCHClOl CM CM fH OtoiooiiDMnna)d-i/i o •H H « O OfliconoioofoNNH o COmztmrOCMCMCMlOCMOO o <3 r| (N r—( o in O 0 H CO O 0 O (D C' O' in r- Zt CD CM r- co to CD A r> r> e #* r- rH it in in it •— 1 <— 1 CM rH it CO co r> 00 O *H O 00 CO 0 to UO CD O to CM CO 0 co CD co it CD * rs r «v #> «* r-J r- Zt CO CM CT • 1 *H m m O to O H CO 0 zt in CD a> <—1 0 - m zf CM CD 0 in CD CD CD r> r> r> r> »H O CM CD rH co O to rH r- CD to rH CO UO CM UO CD to uo zt rH CO CO 00 CO to to 00 m to 0 «% •» r> #V to uo CD CM in 0 co O CD »H rH *H it r—i *H CD CD CO CD CM CD it in CD CD CO CD rH to cc m co O rH t"~ to UO 00 r* r> #* r* » r> e* r> r pO CD to it it in CO it rH •—1 in rH r* it CO CM CD O' CD to CM it 0 rH CO rH CO CO rH r- t"' CD CO CD «V r c* r» rv €* r> #v #V <0 CO CM in rH »H rH it > & JC W •H u. >% u 4 -* '/) g (.4 o _ o CO TJ G • Ifl u m h n •H CO W> UJ o co n; n TO 4 J > o o bO • r: a *-< O 'H *-H u3 •I C< u> u? *-> 3 :_3 G (J *-> - —I - 3 0 • r) uj M U 3 a, tfl • C ♦-> C-< to O K •-I to 3 C -4 c c: c o *-■ •-< o o t. - E. O X t-« „i! hu t : (.0 H *C ^ w c 0 - r 0 'C a c ll, 2 : o ►-I l- < cu C_ ; o (0 T> U rl • U* a Tl o r: 1 P c r-* u. 1 CO c • « v: 2 *3 O 3 (4 •a c *H iC o c g B ai (4 M o U U, u £4 O <0 U. U. 10 "3 «-> £• C O4 moo .* u a u >- 3 it r—i O CD rH O CO O) to UO it CO to uo *> #* * #v • rH 00 rH 00 to CM r- CO rH Zt CD UO CM to it 00 H O uo •H rH t" •» * #k #» • CM UO CM 00 *H :o to it CM CD 10 CD zt 0 CO CO CM co CD 0 CD #» •V * #> • CM it to CM £ <0 +-> (0 UJ IV G DC T 3 P <0 a o c (0 (0 c 0 ) o c •r-t lu CO :d PI Up ^4 O a» •* 0 XJ UJ 2 C (J * O O •r| ^ P P 3 . 3 r it. 0 IT •*-< 00 p V <0 • S-4 m .0 O-. L r • ai ■ 1 ' ti t. > > • O < 2 : P ► ■ P r-< U » 4 E UJ f- 10 * D T iO rH li i. CJ M H O O ^ 2 : (J CO CJ 0 p f w 0 U. f- ;—> *» CO 1 l 1 Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census. For specific tables, see Appendix. DRAFT: 6/8/73 TABLE V.3 District 1021 MIGRATION PATTERNS BY INDUSTRY OROUP Percent of Total 1 INDUSTRIAL GROUP Non-Migrants In-Migrants Out-Mi; 'r\ r* • ;>. 60-65 65-70 60-65 65-7 0 60-65 T '■ r\ } Unclassified 0.3 0.0 2.8 2.9 -i Agriculture 0.7 0.3 1.9 2.9 1.2 Mining 0.3 0.3 1.9 0.0 1.5 0.0 Construction 5.4 7.3 9.4 7.5 7.4 17.4 Manufacturing 40.1 42.7 35.8 44.9 27.9 36.0 Transp., Util., 6 Sant.Serv. 1 4.4 6.2 3.8 1.9 7.4 3.5 Wholesale A Retail 18.2 16.4 18.9 18.7 13.2 18.6 *r. i. R. k 1.3 1.1 0.0 6.5 5.9 2.3 Services 19.9 23.2 24.5 15.0 22.1 12.8 Med., Educa., Govt. 1.3 2.5 3.8 2.8 8.8 8.1 — Derived from U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census Tables. For Specific information, see Appendix. *F, I, R, E: Finance, Insurance and Real Estate. 69 DRAFT: 6/8/73 33 > u CO Q f2 O'-. XI 10 to o o u V fL r o o r’ ! 1 1 fH 1 1 r~ f>. m n a) cd r-l ^ m MO h r- to cm r- c i o o rH 33 o O O O rH CD O O rH O CO O O CD Rati 13 rH 1 1 1 1 1 1 i 01 co CD CD rH CO CD #H O CO CM CM * CO CO CO rH rH CO CM O O CO c. c r: i o o CM o o rH rH rH rH 1/3 O * O O O O O CO O O C 3 s: co rH rH cO in 1 1 4 -» Um •H CO ^ in id co 03 1/3 rH ID CM CM CD 33 CO O 33 CD 33 x: in co ± O O CM o o O CM CM CO 3 Cm CM 33 CM CO rH rH O IT 1 1 ^ CM co CM CO CO CD lO r~ <£> r- 33 CM CM O CM CM o 1 CD h -3 CD J H 3 D O ID CM CD O O CM H (O 3 to OH co O rH CM in CO 1 CM u> 1 1 1 1 1 J 3 CO O O CO ID CO rH CO f' 33 t**“ QD iD o m .7 .4 .0 a r- c c 1 £ CD ID in :3 CD lO rH CO rH CO O «H rH cm cm in 33 CO CO id m O CO O CM - 1 7 59 h r* co CM CM #H j m p 1 1 rH 1 cr 3 in D D H CO »H CD CD Hi D 3 33 CM O m co o u , nr in _ O' 3 O (N in rH 33 Cm l l l l rH f"- CD CO ifl d 3 m rH rH CM 3 33 *H o m cm rH rH CM 179 610 127 l 121 , 178 220 n n CT' 10 id IT 33 CM CD CO CM CD CD CO U"i #. *• » * m io u5 in r- t" O H (N l/l rH C- 33 CO O CD CD (O O 3j iD ID O O O CD cm t - " co m cm cm o cr> cm h m ^ co O H (O O M cm CO CD m o h t' co in co h n ^ co co o o o r> o o o (N in id in co cr o in cm n c o CM CO CD CM *H CM CM 03 iD CM O cm r* O' o (n c^ in CD ^ O H n in M lO o J o cm o rH r~ lT> O' CM cm o 03 O CD O t co cm co r~ m rH .3 CD Cm Cm cd r- cm 10 CD m o CO CD o r-l CD lO 1* CD CO C' r- CO O CD CM XT in CD 4H 33 ID CM CM in rH 4-4 O O co o CM 3 in CO lO r- •H CM rH in 10 CD CD c O 33 CO o n CO rH »H in t" lO iD CO J i£> *£> m r-4 in •• w O CD r-4 CM m o ID rH zr 33 co n h in cd o n r; co i£> r» o o o i—i o u. >> u a? V) 03 T x u 1 ‘ r 0 > #r > w o ml 14 o Cl r~s Cl O *H o JC rH U o c« o —! w o n G w rt i -* rH o :* 3, f. v> v d- , f*> t: u c. Jr. G C “0 ►-*! — m m •G , O t *j l « r- r-4 • H o c r. t> IT H c 1.2 :* i. x5 o r - cl r »-i > »* •H C *-» , •• * rH ,« f ..4 a o (/> rH n o U «•' : x‘.i vi cj im tu: ci < X) c a Or a. < a a in u «H $ U 11 n. to c. o in in c 11 o o , rH V> i m i *-* • a. I •'« i E-< In 3 Q :* > w *-3 CO < H W o •H r5 o *-< nj x: i/> i 4-> U-i • H oc r-i < e CN o O V u c ■M Cm O r •H o £* cj 4-» M •H r. Q rg >s •u o u r J L v Source: U. S. Department of Conferee, Fureau of the Census. For specific tables, rce Appendix DRAFT: G/8/73 CHAPTER VI District 1025: Virginia A. Summary of Economic Conditions There has been relatively little economic progress in this district during the twenty-year analysis period. Economic activity continues to revolve around a large mining industry. Manufacturing activity has fluctuated as has the tertiary sector. Agriculture has declined as a source of employment, but incomes generated in this sector (measured by value of agricultural products) have risen. There are positive indicators, however. Incomes appear to have increased in rates of growth during the 1960-1970 decade; viewed in the light of decreases in population, the resulting impression is that mining activities have become more mechanized, thereby raising the productivity and income of workers in that sector. The same appears true of agriculture. Future growth of the district's economy rests heavily on the health of the mining industry. Policies to broaden the industrial mix and attract more manu¬ facturing activity into the district would provide a much firmer basis for long-run growth. To fully assess the future of the district, therefore, information on 71 DRAFT: 6/8/73 current policies and programs affecting the area is required. Additional information is also needed on the nature of the mineral resoures of the area — their type, quality, and quantity — and on the projected national demand for these resources. B. Detailed Analysis 1. Outputs (a) Income and Income Distribution . Both ad¬ justed and unadjusted per capita income increased in the period 1950-1970. The increase in unadjusted dollars was from $686 in 1950 to $2479 in 1970. In 1967 dollars, this reflects an increase from $951 to $2132. The district improved its position relative to state and national per capita incomes. In 1950, the district per capita income was only 46 percent of that of the United States and 56 percent of the state's, but by 1970, these figures had increased to 63 percent and 69 percent respectively. In 1950, 77 percent of the families in this district earned less than $3000. By 1970, only 21.8 percent were in this class. And in 1950, only 1.2 percent of the district families had incomes of over $10,000, but by 1970 this had increased to 21.2 percent. 72 / / DRAFT: 6/8/73 Median family income increased from $2163 in 1950 to $6188 in 1970. However, as a percentage of U. S. median family income, this represents 70.4 percent of the national median in 1950 but only 64.5 percent in 1970. As a percentage of state median income, district median income fell from 81.8 percent to 68.4 percent (see Table VI.1). (b) Employment Patterns . In 1950, the unemployment rate in district 1025 was 3.0 percent, well below that of the U. S. as a whole (4.9 percent). But in both 1960 ..nd 1970, the district has experienced a higher rate of unemployed workers than has the nation as a whole. The district figures are 8.1 percent and 4.4 percent, as compared to 5.0 percent and 4.0 percent for the United States. Total employment in the district has been declining steadily since 1950. The agricultural sector in this district has steadily declined during the period 1954-1967. In 1950, 18.4 percent of the total employed labor force were engaged in agricultural occupations, but by 1970 this had decreased to only 4.9 percent, reflecting a decrease in the total number of persons employed in agricultural occupations of 76 percent. 73 . i i j i r i- i DRAFT: 6/8/73 Employment in mining industries decreased by 39 percent over the period, but by 1970 it still accounted for 29.1 percent of the employed labor force. Manu¬ facturing employment increased 138 percent from 1950 to 1970, and this industry group employed only 14 pecent of all workers in the district in 1970. The "Medical, Education, and Government" sector also ex- peienced quite a large increase in number of employees. In 1970 this group employed 15 percent of all employed workers in the district, representing an increase of 124 percent since 1950. Wholesale and retail trade showed moderate increases over the period, moving from 10 percent to 17 percent in the twenty-year period. Agriculture and mining still employ a far greater pcrcentage of the workers in the district than in the state or the nation; the decline in employment in these sectors has not been as fast as the corresponding declines in Virginia and the U. S. as a whole. Despite the fact that manufacturing increased very rapidly between 1950 and 1970, the percentage employed has not reached the levels of either the state or the nation. The same is true for medical, educational, and government industries and wholesale and retail trade as well. 74 DRAFT: 6/8/73 The location quotients show the extent to which the district is based on mining activities. No other in¬ dustrial group even approaches the basic level. Professional, technical, and kindred occupations increased 84 percent over the period, but they still represent a smaller proportion of total employed persons in the district than in either the state or the nation. This pattern has been true for the entire twenty-year period from 1950 to 1970. Farmers and farm managers decreased 79.2 percent from 1950 to 1970, but it is still true the district has a larger share of the labor force in this occupation group than does Virginia and the rest of the nation. Employment in the farm labor category decreased 76 per¬ cent between 1950 and 1970, but the same is true of its relative proportion employed. The area where the greatest progress was made was in the Service Sector, where clerical workers increased 302 percent over the period studied, and service workers increased 114 percent. Despite these increases, these categories still employ a smaller percentage of the total employed workers than do the same occupation groups in Virginia and the nation as a whole. Again, 75 DRAFT: 6/8/73 the overall picture seems to be one c£ shifting away from the primary sector and moving toward the secon¬ dary and tertiary sectors (see Table VI.2). (c) Migration Patterns . In the ten-year period from 1960 to 1970, the district suffered a loss of people due to out-migration. Of those who did move to the district between 1965 and 1970, 27.8 percent were in mining industries, 19.4 percent were in con¬ struction, 27.8 percent were in wholesale and retail trade, and 13.9 percent were in the service industries. 2. The Economic System (a) Agriculture The number of farms in district 1025 has declined steadily over the period 1954-1967, with most of the decrease coming in the first ten years. Since 1963, the rate of decrease has been smaller than that of the state and the nation. Total farm acreage de¬ creased from 1954 to 1963, but then experienced a 2.4 percent gain from 1963 to 1967. District farm acreage decreased faster than total U. S. farm acreage between 1954 and 1963, but then increased faster than the U.S. after 1963. The value of agricultural products increased over the whole period with the exception of 1958-1963. Since 76 •'TiV.ft- J ~ —* -*** DRAFT: 6/8/73 1963, the value of agricultural products in this district has increased 46 percent, while the rest of the nation as a w’^ole has been experiencing a decline. Livestock, dairy, and poultry represent a higher proportion of agricultural activity than crops, and their value increased over the entire period except for 1958-1963. After 1963, the value of livestock, dairy, and poultry increased faster in this district than in the rest of Virginia and the nation. There seems to be a slight move toward this type of agriculture in the district. (b) I ndustry (1) Manufacturing. The number of estab¬ lishments has remained fairly constant over the period in this district, a situation unlike that of both the state of Virginia which experienced an increase and the U. S. which experienced a slight decrease after 1963. The number of employees remained generally steady, oscillating around 1400. Meanwile, Virginia and the U. S. had increases over the period. The number of production workers decreased after 1963. The value added by manufacturing reached a peak in 1958, and ha^ been slowly increasing since 1963, but at a much slower rate than the state and the nation. 77 ■ DRAFT: 6/8/73 (2) Mining. The number of establishments has decreased over the whole period 1958-1967. This decrease was faster than the one in the U. S. as a whole. The same pattern is true for the number of em¬ ployees in this group. However, the value of shipments has been rising, reflecting a more mechanized mining industry. (c) Commerce (1) Retail trade. The number of establish¬ ments has been decreasing since 1958, a pattern comparable to that of the U. S. But between 1960 and 1967, the de¬ crease was much faster in the district than in the state or the rest of the nation. Sales increased between 1954 and 1363, but decreased 50 percent since 1963. (2) Wholesale trade. The number of es¬ tablishments moderately increased from 1954 to 1963; the increase was at a faster rate than in Virginia or the U. S. between 1958 and 1963. Since 1963, there has been a decrease in the number of establishments, compared to a small increase over the nation as a whole. Sales reached a peak of $62.5 million in 1958 and have not been that high since. Meanwhile, wholesale sales in the state and the U. S. have been increasing steadily. 78 JW DRAFT: 6/8/73 (3) Services. The number of establish¬ ments increased steadily over the period 1954-1967 at a faster rate than in the state and the nation. Re¬ ceipts increased over the entire period with the ex¬ ception of 1958-1963. The number of paid employees increased over the period, but after 1958 less rapidly than in the rest of the U. S. 79 E O o c m \ CO \ VO *—1 •M E Cl u c ft) •H ■o (U r. ro CO 00 VD CO CD iH VD rH v % (N CO VD a. a. .. o o o m o cr> Cf *—l H O O O U> It* O' i* • H rH *~4 E-< h 3 a z o M H O (D E O u dn g 000‘0T 666‘6-000 ‘L 666‘9~000‘9 666‘S-000‘S 666‘tj-OOO‘ti 666‘e-COO‘E D66‘C-000‘£ 666‘1-000‘T 000‘T Nbfit isiiMttiiiiiitifti Derived from U. S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census Tables, for specific information, see Appendix. DRAFT: 6/8/73 TABLE VI.1 District 1025 Income and Income Distribution 1950 , 1960 1970 Family Income (% of families) Less than $1,000 20.3 14.6 4.6 $1,000 - $1,959 24.6 13.4 8.0 $2,000 - $2,999 31.8 14.9 8.4 $3,000 - $3,999 11.7 11.2 9.2 $4,000 - $4,999 4.7 9.7 8.9 . $5,000 - $5,999 2.9 1 18.3 8.6 $6,000 - $6,999 1.4 6.3 8.0 $7,000 - $9,599 1.5 7.8 22.3 $10,000 and over 1 • 4 3.9 21.2 Median Family Income $2,163 $3638 $6188 as fc of U. S. 70.4 64.3 64.5 as % of State 81.8 73.3 68.4 Per Capita Income $ 686 $1098 $2479 as % of U S. 45.9 49.5 63.2 as $ of State 55.9 59.6 68.6 (in 1967 dollars) $ 951 $1238 4 $2132 . Derived from U. S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census Tables. For specific information, see Appendix. 81 » \ \ so u. s Q < H C o D. a. < c G W r> o 3 c; **4 Hh M u a r- w o u w 3 c*j c o o © -c ♦> 44 o 3 ns 1) & ca s g o o 44 O 4 -» § C> a in 3 % V K District 1025 employment by Industry and Occupation Group; Location and Quotients t*) r~ \ oo \ vo E-< fc. oZ O JD rO 4-> CO U3 rd -c o a D C $ r, o to n> vO «*•» m r- S oo \ H Q > 10 ►o cs < H in CN o •M o •H t* w o 4-J n o 03 jC CO I +-> l/) 0 'J o, l : o *T i r. *0 t>N c, *o ; * —itt _ 'V P o a, £u < 0 O O (f) O r-4 Xi 03 4- J O a> a, C/j m 3 j) P o o 0 4-J M-4 o 7) P o & r/^ 0 a r a 8 o f o < 4-1 o o E U r»i C. C 1 f0 00 D u u 7) o 'TO [ DRAFT: 6/8/73 CHAFTER VII District 1033: Tennessee A. Summary of Economic Conditions In 1950, the district was based on agriculture, but the manufacturing sector was very strong. By 1970, agricultural employment had declined while manufacturing employment increased by an equal amount. Much of the shift into secondary economic activity occurred during the sixties, and appears to be accelerating. Tertiary activities, while growing as well, have shown a great deal of fluctuation in rates of growth. By contrast, the state and the nation have been leaving the district farther behind in terms of relative rates of growth in incomes. Apparently the district has not developed to the point that higher-3kill, higher- pay industries would be attracted. Nor has the growth in incomes been sufficient to stimulate continuous growth in the tertiary sector via greater effective demand and higher rates of local saving and investment. Further research into the endowments -- both human and natural — of the district and knowledge of policies aimed at developing these resources is needed before a firm conclusion can be reached regarding the economic 85 mgm • *** T; >- - yrr - - ^ » - W- - ..ft p DRAFT: 6/8/7 3 future of the area. Without this further knowledge, the conclusion is that growth in manufacturing employ¬ ment will not be sufficient to cause any further develop¬ ment of the tertiary sector. As a result, the growth which the district is now enjoying may slow down even more than it has. B. Detailed Analysis 1. Output (a) Income and Income Distribution . Both un¬ adjusted and adjusted per capita income increased during the period 1950-1970. Unadjusted per capita income rose from $943 in 1950 to $2308 in 1970. In adjusted 1967 dollars, per c apita income grew from $1308 to $1985. However, per capita income in the district as a percent of the state declined from 94.9 percent to 74.8 percent. As a percent of the U. S., district per capita income declined from 63 percent, in 1950, to 58.9 percent in 1970. The income distribution picture is somewhat more en- couraging. In 1950, 27 percent of the families in the district had an income of less than $1000 and only 1.3 percent earned $10/)00and over. In 1970, only 4 percent of the families in the district had an income of less than $1000 and 28.2 percent earned $10,000 and over. t 4 I \ I 1 i • *9 86 ' ■■ u Jc- w - » ^ r *wm — - wmfe — ^™ •Nr^'-TRW DRAFT: 6/8/73 The income distribution has evolved frcr hignly skewed at the lower end to increasingly skewed at the upper end. Median family income in the district increased from §2132 in 1950 to $7011 in 1970. As a percent of the U. S. median family income in the district rose from 69.4 percent in 1950 to 73.1 percent in 1970. As a per¬ cent of the state, however, median family income in the district declined from 107.5 percent to 94.2 percent between 1950 and 1970. (b) E mployment Patterns . Unemployment in the district moved in the same direction as that of the state and the U. S. It remained generally higher than either of them. (See Table VII.2). In 1950, the dis¬ trict had an unemployment rate of 4.4 percent, increasing to 6.5 percent in 1960 and falling back to 5.7 percent in 1970. Comparable figures for the U. S. were 4.9 per¬ cent in 1950, 5.0 percent in 1960, and 4.9 percent in 1970. The primary sector has been declining in importance since 1950. Employment in this sector decreased 73 per¬ cent between 1950-1970. In 1950, 23.4 percent of the labor force in the district was employed in this group, only 5 percent in 1970. On the other hand, manufacturing employment in the district increased 79.3 percent from 87 —„ DRAFT: 6/8/73 1950 to 1970. Employment in this group represented 28.5 percent of total district employment in 1950, 39.1 percent in 1970. Likewise, construction increased its share of district employment slightly from 7.0 percent in 1950 to 7.9 percent in 1970. This represented a 45.1 percent increase in employment during this period. The biggest gains in district employment were in the tertiary sector. This is evidenced by a 135.6 percent rise in district employment in the medical, educational, and government category. In 1950, this group only repre¬ sented 9.1 percent of the district labor force, versus 16.8 percent in 1970. Business Services also increased their share of district employment by 97.9 percent. Most of the gains occurred between 1950-1960. The general impression obtained from the location quotients is that employment in all industry groups has been changing along the same lines as employment in the state and national economies. In 1950, agriculture appeared to be a basic industry. By 1970, manufacturing appeared to have replaced agriculture as the basic in¬ dustry. However, the location quotient of 1.5 for manu¬ facturing in 1970 is not sufficiently high to warrant a strong '-onclusion in this respect. Although the tertiary sector has been expanding rapidly, the pattern of the location quotients indicates that these changes resulted 88 -^*-7rrj*-r'-"t. .