Narrator hello, im george stone. The big count of the population in these United States is made every 10 years. This is the time when Census Bureau enumerators visit every household with a list of basic questions such as, where were you born, how many people live in this house, how many headed how did you get to work last week and so on. , this is not the whole story. Between the censuses, the bureau conducts other counts of agriculture, business, housing and many others as well. And the results of all this questioning appear as statistical tables in this fivefoot shelf of books. I dont suppose many of you reach for a volume of census reports when you feel the urge to curl up with a good book. But still, these columns of figures have a great deal to tell us about who we are, what we do and how we live, about the american drama and the American Dream. And my authority for that statement is dr. Philip hauser, professor of sociology and director of the Population Research and Training Center at the university of chicago. Can we translate these tables on population into a picture of how americans live . To a considerable extent, we certainly can, because they present the figures along with results of sample surveys conducted through the census and other federal agencies. They tell us what kind of housing we have, what kind of facilities and gadgets we have in the houses that make up such important parts. Such an important part. They give us some indication of nonmaterial living as measured by education, which opens new vistas to the educated person. And they tell us a good deal about the way in which the American Family spends its income. How it lives with the income. Certainly that is pretty important. And over the years, with the census and other data, we get a picture of how the american lives, how living changes, and how the American Dream evolves. Lets start with hard facts, those things we can learn directly from census tables. With every census, we have found the Center Population in the United States moving westward. That is quite right. When the first census was taken in 1790, the center of population in the United States, hard to believe, was 23 miles east of baltimore. East of baltimore . That is out in the ocean. You might think so, but by 1950, the population shifted about eight miles northwest of Richmond County in illinois. This is getting closer to the Geographical Center of the United States. Not quite. With the addition of alaska and hawaii, we expect the Population Center to shift further north. Further west and north, but probably not as most folks believe because of the small population of our new states. Beyond the ability to establish the socalled Center Population, what else can the s tell us about where we live . Where we live is also how we live. The census tells us our population is distributed regionally, even though we are a single nation, by differences in client, geography, tradition. Differences in climate, geography, tradition. Life in the south is different than life in the north. We know from the census that the south and north were about equal size at the beginning of our nation, and grew it about the same rate. The impact of rapid industrialization of the north, the north grew rapidly and in a short time, outdistanced the south. The west has been the most rapidly growing part of the United States. On the west coast, we are witnessing the completion of the settlement of this continent. Where we live geographically has less to do with how we live. By that i mean, the differences between living in iowa and california are not likely to be as significant as they once were. This is increasingly the case. Among the reasons are mass media, magazines, communication, books, radio tv. They help give us a more uniform pattern of living. And cut down differences between different sections of the country. Similarly, differences between living on a farm and city are tending to become diminished, because the urban way of living is diffusing throughout the United States, including rural United States. On the other hand, there still are important differences in local ways of living. What do you mean . Even in the city, if you consider detroit, philadelphia, los angeles, families in those cities live in singlefamily dwellings primarily, about 70 all of the families live in those in these live in singlefamily homes. In contrast, in new york, this is only 30 , in chicago 40 . So there are local variations in patterns that do make a considerable difference. I should say they do. What about the typical American Home . Is the dream of a rosecovered cottage still coming through, or has it been replaced by Something Else . It has not been replaced when we see the fact. Here, we can see that as of 1950, as recorded in the census of 1950, two thirds of American Families still lived in a singlefamily detached home. I guess the rosecovered cottage is still there. Still there. Only a fourth of our people lived in apartments. Only 6 in large apartments houses of 10 dwelling units or more. This is for the country as a whole. How about the boom of highrise apartment construction . Do the figures for urban areas alone attend to support this idea . Those of us who live in cities may get that impression, with all the highrise construction. But actually, the facts are to the contrary. 1957, there were permits for 9 million dwelling units. 8 million were for singlefamily homes. Less than 700,000 were for apartment structures with five or more dwelling units. And if we look at the actual impact of changes in housing over time, contrasting urban and rural, we can see that as of 1950, just less than half of all the people in our cities lived in singlefamily homes. An additional third lived in small apartments of just one unit to four units, and 10 of our people lived in large structures having 10 units or more. In the rural farm areas, 96 of everybody still lives in a singlefamily dwelling. That is a predictable figure. I remember a time not long ago when a famous president remarked that a third of this nation was ill closed, ill house, and ill ill clothed, housed, and said. Fed. What progress are we making toward lowering that figure . Whether anyone is ill housed depends on the standard that is applied. By the u. S. Standard of housing, a good part of the housing and most of the world is substandard. For example, what we call substandard housing in the United States, as i visualize what i have seen in asia or latin america, i can assure you would be most welcome there and constitute a considerable improvement in housing in those countries. But it is true that