vitrine · US · the 1900s

The 1900s room

The composite family. Each room is a statistical composite, assembled from separate distributions with separate sources. The family at the median income did not also have the median house, the median car, and the median diet. No single family described here ever existed; each fact tells you, in its provenance drawer, which real population it was measured from.

Decade 1900s 1910s 1920s 1930s 1940s 1950s 1960s 1970s 1980s 1990s 2000s 2010s 2020s

era-graded light · absent technology isn't drawn · every glyph opens its specimen label

The home

The home · 1900s

Renting: 4.73 rooms/family, $24.60/room/yr avg rent. Owning: 5.92 rooms/family. Rent was 12.95% of expenditure.A

Housing: rooms, rent, and tenure, 1901

rooms per family; USD per room per year

MeasuredWage-earner families in selected industrial centers, 33 states — NOT a national median

provenance

Eighteenth Annual Report of the Commissioner of Labor, 1903: Cost of Living and Retail Prices of Food
U.S. Department of Labor, Commissioner of Labor (Carroll D. Wright), 1903 · source
Confidence: A — Official series
Curator note: From the 18th Annual Report, Table III-K (p.370-371), OCR'd via GLM-OCR. Summary of families renting and owning homes by state and nativity. National narrative (p.73): families owning homes averaged 5.92 rooms vs 4.73 for renters; 1.16 rooms per individual (owners) vs 1.01 (renters). Average cost of rent per room was ~$24.60/yr ($24.66 native, $24.55 foreign). The survey covered 2,567 normal families in 33 states; families with boarders excluded from the housing table.
Source note: Data collected 1901, published 1903. Surveyed ~25,000 families. Sometimes called 'the 1901 survey.' Referenced in BLS 'How American Buying Habits Change' (1959, on FRASER) and academic literature. Direct Internet Archive link not yet found — access via FRASER series page or library copy. Government Printing Office, 1904.
Assumption: The composite family
Assumption: Urban/rural splits

The home · 1900s

~46.5% (national, all households)A

Homeownership rate, 1900s

% of occupied housing units owner-occupied

MeasuredAll U.S. occupied housing units (decennial census)

provenance

Homeownership Rate by State: 1900 to 2000
U.S. Census Bureau, 2000 · source
Confidence: A — Official series
Curator note: From Census homeownership time series (owner.pdf). National rate ~1900. This is for ALL households, not just the wage-earner families surveyed by the Commissioner of Labor — those families were overwhelmingly urban renters.
Source note: Time series of homeownership rates from 1900 to 2000 by state and nationally. 1950 national rate: 55.0%. 1940: 43.6%. 1960: 61.9%. Also see companion table: https://www2.census.gov/programs-surveys/decennial/tables/time-series/census-housing-tables/ownerchar.pdf
Assumption: The composite family
Assumption: Urban/rural splits

The budget

The budget · 1900s

$827.19A

Average annual family income, 1901

USD per year, nominal

Measured2,567 wage-earner families in 33 states, head earning <=$1,200/year, year 1901

provenance

BLS Bulletin No. 49: Cost of Living and Retail Prices of Food (18th Annual Report of the Commissioner of Labor)
U.S. Department of Commerce and Labor, Bureau of Labor, 1903 · source
Confidence: A — Official series
Basis: Annual figure
Curator note: From BLS Bulletin No. 49, p.1138. This is an AVERAGE, not a median — the report did not compute medians. Population: 2,567 wage-earner families in 33 states, head earning ≤$1,200/year. NOTE: the University of Missouri guide cited this as $749 — the primary source says $827.19. The Missouri figure was wrong.
Source note: Primary source for 1900s room. Average income $827.19, average expenditure $768.54, food $326.90 (42.54%). Rent 12.95%, clothing 14.04%, fuel and light 5.25%. Average family size 5.31. NOTE: the University of Missouri guide cited average income as $749 — the primary source says $827.19. The $749 figure is WRONG; this is the correct figure from the report itself. File: bls_v08_0049_1903.pdf (268 pages, text-extractable via pdftotext).
Assumption: The composite family
Assumption: Values are shown in period money
Assumption: Income vs consumption
Assumption: The affordability axis