■ly w ^ TMvr^ 1 W?" ^ DRAFT: 6/8/73 from increased demand for services within the district, rather than from without. Professional, technical and kindred employment in¬ creased 116.5 percent from 1950 to 1970. This parallels U. S. and state experience over that period. Employment in agricultural occupations has been steadily declining during the period. In 1950, 23 percent of those employed in the district were in the primary sector; the same figure was only 4.4 percent in 1970. Operatives and kindred increased their employment percentage of 51.9 percent between 1950 and 1970. This group represented 22.1 percent of total district labor force in 1950, 26.3 percent in 1970. This employment category has become the single largest occupation group in the district and this change is consistent with the increasing importance of manufacturing in the district. Tertiary sector occu¬ pations such as clerical and kindred, and service cate¬ gories each increased their employment in excess of 100 percent from 1950 to 1970. The clerical group employed 13 percent of total labor force in 3970, the service category 9 percent. Despite these dramatic changes as a percent of total employed, the district is still below the state and the U. S. 89 DRAFT: 6/8/73 (c) Migrat ion Pa tterns . The dist ict experienced a net gain of people fluring 1960 to 1970. The gain occurred between 1960-1965 and there was some loss from 1965 to 1970. From 1965-1970, the largest proportion of in¬ migrants went into manufacturing; also a large proportion went into wholesale and retail trade. 2• T he Economic System (a) Agriculture The number of farms has been steadily de¬ creasing since 1958, following an increase during the period 1954-1958. The decrease, generally, has been at a faster rate than in the state or the U. S. as a whole. Total farm acreage increased from 1954 to 1963 and de¬ creased from 1963 to 1957. The state pattern, on the other hand, was that of a continuous decline throughout the period. Acreage decrease in the district between 1963- 1967 was at a much more arpid rate than in either the state or the U. S. The value of agricultural produce increased from 1954 to 1963 and decreased thereafter. The increase was faster than in the state or the U. S.; the decrease occurred during a period in which the state experienced an increase in value of output, and the U. S. was remaining relatively stable. The composition of agricultural output fluctuated with crops dominant in 90 DRAFT: 6/8/73 1954 and 1963, whereas livestock, dairy and poultry products dominated in 1958 and 1967. However, the value of output represented by livestock, dairy and poultry has increased during every period, with a slow¬ down in growth in 1958-1963. On the whole, there does not appear to be any trend in the composition of value of output. (b) Industry The number of manufacturing establishments has steadily increased over the period at a faster rate than the national economy but not as fast as the state. The number of employees has increased with the most rapid growth occurring during the period 1963 to 1967. In¬ creases were consistently greater than in the state and the U. S. Value added by manufacturing has been steadily increasing during this period. Again, the most rapid increase was during the period of 1963 to 1967. With the exception of the 1954-58 period, growth in value added has exceeded the rate of growth in the U. S. or the state. (c) Commerce (1) Retail trade. The number of establish¬ ments has increased except for a small decline in 1963 1967. In Tennessee and the U. S., however, the number 91 DRAFT: 6/R/73 of retail establishments continued to grow. Following a decrease in 1954 to 1958, receipts grew consistently from 1958 to 1967. The period 1958-1963 was the only period in which retail sales grew faster in the district 9 than in the state and the nation. (2) Wholesale trade. The number of establishments has steadily increased from 1954 to 1967. Except for the period 1954-1958, the rate of growth was faster than in the U. S. Sales in the district increased also steadily, but after 1958 not as fast as Tennessee or the U. S. (3) Services. The number of establishments increased steadily over the period. During 1963-1967 growth was slower than Tennessee or the U. S.; from 1954 to 1963, however, growth was the same or somewhat faster than in the state or the nation. Receipts grew steadily as well and followed generally the same pattern as the growth rate of the number of establishments. FAMILY INCOME DISTRIBUTION t r! Ol o, c c ' o t >1 CD O rH "I »r> O r- *H CD rH (' • H ON O r- 1 , ^ r r «» k c? CO CO r- | * | »~. co- t % i j I: C ) c» C fH U 4 O' O, w o u c/: .1 0; B U o o rs <_ u a. co c> (J ** 0J § o rj •ii o . J CO V O •H f« in c 0) •n o- o c. > •r4 < Q) o o o CO DRAFT: 6/8/73 TAD lil'. VI1.1 District 1033 Income and Income Distribution -———- 1950 1960 --#. 1970 Family Income (% of families) 9 i 1 Less than $1,000 27.0 ! 12.9 | 4.0 $1,000 - $1,999 20.3 12.9 1 i 6.8 $2,000 - $2,999 20.0 12.2 • 6.5 $3,000 - $3,999 15.0 - 12.4 1 7.3 $4,000 - $4,999 7.3 11.4 ' j 7.8 $5,000 - $5,999 4.3 10.3 8.9 $6,000 - $6,999 2.4 8.2 8.2 $7,000 - $9,999 2.3 12.8 22.5 $10,000 and over 1.3 7.0 28.2 Median Family Income $2132 $3970 ' $7011 as % of U. S. 69.4 70.1 73.1 as % of State 107.5 100.5 94.2 Per Capita Income $ 943 $1455 $2308 as % of U. S. 63.0 65.7 58.9 as % of State 94 .9 94.3 74.8 (in 1967 dollars) $1308 $1640 $1985 Derived from U. S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census Tables. For specific information, see Appendix. 94 o 3 O' T3 C <0 a o a % v* *3 U £. H *3 L u W O S-g n3 >* *-j w 3 •d c X A ♦-» c 0) o .- r- ft) Cl s. vi. e UJ oft co * iO —< ro H 5 : 2 co in 0 O' CN in ID ft 0 * CO CN t" cr> r~i o O Si o m c» ^ cocomcocninr^t'' ,-JorHrHOOOOO omcNCNr-cnioor' .. • • • (NOrHrHOOOOO C^WHHt-CDCOOJr* rHOrHr-lOOOOO CN.ftrHCDO>CJ*lOCOCD rHOrHMOOOOO CN lO O CM 00 O CD 0> O' ,HO U 1 ^ ^ csiiDinu">c r )Ot'~c>in r'~CNfjt''fDftcr>rHCD i i * H SmSSSScjena- i i *° (C CN CO O (Ti 00 05 C"» lO OlDftlOftCOCNOlD j H H H H (7 1 H J - “m o ft a ^ o (r r) o n ^ id cn cn r- cd -< ° ® ^ ° H f' J f5 H uT lO H H CD CS OCNOpHOOCOmftO ..,.»•••• mor-o^iniDCNiD«x> co H •-* <(N in O' O H O o N ^ coocDrHiniocDr-CN rH CO «H *"* ^jommcoocDM coor'-cc.inft»-HiDC' CN •H r* CD ID r- O' 1 rH CN ID ID 0 CD CO CO CD cn ID in 1 CN n 3 ff CD 1 CD m co ID in co ft’ rH O ID rH CO in CN CD ft O CO CO CO 1 H ft pH rH CO 1 1 fT CO iD 0 ID CN co ft O pH rH CO ID CO in CD cD rH O* pH in H H rH CN CO CN CN pH ID cn CD in in CD O' CD «D 0 ID CO pH CN cD CD ft pH pH CN CO r- 00 CN pH rH r—\ CD CO cD • ft in r~ ID CO CN pH : in • r» *H rH CN o o o o t^^-CNr'tHOCDdrtn COr-JCOr-HrHr-lClDO CN ID^HCN^OMOOJH iccncncNCN^hinH » ► r * e r» co m c-* co t> r»iPt^oco*H«DOD co uD co ft ft CNinm^roin "tC 0 CDCN<—ICNCOdlCOlD — f. iDinMDioMHinhin o in H /: V) •H U. uD >s Is to ft) (4 o 0 O in *o • nj ££ f3 l/J pH - •«-t to ud r3 as o > o § o c o •H O 3 to t. ^ •-I i n c c o U to • c — • r -4 • «- S£. o • tv O4 o (0 0£ 3 > • cu L • ud a* o UD CO U V * ? ‘ ~4 * r-l O u r? w m u r? n - r. a os o 0) •O U . a> a> w 6 so¬ ts d o-'C all! c uD e *“H u. w sft • o *h • t~ TJ T3 c *H c r. u u <3 u r- *h O ffl ^ H h* U-. H # o • ■8 c •H *ft U5 ;, S ■s c e ft) -H *C3 6 ii H c> o U T) ~ 0 c ft) u o « {4 L o u u ► w C JL' F. •’-* t. c o. ft) 03 4S o -* o - ^ -• * o u cO < zr. v > • h . r t o. n 3! • V) f • U ?. k kz V) *r» O u c» **« —< T3 0- ftj l« tX ?: u in 1 .’ o CU 10 o lft Cv Q> AJ W w os *8 6' O | <0 c 0) o § e •H U W Oft u. « o to I ■ , i mm ' ” , ^ 'i tr.^ ^n ^^y yyrrvar't "*"Ty ■ — JH' W» ff- 9 : >" ' W 4-> C •H P cn *—i •H o *H rH O o o o O O o u: 3 00 O' o O uo CM CN cn CD cn r- < CD GQ c Cn CN o rH rH o o O o o • H CO P • rO o O) CN CO CO cn y U0 o cn o o o o o o -j rH o P o CN if *H CO cn cn CD CO CO w G • co 0> o> o rH «H o o o o o < >H rH CQ 4J Q B s o ID CN CD o CN CO' cn CO cn cn < (T> O o o LO o o H C rH CO o ^H P o CO o If CO cn If CO CO (0 ID o o •—1 O »—i rH o o o o o 5 rH c? CO rH CO cn r- cn r-> cD in O) -f IT f o cn CO D CO in if • CN CD uo in CO o r- cn UO CD CN CN f" co i—i o a. »H o 00 o CN If CO if cn rH co rH zt co f—i uo »i 0 1 — rH CO CN uo uo 1 rH rH 1 rH 1 rH 1 rH M o CN If If cn CD CN r-~ CD CD r- cn rH CN r- CD UO o r*- o CN • z 1 CD CO rH CD CO • • CN CD O) CD rH o CD CO CO co cn If o in CO CO IT) CN CN CO If CD UO CN in if if CO CD CD CN If K CD 1 1 CD | 1 1 rH O c-° o CD CN 00 o UO CO CO cn UO in CO CD 4 5 CO if rH o CD r- 10 • 1 o CD If CO If CO CN o CO co CO CO co in CN CO If O CO r- in o If •H rH rH rH cn rH If co CO rH If rH rH CO CO if to 1 1 1 i o o CN cn rH OD CO UO If CO if CO CD 9 0 CN CO If O rH •—I o • O' uo O cn UO CD CN CD CD CN CO CD co uo CD CD rH O H in o H CO rH rH rH rH i —1 CN o < o 1 CN cn cn CO rH o O CN zt CO CN Ci H CD cn CD in UO r- GO o H CD • O cn CO o CD in ID CO r- CN cn O') CD O CD CO i—1 CN CD co if o t- rH 1 — 1 CO rH rH rH CN o P- o o If If o uo uo CO lO CO •— 1 co t- 00 CN rH rH i—1 cn CO CO If o dP IT) • Cn CO o CO in If CD cn uo uo CD CO CN rH UO LO o rH CN CN rH rH CN o •— 1 r- If CN r- cn CO If uo in CO CO cn cd O CO If rH m CO r- O CO CO H r** uo CD cn CO 0) cn co o cn If in CO CN CO o O if CO CN in in o CN CN CD o CN uo CO CN CO cn r- ID If uo CO W CD r> a a a p A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A >» rH CD o o rH CO CO i-l CD If 00 CD D- o CO rH rH rH CD cn o in CN CN *H H CN CO •H CN u rH CG sc CD zt rH CN if cn CO CN rH CO r- o O i-H CD CO rH UO co CN If □ o CD cn cn CN CN if r- UO rH rH 00 CO uo cn if o CN It CN CO rH CD O if CO If If o rH cD CN cn r- CD r- o CO rH CD cn cn o cn ci': cn a a A A a A A A A A A C- A A A A A A A A pj If r- CO LO r- CO r-* CO cn CD CD o If CO CN CD CO uo CD » CO *—I rH rH CN o sc P3 Z rH CD uo CN in CO CD CN cn o If in in o o CN UO CO 00 cn o o cn CN UO rH rH 00 if O o co CD co zt zt C4 UO in If CO CD U0 cn CD If O 00 co cn CD cn CN if CO CO CN rH CN CO cn CO CD If H go «> r A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A rH CO CO uo d- CD cn UO UO cd CO CN rH uo r-~ in •H CN CN rH rH • — 1 CN o *— 1 T3 r^ IT) in (D if if fl) • CO X) o A— • rtf u w +J j-« •H •H C H > U, cd * CO H D •p uO •H CO > cO id o Cl, >> 4 -» • o 0 . u A (y 00 • O r> £ bO • 3 > A Pi o V) c c rH cq b • O at o> o •H •H uD a> O •H •M to C /3 a tt. o 4 -> 3 V) a> *JC 3 o >< Cm O ^ rH r-H h tn o c (D tfl 03 PJ • u ti X) M-J id in G C a S-, H G •W c d) 3 <0 fl 0) 3 z x; X) o id -Vi A cn o j 1x0 o G *H D c a> X b • X £ O A u S H 4n nj K (D 2e <3 PJ Q A •> o U W P P A J • (fl ■ •H cn P > • 0 < a; O G G a) »H •H X) Ph (.1 O P rr--KT- ur r-?tz-'rr*£ DRAFT: 6/8/73 table viI .3 District 1033 MIGRATION PATTERNS i)Y INDUSTRY GROUP Percent of Total 1 INDUSTRIAL GROUP Non-Mi grants In-Migrants Out-M Igrants 60-65 65-70 60-66 65-70 Cn O 1 v.*’ 6 5-701 Unclassified O.C 0.0 i Agriculture Mining 1.3 0.7 1.5 0.0 0.9 Constriction 5.0 , 4.9 11.2 10.8 9.0 12.9 Manufacturing 52.7 55.6 39.8 53.3 40.5 37.9 Trarisp., Util., 6 Gunt.Serv. 4.2 6.5 9.2 4.6 6.3 6.0 Wholesale 6 Retail 18.5 18.3 21.4 16.0 18.0 19.0 *r, I, R, E 3.3 2.0 5.1 4.6 4.5 6.0 j Services 13.3 10.7 11.2 7.2 13.5 13.8 Med., Educa., Govt. 1 1.8 1.3 2.0 1.5 8.1 3.4 Derived from U.S. Department r r Oowncree, Bureau o r i he Census Tables. >’or Specific information, sec Appendix. *T, I, R, E: Finance, insurance and Real Estate. 96 t I" CD \ V£> e- lu w -3 < t- r> o 4J O *H *-» o •H O « I 0» I/) u*> i) *« cu -Oi < 1 ^ X 3 6 3 Sl< DRAFT: 6/8/73 o co co m cn co it O O 00 in co if) in in id ID CN •H ID 1 H MS J O' ID in CO CN rH O O CN O rH o o o Q KJ CO (N J OJ H rH «H LO & LO CD 1 1 1 1 < (u CQ G CO O' (D O' H O H H co m rH t*" lO o co m • • • ID CO It fa • JC CD 1 • • • • • H h n n H W J rl rl CN CN rH CN O O t H CN CO CO CO 1 1 CO 1 • -M O 4-, • H CD CD it 03 03 CN CO CO CO CD CO J o r- m • • • in o m • • • x: CO ID 1 o o .-i <-h r> rH m o o O O rH O rH O rH *H O it rH LO 1 1 cn in cr> in in CD rH f~ rH co r~ nr in cd it • • • cD in cn • • • o CD 1 rH ID O «H O O CD rH CN rH o o O O rH o o o •H CO CN +j ID 1 a rd CJ CS, CO < a CO CD •I}' CO CO LO CO J rl co 3 cn rH CO It • • • in in in • • • m & CD 1 H O in J H rH rH O rH rH CN CO rH O O rH rH rH u x: CO 1 [- co LO 1 < i s~ co u-i •H CO id in pi o H lD co in it Cn cf rH CD zt ft O O ID X CO to o CO rH rH CN O rH o o O O rH O CN O rH rH O It LO 1 1 CO »H O O CN cn in J ic O 03 It 03 CO * • • 00 O rH • • • CO 1 o LO LO rH 03 If O CN CN in ld id 2 16 22 6 24 3 CO rH CO rH CO CN J ^ o CO 1 1 1 1 •H 8 CO J r) O H H in co h 3- r~ r- CO f" CN • • • h in h • • • 2 g CD 1 CO 00 CN rH co O CN ID ID rH CO O CO CN * — 1 « — 1 LO O 03 03 rH m it oo in rH | 39 66 29 U UO 1 1 d*> CO O 1 — 1 • — 1 C''- ID f- co in id J J rH o id m • • • O O CN • • • in i :* rl m co in in h H H rH ID rH 9 14 4 36 40 12 rH CO J- rH CN •H CO in rH a > CO 186 093 114 794 220 350 500 ,900 ,000 rH r- co It in o r- cn r- 343 ,657 ,069 ,589 ,611 ,571 X o fc-1 CJ) rH r n r> r» t^- rH CO CN O *H in cn co 47, 36, 733, CN CN CO rH CO 03 It CN in 1 43 3 Cl, 2 U CO LO 27 5 695 468 023 388 336 819 ,908 ,853 ,885 ,769 ,941 334 ,231 ,326 co r- co 00 ID ID It rH It ft ft ft Ci u cn H f> r r r r> 03 rH CN CO CO rH CD CO CN 33, 25, 361, CM H H CO rH CO CO CO in it rH in co ro 2 oc IT 908 650 798 647 243 296 669 845 ,968 ,614 ,690 ,886 291 ,101 ,508 ,070 ,127 ,671 a H ft r« r r rs ID H CO O' H CN CO rH CN 30, 23, 236, CN f~ O O H CN C'- CO rH It rH rH CN CN JS IT 596 259 737 553 416 280 455 ,484 ,337 ,579 ,000 ,799 267 ,592 ,357 787 ,089 ,380 O' r— ft ft ft ft f% CO rH UD l£> CD CN CN H 28, 23, 212, CN CN C7> CN CN O CO o rH in cm rH o in • -1 (A o 4-» N X' o u c to o (0 c ■H G o a; /*"*t CJ rH 2 £ 0) .X u o pH •CO • r | Cl 4-J to o o o CO (0 o T3 to CO CJ o • H to o o to CO o CO H •H CJ A3 +J /^N A) > 4-> o CJ (0 rH o 3 c LO a> *H o CJ >4 c o L4 C rH CJ o >N, 0) y Xi gj Tl T5 QJ T3 X) o >, H CJ o >. CJ o > ri to 4-> o on CJ T? C »-i to 00 (? O T3 4-> o rH o r-4 4) £ o rH 0 rH L0 J o rH H l/) rH •rl 'O CO o. rH CO CU TJ (0 to (X 0J O c. l 3 CJ M CU 1 * 4-» o -c •H 03 •H rH o l- «l) »H u c u A3 f0 •H H v-r C u CJ 4-J •H •—1 cx c UJ IH rH p ri a> j-. Xi o f: • pH pH CO CJ XI to T3 U XJ •H •|-4 o 3 Tl <1> t: rr< rl Oh CJ rr A3 0) T3 r 4 A3 o D A3 AJ o c, 4 » o rH l 5 • » 4 u 4 ' 4-> »H •rH o 4 J rH ••*4 r 4 4 -1 c o rH id •r-4 •0 1 * r; u Q> o A3 A3 x: (0 C A3 a (0 0) A3 u t r ,! n 0) to 10 to t- < l»H : |w M to 0) IS. i - (/) Or tc Iw LO CL, LO U1 tl". • r4 r. *1 a, CJ r> b u t- rH o > *u up AJ O n,i L4 •rl J! J! O r % •o G tinuous data for all four periods not available. . DRAFT: 6/8/73 CHAPTER VIII District 1034: Tennessee A. Summary of Economic Conditions The data show this district to have experienced a shift away from agriculture and mining into an already (in 1950) strong manufacturing sector. However, the rate of growth of this district appears to have peaked in the early sixties, thereafter experiencing a slower rate of growth. Incomes, while growing, have occupied a worsening position relative to the state and nation. It is this decelerating growth in income which probably explains much of the slowdown in economic activity in the sixties. The analysis is complicated, however, when it is realized that the city of Knoxville lies in this district. It is not immediately apparent to what extent Knoxville distorts the data. If anything, whatever growth has occurred more than likely occurred in or around Knoxville. If so, then the outlying areas of the district have fallen even further behind than the data would indicate. More research is needed in this crucial area before a complete analysis of the district's prospects can be assessed. If Knoxville is a grevth center of sufficient magnitude, then the entire district stands to grow as a 98 DRAFT: 6/8/73 result. Otherwise, indications are that economic growth and development in this district will continue to lag further and further behind the state and nation. B. Detailed Analysis 1. Outputs (a) Income and Income Distribution . Per c apita income in unadjusted dollars increased from $980 to $2380 between 1950 and 1970. Per capita income in ad¬ justed 1967 dollars rose from $1359 to $2446 during the same period. However, as a percent of U. S. per capita income there was a decline from 65.5 percent to 60.7 per¬ cent between 1550 and 1970; and, as a percent of the state per capita income, a more pronounced from 98.6 percent to 77.2 percent. The income distribution picture shows some improve¬ ment. In 1950, 24.8 percent of the families n the dis¬ trict earned less than $1000 and 1.4 percent earned $10,000 and over. The same figures for 1970 were 3.9 percent less than $1000, and 29.6 percent, $10,000 and over. Hence, the income distribution has become de- creasingly skewed at the lower end and moderately skewed at the upper end. 99 DRAFT: 6/8/73 Median family income in the district in the same 1950-1970 period rose from $2082 to $7030. This represented, in 1950, 67.8 percent of U.S. median family income and was up to 73.3 percent in 1970. As a percent of the state, there was, however, a decline from 104.9 percent in 1950 to 94.4 percent in 1970. (b) Employment Patterns . Unemployment rates have moved with the rates in the state and the U.S. and have been consistently higher than either of thase rates. Employment in the primary industry group represented by agriculture, forestry and fisheries declined 76 percent during 1950-1970. In 1950, 17.6 percent of the district labor force was employed in this group; the same figure was only 3.3 percent in 1970. Mining employment declined 64.7 percent during this period from 4.1 percent of total employed in 1950 to 1.1 percent in 1970. Manufacturing employment increased 67.5 percent over the period from 25 percent of the district labor force in 1950, to 32.4 percent in 1970. The tertiary sector in the district also experienced growth in employment. Wholesale and retail employment declined in 1950-1960 but grew from 1960 to 1970. In 1970 it was not, however, back up to 1950 level. Medical, educational, and government em¬ ployment grew faster from 1950 to 1970. The percent 100 DRAFT: 6/8/73 growth for the period was 88 percent. In 1950 employ¬ ment in this group was 13.7 percent of the district labor force, 19.9 percent in 1970. Business services employ¬ ment grew almost as fast -- 81 percent between 1950 and 1970. It represented 2.3 percent of total labor force in 1950, 3.2 percent in 1970. The mining location quotient of 2.4 percent in 1950 qualifies this industry group as a basic industry. By 1970 it had declined to 1.4 percent. By comparison to the state, however, mining is a relatively more im¬ portant sector. The 1970 location quotients do not reveal any truly basic industry. The position of the tertiary sector has not improved over the period and shows a continuing deficiency in these groups relative to the U. S. Therefore, except for the decline in mining, there have been no noticeable shifts in the structure of the district's economy during the twenty-year period. Professional and technical occupations rose 71.6 percent between 1950 and 1970. Agricultural occupations declined at an average of 75-80 percent. The district employs in these groups, in 1970, a smaller percentage of total labor force than the U. S. and the state. The relationship was exactly reversed in 1950. Tertiary sector occupations increased at a relatively rapid pace. 101 DRAFT: 6/8/73 However, the shift followed the same pattern as state and national economies, which left the d ; strict in the same relative position. Operative and kindred employ¬ ment increased. This category employs approximately the same proportion of the district labor force as tne U. S. and the state. (c) Migration Patterns . The district had a net outflow of people between 1960-1970. About 39 percent of in-migrants came into manufacturing occupa¬ tions, 17.3 percent entered retail and wholesale trade, 15.5 percent entered construction and services. 