0-9 | A | B | C | D | E | F | G | H | I | J | K | L | M | N | O | P | Q | R | S | T | U | V | W | X | Y | Z

Image 6 of Kentucky farm and home science, vol. 7 No. 4 fall 1961

Part of Kentucky Agricultural Experiment Station

Interviews with 532 Casey County and Lexington men 60 and over reveals contrasts between rural and city dwellers in a study of *' I Q COIIOIIIIC I'0 BIDS O I BI] LZ. i By E. GRANT YOUMANSI attractively furnished. The urban mens homes were ""t""""* ef R"" s*gV in much better condition than the rural mens homes. _ ln recent decades public attention has been focused The everege Vahlc ef the PYOPBYLY and asscts cwhcd FA upon the many social and economic problems con- by the mch Was $5055 er hguh? Which lhchldcd the fronting older persons in the United States. Very few Vahlc ei lhshrahcc Pchclcs ahd cthc1` lhtahgihlci es W systematic studies, however, have been made compar- Wch er reel PY0PcYtY- Tch Pcrccht ef the mch had . ing the economic conditions of rural and urban older 00 asscts ered 11 Pcrccht cwhcd scmc P1`0PcYtY but pCTS(mS_ valued it at less than $1,000. Seven percent valued , ln 1959 a representative sample of men aged G0 and their PY0PcYtY er $30,000 OY mcrc- Oh the aVc1`agc F over living in Casey county and Lexington, Kentucky, hrheh meh vehred rherr preperry rrrueh hrgher thee rhd .. ; A were interviewed in their homes? The Casey county the rural 1hch*$0>093 and $3.943, 1`csPcchVclY The sample (all rural) numbered 312 and the Lexington urbah lhch alsc ewhed OY had acccss re 1hahY mcrc sample (all urban) 220. No men in institutions were faclhhcs ahd cqultamcht lh the heme than did the included. They were asked questions about their work rural mh and retirement, about their income, property, and V _ _ housing, and about any feelings of deprivation that 4 they might have. ria LOUISVILLE LEXANGTON I Economic Conditions DAAVILLE _ A A A r A__A _A _ A A A A _ OIEISNRO llalt tht. mtu (4b peietnt) iepoited they were em CASEY COUNTY AA, ployed. and a larger proportion ot rural than ot urban ASMRSH men were working (52 and 42 percent). Men in the Bg:&I%G higher status occupations tended to remain in the work {H. force longer than those in the lower status jobs. Re- tired men said poor health was the main reason for Thc 552 meh S"'cld lfvcd m CHSCY ("*Y and lh LX ` A_(_til_iAA A ington. Casey County, in south-central Kentucky. is rela A _ l" _ _ tively isolated from any large urban area. lhe average annual income ot the men was $1,130. Four percent of them had no income, and 9 percent Economic Losses with Age had animal incomes ol $55,000 or more. Urban men . . . _ _ The economic conditions of the oldest men (aged _A. had markedly higher average annual incomes than the .- . . . . A (Ag 7% md $15 HA X Ctivdv to and over) were decidedly inferior to those of the ua rnra meu;.;. t , . . . . . l _ _ _ youngest men aged 60 to G4 . E1 rht -e1rht Jercent \lost (93 percent) of the men lived m private ' ` ` 0 y h 1 ` ` ` ` __ _ ot the rural men aged 60 to 64 were employed, but homes. and ri) percent owned their own homes. Less 0, ~ F- . , _ only 2S percent of the rural men aged to and over than hall the homes (lo percent) were rated in good . . ~ - . ` . _ _ _ _ _ . * were \V()1'lA~_ lllll\'*`l`sll}' ying K\A1>*l=\U<> in age coincided with changes in employment status. ranei. zeonoinic ant .tatistiea . naysis iyision. Yeonomic A , A _ A A __ _ __ , , y* lteseareh Service. t`.S. Departnient of .~\grieulture. A more de- Thi (l\Udg( mhomc Oi the Oidtbt Mud} mtu ; tailed progress report on the economic status of older men in was 40 l)(`l`0(`ht less thm] thc avcrdgc mcmhc et thc I KhSh>` lY~ (l?A=*hl Y*>*A)h$ l{ \1`i