a good part of our people, by our standards, live in substandard housing. Certainly not a third. And those standards change. For example, consider the housing of your grandfather. There, you had a large family system, probably three generations at one point living in a relatively small house, no electricity, no Running Water, and if you can imagine such a horrible situation, no tv. Goodness. Perish the thought. [laughter] how many of us today have these modern accessories to living . Well, lets look at the facts, bearing in mind that a good part of these material gadgets that make up our living are identified with homeownership. Almost two thirds of the American People live in singlefamily homes. But this is by most standards and astonishing thing, 55 of American Families own the homes in which they live. I get the impression from this over here that nowadays, we live in our homes, but the Mortgage Company owns them. The reason for that, 44 of the people who own their homes have a mortgage. That is one way of looking at it, but what is the other side . 56 of American People live in homes that are mortgage free. This is a 1950 census figure. This has improved over time. Even if you look at the 44 , look at it this way. Even though that 44 have not yet acquired sufficient wealth, some are young couples just starting out, they have not acquired sufficient wealth to completely pay for their homes. But because of income and steady jobs, they are able to live in their homes, meanwhile they are paying for them. That is a positive way of looking at it, lets get back to housing standards. Were you going to Say Something about remaining figures . In terms of other facilities, 96 of American Families had radios in 1950. Couple that with the standpoint of how we live with considerations of this kind. 94 had electricity, 80 had mechanical refrigeration, 71 have a private bath and 85 have Running Water. Wait a minute. That means 15 dont have Running Water in this country . Interesting you raise this question, because you are reflecting the american level of living. You think it is bad 15 of our people live without Running Water, but in other parts of the world, certainly parts of the the under the underdeveloped parts of the world that contain most of the worlds people, very small proportions have Running Water. Another aspect is the things with which we live. As i understand it, you are connected with tv, it would be of some interest of you to know, that in 1950 the census reported 15 of American Families with tv sets. It was still a relatively new industry. But by 1958, that increased to over 80 , and that rapid change showed how quickly the american way of life can change, as innovation makes this possible. And the 1960 census will not have a question on television as did the 1950, this time, it will be how Many Television sets do you have . That is a considerable difference. Lets get back to housing standards. Are we making progress in upgrading our housing since that one third of the nation statement was made . Undoubtedly so. For one thing, our income has been going up. We have considerable improvements in the ability of the American People to pay for housing. And consider such a fact that 54 of all dwelling units in the u. S. Have been built since 1920. With these continued improvements, there is little doubt that the total housing has much approved. But we are getting more concerned, the census is, with the mobility of the American People and the fact that many houses are now on wheels. Trailers. So the American Dream of the rosecovered cottage may be changing to rosecovered cottage headed west on route 66. Its not quite as bad as that. There is been a not enough change, that the 1960 census will ask about trailers and their mobility. It is not generally recognized how mobile the American People are. Of all people one year of age and older, 20 change their place of living every year. And of that 20 to move, about 13 are local moves. The other 6 7 are migrant, that is, they move across a county line. Also of some interest, the fact that those proportions hold pretty well for the members of each sex, men and women move around at the same rate in the same proportion are migrants. There is an intriguing thought, for every man on the move, we get the impression there is a woman in hot pursuit . The census doesnt make that interpretation, but it tells you a lot about mobility. There are important differences. For example, those who are employed move a great deal less than those who are unemployed. This is to be expected because the unemployed are apt to move and improve their economic situation. You will notice that employed persons in the labor force move about 20 , about average. On the other hand, the unemployed move at a rate of about 30 . Notice that the proportion of migrants is twice as great for the unemployed as for the employed, a ratio of 12 to 6 . Now, if we consider the employed, we find considerable differences in mobility by occupation. As you might expect, the most stable of occupations is the farmer. Something like 8 of farmers move and less than 3 move across a county line and become migrants. On the other hand, the most mobile population groups farm labor, 27 move and about half of them cross a county line and are migrants. We can go down the occupational groupings. Professional people move more than clerical workers, operators move more than professional people, and down the line. How about age as a factor in migration . Is the retired couples dream of a small chicken farm in the country being traded in on a sports car . We kind of get that impression, but the facts are to the contrary. On the chart now, we can see those under 14 years of age move primarily with their families and move at about the average rate of one in five. However, youngsters 2024 years of age, young women entering the young men and women entering the economy and finding a role in our social order, these are most mobile by age. Over 42 move in the course of a year, and as you see a very large proportion, about 17 are migrants. Senior citizens those 65 years of age and older , tend to stay put. Only 10 move in the course of a year and less than 3 are migrants. Less than 3 . This would indicate the rosy picture of retiring to a sunny place on the beach doesnt come up as often as we would think. Not at all. The facts indicate our Senior Citizens prefer to stay put. I think we agree housing is an important ingredient in the story of how we live. But it is only part of the picture, lets take school. Schooling. A good indication of a nations standard of living is found in literacy. How