2. The Economic System (a) Agriculture The number of farms declined over the 1954- 67 period except between 1958-1963 when the number in¬ creased slightly. Since 1963 the decline has been faster than in the U. S. and is similar to the state pattern. Acreage has been steadily declining as well, except for an increase from 1954-1958. The decline has been also more rapid than in the state and the U. S. The value of products has been steadily increasing. With the exception of 1958-1963, it increased faster than either the state or the U. S. Livestock, poultry and dairy products account for a greater share of value 102 DRAFT: 6/8/73 of agricultural output throughout the period. In fact, the value of crops declined after 1963 while livestock, poultry and dairy products continued to increase. (b) Industry (1) Manufacturing. In the manufacturing sector the number of establishments increased until 1963 and was steady over the 1963-1967 period. The rate of growth has generally been slower than either in the state or the U. S. The number of employees grew until 1963 and declined thereafter contrary to state and U. S. experiences where employment continued to grow. The ratio of production workers to all employees has remained constant from 1954 to 1967. Value added in this sector increased steadily. However, except for the 1958-1963 period, the rate of increase has not been as rapid as in the state or the U. S. (2) Mining. In the mineral industry the number of establishments increased until 1963 and declined thereafter. The decline has been more rapid than in either the state or the U. S. The number of employees increased between 1958-1963 - , nd declined slightly over the period 1963-1967. However, this decline was at a slower rate than in the U. S. as a whole. The value of 103 DRAFT: 6/8/73 shipments of the mineral industry increased until 1963 and declined slightly thereafter. (c) Commerce (1) Retail trade. The number of establish¬ ments declined drastically between 1954-1958 and remained constant thereafter. U. S. and state experience on the contrary has been growth throughout the entire period. Sales in the district declined between 1954-1963 and in¬ creased sharply from 1963 to 1967. (2) Wholesale trade. The number of estab¬ lishments increased steadily over the 1954-1967 period. This was, however, at a slower rate than in the state or the U. S. Sales, likewise, increased steadily while most of the gain occurred between 1954-1958. The rate of increase in sales was below that of the U. S. and slightly higher than that of the state except between 1958-1963. (3) Selected services. The number of es¬ tablishments increased over the 1954-1967 period at a faster rate than in the U. S. as a whole, and at t.'.e same rate as that experienced by the state. Receipts also increased steadily over time; however this was at a slower rate than the state or U. S. rate of growth. FAMILY INCOME DISTRIBUTION > CM ro O C.' u*» v rH 00 00 m ,i> »" •iH O o o r< • -1 V, F * * O I % •" C (0 •H O o o 1 1 | % % •H 4-. TJ lO CD h' 1 y G CD CD CD «» n r, t= P U a.* O IT c i r \i k ► CO ;r> F O Ti o •r1 o X •r*C c 0> o. cx G' G CO * ; 1 : I DRAFT: 6/8/73 TABLE VIII.l District 1034 Income and Income Distribution 1950 1960 J .-4 1970 Family Income (% of families) ! i ! Less than $1,000 24.8 : 11.7 | 3.9 $1,000 - $1,999 23.5 ' t 12.4 6.9 $2,000 - $2,999 20.5 12.7 6.7 $3,000 - $3,999 13.6 ! i 12.3 7.6 $4,000 - $4,999 7.1 11.5 7.6 $5,000 - $5,999 A O I 4.3, l 10.2 8.0 $6,000 -• $6,999 2.4 8.6 8.0 $7,000 - $9,999 2.5 1 13.0 21.7 $10,000 and over 1.4 7.7 29.6 Median Family Income $2082 $4083 $7030 as % of U. S. 67.8 72.1 73.3 as % of State 104.9 103.4 94.4 Per Capita Income $ 980 $1465 $2380 as % of U. S. 65.5 66.1 60.7 as % of State 98.6 94.9 77.2 (in 1967 dollars) $1359 $1652 $2046 Derived from U. S. Pepartment of Commerce, Bureau of the Census Tables. For specific information, see /appendix. 106 c o o r- O P cy o 03 O o cr* O D O' *C 3 C O c o 05 o ex I * c : o *-> nj o ru G • V u Mi o •H Q 'O c 0 ) w 3 «Q *■> c o> g. o H n. E u OrHrHrHOOOOO OCTVCMCMCOOP^OO^ ridHrlOHOHO -f ^ ^ O CO ^ ^ H H ^HHOriOHH (s toHHcn OOOO O*C 0 HHOHOHH ©OrirOOOtDOH OlHHrlHOHH COOCOCMCTCOinO* . . .. c mHHOHOrlH ots^ifiio^^ 0 ] 0 ; tnrror^mrHOCor^ fxiOHiDOjHCDMtD I I I ^ f1 w H rj n ID (OCDtNDHJHOH tf)(\rj(NW(Nn(NlD I I :*r-ooiDCMCozr CDOCTcDCOCDCMlDlD •y in CO CM lO •"* ”l « • 1 cD o ID CM ID r-( cr CO m rH CO rH »H h o 00 1 iD CO 97 . in CM O in 33 . 192 in o rH -77 o cr CM H cn in o CM CO t' CM lO cn CM rH ID H lO 1 3 - CM CD CM *H CO CM rH CM CD CO rH CD CD rH in 1 O H rH CM m in t" CO CT> in O & CM O CD 17 . 3 - o 33 . H *H iD r -4 o rH CO CM CO CM CM in 1 cr i CD COrHCOJ CMcQCNOCT r)H^^CO(OCDO' CO rH *-* iz-icncMCir-irHinocn CO *H ip^ood-ocoot- t'ljJCOiniDt-CMCOCO H CM CM ^ OH^OOJMOilOCS tococr'H'Or'® - CM CD CO iO 1/3 co o* h h OOOlDCOtOCJO'® 1 ” r-.cnocMt-'iO'HcD 0 * • » ** »> "'■'T r^coioiDcNt^r^'-O'^j rH H VO H (O »••< CO i£) in O C" «H ^ o co id - ^ xD "#.. ► » » ' * ° -j-COlOCOCMCMd-iniD m M :» -4 .n «-* « "isssas^sss , J1 CO (N* ^ ^ , , JcCcor^cNcDCN^roo^o ^ (S, H H H M J rHrHrH CM rH O CM O CP JC w u. o a> o co *o • n 4-* G C t- m co -h o C- B O 5-1 e 551 ,U| >s G > fc. c CO O ItJ *-» • * QJ V) &o • on a c -h cu -H -H u3 D ^ *j o i/> D ~ 0 ) * > u CD K. c *-* •r« •/! c r. o y . r\ U.’ «T3 C, CO o o: o *-* ? 73 H T r: u c o * u T 7 o ,.l w T 3 G Q> C' £ S c c cO E G r> rtl • g. n j- f O G ■ “■8 ‘°S C C _ a> *h *o E * ^ 03 O G *0 -G o c tt> i« *11 G L— 03 t/3 ’a -c o 03 G u tw ~J c * -H cO ^ c (0 3 O X ;; *H 0 ) O V. w, >'A fiMu u_ o :<■ O rj l/, *-* ^ •H yi *-» «T1 *v . ^ « IM l< > L jc. O O w u 3 > • u > . o X <1 A ai C ^ ■ L. l .s u c « o. D, o o w #> « 03 H ■9 r »a5if'ir>r> CD f' in “ 0 ; c ^ o -H <4-t r 5^ r :ri'D>r'^'r>2 0 ‘ 0 H rH rH CM rH o o rH O 03 D« V) 1 (onoioo'®®®’® o O O rH o u. COCOrHCDincDCTZtaOCOCO o « 0^t^COlD<2ri<>''0^' 0 H H rH CM o o rH V} G 0> u 550 593 854- 954 963 803 ,226 .915 ,168 ,356 ,195 r- r-* in CD 03 X 4-» 7 j J n in h- n f w n rH in CM 4h O '3,645 .2,040 .5.’42 !2,948 L4,231 30,895 47,019 5,891 16,305 4,903 11,969 CM CO t" r- o 9.2 Estate o 05 03 y n O U3 >- S a. x u o < H O jb- •s 03 (X TJ G <0 03 O c 05 § w c 03 u § G •H U, W on ( o XN. c> O G» o o cm O 4J c 03 8 . 03 O CO z> o § o to I District 1034 Employment by Industry and Occupation Group; Location and Quotients w p m w H 01 cc •X3 c (0 01 O C P 3 tfl c 01 ci c a) c tJ * DC X •H X* C 0) 04 a, < ai o (0 01 01 rH A OJ P 4h •rl U 0) a, w o o U4 to 3 0) c 01 o 0) jc p Ip o 3 m o; g ca o> o u 01 o o c 01 a, ai o CO d 0) o V I I I I i * i O H DRAFT: 6/8/73 TABLE VIII.3 District 1034 MIGFVTION PATTERNS BY INDUSTRY GROUP INDUSTRIAL GROUP Percent of Total i Non-Mi 1 grants T n-M5g rant r. Out-M. grants 60-65 t; o - 7 0 60-65 65-70 D 'sj ~~ J ,5-70 Unclassified 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.4 Agriculture 0.2 0.6 1.9 0.4 0.0 Mining 1.7 0.6 3.8 2.5 0.9 2.8 Construction 3.3 3.0 9.5 15.5 13.8 16.4 Manufacturing 45.0 58- 9 28.4 29.9 26.3 31.3 Tran:;])., Util., 6 Sunt.Sorv. 14.2 3.6 20.4 5.4 4.1 4.6 Wholesale f. Retail 15.1 13.9 15.6 17.3 28.6 20.3 *r, 1, R, E 1 2.2 1.2 5.2 8.6 8.3 5.3 Services 16.1 16.4 12.3 15.5 14.7 14.2 Med., Educa. , Govt. 2.2 1.8 2.8 5.0 3.2 4.6 Derived from ll.S. Dopartmonl of Commerce, Bureau of the Census Tables. For specific information, see Appendix. *F\ I, R, E: finance. Insurance and Real Estate. 108 Agriculture, Ir.dustry and Scrnrerce; Shift-Share Ratios 'O c a a, a < 0) « (0 0> •3 V V a w u o w 3 w e o u o .c v u« o 3 fC o 3 o o t, o Q) U y i I \ \ \ TABLE VIII. !*sn — .m -~a v ■ ■. ■ < W ' rjr.■ -rtr^frrr-^ -T- it CO o P O •H G P CO •H G to C •H P fd P< J H ..... (D J) f) tM > n H m t i i 00 CM CN O 00 H n cn lO h in cm I id j n co io • • • • • CO CN I r-i ID «H id zt CN H H I 1 I CM (T> it CD t " O • • • • • • H rl h CN r-i 00 CO r-i CN CN CN CN CD j- cn • • • • LD o CO a> •H CN CN CO ID cn rH CD • • • • ID cn cn ID rH rH CN rH CO CD O CO CO It '-D H CD h CD O O'* UO CN «'<» in rH C'- it CN CO cn zt cn CD CO CD r r* co cn it r- co O CD It It cn cn co cn oo o rH id cn o CD CO CN r- rH o C- iD rH CN r- it ID CN 00 it cn co id rH rH It rH Zt ID co cn zt r rH CO CN rH H CN ID CN CO cm in cr> in cd j Pi H J lO Orl JOIO r> r #» c* cn CN CD h CD CM CO H H uo cn co ID Zt rH ID cn cn zt o o o lo h 00 ID O CN 00 O CN CD *■ t* CN CN Zt CN CO O cn cn to CD zt uo ID it it r- o O ID CO CO CO rH CO CO «D r\ r r CO CO U0 Zt O CO t" rH O o O CO to CN cn CN O O cn o rH in cn rH (D O Zt CD oo CD oo to CD CO O zt zt «s r n #» r r r r> in tD zt o ID rH CN cn t" CN Zt r- CO CN co tD ID uo cn ID cn CN CN CO 00 cn tD co CD co CO O CN UO cn CN r- CN zt- tD cn cn *H zt r n r> n r. r r> C"* *H r- O tD CN zt to CN CN rH UO ID CN C o o >> G p r-« 3 o a. g a> | to • H P r it) rH o O 0) X c> D U cd >> 1.0 'O •P 3 P o o o +-> CO *—1 •r-‘ o P-* ri r: c> V_r a; ,H-| •—c Ul -1 P Mm o H 3 <0 X 1 f~\ a> O o f4| l- P «H o oo p +J .T3 0 «—i >4 o co n CO CO 9) 5S p. v~ c Oh CD n Vi 3-r rH o *> •o no (J •V V-* •rH R • (0 O <0 G O 0) 0) o *H H ^ G p Q *-r (0 3 Oil 'Kj ( l) a rP iV G o o o I —I v> 10 p c o 6 .G CO •H l U CD to p G o G li« cd o:!r~ r 01 o o to T? (0 CO •H CO o to r-N , £ o > CD a> *.n o O G o C D> r i s —' C rH rH CD rH rH jG f — ) P4 G rH co OH -J to to (X V_,r ft- •H G O • H p G U) l/) rH ID P rH Cl w w a: X. CO a x> •rH m r-i G CD 43 a> 43 ’S""’ 0 "'-’-' DRAFT: 6/8/73 CHAPTER IX District 1035: Tennessee A. Summary of Economic Conditions The economy of this district appears to be growing. Since 1950, there has been a substantial shift out of primary production into secondary and tertiary activities. Indications are that the pace of this shift slackened somewhat during the sixties. However, incomes, sales, and value added continued to grow at a faster pace than the U. S. economy. Though slowly closing the gap, incomes remain far below the national and state averages. By itself, this fact would support a generally negative view of the district's prospects for further growth. However, other signs are strongly positive. Apparently, there exist policies or programs designed to attract industry and commerce into the district. Also, the existence of two superhighways in or near the district could be having a strong positive effect on the local economy, providing rapid transportation to cities such as Nashville Knoxville and Chattanooga. Further analysis of these two factors, plus a fuller understanding of the district's resource base, would be required prior to making a 110 DRAFT: 6/8/73 firm statement about the district's future. In the absence of such additional information, the conclusion of this analysis is still positive: though slow, there is growth, and this growth is accelerating. B. Detailed Analysis 1. Output (a) income and Income Distrib ution. Per capita income in the district rose from $949 in 1950 to $1854 1970. In adjusted 1967 dollars the rise was from $761 to $1554. As a percent of U. S. per capita income, per capita income in the district grew from 37.6 percent m 1950 to 47.3 percent in 1970. As a percent of state per capita income the respective percentages are 55.2 percent to 60.1 percent. The income distribution data for the district reveal a decrease in the number of families in the lower income brackets and a consequent increase in the number of families in the higher income brackets. In 1950, 45.2 percent of families earned less than $1000 and 0.7 percent earned $10,000 and ,ver. In 1970, 5.9 percent of families earned less than $1000, 17.1 percent earned $10,000 and over. Median family income in the district grew from in 1950 to $5380 in 1970. As a percent of U. S. median 111 r r. |»j »r p « V'V'.-.or vwrpv ***** W**Y. ’**'*>?• MfgptMP 1 DRAFT: 6/8/73 family income, median family income in the district grew from 37.9 percent in 1950 to 56.1 percent in 1970. As a percent of state median family income, the respec¬ tive figures are 58.2 percent in 1950, growing to 72.2 percent in 1970. (b) Employment Pattern s. Unemployment rates in the district exceeded U. S. and state rates through¬ out the period. The 1950 rates of unemployment in the district were however below those of the U. S. and the state and are likely to reflect heavy agricultural under¬ employment. Primary employment declined 74 percent from 1950 to 1970. This group represented 47 percent of the total labor force in the district in 1950, but only 10 percent in 1970. Mining employment decreased 73 percent during the period. It represented 3 percent of total district labor force in 1950, only 0.7 percent in 1970. On the other hand, manufacturing employment increased 203 per¬ cent during 1950-70. It represented 14.8 percent of total district employment in 1950 and 38.2 percent in 1970. The t ertiar y sector likewise grew during this period. Business services, for example, increased their employment 213 percent but only employed 2.2 percent of district labor force in 1970. The medical, educational 112 ii j).i.n ji j jjimiin i ifiir ^■•MV7'w*r wr-.wwvs w* DRAFT: 6/8/73 and government group experienced an increase of 135 per¬ cent. This group rose from 8 percent to 16 percent of total employed in the district. Analysis of location quotients in 1950 reveals that agriculture and mining were basic industries m this district. By 1970, agriculture was still basic but mining had lost its place to manufacturing. The location quotient of 1.4 for construction in 1970 may be a reflection of growth in the manufacturing sector. Professional and technical occupations have risen 91.8 percent from 1950 to 1970. They represented 5.1 percent of total employed in the district in 1950 ard 9.3 percent in 1970. Relative to the U. S. and the state however, there is still a relatively smaller proportion of the labor force in this occupation group in the dis¬ trict. Agricultural occupations decreased about 75 per¬ cent between 1950-1970. This group of occupations ac¬ counted fcr 46.7 percent of total employed in the dis¬ trict in 1950, only 9.5 percent in 1970. The district still has a relatively higher proportion of its labor fore a in these occupations than does the state or the U. S. Operatives and kindred occupations increased 142.3 percent between 1950 and 1970, representing 1 j.7 113 DRAFT: 6/8/73 percent of total employed in the district in 1950 and 32.4 percent in 1970. The district now hri a greater proportion cf its labor force in these occupations than does the U. S. or the state. The tertiary sector occu¬ pation groups increased their employment dramatically. For example, clerical and kindred employment increased 230 percent, service workers employment grew 221 percent. These increases, however, were in keeping with U. S. and state patterns so that in 1970 the district had the same proportion of people employed in the tertiary sector as the U. S. or the state. (c) Migration Patterns . There was a net out¬ flow of people from the district between 1960 and 1970. However, among the in-migrants the largest proportion (40 percent) went into manufacturing, 27.7 percent went into wholesale and retail trade and 11 percent went into construction. 2. The Economic System (a) Agriculture The number of farms decreased steadily over the 1954-1967 period. The decrease was, however, slower than in the state or the U. S. Acreage increased from 1954 to 1963 and decreased from 1963 to 1967. The de¬ crease occurring after 1963 was at a faster rate than 114 » *»»•> DRAFT: 6/8/7 3 in the state or the U. S. The value of agricultural pro¬ duce increased steadily during this period (1954-1967), at a generally faster rate than that of the U. S. or the state. Livestock, dairy and poultry products have ac¬ counted for an increasingly larger share of total output during this entire period. Furthermore, the rate of growth in value of this class of agricultural produce has generally exceeded the rates in both the U. S. or the state. (b) Industry (1) Manufacturing. The number of manu¬ facturing establishments in the district has been steadily increasing during this period, at a faster rate than the U. S. or the state. The number of employees has, like¬ wise, steadily increased but after 1963 not as fast as in the state or in the U. S. The ratio of production workers to all employees remained constant. Value ac .ed by manufacturing activities in the district increased steadily over the period. (2) Mining. Not enough data were available to analyze thoroughly the mining sector. However, it is apparent that this sector has been declining during 1954- 1967. 115 -•v*" —-i,-r: r»r>f&-■* DRAFT: 6/8/73 (c) Commerc e (1) Retail trade. The number of retail establishments in the district increased steadily at a rate faster than that of the U. S. or the state. Sales have also been steadily increasing. With the ex¬ ception of 1958-1963, growth of sales in the district was not as fast as in the state. After 1958, however, this rate was greater than or equal to that of the U. S. (2) Wholesale trade. The number of es¬ tablishments in the district increased during the period at a rate generally faster than that of the state (except in 1958-1963) and the U. S. Sales increased also, with the greatest growth occurring in 1954-1958. Except for 1958-1963, the rate of growth in sales ex¬ ceeded the state rate. Compared to the U. S., however, the rate of growth of sales has generally been slower. (3) Selected services. The number of establishments increased steadily over the period 1954- 1967, at a rate consistently faster than the rates for the state and the U. S. Receipts increased steadily, also. This growth was at a faster rate than that of the state of the U. S. until 1963. After 1963,however, the rate of growth of sales in the district was slower than that of the U. S. and the state. 116 FAMILY INCOME DISTRIBUTION •* x Tr=*v?.*r* r ' ? H •H E 03 U. C 03 •H o to cr> 00 m 04 o VO cn o oo m in o o o o if' iO O' O r< hi dn ‘j 000 ‘OT / fjf.f,‘f--000‘Z. Gb6‘9-000*0 GGG'S-OOO'G 4 666‘ti-OOO‘ti 666‘E-OOO‘G 6G6‘G-00C‘<: 666‘T-000‘T 000 ‘ T C'P df> <*> O o o o o • • • « • o o o o o in fO CN r-| v< O 4« • r-i O 44 • r~4 o Q Q. W o u- cn o • H r Q O H •/) ij <1) ( > E X c • i—4 fc -a 4-i a. e* > < •H f-. o a o n i b *o c .O 4-> c 0) o H a 6 U .•••••*•* (NOrH-HOOOOO r^iotNCPi/^r^focoto .«••••••• DrtrHOOOOr^O C0C0OtDJt*f>»HC~i*> ri,-H -<000000 j^(MO*CCDlD(D(D CN-i-i.nooooo n«H-tooooo niDOOr'i^^CNiDt^ CNCNOOOOOOO O CM CD CP to O 0 r-l r- 0 CD 0 d CM CP M CO CO in 0 tO 0 r~ 1 0 in d 1 CM t-* 1 d to CO 0 CM f-H m 62 . 213 . CO d in CO H H CP -77. d d CO 0 CM in CM to rH rH CM d rH to CM rH CM CM CO r- 1 m *H CM U 3 O to CP d to CP r- CO CP CD r- d CO CM rH CM CM O < t- 1 0 to H in 1

