these factors, elderly women average a longer period of retirement than elderly men during which time they must rely on private and public sources of retirement income.

CHART 1-7

NUMBER OF MEN PER 100, WOMEN BY ELDERLY AGE GROUP

'SOURCE: U. S. Bureau of the Census. Current Population Reports, Series p-25, No. 952, estimates

G. SUPPORT RATIO

THE RATIO OF ELDERLY TO WORKING AGE PERSONS IS INCREASING

DRAMATICALLY

99

The fact that people are living longer and families are having fewer children is changing the shape of the "elderly support ratio' (the number of 65-plus persons to persons of working age, 18 to 64 years). The average family in the early 1900's had four children; today, the average family has only two children. This factor combined with the fact that average life expectancy has advanced by 26 years since 1900 is resulting in growth in the ratio of elderly persons compared to persons of working age (chart 1-8 and table 14). In 1900, there were about seven elderly persons for every 100 persons of working age; in 1984, this ratio was almost 19 elderly persons per 100 of working age. By 2020, the ratio will rise to about 29 per 100 and is expected to increase rapidly to 38 per 100 by 2050 (chart 1-8 and table 1-4).

1900

1920.

1940.

1960

1980.

1990

2000.

2010.

2020

2030.

2040.

SUPPORT RATIO

SOURCE: U.S. Bureau of the Census, Decennial Censuses

of Population, 1990-2050; Current Population Reports, Series
P-25, No. 952, Projections Are Middle Series.

TABLE 1-4.-YOUNG, ELDERLY AND TOTAL SUPPORT RATIOS, 1900-2050

2050.

Source; U.S. Bureau of the Census, Decennial Census, 1980 and Projections of the Population of the United States by Sex and Race: 1983 to 2050; Series P-25, No. 952.

The "support ratio" is important because, in economic terms, the working population can be thought of as supporting nonworking age groups. However, a "support" or dependency ratio is a crude measure since many younger and older persons are in the labor force and not dependent while many persons of labor force age may not be working. Although the total support ratio (young and old combined) is expected to increase in the next century, it has declined substantially since 1900. This would suggest that fewer eco

nomic demands are currently placed on working age Americans for supporting the young and the old.

From a public policy standpoint, however, the decline in the total suppport ratio, caused by a large decline in the number of children, masks the rise in the elderly support ratio. This is an important distinction because it is primarily publicly-funded programs which serve the elderly while mostly private (i.e., family) funds are directed toward support of the young. Nonetheless, the increasing demands on public programs caused by a burgeoning elderly population are, in large part, offset by declining demands on private funds for supporting children.

H. LIFE EXPECTANCY

THE UPWARD TREND IN LIFE EXPECTANCY IS CONTINUING The average expectation of life at birth reached a record high in 1983. This increase continues a remarkable upward trend in life expectancy since the beginning of the century. The greatest gains occurred during the first half of the century largely due to dramatic reductions in deaths due to infectious disease. A baby born in 1900 could expect to live an average of 49 years, while a baby born in 1983 could expect an additional 26 years of life. By 1983, life expectancy at birth was 74.7 years of age (table 1-5). Although in the early part of this century, increases in life expectancy were due to decreases in deaths of infants and children. Most of the increasing life expectancy since 1970 has been due to decreased mortality among the middle-aged and elderly population.

TABLE 1-5.-LIFE EXPECTANCY AT BIRTH AND AT AGE 65 ACCORDING TO RACE AND SEX, 1981,

(NOTE: Life expectancy is the average number of years of life remaining to a person if he or she were to experience the age-specific mortality rates for the tabulated year throughout the remainder of life.)

(A) SEX DIFFERENCES

Throughout this century, improvement in the years an individual can expect to live has been more significant for women than for men (chart 1-9 and table 1-6). For instance, from 1940 to 1980, life expectancy at birth for the total population advanced by 11 years, from about age 63 years to 74 years. For women, however,

life expectancy at birth advanced by about 12 years from 65.2 to 77.5 years; men advanced by only 9.2 years, from 60.8 to 70.9 years. Now, however, the gap in female/male life expectancy appears to be decreasing slightly. Between 1981 and 1982, life expectancy for males at birth increased by one-half year, slightly more than the three-tenths year gain for females. The female/male differential in life expectancy was 7.3 years in 1982, as compared to 7.5 years in 1980 and 7.5 years in 1970.

(NOTE: Statistics for life expectancy reported in this section may differ slightly depending on the data source used.)

SOURCE: National Center for Health Statistics, Monthly Vital
Statistics Report, Vol. 33, no. 9, 1984

1990

TABLE 1-6.-LIFE EXPECTANCY AT BIRTH AND AGE 65 BY SEX AND CALENDAR YEAR, 1900-2050

TABLE 1–6.—LIFE EXPECTANCY AT BIRTH AND AGE 65 BY SEX AND CALENDAR YEAR, 1900–

Source: Social Security Administration; Social Security Area Population Projections, 1984; Actuarial Study No. 92.

Americans who reached their 65th birthdays in 1983 could expect to live another 16.8 years. Since 1900, life expectancy at age 65 has advanced significantly. Although life expectancy at birth showed greater increases in the first half of the century than life expectancy at age 65, in recent years, life expectancy at age 65 has been increasing more rapidly. According to estimates from the Social Security Administration (SSA), elderly men gained 2.7 years from 1900 to 1980 and elderly women gained 6.4 years. SSA's projections for the future suggest that elderly men can expect to gain an additional 1.8 years by the year 2050, while women could expect to gain an additional 2.4 years.

(B) RACE

Life expectancy at birth differs according to race, with whites living longer than blacks. However, this gap is also narrowing. In 1940, life expectancy at birth for whites was 11 years longer than for blacks. In 1983, the difference was 5.6 years. From 1981 to 1983, the black population showed an increase of six-tenths a year in life expectancy, almost twice the increase of one-half a year for the white population. Differences in life expectncy by race at age 65, however, are small and have been for decades. In fact, death rates are higher for whites after age 80 than for blacks.

(C) RACE AND SEX

A significant hierarchy is evident for life expectancy of males and females by race. White females have the highest life expectancy at birth, followed by black females, white males, then black males. The largest current gain in life expectancy has been for black females. From 1970 to 1983, black females gained 5.5 years, black males 5.2 years, white males 3.6 years and white females 3.2 years.4

4 Kitagawa, E. M. and P.M. Hauser. Differential Mortality in the United States: A Study in Socioeconomic Epidemiology. Cambridge, Harvard University Press, 1973.