are we doing . Pretty well, i think. I believe it is of some interest to realize the census stopped asking the literacy question in 1940. The reason is quite apparent, by that date, virtually everybody in the United States was literate. There was no point in recording. So beginning in 1940, the census asked the question of how many years of schooling at a person actually completed, and education attainment tells more about a person and his way of life. In 1940, the first census which contained information, a proportion of the population with less than a Grade School Education was about one third. By 1957, 17 years later, that had decreased to a little more than a fifth of the population with less than elementary School Education. A substantial improvement in a short time. And the other end of the scale, those with a high School Education or more in 1940, that was about a fourth of the population. By 1957, those with a high School Education or more were better than 2 5 of our population. Similar improvements were even greater at the college level, since 1940, those that were College Graduates made up about 10 of our population. By 1957, that had increased by 50 . 15 of our population 25 years of age or older were graduates. Education is a good indication of the nonmaterial form of living. Because new vistas are opened up to people who are educated who understand the physical and social world in which they live and have a world of culture, music, art and the rest opened up to them. That certainly would be true. This increase in education could provide us with a a reflection of our own economy, couldnt it . It shows that with a high enough level of economy, it would allow the youngsters in the unit to go to be able to spare the youngsters from the family unit in order to go on to a higher level of education. That is certainly the case, because our high levels of education and the increasing education of the American People is in large measure a reflection of the general level of High Economic living and productivity. Lets take a look at a major factor responsible in this increase in per capita production and our standard of living. I refer to sources of energy used for production of goods and services. Notice that in 1850, 50 of all sources of energy were animal. Another 13 were human beings. Only one third of energy used for goods and services was mechanical in 1850. But a century later, by 1950, almost 99 of our energy use was mechanical, and human and animal had virtually disappeared. That explains why it is such an event when we see a horse these days. That is true, and it explains the great difference in the level of living between the average person in asia and the average person in the United States. Think of it this way, the average person in the United States has something in excess of 10,000 kilowatt hours of Energy Per Capita per year. In asia, this is less than 300. A ratio of better 351. That is what makes the american way of life. Pretty startling comparison, 10,000 to 300. And our income continues to rise. Since 1929, income has increased 160 . Our income in constant dollars allowing for some inflation by 57 . In 1929, average Family Income was 4000 a year. 1957, over 6,000 a year. In as much as we have more money, and the figures indicate we do, we could find out a lot about ourselves by determining exactly how we spend it. Yes. Such information is available partly from the census, and special sampling surveys conducted by agencies, in this case the bureau of labor statistics. Some of the materials have been analyzed over time by the 20th century foundation. Looking at the pattern of Consumer Expenditures of the average American Family in 1909, about one third of the Family Budget went to food, liquor, and tobacco. I daresay most of that was food. I imagine it was. 24 went to housing and utilities. 15 to clothing and personal care. Notice that about 12 went into household equipment and operations, 5 to transport, and the remainder to accommodation of recreational, medical, educational expenditures. In general in 1909, almost three fourths of entire family expenditures went to the essentials of food, shelter and clothing. With the increase in education, there should me more of the budget going into schooling today. Not as much more as you might think at first blush. For example, in 1909, 1. 4 of 1. 4 of the Family Budget went to education. By 1952, it increased to only 1. 6 . That isnt much. Not at all. It doesnt reflect the change of education that has occurred. The explanation is to be found here. By the american way of life, education is a public service, provided by the government. By the state government, in the case of the state universities. What we obtain through the payment of taxes as Public Services does not show up in the pattern of expenditures for the family. I see. That is your explanation. Notice one of the startling shifts between 1909 and 1952, is the great increase in the proportion of expenditures for things other than food, shelter, and clothing. I get the impression politicians promising a car in every garage has expanded to two cars. That is almost literally true. In 1909, 5 of the Family Budget went into transport for consumers, including the automobile. By 1952, that increased to 11 , more than double. There is your two cars for one over that time. This picture of our way of life shows a great increase in our standard of living, but dont we deserve some demerits, lets say, for the fact that there is a decrease in certain expenditures, not only for education but also welfare . Religion and welfare . One might think so, but welfare expenditures for the Family Budget actually decreased by two thirds between 19091952. It was about 1. 8 of the Family Budget and went down to something like. 5 . But, this does not mean we have less welfare or less in the way of health provision. How do you justify the figures . The answer here again is a significant shift that many of these services are now provided by the public. The Social Security system, for example, health and Welfare Services in local governments. We have collected some surprises and valuable information about how we live. Could you give us a thumbnail sketch of the American Dream as it appears today . The trends we described may expected to continue. In quick summary, i would say increasingly, we will spend less time working and more time enjoying the fruits of our labor. That sounds good to me, and the information, which has come from the special surveys recorded in the form of statistics which when properly interpreted can provide us with an idea of how we live