The budget · 1900s

$1,200A

Survey income ceiling, 1901

USD per year — families earning more were excluded

Measured2,567 wage-earner families in 33 states, head earning <=$1,200/year, year 1901

provenance

BLS Bulletin No. 49: Cost of Living and Retail Prices of Food (18th Annual Report of the Commissioner of Labor)
U.S. Department of Commerce and Labor, Bureau of Labor, 1903 · source
Confidence: A — Official series
Curator note: From BLS Bulletin No. 49, p.1138: 'the head of the family must be a wage worker or a salaried man earning not over $1,200 during the year.' This caps the survey at the lower/middle income range — upper-income families are not represented.
Source note: Primary source for 1900s room. Average income $827.19, average expenditure $768.54, food $326.90 (42.54%). Rent 12.95%, clothing 14.04%, fuel and light 5.25%. Average family size 5.31. NOTE: the University of Missouri guide cited average income as $749 — the primary source says $827.19. The $749 figure is WRONG; this is the correct figure from the report itself. File: bls_v08_0049_1903.pdf (268 pages, text-extractable via pdftotext).
Assumption: The composite family

The budget · 1900s

$768.54A

Average annual family expenditure, 1901

USD per year, nominal

Measured2,567 wage-earner families in 33 states, head earning <=$1,200/year, year 1901

provenance

BLS Bulletin No. 49: Cost of Living and Retail Prices of Food (18th Annual Report of the Commissioner of Labor)
U.S. Department of Commerce and Labor, Bureau of Labor, 1903 · source
Confidence: A — Official series
Curator note: From BLS Bulletin No. 49, p.1138. Average expenditure for all purposes. Families spent 93% of their income on average ($768.54 / $827.19), leaving a small surplus.
Source note: Primary source for 1900s room. Average income $827.19, average expenditure $768.54, food $326.90 (42.54%). Rent 12.95%, clothing 14.04%, fuel and light 5.25%. Average family size 5.31. NOTE: the University of Missouri guide cited average income as $749 — the primary source says $827.19. The $749 figure is WRONG; this is the correct figure from the report itself. File: bls_v08_0049_1903.pdf (268 pages, text-extractable via pdftotext).
Assumption: The composite family
Assumption: Values are shown in period money
Assumption: Income vs consumption

The budget · 1900s

Food 42.54%, rent 12.95%, clothing 14.04%, fuel & light 5.25%, furniture 3.42%, tobacco 1.42%, liquor/sickness/amusements 14.51%, misc 5.87%A

Full expenditure breakdown, 1901

% of total family expenditure

Measured2,567 wage-earner families in 33 states, head earning <=$1,200/year, year 1901

provenance

BLS Bulletin No. 49: Cost of Living and Retail Prices of Food (18th Annual Report of the Commissioner of Labor)
U.S. Department of Commerce and Labor, Bureau of Labor, 1903 · source
Confidence: A — Official series
Curator note: From BLS Bulletin No. 49, pp.1140-1141. Rent was 12.95% — the Missouri guide cited 13%, which matches. The report notes that no retail prices were available for rent, clothing, fuel, furniture, or tobacco for the time series (only food had retail price data).
Source note: Primary source for 1900s room. Average income $827.19, average expenditure $768.54, food $326.90 (42.54%). Rent 12.95%, clothing 14.04%, fuel and light 5.25%. Average family size 5.31. NOTE: the University of Missouri guide cited average income as $749 — the primary source says $827.19. The $749 figure is WRONG; this is the correct figure from the report itself. File: bls_v08_0049_1903.pdf (268 pages, text-extractable via pdftotext).
Assumption: The composite family
Assumption: Income vs consumption