- 57 . 37 . 101 . O t co in d d rH CM 1 O CM rH rH d l 0 rH in to CM 0 0 «o to CP (X) r- CO H in d in in d 00 O d CO O O »H tO d to I 0 46 . in d 0 CM CO CP to 0 CO tO tP CM CM rt CO 26 . in d m CO U? lO CM to <0 tO rH to iD d d in d 0 m 1 1 1 0 CO c- CO CM r—\ H CM d CO

r~\ O *H 0 CO CO CO d d rH CM to in i—i CP to lO 0 rH d CO 0' ffip'OnC'JiNO'W (^JtPOCDG'^lJ rH o *►►*►»•> u"> r* CM (P rH d rH CM *4 lftO'^»DCDCOt s HO tvcot^injfMi^ON 00'< T )WOOC'®C'l ♦ P M 'D Jj- O CP <7> KO , (— O CM CO CD CM CO (NCOinC’C'HjHt^ #.*»«»»' * ** CD H O TO H ID COJ- cm indCMOcorot^mincNCM ON>OiDTO(TiPO^r' co co -J r^rHincoorococo in^^ono'CJH^Hrt CM MD .-) NO a) o m d in cp J'lDlDOiOTOHiDlOCOO' COUIMTOHOCDTOTOHJ * r r r r nHnTOCOTOTOHOJTOTO rj in h (DtNHinCDHnTO ^ O TO i/' H J TO i ® TO ^ OrHOOinddCOOCDiO d 04 CO cp rH CO CM CM d CP H ID TO ~Y .G W •H U- > flj o w *o • rj ££ CO to *H > o o G •> <1> W • *-» »/> • t2l 3 > * O G c: rH CO G • 0) O •H • r4 to a 0 G • M G 4-» to in 0 O i-j . J CD 4 :^ 0 U. U *4 rH rH -3 O • T UJ n UJ • bC G > a I: • ^ P ^ g -r o U > 4* *H (4 f"-M G u o 4- c o G H o nj u. u 10 *d *-» G C CL a» o o ^ o G • X o A GJ U JS . • G > • o G E ^5 4-> <0 +-> m w n) o oc X) c ic a> o c to & (0 c o o c <13 C •H U. U ** a: in v o I i Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census. For specific tables, see Appendix DRAFT: 6/8/73 TABLE IX.3 District 1035 MIGRATION PATTERNS BY INDUSTRY GROUP INDUSTRIAL GROUP Percent of Total 1 Non-Migrants Tn-Migrants Out-Migrantr. 60-65 65-70 60-65 65-70 60-65 f,5-70| Unclassified 0.9 Agriculture 0.6 0.6 1.8 Mining 0.0 0.6 0.0 0.0 7.3 Construction 4.3 3.0 10.0 10.8 7.3 9.6 Manufacturing 62.0 58.8 65.0 40.0 51.2 43.0 Transp., Util., 6 Sant.Serv. 1.8 3.6 2.5 6.2 2.4 2.6 Wholesale 6 Retail 14.1 13.9 12.5 27.7 4.9 20.2 *F, I, R, K 1.2 1.2 0.0 1.5 4.9 3.5 Services 12.9 16.4 5.0 12.3 14.6 13.2 Med., Educa., Govt. 3.7 1. ■ -.... 1.8 5.0 1.5 7.3 5.3 Derived from U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census Tables. For specific information, see Appendix. *F, I, R, E: Finance, Insurance and Real Estate. 120 District 1035 Agriculture. Industry and Commerce; Shift-Share Ratios •»«?* f w i 'rry^- r*vo 2 co «D © U cn © O x: i co co o 0 H CO 4-* tD © oc © co & XT CD co tn co vO m co m cm co cm co i co O' CM tD to CM © © H CO O O CM CM O' ID rH If CO CM O' m co co rH c* CM in CD 00 C* tO CM CM in *H co rH co rH 10 CN If ^ cn co o co HlOlOHh rH uo o' cri co (O CO C o to rH if Cm CM tot^«Hrf.*r O' eH CT- in CM Vi V o a 'O © C O CM H I CM O tD CM O *H co cd m CM O 3 rH I- if co rH O CO CM © CM C • • • rH rH o tn co co rH O O (N t/3 O ^ rH CO 1/3 rl H rH rH CM I CO CO CO rH O rH O' if cn if CM CO tn o cn • • • »H O rH J O CD CM -H CO I tD rH O O ID to c- co *H rH O tD lO U rH O O 10 CM CO rH rH rH rH O CO rH rH CM I tn cn cn if cn cn CM co O O' O O' CO CO CO rH CM tD O tD CO rH rH CO CO rH m IT CM m CM CM t" in rH cm • cn io to co m co ro H h CO If if o o r- cn cn m o o o CM CM m rH o m o CO D If cn D rH rt M f ar H in id tD O' if tD co co r» rH cn co CD lO O' ID CO O tD C- ID rH CM in CM l'' <—I rH r-H rH O' cn 00 cm r- co in o co rH tD if CD CO if co r- co rH tD t" rH O' 4-1 o rH © o c 3 t.' 44 O M © © M # n £. © 71 n. © © 1. la »H 0 > ti3 © U © u *.H < It- < o r-3 o o •rt w o w 1/3 ♦j *H »rt M • H © DC 3 r. H/> C*|rH © X3 © *TH T" S—r •31 >3 U ff s r. a- c: H n t H 44 o 0 TJ »H c M ^ i ♦-> y r—< *3 w c ♦-* H M © w r- 44 < rH . -< c- U-3 r i r u © •H 3s ' H| . U-4 —H t- la X) O t: •H,^H 3 © *3 3 u © r— ... c>; r i © r. «—i O r—t i: •H © * •, ^ r» o rH © • -a r XI U 0. 0 2 < tC > |UJ u CO © D.lf - fjl ^1 * < cn lj|< M © rs © V O M M W • H V3 o O © AJ © u o o o 2 O © la C rH o © C >s © © to o o £ o O tn ti *H e-t © ■—t rH x: W Cj. *—t *1/3 u © © .r. M 13 © © 0) © CD a. 3^ UJ ID u- tD LH VC •u c © Q. a. < © e to 05 © rH ■s o •rH •H U & ra (t £ M P S © o © «G Mm 0 P © © 53 ca © § i o «*H 0 J3 u © o. © CO id © © > © 4J O C % •H © a. r. o IM © *o M 3 O 3 C C o u District 1035 Agriculture* Industry 3 nd Commerce* Shi£t~Sh&re R3tios 8 tD CO CO I CD in ro co zt id 3- • • • • • H O CM H C in CO CO I I I co j- m (N cn co cm m o H CN H CN I I cn c\ o id • • • • (N O ID H CO CO o rH CO CO cn CO CN O CO CD H in • • • • CO o *H in o CN CN CD CD CN zt in CN CD rH CO CN tn 1 rH cn to CO 00 CD O o O r- CN m ID CO o o o co CO lO CN CN CO CO r-* o cd r. fs *N * * e * fH in CO CO 03 CD CO CD CN zt rH rH CN CO zt CD CO O CO CD O CN CO CO CO CD rH »H O r- to rH in CD CD CD CO co CO co O r> »* K r. #* r» rH CD CO r- o ID 00 in rH zt CN CN rH » — 1 r- to »H .t o o CO CT> »H CD tD CN H CO CN l n CO O CD CD O CO ID (D C- #* #• r« * M « *» F* rH CO co CN CD CO CN l> H -4- •H CN rH rH CO o CO CD in to ID in CD 3- a- o cn rH o CN t- CO m CO U) o o rH co CN CN CD o 00 cd r> **■ r* f\ * r\ r\ F» rH Zt CN CO CO J* CD CD CD CN CN rH *H CN o o o o 3 X3 O >> U 4-> »—! 2 O Q-* r> >< V) +J c o> J if) •H rH /> 05 0 r- CO CD CD CO CO O CN CN CN r- o CD CO ASM 00 in in 00 CO H ID • • • • • • • • • • • • • H i o 00 00 O •H O o CD rH rH rH CN o zt »H o o Q co CO o 3- CN »H u ID 1 1 1. C/D CO 00 CD o zf zf C"* O CD 3- CD r*" tD rH tD CN 00 cn ID 1 o in CO O «H <—I • CN X CN CO o o to rH rH rH u x: CO rH F- CO m < 1 H w CO tH •H CD o 00 in CO in CD CO ID CO in O CD in r- CD rH O CO /: co to 1 rH in rH rH rH rH r- CN o rH O »H rH rH O «H rH CN in CO ID zt *H CN O CO CO to cn • • • » • • • • • • CO CN in O CN CO co CO r- in CO CN CN rH CN to rH CN in CD CD rH ID CO CN CD in • • • • • • • • • CD CD O ID CO cn tD to in rH •H CO co in CO CN CN co O CO rH in o in lO • • • • c • • • CD o CD Zt CN in CO *H c^ •—1 CN CN CO zt zt CN 1 tu o O CN in CN 00 rH • CD CD in l> rH rH in CD to o O o rH »H CD O') o CN 3 #* #> * *% #» r to CN CN in CD tD rH K 00 «H r> r r» CN CD CN CN rH zt tD *H O rH 3 to ID CD CD 00 3- CD 00 O rt3 CD zt tD CO r- CO CD H O' O 00 CO rH lD in o CD 6 r\ * + r> * »H CD CO CD CO « CO ID O ID (O ID ID r- CD rH * e e* H CO (O CO cr> to (N cd m id to C7> co to cd ID ID * #< in rH <1) O u a U o G a: H U-l 0 >> H 0) 0 0 G to H O m 'G Q> to V) tD •H F. a; H cx CJ G G 5-. G rH 0 TJ tO < G o u •H C f.r •-C !•* CJ 4-1 »H to o S O O W to o o >> c o o rH *H D 4 H C U UJ G XJ rH O £ O O O to CO C) H O G O o H rH Oh ll. «H n .c U1 CD (D X3 x £ w H CO fO tU + J 4~* rH Oi O to O'.lt- (/> « 0 0 cn T3 cn to • H cn 0 cn O 3 ■H u > 0 qj (U G 0 ty G rH > £ nj 0 >> 0) 0) > 0 g 0 0 CO r '—r 0 »H 0) £ rH rH X. rH a. rH cn e. X? cn if) cu G 03 •H V_x e cn CJ X a. & w CO cu CO UJ u: 04 H £ *0 4-< o •H 4h •H O 8 . (0 (4 .0 v u C*J .1 a) r-i A to to > 05 O c CO •o o •H (4 01 (X o 4-t U 0 CCS 4-> H T3 CO 3 O 3 C •H c o o vmmwe** v -. Ppwr'W'J^P DRAFT: 6/8/73 CHAPTER X District 1046: Alabama A. Summary of Economic Condition s The economy of this district appears to be rapidly shifting from one based on agriculture to one based on manufacturing and the services. This development has been steady throughout the twenty-year analysis period, with a slight slackening of the pace of growth in the sixties. Unfortunately, while incomes have increased during the period, they remain quite low relative to the national average. The effect of low incomes can be seen in the slackening of the rate of growth in the tertiary sector during the mid-sixties. An unknown factor at this point is the influence of Huntsville, which lies close to the district. Certainly, much of the increased manufacturing activity can be thought to be the result of the growth of the space program-related growth of Huntsville. If the appar-nt growth of the district is confined to areas near Huntsville, «_hen there arises the question as to hew strong an in¬ fluence this growth will have on the rest of the district. A more detailed analysis of the locational pattern of the 122 WWntf. ■wrp»5'r5*»™?> f WH WOTOW g W DRAFT: 6/8/73 economic activity in the district is necessary before a complete appraisal of the district's r 'ospects is possible. B. Detailed Analysis 1. Output (a) I ncome and Income Distribution . The un¬ adjusted per capita income in district 1046 has risen from $718 in 1950 to $2266 in 1970. This compares with a state growth of from $880 to $2849. As a percentage of U. S. per capit a income, the district has increased from 48 percent to 58.3 percent, and as a percentage of the state per ca pita income the figures show a de¬ cline from 82 percent to 80 percent. When the income figures are adjusted for increases in the consumer price index, there is stil? an increase of approximately $1000 in the district per capita figures between 1950 and 1970. There has been a very positive change in the distri¬ bution of income in this district over the twenty-year period we are considering. In 1950, 43.3 percent of the families in district 1046 earned less than $1000 per year. Only 0.7 percent had annual incomes of over $10,000. But by 1970, only 4.6 percent of the families still earned less than $1000, and 29.5 percent had in¬ comes of $10,000 or more. Thus the income distribution 123 I DRAFT: 6/8/73 which was heavily wciqhted at the lower income levels, is increasingly weighted at the upper levels. Median family income in the district increased from $1261 in 1950 to $7040 in 1970. The district’s position relative to the rest of Alabama and the U. S. with re¬ spect to median family incomes improved greatly, moving from 41 percent to 73.4 percent for the U. S. and from 69.3 percent to 96.9 percent for the state. (b) Employment Patterns . District unemployment rates have followed the same general pattern of fluctua¬ tions that the national ones have, but the variance has been greater in the district. The district figures for the census years 1950, 1960 and 1970 are 3.6 percent, 5.4 percent and 4.0 percent respectively. This compares with national figures of 4.9 percent, 5.0 percent and 4.0 per¬ cent for the same periods. Employment in the primary sector decreased 80 percent in the period 1950-1970. Mining employment increased 11 percent over the same period. The major changes, however, occurred in the secondary and tertiary sectors. Employment in the construction industry increased 165 percent; employment in manufacturing rose 265 percent; business service employment increased 150 percent; and employment in medical, educational, and government services went up 211 percent. 124 DRAFT: 6/8/73 The location quotients seem to indicate that the district's dependence on aqriculture has decreased. The 1950 location quotient of 3.9 indicated that I agriculture was a basic economic activity, but by 1970 this had decreased to 1.9. The state-based location quotients reveal that the changes in industrial mix in the district and the state roughly parallel changes occurring in the national economy. There are definite indicators that the district economy by 1970 has become more based on secondary and tertiary activities as compared to having been an agricultural economy in 1950. i Employment in the professional and technical occupa¬ tions increased by 201 percent between 1950 and 1970. The percentage of total district employed persons having professional or technical vocations more than doubled. The number of persons employed as service workers rose by 215 percent in the same period. Operatives and kindred went from employing 12 percent of the total work force to employing 24 percent in 1970. Agricultural occupations showed a large decrease over the 1950-1970 period, decreasing from 47.5 percent of the total employed labor force in 1950 to only 5.7 per¬ cent in 1970. In spite of this large decrease, the dis¬ trict still has a greater relative concentration of 125 DRAFT: 6/8/73 employees in agricultural occupations that does either the state or the nation as a whole, but this concentra¬ tion is declining. (c) Migration Patterns . Of the district's in¬ migrants between 1965 and 1970, 29.5 percent came into the construction industries, another 29.5 percent into manufacturing activities; 21.6 percent into wholesale and retail trade, and 10.2 percent in the service in¬ dustries . 2. The Economic System (a) Agriculture The number of farms in this district declined over the period at a more rapid rate than in the U. S. as a whole, but more slowly than in the rest of Alabama. Over the period 1954-1967, total farm acreage in the dis¬ trict experienced a net loss despite the slight gain between 1958 and 1967, The value of agricultural products increased steadily over the period. The increase was slower than in the state and the U. S. during 1954-1963, but then faster between 1963-1967. There has been a shift in the com¬ position of agricultural products over the period. In 1954, crops dominated in value, but by 1967 livestock. 126 DRAFT: 6/8/73 dairy, and poultry products wore responsible for a larger portion of total agricultural output than were crops. The percentage of output due to crops fell from 65 percent in 1954 to less than 7 percent in 1967. (b) Indust ry The number of manufacturing establishments grew during the period at a faster rate than in the rest of the state and the nation. The rate of growth declined somewhat between 1958 and 1963, but then increased from 1963 to 1967. The number of persons em¬ ployed in manufacturing has been increasing at an in¬ creasing rate since 1954. The ratio of production workers to total workers decreased and was approximately equal to the one for U. S. manufacturing as a whole. The value added by manufacturing increased at an increasing rate throughout the period we are studying. It was a consistently higher growth rate than either Alabama or the nation as a whole experienced. (c) Commerce (1) Retail trade. The number of retail trade establishments increased between 1954 and 1963 and then decreased slightly from 1963 to 1967. This ’ »-»»• «•* - «" DRAFT' 6/8/73 is the same pattern which the Alabama economy as a whole experienced. Sales, however, underwent a steady in¬ crease throughout the period. Prior to 1963, the rate of increase was higher than that of either the state or the nation as a whole; but after 1963, the growth rate slipped below that of Alabama and the U. S. (2) Wholesale trade. Wholesale trade establishments increased over the period 1954-1967, and from 1958 to 1967 this increase was faster than those of either the state or the nation. Although sales have increased as well, the rate of increase has been generally slower than in the national economy. (3) Services. The number of service es¬ tablishments has increased faster than in the U. S. and in Alabama. Receipts have also increased. Prior to 1963 the growth rate of receipts was higher than that of either the state or the national economies, but since that time the district growth rate has fallen be¬ hind those of the ether two. 128 FAMILY INCOME DISTRIBUTION y Ijint .«**»>* ,-rr» •* r m C*4 c CJ •H 0) VO CNS o iD cr> (N rH CO 00 c' o ' c r-1 C' • H U- • r j CJ o u w c. o 0 n o u r. Hi (T, C> rH r3 H i/) »/) r: d> o 0) .c 4* o 3 o Oj & cn < •H U 0 0 0 O V) ’V“W»*/n *««.-• ■ - , . DRAFT: 6/8/73 TABLE X.l District 1046 Income and Income Distribution 1950 1960 1970 Family income (% of families) Less than $1,000 43.3 14.5 4.6 $1,000 - $1,999 25.9 17.1 7.3 $2,0v o - $2,999 14.3 14.6 7.0 $3,000 - $3,999 7.8 12.0 6.8 $4,000 - $4,999 3.7 10.1 7.2 $5,000 - $5,999 2.4 8.6 7.6 $6,000 - $6,999 1.0 6.8 7.7 $7,000 - $9,999 1.1 10.4 22.3 $10,000 and over 0.7 5.8 29.5 Median Family Income $1261 $3312 $7040 as % of U. S. 41.0 58.5 73.4 as % of State 69.3 84.1 96.9 Per Capita Income $ 718 $10P6 $2266 as % of U. S. 48.0 49.0 58.3 as % of State 81.6 73.0 79.5 (in 1967 dollars) $ 996 $1224 $1948 - Derived from U. S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of t.he Census Tables. For specific information, see Appendix. 130 y o 4-> O 3 O' •a c o c o 3 I 3 o ^ CD C7> C '-i anniODoa'iflCh rHO»HrHOOOOO c- ^ ID Q> o o O O o O o O o :* 00 t" H CM CD CO o CO ex 3 ID 00 ID o O' 1 o CD ID rH uo cn rr CD 3 r- ex tD CO o to m O cn 3 3 <—< O CO to ex to rH CO in i *—i CX rH H 04 CX 1 rH 1 w o in CX 00 CO cn Cn O 3 CO CO CO CC ex H O ID 3 in *» t CO ex 3 o cn co r 3 ex CO CO ID < o in in rH o ID ID 3 cn ex ID H cn 3 1 1 CJ o CO CO cr> o in 3 ID CO 3- 3 3 in cn 3 in 3 cn lO 3 o 1 Cx iT (X r- O ex O ex 3 CD o CP CN to CX in 00 ID CO CX cn 3 ID m i 1 to c o cn 3 ID eo to *H CO CO o a ID O tn CO in r- CX r- r- *-• H r> hi f-* rj *-3 O p < O in 3 r- o r- m in 3 h« t' O cn O cn m u*> m ex CO rH cn O fc- rH ex rH rH •H *V3 Cm P O s >• »—i in CD co cn rH J- cn o -} 4J Cm P lr 1 cn rH ID 3 cn a? CO CD rX *V • M o Cn m O o uo rH CO .H g. to cn #■ r » o uj rH CO O CX ID rH r; 3 Ol D. V. P -j tJ i* t" o ex co cn cn co ex o o or* f' tD rH m ex in 3 r 4 o »H 3 C* tD r- o cn 1 ^ v' ex m H D- ex eo ^tni^cocohcocnHNCN O rHcor^'Htnt^ n h cp cn m o rH r-\ rH CX O o o n to cr id h H i£) O O O O' 3 (*) O H Ul H h H «> it f> • » * » (DH^OnOfOH o cn a) h iT 1 o CC ! ffi J J o I cr co o co J CO O' H (\ O IN H H (O S’ o in CO o to tO in in o o rH rH o ex O CX -t co 3 O O rH in rH ID CO m CO CO r- m o o ex CO ex o in rH ex in in co o to CD rx ex cn in CD CN ID rH rH 3 3- r C4 CX ex O m 3 ex o tD O to cn CO in CX CD in CO C" CO tD r in o CO 3 CC Urn ; _o p n !*:;• w •H U. >> Jh cl C) woo . r? o v p M C H > C3 V) .H C> •H l/l o m ‘ 0) CC V) u a> to r? cxy ~ o 0 r? U U SC M C- rp ■g 45 c •H c «H *3 *£ c • •C >“ •.' Z- 3 C. •* U-4 tO C P r. arc u .. o Cm c: F 5m rH 0 i- • u P to e * -h C» O u< 1*4 u • O Cm C0 u. -3 o Cm p > « CC • w c D 4* to T3 4-» U3 0J u • c • U f? 3 t« Im to u C Cm >* 6 03 c •r - * > - r» 3 i> 4J C» 3 to o ic t» tj rt3 Hi » in O o w 3 o o C *H l- c a> X u X CH i: l—r c -t* V > O u i: >- LJ U H l_ r lc t- M a .t u 3 c •r * o 0 U *> rn »r4 10 *-> ■0 •9 t c* o CD * • ■— F . C, c U-< t. s > • J} < T ij o t. c* r-4 4 • H U n H U. 1 . r. *•» * ■» r-< t.. :; c.» fT' L r J r 1 ; V v> u 3 O I- o 4-» 45 4-» tn to o cs TJ c (TJ Q> o c r0 § to c © o to cc Cm ■# •u c 0) a* ru 0) (0 W tr, a> H ■3 .4-» O © P. (0 U o u. to c Q> U © «C 3 % i A O O I 00 r~ S oo \ MO E-< h 2 Q CN X w CQ < H V) P G o •H P O O' 'O c fd c o cD it o P CJ •H P V W •*H p c o o < lO m C O' O -H • H CO Ui • '0 o zz> O IT) S3 Q p o U) C r- CO (D cr» < H H CO < E- 1 CO O M O ttJ in u o> W o H a, e (•3 o coinuDfocooiocnr^ r-|O.H<-tOOOOO CTij-iDcnr^oiinor^ CNjO»—EOOOOrHO CTicsicoinmr'COOuD COOOOOOOrHO Cninj-CNCOCDOOOOOO *HOf—fr—JOOOOO r-Hcoinococnincot^ CMOrHrHOOOOO OfMCniDlDCO^fr^t^ CNIOOOOOOOO oocooor^'-id-oor-^ OHJJ-O'OtMDH COiHlDinO(I>^3H I rH CM H f~i CN toincMj-cooca'cnai CN CO CO • O CO CM ^ ID S) CD • . • co.. .Hincnitcoitr-CNincoco OCD^C^lDH^CMHhlO CN I CN H CN I iffOCOCOCOCNt^rHOlOit CO O CN ID H rj J- CNt^OCNCOCncncOCN hhOcoha;Ha:cN irlOH^CMDhO r> r a #> r> r» ^ CT> CN LO f-H -3- CN CO r- CO to • n) 1 o if CO CO CO CO CO CN d- o cn CO r- It CN CO CO to o -2 o lO CO CO in in o CD co It cn CN CO rH cn zf CO CO o r~7 (X> 1 1 1 1 CJ • r> r #» r r* r 0 * r * COlDCNCOOJCDhHCNCNCN COOlHtn^CNOCN^OlD cncoj-aiOHCNtDO^com OCO^COCPHCncOl/)COh CN CO CN H H CO H H o It cn CN CO o zf > p <1) 0) Td CD P X) c CO CO • in Q) T> u •H V) • o o a> X XD C if) p •H Jh W) »■ 0) c »H •H c H > a *8 cO P a> U fd M • C o E 0> CO rH X £ Lz X) o •H T) (4 c w O o rd o a. r~' e X rH o rd P c >N P • o zz> uD 6 #* •H (D O (m U, < rd 0. U •» 0) to • o c W U dd rC a c2 C n ■P bO • ni Zf > #» u. r» fd rH C/) o c a> (0 T5 P u •H o V) c C rH CQ U • a • u. rd ^2 C. u, •d '/> $- C CU >* H « a> o •-I •rH cO o «T3 c •rl cz a D 0) <0 o s A-* a p •H P u*) cn O 2 rC T? n: (4 • X CD 5E w >- u o ■M r- r-H e •—i TJ M O 'd 4h H o a> > o XL w >2 >< r o • 0? tiJ rf M H Cm rd •H o u U o E - • bO r-< 'd Cm CO r> a •* r o r J (/> -i-* p I) * 15 O'. Is5 u c -M co c 0) a a, < Q) 0) 10 (0 Q> rH ■8 •P U •H •H o o a (0 b .2 10 3 10 g V o 0) US 4-1 o 3 ra a> b CG 0J o & 1 o CJ <*-« o e 4- 1967. Total farm acreage in the U. S. actually increased 139 DRAFT: 6/8/73 slightly in the same time period. The value of agricul¬ ture products steadily increased from 1954 to 1967. This increase was at an increasingly faster rate than the rate at which value of agricultural products increased in the U. S. as a whole, but it was a somewhat slower rate of increase than the state of Arkansas experienced in the same period. Crops are still dominant in the value of agricultural output, but livestock, dairy, and poultry products' value has been growing more rapidly than that of crops, es¬ pecially during 1963-1967. This indicates that a shift in the composition of value of agricultural output is underway, but it is not yet complete. (b) Industry The number of manufacturing establishments in district 3119 increased more rapidly from 1954-1967 than those in both the state and the nation. The number of persons employed in manufacturing industries steadily increased at about the same rate as the state and two times faster than in the nation as a whole. The percen¬ tage of employees who are production workers remained fairly steady until 1967 when it fell to about 65 percent. Until that time, the district had a larger percentage of production workers than did the nation as a whole. 140 DRAFT: 6/8/73 •"vrv- *• T»t- —►- - The value added by manufacturing increased very rapidly over the period at a faster rate than in both the state and the nation, especially between 1963 and 1967. (c) Commerc e (1) Retail trade. The number of retail trade establishments increased slightly from 1954 to 1967, despite a small decrease between 1958 and 1963. The pattern was very similar to that of the state of Arkansas, and the rate of growth was faster than that of the U. S. economy's. Sales increased steadily over the period in much the same manner as they did in the state and in the nation. (2) Wholesale trade. The rate of growth in the number of wholesale trade establishments was faster than that of the U. S. and approximately the same as that of Arkansas. Wholesale sales have increased steadily and slightly more rapidly than in the state or national economies. (3) Services. The number of establishments increased from 1954 to 1958, decreased from then until 1963, then increased again until 1967. The net result was an increase of 59 percent. Receipts have increased steadily at a rate of approximately percent per period, a growth pattern similar to that of the state and the nation. 141 FAMILY INCOME DISTRIBUTION >. C > H o VD k * t • H 04 ro | % c • • •• •• 1 % •H O o C2.’ *o if) iO 1 % cr> m i rH r-i rH o r- c o Vi o u * O a. V) ' I . i o*> o n o o O • • • • o O o o o in .•t CO rsi r 1 dn S 000 ‘ 0 T 666‘6-000 ‘L 666*0-000*0 606 * 6 - 000*0 666‘ti-000‘ti 666 ‘e- 000 ‘£ 666*2-000* £ 666*1-000* T 000 * T O Derived from U. S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census see Appendix. /*&> DRAFT: 6/8/73 TABLE XI.1 District 3119 Income and Income Distribution 1950 1960 1 -i- 1970 Family Income (% of families) | { » 1 Less than $1,000 42.3 ! 16.7 1 ! 5.1 $1,000 - $1,999 23.5 CM • CO H 9.3 $2,000 - $2,999 14.7 l 14.8 10.0 $3,000 - $3,999 9.o ; 11.9 8.9 $4,000 - $4,999 4.6 10.0 8.2 $5,000 - $5,999 2.5 8.3 8.3 $6,000 - $6,999 1.2 6.0 7.8 $7,000 - $9,999 1.2 9.2 • 18.6 $10,000 and over 1.1 5.1 23.8 Median Family Income $1329 $3030 $6026 as % of U. S. 43.2 53.5 62 > 8 as % of State 85.9 95.2 96.1 Per Capita Income NA $1257 $1984 as % of U. S. NA 56.7 50.6 as % of State NA 91.6 71.1 (in 1967 dollars) NA $1417 $1706 1 Derived from U. S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census Tables. For specific information, see Appendix. 143 ' I n r* CD ‘•v O H (u g O CM M X M e < H ! i 1 i I i > I District 3119 Employment by Industry and Occupation Group; Location and Quotients m h \ oo \ vc t* £ Q p R O cn CO o o cn ID 00 u t- •H on CN o rH »H rH o O rH o o o Ul 3 V) < O’ o CO o CN cn cn O cn Zt zt r- ftj c o cn rH CO o o o »H o o rH o . •H 00 P • r* o ip cn zt zt CN ID n.' y LO o cn rH CO o o o o o rH rH o Q P O CO CO 00 *H CN cn 00 CN cn W C CO < CQ O cn rH o o »H rH o o •—1 o P w o 3 o CN CN CO CN CN cn zt CO 00 F- O' CO < cn rH o o •H rH o o o C- c r -1 00 o •H P o3 U o rH rH r- CN CN in CN 00 cn o o rH rH o CN o 3 •—i T5 ID - in ID ID in zt co rH CO zt cn o rH CO rH CN rH o *H cn cn ID rH CO a* o r- CO *H 3- ID ID in zt rH ID *H on zt X Q o CO in in cn cn p- zt o CN •—1 rH CN zt ID co in O 00 zt in CO rH r~i cn zt cn o cn »H ID cn O CO x* r- o cn 00 o zt ID ID Cm CT> a a a IV * A rv A rv a a rv #• r* r. r. r* A r« A >< r—P r- cn in CN CN ID CO P' CN ID CO zt cn in CN ID zt Zt CN in O rH *H •—1 »— 1 a- CO rH t" CO CD zj- ID cn cn rH -3- rH in cn O cn 00 in a o o Zt zt cn x- CO rH O Zt ID CN ID CO (N lx o m co (X CD cn rH Zt cn co in CO 00 CN cn CN zt o ID »H rH ID CN CN CN cn a a a a a A A 0J H CO CO in st rH rH in in in uo zt zt 3- Zt 3- in 00 CD ao *H rH rH rH ID cn in CO CO CO 00 in •H rH cn CO ID -t o •H CN zt in X CN cn O rH 00 UD in in ID r- zt oc o lO zt cn O CN O co CN o co cn in CN cn *H m o CO ID o cc cn O ID r%* CC IX zt Zt r—1 CN CN cn a r» A a A rv rv rv A A #» rv a A #« r» r> A A rH cn CO rH in m ID ID in zt cn zt Zt CO ID 00 CN CO CO in in CN rH rH x> • 03 > P X 0) (/) c • CO a) •a & •H JC • c3 o o 0) X X3 cn p •H bO •> O c •H c: E-* > •a 03 cu •o uD P a> E Cm aj • c C o C3 X3 U5 C/) rH v iu X3 a> •H T3 P P u O o a. t: e •—( o oJ H >x P • o m> uD e A •H c O Cm Cm V-i np A (1) 10 • o (0 p T3 Q 2 P a • oi 2 > A n: A 03 rH l/) o C w T3 P CD 10 M rH CQ M • u • U. 03 T3 M Im 03 1/3 p C 04 >- H o o • *—1 •ri to 0) 03 c •H C. a a/ 03 (D o H h 4- 0) UD C/i O 2 x: XJ o 03 A V) O o P2 2 o P 13 O o c: •r-» p c p • X a. t: Fm O p r* rH A 1 —’ M o 03 IP r>H o 0/ > o XJ U1 ** :3 o • n W E- H IP c t: •H o r* 03 2 s • ‘m H u in r* c: < * A o o i/.» P p i.O A u D ip l/ 1 o u: o A O. • 10 •H W 03 03 • p •H • •—i 1/3 a r r-H ** IT. • ip r- • fl' VM P s s • rs AT* •V" 4-> W u H > H i o X) o *6 ! v > \ I I (0 o •H P 03 Q> 3 00 I p U-» * «rM JZ CO X a o co o ■9 4h U a> Cu CD (0 o '0 c a; o 4h O D 03 a ^3 O o G <1) n o o tp o C> u •V > 2 g ro C C co to o o 4 -' G 03 to c o •H p 03 > G a> co .1 t so • . . i .1 . i DRAFT: 6/8/73 CHAPTER XII District 3120: Mississippi A. Summa ry of Econom i c Conditions The economy of this district is characterized by a dominant but declining agricultural sector being slowly replaced by the manufacturing and service sector. However, the shift to secondary and tertiary activities has been slow, and the pace has actually weakened in recent years. While incomes have increased since 1950, the rate of increase has been far slov/er than the state or the nation as a whole; income remains at less than half the national average. That incomes have continued to be so lov; probably explains the relative stagnation of secon¬ dary and tertiary activity following the growth in the late fifties and early sixties: income did not rise sufficiently to provide continued stimulation of the economy through increased effective demand and improved savings and local capital formation. A complicating factor in this analysis is the extent to which the growth of Memphis, Tennessee, has distorted the aggregate view provided by the data. For example, much of the growth in the secondary and tertiary sectors may be concentrated in the northern part of the district, and could be based on spill-over from Memphis. If so, then the rest of the 147 DRAFT: 6/8/73 district is even more stagnant that the data reveal. Information in this regard remains to be collected, however. Also required is a full understanding of the district's resources and any policies or programs being developed to exploit them. In the absence of such in¬ formation, this initial analysis results in the conclu¬ sion that the economy of the district is only very slowly growing, and may even be deteriorating. B. Detailed Analysi s 1. Output (a) Income and I ncome Distribut ion. In unad¬ justed dollars, the pe r capita income of the district has risen from $603 in 1950 to $1559 in 1970. Adjusted to the 1967 price level, this has been a change of from $836 to $1340. As a percentage of the state per capita income, the district has slipped from 79.9 percent in 1970 to 60.5 percent in 1970. As a percentage of U. S. per capita income, the district fell from an already poor 40.3 percent to a slightly worse 39.8 percent; thus the district per capita income is increasing even more slowly than that of the state. Great improvement has been made as far as distribu¬ tion of income is concerned. In this district in 1950, 148 DRAFT: 6/8/73 57.9 percent of the families earned less than $1000 per year. Only 1 percent had incomes of $10,000 or more. By 1970, only 9.3 percent of the district's families were still earning less than $1000 annually, while 21.8 percent were earning more than $10,000. So the income distribution has shifted from extremely skewed at the lower end to a moderately increasing skewness at the upper end. Median family income was $869 in 1950, and $4877 in 1970. Expressed as a percentage of U. S. median family income, this shows an increase from 28.3 percent to 50.9 percent and relative to the rest of Mississippi the district went from 70.8 percent to 80.3 percent. (b) Employment Patterns . The district unem¬ ployment rates for the three census years 1950, I960, and 1970 were 2.5 percent, 5.1 percent and 6.6 percent respectively. This compares with 4.9 percent, 5.0 per¬ cent, and 4.0 percent in the U. S. as a whole. The low district figure in 1950 probably disguises underemploy¬ ment in the agricultural sector of this basically agricultural district. Employment in the agricultural sector decreased steadily in the period from 1950 to 1970, with an 84 percent decrease in the total number of persons employed. 149 DRAFT: 6/8/73 Agriculture was responsible for the jobs of 66.5 percent of all employed persons in the district in 1950, but by 1970 this figure had decreased to 16.2 percent. Manufacturing employment increased steadily and dramatically by 445.2 percent between 1950 and 1970. Relative to other employers, its percentage of the work force employed went from 3.1 percent to 22.5 percent.. The service sector as a whole also experienced rapid growth. Wholesale and retail trade employment increased 40.2 percent in the twenty-year period under observation, with most of the gains occurring between 1960 and 1970. In 1950 this group was responsible for 9.3 percent of all employed district workers, and this increased to 17.3 percent by 1970. Medical, educational, and government services also made great strides between 1950 and 1970. While it employed 5.3 percent of total employed persons in 1950, it employed 16.8 percent in 1970, an increase in total number of persons employed of 140.1 percent. Although the location quotients for agriculture de¬ creased slightly between 1950 and 1970 (5.3 to 4.4) this is still the economic base in the district. xhe district has a much larger percentage of its work force 150 ' DRAFT: 6/8/73 employed in agriculture than does the rest of the state or the nation. In manufacturing, despite dramatic increases in the total number of persons employed, the district still employs a smaller percentage of the employed labor force in manufacturing than does Mississippi or the U. S. The same is generally true for the tertiary sector — the district percentage is still smaller despite its large growth. Employment in professional, technical, and kindred occupations increased 11.5 percent in the twenty-year period, moving from 3.4 percent to 9.9 percent of the total employed labor force. The number of craftsmen, foremen, and kindred increased 85.1 percent between 1950 and 1970, from 5 percent to 12.3 percent of all em¬ ployed workers. Operatives and kindred rose by 1 j 4.9 percent. In 1960, they accounted for only 6.3 percent of the work force, but ten years later this percentage had increased to 21.3 percent. These results correspond to the increase in manufacturing activity v.hich this district experienced between 1950 and 1970. The percentage of total employed in the secondary sector in the district, however, is not as large as the corresponding percer age in Mississippi and the 151 ? DRAFT: 6/8/73 U. S. as a whole, despite the great development in the twenty-year period from 1950 to 1970. The number of persons employed as farmers or farm managers decreased 92.5 percent while farm laborers decreased 54.1 percent in the period 1950-1970. In 1950 these two categories represented 64.1 percent of total employed; in 1970, only 14.8 percent. Despite the very large decrease, the proportion of people employed in these categories is still much higher than in the state and the U. S., confirming that this district is still heavily dependent on agriculture. Clerical and kindred occupations increased 167.7 percent between 1950 and 1970, moving from a position of employing 3.0 percent of the work force in 1950 to employing 10.7 percent in 1970. This corresponds to the rise of the tertiary sector which was noted above However, this district still does not employ as large a percentage in these occupations as does Mississippi and the U. S. as a whole. (c) Migration Patterns . Between 1950 and 1970, 17 percent of the in-migrants in this district went into manufacturing, 17.5 percent into wholesale and retail trade, and 22.5 percent into services. This confirms the earlier conclusion that district 3120 is slowly 152 DRAFT: 6/8/73 moving toward the secondary and tertiary sector of activity. 2. The Economic System (a) Agriculture The number of farms has steadily decreased over the period 1950~1970 at a faster rate than in <~hc rest of the state and the nation. Compared to the U. S. in the aggregate, the decline was particularly rapid after 1963. Total farm acreage decreased between 1954 and 1963, and increased slightly after 1963. The value of agricultural products has been decreasing over time, except for 1963 when it increased slightly. The rate of decrease has been faster than the one in the rest of the state and the nation. Crops have been consistently rrto'-e important than livestock, dairy, and poultry products. But the value of the latter has been generally increasing since 1954, and the rate of this increase is faster than the national rate. (b) Industr y. The number of establishments increased between 1954 and 1967 faster than in the state or the nation. The number of paid employees has also trended upward since 1954 faster than the U. S., but not as fast as in the state as a whole. Value added by 153 DRAFT: 6/8/73 manufacturing has been steadily increasing over the period- with most of the progress coining between 1 058 and 1963. Since 1963, the rate of change has been far below that of the rest of Mississippi and the U. S. (c) C ommerce . (1) Retail trade. The number of retail trade establishments has increased slightly since 1954. The rate of change, however, is less than that of the state as a whole. Sales have also increased over the entire period, but since 1963 the rate of increase has been far below that of the state and the nation. (2) Wholesale trade. In this category the number of establishments increased slightly between 1954 and 1967. Since 1963, the number has increased at a faster rate than in the rest of the state and the nation. Sales have been steadily increasing since 1954, with most of the gains occurring in the 1954-1958 period. But since 1958, the rate of increase has been slower than the comparable one for Mississippi and the U. S. ( 3 ) services. In the services sector, the number of establishments has increased steadily over the entire period under observation. Since 1963, the rate of increase has kept pace with the corresponding rates in 154 DRAFT: 6/8/73 Mississippi and the United States, steadily between 1954 and 1967, but Receipts increased not as rapidly as in the rest of the nation. FAMILY INCOME DISTRIBUTION «*g»-ugg ca ^TK v *> •r -4 £ ft Cm C ft •H •V O in cn o 10 cn * 5 * v> o r- cn u •H •H O O a w c u. < •rt c. > b to 3 ■3 C Jk .O P S £ O *—I o, e u o f. rH^(NOCriin(\icio OOiHrOrHOC'rHt^ OCDIOOOOO CO #1 ro o co co h m co t» co 3 in co r~ cn in H • A 3 04 CO tient 1970 if CO rH co rH co in co o* 3- o rH o rH o O rH o c o u: oo 3 o in < ID •H IN CO CO in CM It a: c cn • • • • • • • • • b *h o- o o o o o O rH o •H cn P 0 O V ™ d co H CD rH CO in CM O 3 3s in o O O o o O rH o o. r»3 P O c r- ID GO CO CO o O' CM CO CO < c cn •H rH CN o O o ♦H rH O rH o a: P n CO E- § o O' ID ID CM m CO O ID < H CP G rH CN o o o o o O rH O co o ' H v C* 03 tn CD CM CM ID CO CO ID 3 O’ 3 H rH O o o o o O O O o o- c O o- CM in CM CO CO rH in • to • CO • rH O rH in in o cn r- o in CM CD ID CD 04 3- rH zr CO rH 3 rH Cn CO •* ■ 1 zr rH rH rH 1 w o 2 O O* 1 CN CO rH in co Cm CM 04 3 CO rH o O' CM ZT rH CO tD 00 O' o • 3 3.7 0 tO CD co i rH CO •H CO CO ID rH 1 O' O' 0 * 1 CD c*> O CD 3- rH 00 co If O' CO rH CM CM • CM 3 o it r- H If r- if CM CD rH rH CO WO It 1 ID 00 rH rH rH CO CO CM O' 1 o r- CM CM co in in CO CO O 00 CD ID Co CD O ID CM i> CM rH tO CP if t —( CM rH rH rH 3 E- o ID co CM O CO ID o CO CO CD o in rH o H Co rH 47. O LO CO CO CM rH rH rH rH CO in CD *H in t-H O tX> _1950 in rH CD • f-4 CD CO O rH CO it • in rH • CD tD o CO CO CM co O f' in CO O' it 3 0 ID 3 CT> in (O cn o in CD p 0 CD rH ID in in r- O' ■p b to r* r» r- »\ #■ r> rt r> * CO G •H in CM If rH •D in If CM CO CN u CD CM r. c3 0 O' n- in CT» in O' co CO O' m CD in 3 c; m o~ r- CO O' CM O' CO CD O CO CM »H a: b U) it cn ID cn in in CO CM CO CD cn M fd Pf P o 0) V) c 3 c • CD "O « -a u •H to c> • 3 u o a> w *: -3 G Vi •H U p c ns u H •rl > u ■9 ^ c c "a o ■8 cO a> c 0) f= M ft CD rH •p •rH H u b a c § c o Of uD •H cn > a. X? a •H X? b ro o 03 u5 <0 o a. c H 2 rH o fl G o >> •M • o 3 «o £ ft •H 3 O u. u. < 03 cn ti n V CO • o 0) U T3 E o G - D 4-> bO • Oi 3 >• cc: •» 'p rH n 0 E a> CO XJ P CD •H CO o V\ C c •H K b • u • u. X5 u U. 03 to b c Q. f-* (w cc V o • r-4 •rH vO a> c c 3 ZD - u, o rH n rH r 0 3 rH O 0 > O X) w i: w 3 a • <5 D o UJ H H Uh 03 DC t •H (U ; u o • • • to n Q. CO r> C < ft ft o fj to P •u ft f< CO u c IP c a; o n & •H W) p 05 *3 b rj &* ft o •Ci e o Ck a. < o m a o H •9 p o •H Ip •H O 0 u w b O u. to 3 to c - u b ~rrrjrj Unclassified 3.8 T 0.0 0.0 2.3 i Agriculture 3.8 0.0 0.0 Mining 0.0 0.0 5.0 2.3 Construction 10.6 2.2 7.7 17.5 7.4 4.5 Manufacturing 27.1 35.5 30.8 17.5 22.2 31.8 Transp., Util., 6 Sant.Snrv. 10.6 6.5 7.7 7.5 11.1 9.1 Wholesale f. Retail 18.8 26.9 19.2 17.5 29.6 22.7 *F, I, R, E 5.9 4.3 C.O 2.5 3.7 4.5 Services 21.2 22.6 23.1 22.5 14.8 20.5 Med., Lduca., Govt. 5.9 2.2 3.8 10.0 11.1 2.3 Derived from U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau ot the Census Tables. For Specific information, see Appendix. *F, I, R, E: Financ', Insurance and Real Estate. 