The budget · 1900s

5.31A

Average family size, 1901

persons per family

Measured2,567 wage-earner families in 33 states, head earning <=$1,200/year, year 1901

provenance

BLS Bulletin No. 49: Cost of Living and Retail Prices of Food (18th Annual Report of the Commissioner of Labor)
U.S. Department of Commerce and Labor, Bureau of Labor, 1903 · source
Confidence: A — Official series
Curator note: From BLS Bulletin No. 49, p.1138. 0.7 persons above the Census 1900 national average of 4.61. The report notes this was not due to intentional selection of larger families.
Source note: Primary source for 1900s room. Average income $827.19, average expenditure $768.54, food $326.90 (42.54%). Rent 12.95%, clothing 14.04%, fuel and light 5.25%. Average family size 5.31. NOTE: the University of Missouri guide cited average income as $749 — the primary source says $827.19. The $749 figure is WRONG; this is the correct figure from the report itself. File: bls_v08_0049_1903.pdf (268 pages, text-extractable via pdftotext).
Assumption: The composite family

The table

The table · 1900s

$326.90A

Average annual food expenditure, 1901

USD per family per year, nominal

Measured2,567 wage-earner families in 33 states, head earning <=$1,200/year, year 1901

provenance

BLS Bulletin No. 49: Cost of Living and Retail Prices of Food (18th Annual Report of the Commissioner of Labor)
U.S. Department of Commerce and Labor, Bureau of Labor, 1903 · source
Confidence: A — Official series
Curator note: From BLS Bulletin No. 49, p.1138. This is the total food expenditure per family per year — $6.29 per week. The report also collected retail prices for staple foods from 814 retail merchants in the same localities.
Source note: Primary source for 1900s room. Average income $827.19, average expenditure $768.54, food $326.90 (42.54%). Rent 12.95%, clothing 14.04%, fuel and light 5.25%. Average family size 5.31. NOTE: the University of Missouri guide cited average income as $749 — the primary source says $827.19. The $749 figure is WRONG; this is the correct figure from the report itself. File: bls_v08_0049_1903.pdf (268 pages, text-extractable via pdftotext).
Assumption: The composite family
Assumption: Values are shown in period money

The table · 1900s

Beef (fresh) $46.38, beef (salt) $10.61, hog (fresh) $15.64, hog (salt) $17.60, other meat $13.29, poultry $9.91, fish $8.35, eggs $16.17, milk $20.03, butter $27.73A

Food basket: expenditure per family by item, 1901

USD per family per year, nominal (avg among families buying each item)

MeasuredWage-earner families in selected industrial centers, 33 states — NOT a national median

provenance

Eighteenth Annual Report of the Commissioner of Labor, 1903: Cost of Living and Retail Prices of Food
U.S. Department of Labor, Commissioner of Labor (Carroll D. Wright), 1903 · source
Confidence: A — Official series
Curator note: From the 18th Annual Report, Table IV-M (p.499), OCR'd via GLM-OCR. Summary of expenditure per family for various items of food, by nativity of head of family. National totals for 1,578 families. These 10 categories total $185.71 — 56.8% of the $326.90 total food expenditure. The remainder covers flour, bread, vegetables, fruits, sugar, coffee, etc. Beef (fresh) was the single largest food expenditure at $46.38. Butter ($27.73) exceeded milk ($20.03) — reflecting the era's dietary patterns.
Source note: Data collected 1901, published 1903. Surveyed ~25,000 families. Sometimes called 'the 1901 survey.' Referenced in BLS 'How American Buying Habits Change' (1959, on FRASER) and academic literature. Direct Internet Archive link not yet found — access via FRASER series page or library copy. Government Printing Office, 1904.
Assumption: The composite family
Assumption: Values are shown in period money

The day

The day · 1900s

59.0A

Average weekly hours, manufacturing, 1900

hours per week

MeasuredVarious national aggregates (depends on table)

provenance

Historical Statistics of the United States, Colonial Times to 1970 (Bicentennial Edition)
U.S. Census Bureau, 1975 · source
Confidence: A — Official series
Curator note: From Historical Statistics of the United States (Colonial Times to 1970), Series D 765, p.76 (OCR'd via GLM-OCR). Total manufacturing, all workers. Union workers averaged 53.0 hrs; payroll workers 62.1 hrs. By 1910, hours had fallen to 56.6. The previous Tier D figure of '56' from the Missouri guide was close but unsourced.
Source note: Free on Internet Archive. Contains population, labor, prices, housing, and diffusion series spanning colonial times to 1970. Essential for pre-1940 decades where no dedicated survey exists. Predecessor to the Millennial Edition.
Assumption: The composite family