159 Agriculture, Industry and Cotwperce; Shift-Share Ratios I •o c 0) o. a, < v 4 > (0 •a u & o f. £ 3 CO e o> o ® • -C 5 a 8 | & -3 - i 0 £ c ^ o g: I«S (0 •H Q a) u ti «> E E O o •o c fl :x fr* p V) 3 •3 P V 5j O ■r P oo < O r- •H CD P 1 a fO co U 3 « lO c n c G U CO m co • 1 CO CO co 1 10 • p 3 4 * •H CD -C LO w 1 zf UO r~ in O ' •H CO P ID fd ce. 0) co x oo CO in I p 4^ •H 00 X uo co ^ in oo uo uo c cn H ^ CP 04 CO CN! rH I I J rH h H rH 00 rH 04 »H it I id t*-* it cn co CM O H ^ CM 04 I I f CO CN CD - 3 - it »H C 7 > a> uo in • • • • • • • • • • • • • rH CD 0 0 O 0 O O in 0 O 0 0 0 =T cn cr> if) O cn m -■t a- H 04 CJ* r- • • • • • • • ♦ • • • • • rH r-* CM It rH •H 0 O O O CM O rH •H rH 1 1 04 O O 04 ir- rH rH a> CO 04 CO 00 O • • • • • • • • • t • • • CD O (T» rH 0 O O rH 04 cn «H 0 O CM O CO CP • • • • • rH O UO rH O O It Oi H • • • • rH O O O O O cn O 0 3- CD 00 • • • • rH rH 0 »H rH in cn CO 04 ID CO t H O • « • • • rH 00 CO I I I CO 04 CM CO O CO o I ^ CP t CO H • • • • • to H co it It CO if IT I I I CO p o a r-s. rj O o o Jh o a, v—•” U-I 0 ) o CO CO E g <|Cm u U < u • r-4 G Q * o o p 10 U «H O X CO •H r-4 X) re p (ft u: //> 4-4 CO O N —' LO O ^ 3 O X X C G P 0 O X *-< —I *r4 X G« 4-* < rH a O fC ■ * r* g t, r* a* t- i i CO It co • • * o o o CD CP O • It rH O rH o in h • • • rH O O t CO It m CO CO 0 CT> rH • • • • • • • • • •H rH rH O 0 0 0 O CM CO rH rH CM CO 00 0 c • • • • • • • • • 0 0 O O rH CM CM H 0 0 0 (X a, O* in 0 * CO cn LO CD O CO UO cn cn C/3 • • • • • • • • • • • • • LO rH cn Zr CD rH it uo uo CM CM rH O rH CO •H CO »* w CO it cn CO CO CM CO 0" CO CO cn 3- cn CO CD CD r- (O CO CD • • • • • • • • • • • • • 2 1 O rH CD CD CO CD CD CN CM 3- rH CM CO cn O CO 3- O co cm in C>J j- rH CD CD 3- rH CO CN CD uo 1 i 1 rH rH 1 c*P oc 3- rH 9 6 cn CO CO 00 CO t"* fH CO Jt ID 0 CO UO l/J • • • • • • • • • • • • • 1 C- CO CM CO CD CD 3- rH CD CM rH 0 CD LO rH CO O It uo co CO It O CM rH UO CM CM »H t*- CO 00 in 1 1 1 rH 1 1 1 3- CO CO O LO in CO O O O O CO l> CD in cn CO uo CO o- in co 00 CO cn rH O O O CD UO 0 in co cn 15' uo CO C, CD co cn It It cn rH CM CM CM 00 CM rH uo CD in in X Cn r « C*. r> r r\ n #* r r. r r. >- rH in CO It CO UO It r- rH It CO CO OP 0 QO CD co CO 0 X rH »H s: co co r- 3- rH CM O ro in 0 uo CO rH CD uo LO W CO rH 04 rH CO CO O It rH CO CO CM It It LO c> cn 00 O CD cn cn It CM H rH c- 0 CO co cn uo rH CD c- Ii' 0 CD O r * r> c" #k *• r* n r> #. «4 * #» u •H O rH in cm 00 4 4 3- rH 3- CO CM CD CD rH CO CM »H CO CM 00 25“ H f5 TZ in cm co m CM CD cD uo CM CO rH CD CO r- CM CO It cn CO 0 0 CO It rH Cn r*H cD CD O' CM -4- in X O'i r- CO CD LO C" 0 CM CM rH C- it CM CM CO 3- rH CD r- 3 CD CD O') r #* r> c* n #» r r\ n r r r« #* rH CO It o- CO CD rH CSI CO rH CD CO UO UO rH 0 CO rH rH »H CO r- *j0 3 - m cn CD 0 cn OO O CO rH uo CD cn It CD H' in co CO CO CO rH CM O O CO rH CM CD •—1 r- CD in rH rH cn 0 0 - O CD uo CO CM It rH CD 3- co uo CD cn v* r r * «N r» * 9 #* r #» r r X CM CM »J> rH r- CM rH C r-( cn co 3- It CO in id '— 1 rH »H CO rH O to W O >1 P .r-N rH P O c rH y 0 •H O E G r-N 3 £ rH O £ o> 0 O CD X o o rH to G X) n < a, > ?■ co -iw t— E U CO c G e a. a •h o X G CO X G H 3 ££ O rH Q) Cu rH E co G X C • ►“* l< CQ O o g •p p c o o.!e- M CO G X rH *H m g CD CL, CO ^-*V 0) o o > G o CO a,x w g a CD LJ co a G X G G G G W D, (O CO o p o C rH G e w X (/•) CO Oi '-‘PE 1 h a. w X -H *0 G X P U -H Cf) o aJ (0 ■ o $ tu <4 £ o v & E E O o 4-1 O •P c V (4 aj a o 0 co 0 o 'H fn 4) a. o 4-1 o Uh (0 T3 V) 3 O 3 C •H +-> B C I i; II l » t • i I, !• ii 1 i! I. i 1 1 1 DRAFT: 6/8/73 CHAPTER XIII District 4125: Arkansas A. Summary of Economic Conditions The condition and outlook for this district is somewhat the same as for the first Arkansas district, District 3119. Agriculture in this district, however, is even more dominant. While the secondary and tertiary sectors have made up for the decline in agricultural employment, the shift to these sectors does not appear to be having a strong enough effect on income growth to sustain any more than a slow rate of overall develop¬ ment . As in District 3119, programs and policies designed to increase the number of high-skill, high-pay manu¬ facturing jobs would have a more favorable effect on economic growth through increased effective demand and higher rates of saving and local capital formation. Furtner information regarding the existence of such policies and plans is needed before a firm prognosis can be made. Nonetheless, it does appear, on the basis of available evidence, that economic growth is occurring in the district -- the question of the pace of that growth remains. 161 DRAFT: 6/8/73 B. D etailed Analy sts 1. Outp ut (a) Income and I ncome Distributio n. Both ad¬ justed and unadjusted per capita income have increased in the period 1950-1970. Unadjusted per capita income rose 72.5 percent between 1960 and 1970. The growth, however was not as rapid as the growth of either the state of the U. S. per capita income. Therefore, the ratio of per capita income in the district to state and national per capit a income has declined. The income distribution situation is a more favorable one. In 1950, 44.5 percent of the families in this dis- tr ict had an income of less than $1000. Only 0.6 percent had an income of over $10,000. By 1970, however, only 5.2 percent of the district's families earned less than $1000. And more than 16.5 percent were earning over $10,000. As can be seen in Figure XIII.1, the distri¬ bution has shifted from being highly skewed at the low end in 1950 to being increasingly skewed at the high end in 1970. Median family income has risen from $1184 in 1950 to $4969 in 1970. This reflects an increase of median district family income as a percentage of state and national median family incomes from 76.5 percent 162 DRAFT: C/R/7'i to 79.2 percent and 38.5 percent, to 51.8 percent, re¬ spectively . (b) Employment Patterns . Unemployment in dis¬ trict 4125 has risen from 3.6 percent in 1950 to 9.6 percent in 1960 and 8.9 percent in 1970. Unemployment in the U. S. was 4.9 percent in 1950. 5.0 percent in 1960, and 4.0 percent in 1970. The largest industry group in this district in 1950 was agriculture, forestry, and fisheries, which employed 51.2 percent of the total district labor force. But by 1970, employment in this group had declined to only 13.6 percent. Manufacturing, on the other hand, increased from 10.1 percent in 1950 to 25.2 percent in 1970. The services industry employed 7.3 percent of the labor force in 1950 and 16.9 percent in 1970. Retail trade and business services also increased slightly. As indicated by location quotients, the economic base of the district is agriculture. The location quotient decreased, however, from 4.1 in 1950 to 3.7 in 1970. The largest increases in location quotients were in the construction (0.8 - 1.5) and manufacturing (0.4 - 1.0) industries. Very little change occurred in the service industries. Wholesale and retail trade in¬ creased from 0.6 to 0.9. 163 DRAFT: 6/8/73 On the basis of the location quotients, agriculture is the only basic industry in this district. There appears to be a continuing but lessening reliance on agriculture, and a continuing though lessening dependence on areas outside the district for some services. This district is a net exporter of agricultural products and a net importer of services. It appears possibly self- sufficient in manufacturing. The data show a continuing relative dominance of agricultural occupations. The location quotient for farm laborers and foremen has risen from 3.6 in 1950 to 3.9 in 1970. This pattern is similar to that of the state as a whole. The professional, technical, and kindred occupations remained stable over the twenty-year period. The other yroups were generally stable as well, with only slight increases in the percent of labor force employed in each classification. (c) Migration Patterns . Our data on migrations is based on a 1 percent Social Security sample. The figures indicate that there was a net inflow of approxi¬ mately 1900 people into district 4125 between 1960 and 1970. Of the in-migrants during 1965-1970, 32 percent had occupations in the manufacturing industries; 18 per¬ cent were in wholesale and retail trade; 13 percent 164 DRAFT: 6/8/73 were in transportation, communication, and public utilities; 12 percent came into the cons'ruction i ndus- try; and 2 percent of the in-migrants were in agricultural occupations. Due to these migrations, there was a net gain in total wages earned in the district of over $6 million in the ten-year period. 2. The Economic System (a) A griculture The number of farms in this district de- creased steadily from 1954 to 1967 (17,131 to 8,484). This decline was less rapid than the decline in the number of farms in the state of Arkansas, but it was more rapid, especially in recent years, than the de¬ cline in total number of farms in the U. S. Total acreage in this district also declined in the thirteen- year period, but not as rapidly as the number of farms. This decline, however, has been at an accelerating pace. Total U. S. farm acreage actually increased between 1963 and 1967, but it continued to decline both in the district and the state. The value of agricultural products in thi-a distric has been increasing steadily from 1954 through 1967. The growth has been faster than that of both Arkansas 165 - DRAFT: 6/8/73 and the U. S. Between 1963 and 1967, the value of agricultural products in district 4125 grew much more rapidly than the value of total U. S. agricultural products. Agricultural activity has shifted in value terms from crops to livestock, dairy, and poultry products. This shift has been somewhat less rapid than that of the state, but both have followed the same general pattern. The changeover from crops to livestock has been more rapid in this district than in U. S. agricul¬ ture as a whole between 1963 and 1967. (b) I ndustry The number of manufacturing establishments in this district fluctuated around 200 in the period 1954-1967. In Arkansas and in the U. S., however, the number of establishments steadily increased in this time period. The number of persons employed in manufacturing in this district increased rapidly from 3730 in 1958 to 6800 in 1967. After 1963, this growth rate was faster than that of the U. S. as a whole, but somewhat slower than that of the state of Arkansas. The percentage of manufacturing employees who are production workers has declinrd from 91 percent to 85 percent. The general pattern is quite similar to that of Arkansas and the 166 DRAFT: 6/8/73 U. S., but the ratio in the district is consistently greater than that of the state or the nation. Value added by manufacturing increased at a very rapid pace over the time period observed. Prior to 1958, the dis¬ trict's growth rate of value added lagged behind the U. S. growth rate. But from 1958 to 1967, district value added grew much more rapidly than U. S. value added. The state's value added has also increased in this period, but at a slower rate than the district. (c) Commerce (1) Retail trade. In the area of retail trade, from 1954 to 1967, the number of establishments in district 4125 grew faster than the state and much faster than the U. S. This trend has been accelerating since 1963. Sales have also increased in this period, and with the exception of 1958-1963, this increase has been more rapid over the time period that in either the state or the nation. (2) Wholesale trade. The number of whole¬ sale trading establishments increased from 1954 to 1963 and remained fairly constant from 1963 to 1967. The increase from 1954 to 1963 was faster than the state or the national increase, but from 1963-1967, the number of establishments in the district declined slightly while 167 DRAFT: 6/8/73 total establishments in Arkansas and the U. S. as a whole increased. Wholesale total sales reflects the same pattern as the number of establishments in the district, the state, and in the nation. (3) Services. The number of establishments in the district grew from 1954 to 1967, with a slight decrease in the growth rate between 1958 and 1963. This growth rate was about the same as that of Arkansas and generally greater than the U. S. growth rate during this period. Receipts grew from $4,489,000 to $12,005,000. This trend was generally better than that of the state and very similar to that of the U. S. as a whole. 168 o e o u c g o ) > > I I i * l r> o\ O o o •*H •—l 00 (N VO ir» u» r- 10- 1 l u« ■H * c 1 % «0 • • •• •• o •H o o o 1 •H CO cO r- 1 % (J a- s: H H rH { % • dn 3 000 ‘ 0 T 666‘6-000‘A 666*9-000*9 666*5-000*9 666*6-000* h 666*6-000 f 666*6-C00 *C 666‘T-000‘T 000 * T ifi in 3 V) c o O 0> X o 3 r» C£> ^ '“i c; I o CJ U-. o M G d> n o« C Q . I CO c •rH L c o Q. > < •H O C 1 r j to DRAFT: 6/8/73 TABLE XIII.l District 4125 Income and Income Distribution 1950 , 1960 ; 1970 Family Income (% of families! •4 -- j 1 Less than $1,000 44.5 18.1 5.2 | $1,000 - $1,999 30.0 24.5 ! H.7 $2,000 - $2,999 14.0 17.3 12.5 $3,000 - $3,999 5.9 ■ 12.5 i n.i • $4,000 - $4,999 2.5 9.0 ! 9.8 $5,000 - $5,999 1.4 i 6.0 i 9.1 i $6,000 - $6,999 0.6 4.1 7.6 • $7,000 - $9,999 0.6 i 5.2 1 j 16.9 $10,000 and over 0.6 ! 3.3 I ! ; 16.5 Median Family Income $1184 ; $2427 $4969 as % of U. S. 38.5 ! 42.9 | 51.8 as % of State 76.5 j 76.2 79.2 Per Capita Income NA $1065 $1837 as % of U. S. NA 48.1 46.9 as % of State NA 77.6 65.8 (in 1967 dollars) NA $1201 i ! $1580 Derived from U. £. Department of Commerce, Bureau of t.he Census Tables. For specific information, see Appendix. 170 DRAFT: 6/0/73 TABLE Xf I 1.3 District 'tl2S migration l ATTi:, BY INDUSTRY GROUP Percent of Total 1 INDUSTRIAL GROUP Non-Migrants I In-Migrants Out-Mj grants 60-6 b 65-70 60-65 C5-70 60-66 - 5-70 Unclassified - - 0.0 5.0 1 _ 1 Agriculture 0.0 1.0 0.0 2.0 - - Mining - 1.0 7.4 - 2.6 1 Construction 0.0 2.1 11.1 12.0 10.0 13.2 Manufacturing 34.8 30.2 37.0 32.0 25.0 28.9 Transp., Util., 6 Sant.Sorv. 7.2 6.3 7.4 14.0 10.0 10.5 Wholesale 6 Retail 27.5 17.7 11.1 18.0 20.0 10.5 *r, I, R, E 2.9 4.2 7.4 4.0 10.0 7.9 Services 23.2 31.3 18.5 1.4 15.0 23.7 Med., Educa., Govt. 4.3 6.3 0.0 4.0 5.0 2.6 Derived from IJ.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau o i the Census Tables. For Specific information, sec Appendix. *r, I, R, E: Finance, Insurance and Real Estate. 172 District *»1?5 Enplcynont by Industry and Occupation Group; Location and Quotients > ! V u fZ 4-» CO u •3 o r-4 ■a a u a (0 9 w 9 O o JZ V 44 O => 3 9 O 44 O Cm as cj c/5 3 o o 9 o to r*C I CO r* \ 00 \ ID CN M t-4 hH X a CO < H 0) 4~> <0 w w 03 .3 *o CJ o. < 0) o to m (/) Q> . «-~4 <0 u o a. o (4 <2 to 3 CO c a- a 0) ,c U<« O 3 fU o ru a> d I o 44 o c 0) B a ai a co 3 «> H • to to o a. 4-» O C w 2 ^ nj •» so 6 V a> > H 3 O a> to c o t> »2 <0 > <0 o c to c o tfl > (4 o to Xi o V I • 17" TABLE XIII. 4 DRAFT: 6/8/73 to o •H i? CD CN O •H 15 CO •r-( Q 00 I 4~> lu •r-J si CO • r- 0) o Cl o E F: O CJ T1 C O >> C« 4-» IT. t3 •V c ►-H CJ Cl a o .3 'V c o Zi oj o & o C/J CJ rH rQ •H VJ 00 o Cs o c 10 •H CO >> r-i r6 C 0J in k o >> a> ;» •H ■|J 3 o CJ OT C o u u i2 ID +J O c (/) c o 4-> > 14 CJ w 43 O ' APPENDICES APPENDIX A: ALABAMA DRAFT: 6/3/73 Derived from U. S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census Tables. DRAFT: 6/8/73 APPENDIX A: ALABAMA Table 1 Income and Income Distribution 1950 i j 1960 1970 1 Family Income (% of families i j Less than $1,000 31.5 12.7 4.6 $1,000 - $1,999 22.5 13.9 1 6.8 : $2,000 - $2,999 18.3 I 12.5 7.1 I $3,000 - $3,999 12.1 11.7 7.3 $4,000 - $4,999 6.6 10.9 7.1 $5,000 - $5,999 3.7 10.0 7.6 $6,000 - $6,999 2.0 7.8 7.5 $7,000 - $9,999 2.0 12.6 20.8 $10,000 and over 1.3 7.9 31.2 !Median Family Income $1820 $3937 $7266 as % ot U. S. 59.2 69.6 75.8 Per Capita Income $ 880 $1488 $2849 as % of U. S. 58.8 67.1 72.7 (in 1967 Dollars) $1021 $1710 $2450 Census^Table^" S ‘ UepartInent of Commerce, Bureau of the 176 u & CO G> O u 1> I o u c o e & Q. O O 00 ro *» u u zs o 00 I I % % I APPENDIX A: ALABAMA c o •rl «-> o 3 O' c o •H 4-* ri .Q (0 £- G t" I D O O !*—I '—' Hl^ 00 O < 3 « O' O 10 G O u o C m <0 CX 3 O O O X) G 10 U •o G K-l .Q c V g. o a lol rH O rH «“( *H O O *H O U1M—tocncpaiocr* ,HrHrH.HOOOrHO Oiocncor^ooiorooo cC *H OOOCO»—iO f.t'O'OlOOOC'-M^ t" CP CM St r- tt •H CO o 1 l r. 00 1 tD 1 c* m CO st r —( r-4 CO *—4 o CO r- o CM CO o o ID in • in • in • o to LO tn CO rr o m CM r—4 CM CM CM uo to i 1 o ID tD CO CP o CM O o # • • • • • • • tD o m ID CD uo 3" st o in in CO CM «—4 CO »—4 uo LO i i CP CP tD t"- o r- o tD • • • • • • • • CO o CO CD ID CP CO CP r-4 CM r—4 CM CD «—4 r** in CP o CD 3 ID • • • m • • • • CP r-4 ID tD in t^* St O m CM r-4 r-4 r-4 ID C^- CO CO CP r- St in • « • • • • • zt CM in 3—4 in St CO CP o CM CM r-4 r-4 13 CT>3C-'-r'-i0C3rHir. 3 CM a) O in 3 3 CO CO 3 #»#k* , r'rrCNrHCT'C0CO:*»f~ -t 00 3 r- OS 3 O :0 CO CM H CM lOCMOitNOnff’cfH inOLOcnoij-tncNJO OPC-'COG'C't^UOt'-lO ere > rr»***rr> JHHIMNOMOID OrHC'~CO<0CDinr-tl0 H OJ '—i H H K H H x rt n to to co O h CM 3 1C, CJ Ul 3 p-* O >—l »H 10 1 —l r~ 3 nhSSO'nroujm iXcMuocMuocncocrio cvj cm -s >H •C M •H U* U 5 >* U V* to o V* o u+ u c CO O V r 5 n v< n? H IS) t- 1 L> «*H rr * 4-3 • a t*0 *H .O' a* CO w o o c o •r| •M o 3 b£) ^ C ♦-* •H *h yj C-.CC r *0 •-* O < x o c o > * c • .*-» ur u* o n Zj CO O c» •* c r r~-i * rH T? . r w f?» w Cl w * c. w : ct: o * ,*I rl •* Si • O *“4 m OJ >4 >- •* <*- C f- > u. a. ?' in r-4 O CD r- 3- in CO r- CM r- CO St rH st CO r—4 CO st CO CO CM CD CO CM CO tD CO CM O'* tD CO r—\ 1 r-4 • 1 1 ID CP CD ID in in CD st CO in # • • • • • • • • • CO to to 3-

CO o tD CO r* r-4 r-4 CM CO ID CD CO to CD CP CO CD CO CO • • • • • • • • to in ID m O CO u0 IT; st r-4 r-i r-4 i —4 rH • in H O • CM H X • CO o o o o o o coOf-tt^CNcoincNr'-ioio cpcpuor^couococor*c^m .JCNlO^COl^CMOHCDCN *■»#>•» r>?«r.rir»r**» h ID W ID h H ID CM h J-ClOOhCOL.O^HHh cH r-4 »H CM r-4 r-t^cocnocsiOrfr-coCM cocorHCMincnr-ococor^ ootomcpcpcM.d'r^cPcD *#»#»*•.#»«*•»«*** io ri rH oo c- cp to r*- *h m uo O^COH^C’O'HtDCDfO^ rH H CM (NfOHHCT'fOOiOOl^n (NjH^CNOOC'OJCBO COCDCO( r )COCT'^OHHCB *#»***'*'***>«'#•«• _-f ocnuor^ o ^ uo o o> to ~J c C O l rj t4 O C •Cl .V. T) o o u i- rj M 5h C> ;t C- *H r C ^ y. r~i c> o c. -j a io tj to ri co o c: c/ x u c I • ir 5- • C •-! O !c rp •f 4.. 4-» —J x. r* y M • n r. .. i C. F* f., C. U V ri r > 0. Oi f*< 4 J ru a o X Vi o in r-4 OO ft CO CP t" <7> cr> ft in lO o 1C o CO CO o r-T n o ft-3 >: Ui < F— O H W <; CK. (0 >: o ^-3 1.5 s i ; r- r- H n w -t. tn u c c- oc *rl C? U C r c. b c H o 3 0« 5! M O •H 4» £ o fc4 fi jC V) I r VJ o o *4 ro d u o I I U c» - kD •Q « ^ H ^ V4 •0 i* t. rp fv oi ^ o r* co co r> cm 3 cm 3 n 07 «?> h (\ H O) h h r. 07 CD 07 O U 7 Hu>HOCM n r> i H h j J" H H H O H <57 CD O CO © O rH eH O CM O rH I I CO vD O I r> CT 7 M O O .H I h CM O H H H I CM © OHH tO CO r( r* O r-4 cm r** cm Cm O H 07 07 «*7 OHH lO O O CM H (* • • • • • « H H H H H O o CO O' 3 1/7 rH o O if 3 •H o CO c< cr» © rH o O’ o Cm rH © rH CO 3 Cm CM 1 o CM rH rH * 1 *H 1 »H 1 rH rH © * r-J O' CM r- CM r-1 CO O* rH (**■ O O' kC. 00 CO © 3 CM 07 m CO CC © © CM CM CO 3 CM rH c* CM I 03 i /7 3 3 .7 O lO 07 h n cm n O' O' CT CM CM o n o 7 O O O' i£> O' H H n J CO O O O' o CM [- H p* a> co »n cm CM O' CM O' rH 3 •H 3 r-< C 7 H 07 CM J H H J U7 CM CM O' 1/7 P ft I s 3 ID © O O CM CO CO CM © f*. H O' P ffl © «H 3 O © O 00 CO P7 CM CD O' CO tO CM O (M CM * » • * * (M O' l> 07 <*7 O' »H CO 3 O* tO CM CM a n n o n CO 3 © CO CD p l/l (M C> CM • • • » « to O 7 C7 o H H H a CM c-t 7 H CM x o r> cr © tl ^4 U 7 3 O p, ® in i^) » • » • » © O C 3 O .H > CM O CO H rH OHH #-< o o o in o o o o a o) i/> 7 a to © 03 CO CH CM CM M3 • O O' O O 3 P C 7 H O cr- © co 3 r. t- CM in CM rH © CD r-> 3 CO O' rH © r* c> • o r* O 3 rO O' O' rH © CM « * cc a c O O CO 3 CD CO CM r- r © CM in rH O' CO rH © co c rH CM rH CO CO 4* «> • u CO r> i O' O' CM O O CM CO O © op CC CM la ! -t. t.Mj: O u « Mh o i/ 4~ j-; c* r*^ c r u •»« rH rH C- o r ! o o V V) u <» | P O o i: *V | I' o o 17 E Vi r •H 3 O V. . r. -H ^ c f i r*» C *> »-> o t» i-’ «lrl C- u ■J r v> C| —% o c U CL O c- u -—4 O fa y C , >3 •V -o, -1 c. ;-n '3 >» c CJ 3 •H U| *5 t i r m c c C o c. r 4 N-r o cx r^ •y •c n - c *H ►-1- ir *i l. «r r-* rH rH - • rH & O o /- 4^J .• # < •»' n • r; •: » - l' *r ‘. r « 7 .1, V K7 oj c ) *> ■»* f f a' ♦- K t» n • Hi ,V u r* ;. • , * r « 'M a. U) % . »4«' » 4 *. H 1*1 ■ — — « » 1^4 W) t4 rO • H in •4. * ' H l 1 rl y *. *« r-, r , 4 01 <• •*; » . .T* C c <5J V fi o • • « ' . 1 • ••» «' « • • • * • J • • * •». * * *' J • H • 4 *-» . •! £ r • . i .. c (% r* n r ! .» c: rj V VI "5 •r >11.1 .. .0 4 ;u t — U 4 ■ :c i.s •. i i>. l.i cr. a, «• •i .‘i 4 •: f. »• • H o :• *' 1 •• 1* nJ •. i t * • • • • • 4- • • c > • > * • *1. m « < 4»4 c.- c* u 9 *0 t. ‘d C3 £ i CO r-* CD VD I CQ 3 < X H Q 2 Id P< S 3 w o "H V o H flj • C to I 4J V*H •ri -C (0 ro <1) r-H X! (0 Eh •K V o 1-4 0) o o T3 C rj 4J t/5 •o t: H . -t O CD iT» O in o O o o o o o o o r> OI rH l Derived from U. S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census Tables. DRAFt; 6/8/73 APPENDIX B: ARKANSAS Table 1 Income and Income Distribution 1950 j 1960 i 1970 Family Income (% of families) Less than $1,000 36.0 14.2 4.4 $1,000 - $1,999 25.6 18.3 8.2 $2,000 - $2,999 16.6 i 15.2 9.2 $3,000 - $3,999 9.9 12.7 8.9 $4,000 - $4,999 5.1 10.3 8.5 $5,000 - $5,999 2.7 8.6 8.7 $6,000 - $6,999 1.3 6.1 8.0 $7,000 - $9,999 1.5 9.1 20.0 $10,000 and over 1.3 5.4 24.2 Median Family Income $1547 $3184 $6273 as § of u. s. 50.3 56.3 65.4 Per Capita Income $ 825 $1372 $2791 aa % of U. S. 55.1 61.9 71.2 (in 1967 Dollars) $1005 $1547 $2400 Derived from U. S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census Tables. 180 Employment by Industry and Occupation Group; Location Quotients 0) XL 4-i o 3 r0 ra o> o o Uh o c Q, e TJ ru Q) n V) r> u d 3 O t/1 00 H v \ \ I CN o •—< rtf H P P W 3 X> C P c: o & o >-l (X e w a o •H H P O cr O H? cz cr» O r~» 0) u o O id J o > n D a’j i X ;j o' ;o g o IT Cn r-4 (N^lrHrHOMOrHO CCCOHhOlOOlHCO C^OrHOOMOMO cnr^cniot^coiDOoo fNOOOOOOr—(O O cn €0 *— CO O f-H Cm CN cn P- ! it CO ID cn o- cn O cn it C CN CN cn *H CN CN tP i 1 r-< to cr a CJ r~i ID ID O ID 00 CO CD cn ID V "j r • •»"4 Pi < ID CO r~i cn CO *H ID CO 00 P < o It CN it *H CN CO O ■J.’ Cl s 1 ri o o c c*> O o It it CO CO it It ID vD • • • • • • o 1 If CO CO CO r—J CO cn it co •H o ID CN CD <—i CO P to 1 1 1 n3 o *.-0 O It CO CO *H It It ID CN ID • r C-* 00 O II) CO co cn CO CO O P <—J CN CN 3 P3 o ..f Pi H CD o o r- cn It i —1 CN It O 1—4 | LD • • • • • • • C , i C* r- o CO O CO 00 it cn o Cm - r-i H CN •H •,-4 O | p to r» •* 0 * r* ■^'lOJ'OIHlOOJnCM ^ lO ^ N C4 lO CO oooj-roooiDj-jf OjUSMOOCMrHJ-O c\OD4uia)CDa)n-( lor'CN^Hj-mcNr'rH •'r>rr»r\*vr>#s»v »H CO CO CO O) (N 4- in ex cnmc\HfOLD(Nic\foo co ^ooHd-u)r^cno)rvo cnj-ir)inc\ja)^iococ\N CO CN ID GO it CD CO H ID (N (O o r>- to (N H ^ ID oi r~ Cn CD CO Jt a? CD it o o o r- r- CO o CO <—1 O o CO it rH r- cn CN rH CD it CN it * r r' 0> r» e. It cx It it r- CO ID CO r-i CN CN CO CO rH ID LO co it o ID cn n c? CO (\ H O ri o> H H it ^o H h C\ h H h ^ ^ ri ^ #s r» r» r' t— nr^cniDt^cnr' ro i j n ci in k ^ ID o cO it ID rH CN o o CN CN 1 m CO CO 00 it O LD It o CO ["* « 1 00 00 rH i —i # it CO CO ID it CO CN 00 rH CO o p ff* p cn ul r* 4 r k * C» 0- X) c O a a, < a? o w w CD x> (0 4n •H O 0 a, co P o p, •J) o to r: o c_> a> xi. p u« o Z5 0? 0* ij fO 0) v> P - — C <0 c u • Q? »p c; 0 x: a> P c: T 4-' to CO V a* P .. -4 V. "0 o *-'• p P r: •H U. • -n p ri C u •H s r» r- Kl •« c: 0* H r 1 •/: a F. H U5 O'. F- 00 J. O C ■ l T' ri, " > P >> •P cn .—1 to •• t •* 4 • •'0 to 4-> > o /C. r« r: o V V r f 'O r~i 0> o rr* r^i i- * C! n o’ n A4 a? • C; ri • ' * P M r- j, M-4 ( 4 . rl' :o r-. o C bC k“! -H fi' ;r > c. (J, j •') . < f n . •J) Tl 4 ' 1 1 co O' O • r-4 4 ' «» • H • ; ! v L j -1 n* s' * r . u. r 9 • H tj 01 •:< »o U -t I i ) <0 - in ') "J ' J f ' 4 1 r.i rt. l ) .1 1 * r» f. p —j • n M rjl *rj u\ !' !j 1 . it, *i ..: '; r_i *» J • .< 1 71 1.) c, > >■! >* :i hn u IT 1 it. ! 0) :< 1*4 c • U) r> o k 1 • •. 1 P »0 c: U4 H U* t/1 O' • 1 •T3 \) L*'. (i n p X* f '-1 Hj V , •/s (!) * ( CJ • ' , i»« > . 1 »\ O . 1 •C pi 0 . I*'. 0 > * Uj •H (• »r y> j r< a* a’ , ' 1 »4 <-• r-' 1 r- 0 CJ »H < 5 Im a, V 1' ” k k jl. t » \ < 0. V P 0-4 CO . J O ! - Cm -** CD I o r- \ CD \ V£> e 2 Q W < (/) § cc, < CO X H a w 0« < CM CO i I i i i i i : i i i i i I i t \ \ i .! i APPENDIX B: ARKANSAS DRAFT: 6/8/73 co < 1 ) H JQ 10 H to O •H -P 2 <1) >>4 <0 W I +J y) i 4J (Q D V c 0) w o o •H p O' u 'J & ce: U. S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census. For specific tables, see Appendix APPENDIX C: KENTUCKY DRAFT: 6/8/7 3 - J o o o o f 1 o o C) IN «/> • f. 'i') Derived from U. S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census Tables. DRAFT: 6/8/73 APPENDIX C: KENTUCKY Table 1 Income and Income Distribution 1950 ~1-- 1 j 1960 1970 Family Income (fc of fami1i^q) 4--— Less than $1,000 26.5 12.1 4.0 $1,000 - $1,999 22.7 14.0 7.2 $2,000 - $2,999 20.3 12.0 7.3 $3,000 - $3,999 13.2 11.4 7.3 $4,000 - $4,999 7.1 11.3 6.8 $5,000 - $5,999 4.1 10.5 7.2 $6,000 “ $6,999 2.1 7.9 7.1 $7,000 - $9,999 2.3 12.8 20.7 $10,000 and over 1.6 8.0 32.5 Median Family Income $2037 $4051 $74 1 as % of U. S. 66.3 71.6 77.6 Per Capita Income $ 981 $1575 $3076 as % of U. S. 65.6 71.1 78.5 (in 1967 Dollara) $1360 $1776 $264 5 Derived from U. S. Census Tables. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the 184 Deployment by Industry and Occupation Oroup; location Quotients VI u n o oc ■a c n c «3 U 3 A s %. a. < o o 10 e 2 * *0 ♦-* o M Va •H O & w *4 £ .r 3 V i 03 O o u cc Q. o n to z> & o to in CD r 4 V v i : APPENDIX C: KENTUCKY CN O r—4 o H rH O rH cx £ CO 4 -» O c r- c, o •H rH 4-J O 3 cr o CD C cn O —■• 4-* T u r.. » Q- 1/-)' o a"' <0 I 4 r u rj o n •H » < o o ;j: <0 3 a O' c^» r.i i: : 4-4 o >*> tO XI •j cn 4-> a u . c o CD Cn CDCNCMOOCPhCOO rHC 0 rH»H-- 4 OOOO HHHrooooicoai CN^-iHOr-I^HOOO Ht > 'C^lDOCOlDatCD • ••• •••• CMJ-OO.-tOOOO H I < I cncscr>cooococT>cNO UllDOiHCtlOHHin 3T CO rH r—i 3 II I OlOOlDC^C-MlD CDCNt^lOlDCCcOr'fH CN •-( CN 0J0nCVH3OlDlD 33lDHr'[vullD3 •-I CN *—I fH a)c r )r^m^)[/) 33 n lO^lCItOMOSiOcn CN rH rH cn CO CO cn CO uo CO CD CO J- oo o l co CN CO o CO CO CD zf CO r- r-f o CN XT CN H cn CO CO 1 1 1 1 1 UD CO O CO CD CN O r—i UO CN CO • • • • • • • • • « • CO cr* o CO a> uo CD CO cn CN CD V uo UO CO CN CN CD co CN »H .5 1 1 T3 c CO CO 3- cn co CO CD uo UO O o a. • • • • • • • • • cn l ft CN CO cD uo CN. 3- cn CO cn CN 3 O CSl I s CN O 3 j-cOioiDr'j-j-ojcn CN cH •—4 m j- a- in cn 3 00 CO O r-' r~ id cn cn 3 u) co o cn in zf ZT o CD r- r- CO rH ZT H cn CO CN o uo #* n n n #« #* rH f- CD CO 00 cn u; co OO r> r» r- #* f* * r> r> y •l c »H r- o UO o cn CN Oi o zt uo r- cD . uo -4 co CN uo O) CTi in rH rH •H cn *1 CO £ CO •«H u, U5 jn f* 4-> to «> fy O U. (n V •'J r. C/J o O j o 4-> c: •X f r P j> t- co o • ,, 4 i •—i CO 4-» \ U5 • ~4 > - c? rc J •* * • n • a n • »*0 r* CJ) rH (r: »Ci > •» -".1 m r-" r. • H c. • ro < o ••A 4 » V*** l,n o r.i •r| U ?~y t/J (J 4*. t 4-* r • •:c ;j f J (J y 4-4 'rj | • 3 f ) • *n i»' 1*1 U1 . . 1 t4 f t*A. if, r~ Irr | C 4-» *4 4 to Ci O'. b y U* # •H fC .1 r f 4 0> n • . ( r. i: cz r r > » 4 p T7 f ) 0, TI £ qj p o u. <0 TJ r £ P ai u l/» •n I • a i u» -i v 4 • , t r! »« t, :• u »h O. (. V *0 p o ‘c p r. nt c. P C* r' l o r>j d. > f.j pj < M i- ?r>. Mi o . I r v 03 n o £ n o o c. 07 P .1 to c: a> o c ^TJ c •H u. u #1 (V. ► 4 fl 73 ;/. f- C-* o O o rj rn -j 'j P £ £ ’4-i o 4 - p o £ P n 04 ci 00 r ,) o :.i o ir» co APPENDIX C: KENTUCKY m DRAFT: 6/8/73 Table 3 Ajriculture. Industry and Commerce, Shift-Share Ratios <0 O 3 sC O O *-4 o o O C« CD CN to i/i ih it n on CM H lO /7 (N f" CO * ro ifl c< o j n ll) rJ (*) H o cn «h tO CN (N .O CO —« UV rH fs. »H U3 CO CN lO H C W N 03 n fv O O' o o r> o T' (D Irt iD H H l/l 1,0 ^ »0 CN CM r* :» :r * «r> 03 C' i/l CN O •T O 03 J n n co j O H (SI H ^ *H ^ rH O O O J r* co vO CN O rH CN -H (*■> o I s ^ ©MOO o •—( o I H O O' (\ H H (N co n «H O rH I o «H o I o o o *H #H * wo CN O O 0(0 0 cn I O O CN I N O O o o o O Cl o cm o o n o (v • • • 0 0-1 O O c H 03 O IO J CO r* 10 o J C' CN O' Cl O (N CN CM O w k-* c o s 51 «/> 4-» c V 12 a ~ Vt w o r? r p C 3 „ c| ! — | M »• *•« l» * „ V. V t: : o ■ *c —. o o o •>( o Zk ■ "r IS ‘ -I ’ >" «!•=!' lV-' i.;V ‘ ' »-l- I K .■ j lt J hi • o . m ol< <- *3 •- C/. r« Tel -s Ui ■'* I>V ^ C: C ' J 4-> t* o c* T3 C •« H ^ *0 1» 1 G- to o O (|> *-*0 0.' i- —5 O u .> n o — H v) c M ~ G ^ .X w o D' &. u*> cn CN O' UO CO * « o o 03 co *H CM O o CO m #h UO 3 O CM CM V u Ci CD CM —< CM 5 ro -J CO O O' CO CN o CD • o r> r> co rH u cm o- CM u H #H CN o 03 •H J5 o i_il. 4* o c o £ . I 0» o C/3 i o u :J A % so CD \ V l » % ro oo N vo >i be u D E-* Z w K U X w O z w cu Ph < fO d) u •Q - nj y. * K M 4J W 2 T3 C 4 ) W D U •w u *r Q O o 'H I *- 0> its J-f .4*> I -3 tn co CD rH m • • • • • o CO o H o o (T> cn h in O O rH I t* a> f co a. co is II io it. l: ,c. o co to h m ID *H CD in cn o) h h ^ ^ n in rH H (\ I 1 OlD OH lO • • • • • CN in CN rH 00 CN CN in I I I CD CO O it CD CO CO rH O O O CD CO CN cO r> ^ r #. in in in co cn CN rH CO JT CN rH r- CD it co in cn o j co o h n H o c\i h h cr CO lO CN CN CO CO rH CD rH f" rH m co cn C V.I o •5 r*» *4 co in co cn O rH CN rH CO It x> CO »H r- CO CO T' ^ 00 CO CD O I CN O rH O I n h co rH o CD CN rH rH O rH o I h OH rH rH rH O O co • • • rH rH CN I I I CO lO CO O O CN I I co m o r* it co ^ in cn CN CN it (O J- h o CO It CN CO H H ^ co »h m CO rH rH I I rH rH O • • • CN CO O CN rH I I CN CN in ^ It CN it in it 00 CD CO CO CO I I I CN ^ r- cn I in CD cO CO • • • CO CO JT (0 0(0 H CO ^ CN o co co It t" CD rH CN I I I it o o o r- o o CD O O O co O O cn io co o cn co co cn in ic CN C*" CO C*: rH CD r* CO it CN CN 10 CO O CD H CO »H O it cO CO CO CO it cd it m in o h co CN O O 00 CD It It H H in #* CN CN r- rH CN It in r* if it co CD in CD CO in * r e. 00 CN O CN O CN r- rH * CO h n h O lO CO rH CN CN r r « o it m CO t'* o rH *H ID H O co CN rH It It CD rH CO o co CO o O in in o A * * o r- 00 CNJ in CN t-* t rH CN to CN in H rH m lO m CN 00 CO Cl rH in CN CN »H rH r- f rH t It ID 00 CO t rH 03 co in CN ID CD CO in It It o lO It CO CO ID o * *i e- * r r #* CO CO It in It CD CN cn CD rH CN m ID co O CN rH If Cw »H CN CN ID CO f" co O rH CN in cd r r. r CD O O CN 00 O in rH CN CD CD CO in t in CD in co r r r o O CO CO CN t r-H rH CO cn 5 I CO O *• C) 2 V; c • •- V. / ;*■' i i' - * () o 1 -3 ro I i 1 V) • J w 1 •; r: • • jj :i 1 » > « *- « l.’ •It c» A3 { . •j; ; • f ) c r~ •n •H win 0) .C4 f-. ! -D v.: . . ’ *.1' ,« . i:} • * it- w t. K cn a 5r ,1 <1? >, c o o » 1 -H * .. M i: O 14. .J rl O 3 A O to o v O »*H i u\ co *-• =» 'TJ a r:! V *Hf, •u r-H j ■ rj *. 3 d fe ■ .Si o o ) X 'rl c» « n t r-< r*. CN rH rH CN rH rH CO rH CN ID rH o o O • • • • • • CD CO rH CO O CN CN 1 rH 1 1 in CO m CN •« «• rv r- CO r- ID ID CD co rH CD co CD if * ro CN o r- CO if cr> CO ID CO CO CN O' ID CN CD rH O CO r r. r< r r> rH j- in ID co •—l CO rH CO CO CSi CO r> CO o ID if CN CN m o in CD CN CD in r- in CO *» r* «• #> CO CO rH CN o o ■3D CO rH OI CO in CN «k CN CN rH r* CN CO cn ID CD it CO co CO CN o co rH r r r* CO CO rH rH r- (N CN It rH CO t CN CN w o cn ^ o (0 co ^ f—•. c O o - 'H rH C* *j> ;-'H i-* , E O ° X rH rH cn (i, • - ^ B .n o C O 73 ♦-' rH • »-• 01 — c/i a. ii.j r i (x. o o o —4 on 4 - a. G W| mi t. ce: U. D^jjartment of Commerce, Bureau of the Census. For specific tables, see Appendix ddlSSISSIK :Q XlC.Od l'/ UJ O o - - *-< o o o co 1 • o C ) c. u Jfc. *wA v.' Derived from U. S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census Tables APPENDIX D: MISSISSIPPI Table 1 Income and Income Distribution 1950 T | I960 1970 Family Income (% of families) Less than $1,000 44.4 19.7 6.6 $1,000 - $1,999 24.6 18.0 10.0 $2,000 » $2,999 13.2 13.9 8.6 $3,000 - $3,999 7.9 11.2 8.6 $4,000 - $4,999 4.2 9.3 7.9 $5,000 - $5,939 2.2 7.9 7.8 $6,000 - $6,999 1.3 5.8 7.7 $7,000 - $9,999 1.2 9.0 18.2 $10,000 and over 1.0 5.2 24.6 Median Family Income $1228 $2884 $6071 as % of U. S. 40.0 51.( 63.3 Per Capita Income $ 755 $1204 $2575 as % of U. S. 50.5 54.: 65.7 (in .1967 Dollars) $1047 $1357 $2214 Derived from U. S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census Tables. 188 ' Employment by Industry and Occupation Oroup; Location Quotients * U trt u r3 o CC xf c ns Q> U r. rz C •.« L. .3 c w CU Cu < o .Q ft *r> U O Ci. u o Im c o u* o 3 n? o ro 0) u (- o C\ c Si B u ns cu CJ o to r> (4 :i O c> V I I Employment by Industry and Occupation Group; Location Quotients LJ - H fS O CX O o & X O n »—i a r*. rj r. i-i nr. ► ? c a, w o Uu I/) '0 t: o c_> »T? o % co V V u o 'J Uh o 4- C a> e 4-J <3 a. C.' o to u ti -1 b co 4 Cx. o\ . j f M CX4 a. M to w M to w M 2C Q X M n •-» w a. a < r-"> O H A iC O i V \ i i >a- . Agriculture, Industry and Commerce; Shift-Share Ratios M O '-O •H 1 -H CO d o ID oc to < o in t, CO H ID • i to co no i n • 4-» 3 IH w o ►J IX. il) oS i y S I r- CD I o cC CO iO I CO in co LD I CD cr> in CP r~i CD M CP CO in H n CNI CM CO I I I it GO M t^ CD CO CN CP CN CN CO

^ O H it it CN UP CN h D ^ it CO r-i CO CP CN CN rH O CO CO H (O H r- CN O 3- it 00 CO CD • • • • • • • • • CO CP CN CN CO co in CP CN rH CN CN CN CO CN CD CO in CO rH 00 CO 00 • • a • • • • • • CP in CP rH in CD CD CO CD rH CN in CO It *H •H CP in CO rH O O O M O o CO CO o CN in O it CD r-> CO zr in CO CD o o O O O o it in M CO co O CP M m O zt M CD M it 00 CO CO CO CP in CP CP CD co it CP in CN e ft r rt r* ft e r r< f> ft ft f* ft ft f* as e CN CD CD CD CP CN o CO in it o o M o CN CP CN CP CO CO M rH r- o CD cO CO co CO CN CO M o CN t> CN CD CO CO < — 1 »H CD CN CN CO CN •H CN CN rH CN *H o CO it CD o CN CP rH CO M rH CP it it CO CD O CN it in CD o CO CO O CO CD CD M CN CO CN CD it CD in in rH CD rH M 00 €0 CO CO in it CP CO CN it rH CN rH in CD CP o in * r» f» r> ft ft f* r> r» #> e f* as #» ft ft rt ft * f' CP M it cD CN 00 CD CD in CD CP it 04 CN CD CP CP o o o r—1 CN M it CN O rH CD rH rH CO CO rH o CN rH it CN rH rH o CN CP t> CN CN O rH CP it CO O CP O h id m h h * 00 CO it cn co in rH O CD M it CN it rH in cn co in O rH CN CO O in id o MD h it M CP ^ if) OJ CO O M cn in rH CD CO O o* co in H (D h CD e« in rH CN in CD 00 CN CD 04 04 in co CO rH o CN CO CD O' in CD CD in o O CP it co rH CO CD CO H it •—1 3 in co CN rH CD *H it CO rH <0 ft f> 0> rH »H b CQ CD CN CN CN it CD CD CN CN co o CD o CD CP M rH *H in in CO CD CN o CO C£ CO it CD in it *> CP CO CP CN CD 00 CN CP CO O- CO CO CN CN CD o Q) ft c» * ft ft as ft f» n ft ft * ft ft ft O CP rH CN CN O co CN CD <—! in rH CO in in *H CO ^r in in O CP O' O rH 0 in it *H O r-i o it co rH CO CN in rH G u o w 4h o 4J 4-* 4-* o o rH u cr rH 3 a> M O o CD J a> o rH •2 o C_y Cl CJ o c: 0) u H VI o co to CO CO •H C/) o CO G w •H M a a. H »H •H o n H a> > H o Cl H •M Cl le a c vf> <11 H o Cl C o Cl u c •H c a •3 ? Q > CJ 0) ?0 o u 03 >. c (il C G rr rx. rH oo a, X) CO CX © O r J ID a. <(, rH •H i c: w E fC • H E Cl •r-i H F O r no e U *T3 •H a; H w X. '—1 u3 4-» rH Of u • vy l±-r 'j-, ID a* U ^ i o •H rH cn V (0 a XI CD CJ 1 ) X? D Q* H3 »—1 cC a' 10 Cl TJ rH m Cl TJ Cl cJ 0/ TO O < ) »H 0 »—i C 4 J a* • H u •M rH • H o i.' *—< •H rH i-> u •ri • it* to O 1 * ,r ; o r-| u r, •H w) b ?. (0 n a? -C CO 03 CJ a CO a> CJ 'p to V) c; *-• *• < < m CJ < CQ CJ u K •H e a cx a < CD Cl w W PFr.'.DIX E: Derived from U. S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census Tables. APPENDIX E: TENNESSEE Table 1 Income and Income Distri 1 ■ j tion *.. 19 ISO 1960 1970 Family Income (*■*, of famil ies) Less than $1,000 26.6 12.2 3.9 $1,000 - $1,999 23.8 13.2 6.6 $2,000 - $2,999 18.9 12.9 6.3 $3,000 - $3,999 13.0 12.3 7.1 $4,000 - $4,99y 7.2 11.1 7.3 $5,000 - $5,999 4.2 10.1 7.8 $6,000 - $6,999 2.3 7.9 7.7 $7,000 - $9,999 2.3 12.5 21.3 $10,000 and over 1.7 7.7 31.9 Median Family Income $1984 $3949 $7447 as % of U. .v. 64.6 69.8 77.1 Per Capita Income $ 994 $1543 $3084 as % of U. S. 66.4 69.6 78.7 (in 1967 Do 1 I.ixs) $1379 $1740 $2652 Derived from U. S. bepax of Commerce, Bureau of th® Census Tables. 192 APPENDIX E: TENNESSEE c* o r-4 X> r* H O 4-1 «3 to U *3 O C4 •O rj U U c •0 r« p w ft: u. •K •C c 0 o. D. < « V V) « c H -Q <0 t (\ (0 u o u. c O' o u c 4) £ & a, o Q in o (4 3 o to I • >3 Employment by Industry and Occupation Group; Location Quotients 4 fj I o u T> C r3 t 4 4-4 W 3 'O c O to H 4-> T> u. o . r» & f-i a © o o o o * o tn H CD rH CN rH cc co _-r OHHH CN I co co cn H M ^ H CO O lO lO (S^ OH I I ex —< • • < HOS C* CO CO OHH O CN UD H H H C4 M ^ O *H O I * <0 <7» rH O O CN 00 o m 5 o o O' to m r>» (M H O' CO ^ <£> CX rH in CM H tn to O' ^ o o wo h m h C'COtO cO to CO CX to OD •H CO CX rH I x j- rH CX rH 03 r- vO IT CT» lO in in cn CX a rH to o CO * CX | ?! C) L »- u l. ; c 3 -Vi r-i 4J rH *> 3 0 ••H b'l 1 c tO L 3 VO CX CO O u/ .f O.H o tn co rH r-< fX Cl uo to o o o .* to c* co co ^ cx co o o o in o n in D H CM CD ^ H tn CM CM co r-H o CD CO tn CO CX to O LO o tT O O O O -f o o o O O tT rH • » » n i/> CD no -H h n CM J O O' r* co cr cc CD O tO CO C* H O' it • • » • 5 O' O (\ n id o C) cx CO to cx o o in D o co c* co VD rH tn rH co r- o o to c. .«n od to to to cx r- to WO rH c cr> -T CX CX CX a» ^ m o t^. j m h »■< a) •H © CX CO CO o r* co j- ^ o rH in o .y 04 CO CX »H o o o n o .-?■ co m cn cm n j o ^ O* CD O in N [V ' * * * r » ^ m o co to o* cn o o CN CN CX rH co <7> h* to in cn cx co o m o o ♦ » r » ^ O „ CO lO H f\ CX CN sO CO CO .r C- -/ rH CM Lt h • r » ^30 co r- io O' r-H tO CD rH CX CX CC fx H J r • * CD CT CO O CO O rH in cn in cx cx o OHH f" to CO tO M © 05 O r r » •H O rH CD to CN rH rH c* CO ffi li m tn cd m CN © o (N m O in rH rH cd in o h m O' CD O' J Cx o o c f" 5 GHO O CO fv I CN CD O I CO rH tO m h to co no CO rH 00 in o to | 0 0 51 r> • r I to CN 03 I rH O CO fN. CD ! to rH i£> I O CN CX I CD CO f* 3 3 O 3 o o o • TJ o fc. X« rX 3 w o £ W O CD | to ci t* O *H A. -* u V. t» Vr 44 j 05 I, X/ t'l^ tn'. i c u s c ? •*- -j -* i c I 0 O "•*-*. x! cn "? « -c -*) T' o n 1 4 ^ * f - O C 2 s "Ji -: f? - >*»'H t ^ *1 - 1 « ;is :l«2 y . M ! r .'! IJ rl t. n :| ‘- « ^ -* *l« C . ^ *r* S O J M 1 fi w C - — O A/ o C *rX C S c u o-'Js 2 ® ” . X r t V • »H r-X r - | ‘ ' t- ^ | - <*> ^ *C 1 - 4 — t T.