The day · 1900s

$0.216/hour ($12.74/week at 59.0 hrs)A

Average hourly earnings, manufacturing, 1900

USD per hour, nominal

MeasuredVarious national aggregates (depends on table)

provenance

Historical Statistics of the United States, Colonial Times to 1970 (Bicentennial Edition)
U.S. Census Bureau, 1975 · source
Confidence: A — Official series
Basis: Hourly rate
Curator note: From Historical Statistics of the United States, Series D 766 (hourly earnings), p.76 (OCR'd via GLM-OCR). Weekly earnings computed: $0.216 × 59.0 hrs = $12.74. Union workers earned $0.341/hr; payroll workers $0.152/hr. By 1910: $0.260/hr ($14.72/week at 56.6 hrs). Previous Tier D figure was $11.00/week from the Missouri guide (1905) — close but unsourced.
Source note: Free on Internet Archive. Contains population, labor, prices, housing, and diffusion series spanning colonial times to 1970. Essential for pre-1940 decades where no dedicated survey exists. Predecessor to the Millennial Edition.
Assumption: Values are shown in period money

The day · 1900s

$6.17A

Average weekly earnings, wage-earning women, 1905

USD per week, nominal

MeasuredWage-earners in manufacturing establishments, United States

provenance

Census of Manufactures, 1905: Part I
U.S. Census Bureau, 1907 · source
Confidence: A — Official series
Curator note: From the 1905 Census of Manufactures, Part I, page lxxxix. Women earned $6.17/week vs men's $11.16/week — a 55% gap. Women's earnings were $4.17 above the minimum and $4.90 below the maximum. Confirmed by Hutchinson, 'Women's Wages' (archive.org) and Missouri Prices & Wages guide. Upgraded from Tier D to Tier A: figure is from an official Census Bureau statistical series.
Source note: 1905 special Census of Manufactures. Part I, page lxxxix reports average weekly earnings by sex: men $11.16/week, women $6.17/week — a 55% gap. Women's earnings were $4.17 above the minimum and $4.90 below the maximum. Cited in 'Earnings of Wage-Earners' chapter (Census.gov PDF). Also confirmed by Hutchinson, 'Women's Wages' (archive.org) and Missouri Prices & Wages guide.
Assumption: Values are shown in period money

The day · 1900s

48.2 years (white male), 51.1 years (white female)A

Life expectancy at birth, 1900-02

years at birth

MeasuredVarious national aggregates (depends on table)

provenance

Historical Statistics of the United States, Colonial Times to 1970 (Bicentennial Edition)
U.S. Census Bureau, 1975 · source
Confidence: A — Official series
Curator note: From Historical Statistics of the United States, Series B 116-117 (Expectation of Life at Specified Ages), p.76 (OCR'd via GLM-OCR). Period 1900-02. At age 20: male 42.2, female 43.8. At age 40: male 27.7, female 29.2. By 1909-11: male 50.2, female 53.6. The previous Tier D figure of '48 years' from the Missouri guide was accurate.
Source note: Free on Internet Archive. Contains population, labor, prices, housing, and diffusion series spanning colonial times to 1970. Essential for pre-1940 decades where no dedicated survey exists. Predecessor to the Millennial Edition.

The day · 1900s

~100 per 1,000 live birthsA

Infant mortality rate, 1900

deaths before age 1 per 1,000 live births

MeasuredU.S. resident population (birth and death certificates)

provenance

Achievements in Public Health, 1900-1999: Healthier Mothers and Babies (MMWR Vol. 48, No. 38)
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 1999 · source
Confidence: A — Official series
Curator note: From CDC MMWR Vol. 48, No. 38 (1999): 'approximately 100 infants died before age 1 year' per 1,000 live births at the beginning of the 20th century. In some U.S. cities, up to 30% of infants died before reaching their first birthday. The 1915 rate (first year of reliable national data) was 99.9 per 1,000. By 1997: 7.2 per 1,000 — a >90% decline. This is one of the great public health achievements of the 20th century: sanitation, milk pasteurization, antibiotics, and neonatal intensive care.
Source note: CDC Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report article summarizing 20th-century declines in infant and maternal mortality. Key data: 1900 infant mortality ~100 per 1,000 live births; 1997 rate 7.2 per 1,000. Total decline 1915-1997: >90%. Includes Table 1 with percentage reductions by decade period. Also reports 1997 infant deaths: 28,045.