-rX W H Cl ,^i , ,. -■ ‘-r u x-» £lrj i- » U> o u C, 'D c *; '-I n c> TJ o ; 'jo C n n n ^ t i// r« :c|uj cj cu co CT t) X3 *H n U *r- *14 j UJ ft Cl, I X •H X) G a; o. Q. < o 0) o • o o rH rO 44 O *H 4x •H o o a wo £ m D V) g (J «4x 0 o Kf O | a Q> u r« o E J Ux O 44 c 8.’ £ CO z> A t? ON I I I % \ \ ! CO o H •9 b* « O •H •P & o U m -c co i •p Tt JT W C /3 jo ss fc A 1 rg ID K 03 ■3 31 X. » C/) CO I t/> U4 H x: cd LO ID f -3 u"> r- id i oo W O °l c*> co o i oo in ^ H O CO iD * • i » t •—( »H m o lA H J I I I I O (\ fv (V (£ • • • • « o rH cn cr> O rH o co 33 o» 3- r- 1 • • • • • .4 CM co zr CD CD l . CM 00 *H in co CO o o o in • • • • • • in 00 uo (D o o CM CM -4- 00 1 CD o zT in (D ID CM rH o o in H in h OCOin ID ID CO CM ID 00 O LO CM CM (O cn 4- •H CM rH GO C" ID m in cn c\ 4 H o in 4 X •H c CD a a < CD O W W O DIX F: VIRGINIA I ►--i O'* Derived from U. S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census Tables. APPENDIX F: VIRGINIA Table 1 Income and Income Distribution 1950 1960 i 1970 . ' | Family Income (% of families) i • « Less than $1,000 18.5 8.4 2.8 l ' $1,000 - $1,999 18.6 9.0 3.7 $2,000 - $2,999 20.1 10.5 4.4 $3,000 - $3,999 16.0 11.2 i 5.3 i • - $4,000 - $4,999 9.5 11.3 5. b * . $5,000 - $5,999 6.4 10.8 6.6 ; i $6,000 - $6,999 3.9 8.9 6.9 $7,000 - $9,999 4.6 16.7 20.8 i $10,000 and over 2.5 13.3 43.7 Median Family Income $2644 $4964 $9049 ; • as % of U. S. 86.0 87.7 94.4 • - i Per Capita Income $1228 $1841 $3616 ' 1 as % of U. S. 82.1 83.1 92.2 (in 1967 dollars) $1703 $2076 $3109 _• Derived from U. S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census Tables. 196 o a : u. X •-4 a cu A, < V •H a < o c o « H a f' v •*< 4« M o e* a w u £ in ti o o 3 •0 k fC © u V □ o c c £ 5j a. c» o a, CO u a o: D CO c Ci o a> .n p 4h O n n? a C-. O a rH O • • X) T3 Ch c3 C X H M >i Q M t: P u 01 CX. ri cu < c: »H CO O' CO rH lO co co cm co co t/> m I (n h n w H h* O H O I i co io t-* -f ® rH CO O O O i O’ CD O' jy O O O O in M O (N CO H u) h »n ^ in O' m co rH it »H • • < o *n z iy co on rH O O in h co in H O in co o O rH rH CO O cD in co tO CD O O' H H H cn if «H cm h in H mm O' CO H I to ^ cn co cn to CM I I ID CO ^ O N O' H O' J CN rH rH rH U I I I r- m rH O' to r- CD H O' h r- m cn m O' od cm co cm »h co rH to r** rH »H CO (N H H O to it r—i 1 CO 1 LD 4i Cl CD VI w 3 >« 'O o c M a, r: ui 00 o a: in w CD 3 r i 4-3 1!) rH 3 U ■H Zt tn | 1 •n < 1 1 o* . _i 10 n j o (n 1A H Ol (O oo r-H p- h •H I—I CN I I I .a - id co co ce • • • • • CO O CO it CM CM r-H rH CO I I CM r^ in CD m CD CO • • • • • • CM 00 CM rH co rH LD zt rH rH CO CM i—1 Zt in co #* o 00 CD It Zt CD zt it cm 10 CM it co ^ r> »> r O (N O r-H H id n j ID CN CO CN ID J- CO O O ID J- O O lO ft* ft* ft* #* CM rH CD o H h (M t Zt CM CM CD CD CO in LD CM in • • • • • • • CM CD CO OO CO CM r-i •H zt rH rH I I in o •d- • • • • LO CM rH rH LD C"> CO O o o CO o o o CD co CM r fs c. zj- CD co CO LD LD CO Cm O Zt CM Zt rH CO zr CO CO LD in o lO CM CN r. r> it CM CD LD O CO zt CO CM O CO CO in CD in zt CD CM CM CM CM rH o r-H o in in LD *H CD LD CO Zt CD CO LD r ft* ft* r* r» ft * CO co CD zt It rH It CM CD rH CM Zt LO o CM zt rH CM CM CM rH CM LD LD CD LD LD n J zt 00 o rH CO CD LD 00 in CO rH LD zt LD uo »H rH LD Zt CM CM ft* »* ft* ft* ft* «* »* r* r* LD Zt CO CM Zt CM LD CD LD CO •H LD c- 00 Zt rH rO r-i CO rH rH »H rH CM O o o V.V C) to /-* >* O (h cn o 4w •M o rH c r-i d 0) o p *•—' a, z cn tn •* a* >* cn o t. 0) rD| d •H G CO XI P3 3 +-> o CO £ u n? u AC U-. •H 4-< V >N d : TJ O, Of d -1 c J» u iQ H •r-t G • > CJ *-3 h-< < * C O 0 G < K O d a» £2 CO d 73 73 a.’ c r- o o co o o r- o ld ♦> r CO CM rH CO CM d H CM zt CO CO CD CO rH ft* ft* in It rH CM CM U CO +J c V £ « o o o CO CO rH • • • O CO CO CM rH cm co in CM I in co cm *H r- o co co oo zt CD CM CO CM CD ft* in CO O CD O CM CO CM rH rH ft* #* #* CM O CM co cd r- H CO Zt LD rH 00 r—i zt CD o o CM CD ft* ft* #* #* rH CO CD CM »H CD CO •H O rH CD CO cm in r* ft* rH CM CM CO r- rH ft* CM CM rH o zt rH ft* r. CO rH CM O CM 10 4-» c a> CM o CM * CM CD O CO CO CO O rH Zt rH CO CO h • • • CM rH O *H Zt CM Ztr^CD rHztcO CO rH LO CO LO CO rH CM rH in o o rH C"~ r^~ ID H I LD rH CO 00 r- r- in LD • • • • • • • • Zt CD LO o rH CM CD rH 00 CM LD r- zt LD Zt CO CD i—( CM 1 1 LD zf It m co in cm co r> n r Zt CM CO co in •—i c- CO Zt H co in co co ft* ft* ft* t in o r- in co r- o •H rH O CO CD CO r r « CO 00 CM co Zt zt ft* co o Zt r- CM rH 0*> cd »•#*»* CM zt CD LO CM a> LO zt LD CO rH zt CD CO CD ft ri ft CD LO O H CO h 00 CD CD in H lO CD o t^ ft ft ft o> co rH co in in CM CD co CM CM rH H in in ft « in rH LO rH m zt rH CO CO 00 CD CM rH CD CM r~- CM i-li I U f.i rp c o c Q< O -h u CO Q> W •H O O o CD cn 73 CD n3 &£ o H H 1) a, —t —- E rci W W W (l) o 1/3 V~( a r> * *0 Q) + J M *H -—I <0 HJ 0) w co a. to o CO O e/3 O C) C H Cl 03 >, g •" w 00 c C3 (h C3 Q. 03 Q If) D 03 u H A co CD ' WEST VIRGINIA e> x n x to a. a. < in Ci 10 D*. r« a) bO •H a, ;o o o >—i -a) f - C • i . n U1 3*: o ►-I o o o CO v> •J Derived from U. S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census Tables. APPENDIX G: WEST VIRGINIA Table 1 Income and Income Distribution -.- . ■ - - — - — - — - ..... -- 1950 1960 1 197 0 Family Income (% of families) j Less than $1,000 18.4 10.7 3.5 $1,000 - $1,999 16.5 11.2 6.8 | $2,000 - $2,999 25.2 10.7 6.9 l $3,000 - $3,999 17.6 10.7 7.7 j $4,000 - $4,999 9.5 11.7 6.9 $5,000 - $5,999 5.5 12.2 7.2 1 $6,000 - $6,999 2.8 9.6 7.6 i $7,000 - $9,999 2.8 14.8 t 23.7 ! i $10,00 and over 1.6 8.4 29.7 ! Median Family Income $2597 $4572 ! $7415 j as % of U. S. 84.5 80.8 77.3 i Per Capita Income $1065 $1594 $3015 as % or U. S. 71.2 71.9 76.9 ! i (in 1967 dollars) $1477 $1797 1 $2592 _ Derived from U. S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census Tables. 200 o «: K-< > H to V o X *-« Q 3 cm o rM A rj f- X •H *o C & a ♦-» o •H 4« •H O Q> U to & u. V) 3 w c a> o a> JC 3 trj £ CQ a u h 0) i o o *u o !-• C V e 4-> t. LL V a to z> a CM ~ & o l/) V \ V Table 2 Employment by Industry and Occupation Oroup; Location to to 4 > f: rj •r \ 4-> O 3 O' +-» o c r- i> o r-^ C' r- CT> r- •—1 >• r~j . J £< »•< i-J o a ID ,0 CD a r-4 «<< o IT. C) ♦H to*.ncMcNCnincoc OrHrHOrHOOOr-t H n-cocncnroocDO^r OrHOOrHrHOCMO H (notot'rimiatoH oinoo.-tooocM mcnoDcocor'>-'r-ioD CO ID CM rH Ci (\ II III •HrHOlOOMtHCMOO ojcor^Hiot^ojtoco ID H n CO ID • • I I I CM ^OOlrHCSIDl-r-rOJ- rCCOCOlOHOHrlO ccd in rH a- co III II rH I cm oinioioinoincnoco .. OhlDIDJiDdlJiDlDcO in® ^rH oo cm to in ® II I II II iniODl-incn r H®r--cNCNo C r )- 3 -inOtD®t''-C 7 >inCMC''> l •••••••#* CM ® CO ® ® CM ID CN Cm rH cm OrHt^O ^■r-imcnoocostiniD •H CM rH |H OHlDCOCOlDOiricfl Cm rH rH CM o> oo o r~i d- to r- •H CM o o r- j- tC r-H rH rH o ID o rH rH CM rH o *H in o o cn OD ID CM O • • • • • • • • a CM ♦H m CD CM r- to O »—l >—< CM O rH cn CM o cn CO in to O • • • • • • • • • • in CO to CJ rH rH in 00 CD rH CD O ■Hiomi-^ocMOcoo CnCMDrCMOOOCOlOW j- - 3 'rHr'OOwo® r-tJJ-CMJ-OHnCM o ® in .—i®i^-o*>® ®®mrH®CJDDt^CM CO O CM | CO rH CM CM neeinhivHd'CM CM®CMCMZf®CMOT® o ® O H rl ID N rH CO I s H (D H i—I 0> CTI CM O r~®rH®®J-®Cr)^H H^-(\COCO(^Hd-d- ^for)Hmoi(Nnu: O (D to 0 > r' UD .t (Nl (O H Cncr>COCOrHt>OCDCirH^ lO to H Qi O CO I'M Cl CO lO CM ^'•*'ne> 4 -’ CO o Pi c u, 3 o Pi V) • o o • be ~h d: m > C C *H r. O •'■4 -M U*> O •H Pi z> fj) •m c U H •* rH r. rH . ? * *"* P< fTJ uo P c a w •* r: C 4 -» * 4 - CO C) CC a *H (0 H C 1-1 •» r> Pi c c z: «h o ►h it w O T ^ ^ ~ o < t: cj e- ^ l. > o o rtl o a "D PI •v I* ^ b £ £ ii r,: r J ol e’j a, y o ! i , O') -I • ! I- •v f/ C «H H 'H rH '1 ; * d 1/ -r | • ^•1 S- C‘ ” *0 r i I- x c, cn -ET in rf CM CO cn in in CD CM CD Cy c i •i) it r: E Q) E q> •H 'C l 4 0 . t O ff * 1 'j a P- V) kH ' . c; . c» » j. -M LJ r-. a T "• > • c ; >, r I V vO o : to i ^ t. r: o u: (r • >: o r.» > C 5 j.a u :< L ; • . o :t tfl P -4 ft) l * 11 -i 10 —* r* i*' . c* 111 ~ • rH r •• •» ; r- [— nj ►■1 tJ. ti ,) ►•4 r L’„ a ■ [ - in CM I r-i CM CO CO H CO O H CO CN in O) to LOlOC-mDC-CMCDCM^-cDCM o iDCOCOCnCMiniOrHCDOCM to cojniflr, iDcooioj j- ID CO a> rH (£> (T> H r L » i-J v 00 "J C; o n “! - >* o wO D. u Oh n CO D* c (J p« o c to partmer.t of Commerce, Bureau of the Census. For specific tables, see Appendix • • < IH r: o « ►H > w g x M Q LO Cm a ro o H -O tH 9 « w c •H 4 -* 2 O u to .c c/i I 4 J •H rC w a) o ll o c M o o T> c o O O o ^ in ^ c\ o o o I CD (N O in O O O «H I I in ^ ^ h H (N H H I m in • • c •H O 2 ID CT> H O rH O cn *H ID ^ ID CM o o I m m Cl OH id oo r-» o o o m in co r-i O O I H (\ H o o o I I 3 I-* O O O I (D tV H o o o »D cn m moo i ID o- cc m * o tv h> tv in pi m d h in o h c\ in ^ H CN rH rH III I co in in Wi h in cn m id m h h i i i t-M o cn o O lOMn in m cn m m cn o m « in h d id m cn CN i i i & a cn m rH o m cn d o CN m » i cn o o cn in in ^ o oo cn H O CD *H rH I I I s * CN ^ »n r- # O m rH I l rH m m h r* i id m Cm iD JJ c. M c: 3 M. TJ IZ M .3 n. 0 rr. >4 n i 4J rH ;» 3 O •rf U . m < 1 cn o cc m J 5 O (D 6 •H r> cn .■♦ j j O rv in ^ o c o o in c\ ^ o n X m CN CN O' m cn cn o —i m cn cn co h n ^ Mn O O *-H CN CO *»#•*» 3 O C H h P CN f' m cn .h r>. in co m id in cn m m o O CN iD (D c\ m * o o o zr o o o co o r» m CN ID iD CO m cn cr- ir CD O H H *h o r- H C CD rH CD P H O i/l o o co ® J P C' *h o j- rH cn rH •H CN t-* oo cn CN in (N p. o m m cn CN CD r- CO rH O' CO o o o co o o t» id m rH m o ^ cn o rH cn id m o mm r'* id m cn r- »n m o rH o CO ID p" CJ CD o id cn CD (N G i/l 00 O CN in in rH m cn rH cn in o co CN rH moo cn »h m CP CN CD O iD J- in o m cn Cm OfM.CN cn CN Pm cn m m r* cn fM rH rH rH fM. p-j CC iD rH mm o »• « * ID CN CO m rH o o o o-g C 3 ft O c.. X u ras to # -j ^ c 3 »• r-i < > n to cv. o 0 >■ c 0) J C r « w£f C'l-Cj ft' -3 3 |n rj| u ;r t; < ?|r, i, £ **-M U n v ft 0 t: is-fl *v :i c -3 -i r„ rH 6 r-. ... i r -1 D «H ft *5 —•{ .• f ji.j v; o cn! ft o e D O rr, JCH l.| ft V> ♦-*, CD M O m.. y — ^ DC 3 ! C r - M “J , «. >. cr <:• c : r DO-- -*~2 c C/ c -2 c)| vj n *c w •-1 ^ o n, r- r- O C t, C C - o Xf.. c c 1 - O 0 Ire C. > a> t, X c O 01 ,1.1 W -I -'t 1 “3 'V i;U : ^ C U- - • o o o 10 *-» O o C rH i) c > ji ^ ° < » iX*D o in a ^ E C 4 - E u: H Q. UJ u -a *h o T 3 a a a< *o *-> (J *ri C T C (0 Q 6 4-* | £ CO o o i A C CN \ V 1 fti-yMMUiA WC,bl VXKIjINIA co Cl o cd tc. o CD rH O o cn cD it in it CO in a- CD j»- CM cD CD CD CM • • • • • • • • • • • c • • • • • • • in it rH o it in CM * cr c o m CN it CP CO r ^ r #> r it m CM CM C> CO CP CM CD •h co cm cn co rH CD it- D cn CM o o CM o »H CD • • • • • • CD in it d cn rH CD 1 1 *H co CM CO O in CM • • • • • • CM O in it o CM m CO 1 l 1 in rH cn • • • CD r- CM 1 i CM O o O o o O o o O CO o O o r- to CD in r> 9 #> 9- r* it 10 cn rH in o CM cr. CD it cn *H »H o r 9 * CM »H CD co CD CM co CO CM cr. it O CO n O rH *H r^* CD in p r> r» 9- * r* o CM o *H CD co it CO cn #t rH r-f o in in CD o CD cn rH O r- it co CO CD r- #• r> * e. 9 d- o it CM CD o »H O'* rH CD cn rH CM co * *H CD CM it CD CM r- in CO CM rt rv CD CO rH cn CD cn o o r~ cm in rH I CO h 00 « • • H OCT rH «H I I CO rH O r-4 f"H rH CM rH I h t • • • o in h i i in it o t"* 00 CM CM CD it (X) cn 05 CD in in • • • • • • • rH in in CD m r- i 00 CO I cm o in CD O CM in in h + + * in cm . t rH CP CD cn m o co •H CO oo cn co o * * r» ID CT' H rH |> ID t- »h in in o id in c h in r> * CM O O cn cm cD co co in CM CM rH O 00 CD r * r. C\ m 00 cn rH CO cO t"» C* [N CT ' H rH »H O r- r- r* Ou (n H cm CM fN O 03 O CD cn cd fs m 9 r« 9 in o m cm CM o .t in CD CO cn o r- CM co cn it CD cn cn CM r- rH o o» O t- CD Cs' CD CD 9 * e 9 9 #5 9 r» a> CD CM o CO cn cn. O CD CD CM CO *h rH CD it CD O o rH CD CD O CM rH co CD 00 rH CM »H 00 r- CD CM CO *H o cD »H CD •H it m o o o n c c .R M #> •'f W O 4-» w r ♦ W u O e. cj •H •0 >> "O rt3 r5 O o O o O (1 •H •H c> D r.H 4-. o d. r* •'J G o v ✓ U-. rH U t3 2 rr* Cl O f; Jh rt 4 .» rH 0 U) D *H G 'O 10 »/3 7*5 >z H < • o P (X C; >4 rH 0 r J u ♦ »4 r: • «/: o 3 »-1 1(1 O «i a o o H j cn. Sis o o o rH i/> r g H r* • r-t •c c a< J w 15 W O *5. *J O C I. C O G tr O O 1.5 V/ l. —' l. 1*5 to •l- "J —( • -* "3 !l : - < cj <~H • o —I "H f? <3 45 t/5 I * tn a. :«lui 05 a. O (0 o 10 ♦-» o o c rH a •CO J s—r o *H to w a •.-1 •H c H a ID •H a Or I-' u •ri 73 a* rj U rt: a, T5 C o Q. D. < e> o w to <15 rH *Q 13 4-i •H u 05 a, V) b o u- 3 W o CJ <4 h o 3 <0 C5 S CQ O U G a> c i o o 4-» O c Q) e 4-» u O0(\Hr:u)O O Oi H CN f-i CM m r'rooo'oHooH wOifiifticoincoM CM CM CM hOOlHO'CiOHt'' iOHinr^*o©incou3 CM r-i rH ‘OhHO'®CO(n(NN CVHtDu’^Ouit'tM •"< CM r-« *H wcpinrcHOr^h-io cjcDnooroonm jr^fNCNHCODUjoj ©OCMr^tDCNCOCMCM -■J n i> n co q cc ui cc h n a> in [\ CM J O' in lO (O O h © O ro m j cou^r^o CC O C*1 O H C O ,l£> C'^uocococm^oo i/'Hr'iraiinHto ooa>«/>^r-^rcMr^ • » r * r » ^ t. J H fO HI o ft (N^rj(N(T>r , .Ou3 ~; «■> cm tr o •x' cr> cm ■* »“< <7> lO n in 10 10 ff) COCT'OtOCDr^f^CMfO OCNHf'lDJrg^^ oa»^mna*>oo*H • • »•«*••» n j 5 o n ^ h u ft) JC. 10 X) c *9 u fe5 •c v: > u o c3 o u W -U H • a) > c» c c, «hl) *3 CO CO r~i O *TJ CO *-* 3 •cm . to • a: > c -H T» U *n to c a u n co D 3 O • «-* ♦ *H u • n ur tj o rx, co » c w c* .vc o C —< *• O 1 Q *- U c. .r. c 3 n i: on _ _ _ o x, h :< u u >: KCiononcocM^coH H ^ t" ^CDiDOtCHOO ©OCMffinPXNHOtC C"HCDh(O^HCV^OcO ^ n r> h ^ J H j n n co ^ H n in r) i i nCDfflOHOCDlDOCOJ r^*Hr'incDCMt£> ^ ^ O H H CM CM CO 1 I I fflODOHCHOiAWfiiirt H H H H H (NC'^JCMinjfs.^CN© Hnco^f>.nco(Nj(D('j^ »H *H rH #H hhOCOOCDCDiniODH CDf^CD(\hnC»CMts^«j H H H ^ ^crijrooinmr, hid HJJ5HHOOM710J ojoH^HcoocT'ocntnm ffliDHinnconcNij'coiD cm j^omin^u'iCN HHlDnmOfOHCD ro *~< H H H o J Cl (D in (D (D CO N O H ffl j omo cr n i\ in o o & cDtncocj'tNciDij'coin * * * * * •> *• » * » » CMiP'TiOcUHr^i^J^rs. OOOonrycT'CMj? (N in j n c p- cc r .3 ^ h h (\J U 0 O) 3 CO •-< H uO H (0 o^iniDnujo^fsCDu'iH O (O o (4 H H H (\ o CO Cm tr. o co cd o> Cm co uo (m ho O CO CO CO X> Cm O •h o —• o' cm a .t Or - ' a c h .i > i5 o o O CO o CO J CM ^ J ^ O O h r-4 H J CM O (a •o c to ■ ft-d now to c, c "U Cl, *3 c c n • »h x t; m ^ rf o u> C. •o c c C’ «H TJ fi ^ H 0/ O C TJ XT C* • -- F o c. O 14. U C -* u ‘ o u 1 <0 .H « (" • c- o ' f. k ft) . t rri i^| h i»l •*- >: o «o C C". n « c 3 o M O X c X h. > o o rfc i c o f= o • V* £ o t, U. L-4 X3 *-> c a. *3 c o • X A U1 3 - u n $ t- n l*. -J a> & o o o o o o 0* CO CO CM >* o *0 cu 4-3 < J- o to c £ f- U3 >: IJ s *o c C' (X a, < ft) c 1C «c »0 o ft) cu V) r- o «n 3 M C ft) o <44 o 10 to o ft) Oft T> c *c ft) u c «c U) m ft> u (4 ft) F 1= O U Cu ft) Cl t/i M & u. « o to \ \ 203 Employment by Industry and Occupation Group: m CJ |e> < IT |o ictf» L-3 < H O |E- U, ° O' 0 o h I O in o r- o CD I O in o i^* cn o <0

CD LO if A c> -1 CN #• o CO r^ r> CN CO CN in O in cr o CD O CO CO CO to A if r- A r- O' CO A in CN A A o- if if 107, 639, O O G X s 3 2 CO r- if rH •H CO in O CN in cr It X A rH rH r- rH A in A H A CO A if CD in V Mh o in CP jnHdHr'r^jcooo CP CN CN CD CD in in (N h * * H hfflco^nj-HO'n snoirtcooHuis H H H fO H (\ O I I O lO O) O H CO (J> O' If! C^CnOOCNrHCOCOO CO ON i—( CN rH CN UO I I MOO^tDHOlfiH noiciAiooineoo CN CN D cooDcooocDCDinin Att^CNCNr-HCDrOlDCD «'0<^or'r'r. OOCNt'-lDCNOOCNCN ^•cor'-cnoot^.coiDrH CDCDcA®H(OC3U3h •HOOCOUDCOOCCNCNCDrH H CD O' O^COlDOOO.H OO OcDCNCTltOfOCNHOcD 1-1 1 » *—I I ( O'Hror'n^nCMjon cDp)f't^f'% G v to g g o f^ > u G G o cn x • n3 -M ^ C £~* fU 00 rH a) > G C cn X3 g f: X* C 4-< o o * G • G ft3 00 U r-4 X3 10 04 XJ O O a. r> o CK 'Z o e- < a, :d o T) W O O C E a; . ^ e o ^ Un a, to L 0) H * (0 C 0) n -h to a» ♦-> C3 • o fa g :« 4-^ fO • > > 03 r il 4-> to id G DC x> G G G u G 03 G 3 CO c o u c G G U) cv: x •H XJ C G a o- < G G CO CO o H c a •H •n4 V G a, c G ct ■M G I CO tO CO ID I it IT) CD co co co m • • • • • W) rJ O r—i rH CD (N CO CN in • • • • • ^ H L.O CM o *H H (\ H I I if o r' cp co on co co id co CN ON CO I I CO rH rH CN rH CD CN CD in rH • • • • • • • • # 0 It It to tO < co O «H 1 *H •H CO CN 1 1 2 CN rH CO CD CD CD CO rH CD CD CD CD -t « • • • • # • • 9 It CD It u*> to to It .f H in co rH 1 rH 1 CN CO m • r* 0 CN CD m CD It rH in »H It f- *H CO t ■ CN •H ♦H rH CD *D v CO ^ ^ O o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o *H - r- CM C> CD r—i ,—i m cn r. r^ o in CN rH if) U) CO CO H H CD tn cn O' co ^ ^ m to CO ^ CN CD 00 CD ^0 O CD ^ »> #* #» #> r~ 10 ld cn uIOO^hj- H C/ ^ 0) ^lOO CO ^ ^ O to H O rH o o oj cn co un irt r- to ,-h * r* *■ r* * o co cm co cn •H cm cn ro in f" «-i d- J- o CO rH o co n- O H H CDCNC^LT.cr •—i c> cm cm 3 —i _-r u) ► “ ^ r ». CM cr> J- rH (M CO l/) H" CN Hi t' H H. (\ (M o o o o ^ o o o >h cn ro co r r» #« *. H (\ I/) fO h (\ in (O CO CO CD CD ^ f O' (O H H H lO CN H CN ID O CO (P H CN CD (N f- rH r r r r rH CN CO o rH CO CO CD CD (N CO *»#»#. tO CN CN rH #H CD to co co co oo to uo o m ci h r r. #» #» CD rH to CD tD CN tO fD (N ^ O ^ ^ i> UD rH »H H H in r* ro it H CO (O t (X) H IT «• * » , tO »H CN Jt CO ID > H CN l£> CO CT> CD O o uo o * #• CO t" CN to IT) CD O O tO CO O to r- it »■ r r co m t co .h o to 00 it m to CN O H CO o to r r r c> o o to r' co t'- rH CO r r r r~i in c> CN rH c» co cd CD CO in co CT- CO CD »H tn rH CO rH It CN CO oo cn CO »H to it o it oo co CN CD CN' It 00 it rH rH 00 CN rH r r r h CN H CC t t H Wi CC r r # rH O CO to CD CQ rH O i? to m ro r r r rH U to CO O iT C x #•».#» rH It CO It to < < < i*. : It rH It r* #• #* * * it 0 CN to a> 10 :r c r- It CD CN 0 0 0 co CD CN r- crj CD in c> r> * 4» f. r- rH 0 in CN CN CN 0 CD CO CN CN O CD rH CD rH CO CD CD 1—1 in It ro rH It co on »H U) co ^O o> CN in u t- + + r r» #» #> •H It Dy O O U ) CN •O CN (-» O' CO CD •L/ r- C‘ •—< C\ rH m h If r O r r* r r r «*• rH CD •—< Ch CO CN to O CN rH rH O O rj g O >> W| O C in 0 co rH •H GJ X O Q) *H E 0 O *H r O x: rX •H G O in 00 a, •H in O '— in 4-> r> in i —1 c> 71 u >> a> X) 0 T3 "U D rj >N c O C •r-4 Z3 4-> c 0 O rj 00 rH •H XJ Cj G [ . CL +J < H u* r> G u C3 rX IH rH UJ O O 4 Un O u 0 >> X 3 C »T3 O’ •—< ■8 3 O rH C o» x> 03 O H ro «h ; Z3 (X 0 0 rH 0 > 'U u •H c • 9 r* i) . 1 l-H < m o o oo o i J rH C O N-r S oo cn 00 O 4~r HOC •M C G E rC W .*> X) O rj *H H Or e u u (-0 o *c X h- X) O 00 TJ ^ a h ^ G D3 u in oo a O T? H rH «H O c ^ j: co n- :« m > 1_» O 0 r-J O 0 ^4 CT rH 0 G O >N a> O O *»v G O 0 cn 0 1 X rH *H rH { 00 c> C. n— '.0 CO Q 4 •H V G a> H 4-J ( * u: A » »H r • ^0 00 O Xj •H n G "D G r3 0 TO 4-> rH •H rH *-» u •H 00 n nu O to 0 r- DO O') .*) a: CH o X • H XJ c a cx u c 0) o I/O M o rH •D *-> U •r< <4-« • r-4 u o a* 00 x o u. in o to c G 4-* (4 D> a j o co o u o to o a c> G <05 r-4 r: H r-4 »• 4 r—4 r-H rH o G a, co JO JO JO JO £ .x G G c G p : o g «» r; o C) o CJ O G cn c> in r—4 CO (T i CO p U' CJ> --T CO CD CN4 IX) r; 4 V «TJ -4 r-4 • 4 g .i3 'to >. 4-' • * t^ • • r t 1 i-» u: G »0 a* a> O’ <•> to Jl J-i .4 > J 4 Jl ** ^ V. ;•! r» o »-4 rtf to? a. 4- > g Is V < CO go r—4 o r*: cj 4 J C.0 XI Ci a. a Xf ■V g TJ to c G G o r? C :• o ^ • r-i O g tr o ^ ^ a; a e> o ro CN in u 05 r—4 f" 00 04 CN \D :*s ♦ ^ 4-> r-4 r rj r-4 r- 4 r~4 H Q3 • O ‘ . r? t? to CJ •H o C» o o a> C o to o c o u« C’ • 4 ^ O r-4 rH .H H r-4 rH r-4 ri •H r? *H o t' c oo i n m (»> • i » 4 t- Hi G C u W-i X) m ♦—4 iD zr CO O •r4 * .* CO CN (0 rH H n 4> r; j: to 4-» u •H rs o o *-> CO >. •H Jj G >> rj • • • 4-’ 4* 4-’ G 0 CO to CO rH G G • -4 G ;l ri E • • • O O o jr C D • —» •r-4 C.' c.^ c G a» C- 13 n J *r j t-0 T1 nl • .c C’ c G G < C G CO 4-J 4 • • (Q c3 411 *T? CO ^■n >> U-4 U, P» C> *-* O 4^ c* C> • o : -) O O r: 4J Cl 4 * r 4 » ♦-» CO 4 * 03 .1 D r? fU 0? <3 TJ c> o P* J ♦-» c 4 » 4 • • • * c: c» d o 4.0 rj to CJ (O CO