The day · 1900s

46.8C

Women's weekly unpaid home-production hours, 1900

hours per week, prime-age women (ages 18–64)

MeasuredPrime-age women and men, ages 18–64 (benchmark years 1900–2005); also all-ages per-capita and per-household aggregates

provenance

Time Spent in Home Production in the Twentieth-Century United States: New Estimates from Old Data
Cambridge University Press (Journal of Economic History), 2009 · source
Confidence: C — Reconstructed from period surveys
Curator note: Ramey (2009) Table 6A, 'All Prime-Age Women' column. Reconstruction from historical time-diary studies (Purnell Act 1920s, Wilson 1929, USDA 1944) linked to AHTUS/BLS surveys from 1965. Includes food prep, house cleaning, clothing care, childcare, purchasing, and household management. Numbers in italics in source = partially extrapolated. Draft version (NBER w13985) has identical values. Splice caveat: Ramey measures women-specific home production ages 18-64; ATUS (2020s room) measures all-adult household activities age 15+ — a concept change that must caveat when plotted together.
Source note: Valerie A. Ramey, JEconHist 69(1), March 2009, pp. 1–47. Reconstruction from historical time-diary studies (Purnell Act studies 1920s, Wilson 1929, USDA 1944) linked to AHTUS/BLS modern surveys. Draft version: NBER Working Paper w13985 (May 2008, 63pp) — data tables are numerically identical to the published version; differences are prose tightening and table reformatting (5→5A/5B, etc.). Tier C (period-survey reconstruction). Key tables: Table 5A (nonemployed women), Table 6A (all women, prime-age), Table 7 (men, prime-age), Table 8A (all ages), Table 3 (component breakdown). Note: Ramey does not use the 1992-94 survey (missing data), so no 1990s benchmark. Splice point to ATUS: Ramey measures women-specific home production ages 18-64; ATUS measures all-adult household activities age 15+ — a concept splice that must caveat (Plan 004 Measure guard).
Assumption: The composite family

The day · 1900s

3.9C

Men's weekly unpaid home-production hours, 1900

hours per week, prime-age men (ages 18–64)

MeasuredPrime-age women and men, ages 18–64 (benchmark years 1900–2005); also all-ages per-capita and per-household aggregates

provenance

Time Spent in Home Production in the Twentieth-Century United States: New Estimates from Old Data
Cambridge University Press (Journal of Economic History), 2009 · source
Confidence: C — Reconstructed from period surveys
Curator note: Ramey (2009) Table 7, 'All Prime-Age Men' column. Early estimates from Purnell Act studies and Lundberg et al. (1934); 1965+ from AHTUS/BLS. Men's hours rose 13 hrs/week across the century (3.9→16.8), partially offsetting women's decline. Numbers in italics in source = partially extrapolated.
Source note: Valerie A. Ramey, JEconHist 69(1), March 2009, pp. 1–47. Reconstruction from historical time-diary studies (Purnell Act studies 1920s, Wilson 1929, USDA 1944) linked to AHTUS/BLS modern surveys. Draft version: NBER Working Paper w13985 (May 2008, 63pp) — data tables are numerically identical to the published version; differences are prose tightening and table reformatting (5→5A/5B, etc.). Tier C (period-survey reconstruction). Key tables: Table 5A (nonemployed women), Table 6A (all women, prime-age), Table 7 (men, prime-age), Table 8A (all ages), Table 3 (component breakdown). Note: Ramey does not use the 1992-94 survey (missing data), so no 1990s benchmark. Splice point to ATUS: Ramey measures women-specific home production ages 18-64; ATUS measures all-adult household activities age 15+ — a concept splice that must caveat (Plan 004 Measure guard).
Assumption: The composite family

The day · 1900s

78C

Total home-production hours per household, 1900

hours per week, all household members combined

MeasuredPrime-age women and men, ages 18–64 (benchmark years 1900–2005); also all-ages per-capita and per-household aggregates

provenance

Time Spent in Home Production in the Twentieth-Century United States: New Estimates from Old Data
Cambridge University Press (Journal of Economic History), 2009 · source
Confidence: C — Reconstructed from period surveys
Curator note: Ramey (2009), aggregate home-production hours divided by number of households. Fell from 78 hrs/week (1900) to 49 hrs/week (2005), a 37% decline. Household size fell 45% (4.7→2.6 persons) over the same period, so per-household hours fell proportionally less than household size. Per-capita (all ages) was 16.4 hrs/week — slightly higher in 2005 than 1900 because fewer children (who do little home production) are in the population.
Source note: Valerie A. Ramey, JEconHist 69(1), March 2009, pp. 1–47. Reconstruction from historical time-diary studies (Purnell Act studies 1920s, Wilson 1929, USDA 1944) linked to AHTUS/BLS modern surveys. Draft version: NBER Working Paper w13985 (May 2008, 63pp) — data tables are numerically identical to the published version; differences are prose tightening and table reformatting (5→5A/5B, etc.). Tier C (period-survey reconstruction). Key tables: Table 5A (nonemployed women), Table 6A (all women, prime-age), Table 7 (men, prime-age), Table 8A (all ages), Table 3 (component breakdown). Note: Ramey does not use the 1992-94 survey (missing data), so no 1990s benchmark. Splice point to ATUS: Ramey measures women-specific home production ages 18-64; ATUS measures all-adult household activities age 15+ — a concept splice that must caveat (Plan 004 Measure guard).
Assumption: The composite family

What had arrived

What had arrived · 1900s

Telephone: 9.2 per 1,000 population (1898), ~5% of households. Automobile: <1% (registration incomplete pre-1910). Electricity: <5% of homes (urban only). Radio: not yet commercial.A

Technology diffusion: telephone, automobile, electricity (~1900)

per 1,000 population or % of households

MeasuredVarious national aggregates (depends on table)

provenance

Historical Statistics of the United States, Colonial Times to 1970 (Bicentennial Edition)
U.S. Census Bureau, 1975 · source
Confidence: A — Official series
Curator note: From Historical Statistics Vol 2, Series R 1-2 (p.192, OCR'd via GLM-OCR): 1898 had 681,000 telephones = 9.2 per 1,000 population. With avg family size 5.31, this translates to roughly 5% of households. The report notes motor-vehicle registration data for early years is 'incomplete, largely because few States required their registration' (p.113). By 1907, telephone penetration reached ~7% of households. Electricity diffusion was limited to urban areas; rural electrification didn't begin until the 1930s. Radio broadcasting began ~1920.
Source note: Free on Internet Archive. Contains population, labor, prices, housing, and diffusion series spanning colonial times to 1970. Essential for pre-1940 decades where no dedicated survey exists. Predecessor to the Millennial Edition.
Assumption: The composite family
Assumption: Urban/rural splits

A day's work buys

A day's work buys · 1900s

$12.74/week (manufacturing) = 1.66% of $768.54 annual expenditure → 60 weeks to cover annual expensesA

What a week of work bought, 1900

ratio of weekly wages to annual expenditure

MeasuredVarious national aggregates (depends on table)

provenance

Historical Statistics of the United States, Colonial Times to 1970 (Bicentennial Edition)
U.S. Census Bureau, 1975 · source
Confidence: A — Official series
Curator note: Computed from primary sources: hourly earnings $0.216 × 59.0 hrs = $12.74/week (Historical Statistics Series D 765-766). Annual expenditure $768.54 from the 18th Annual Report (Bulletin No. 49, p.1138). $12.74 covers 1.66% of annual expenditure — implying ~60 weeks of work to cover expenses, consistent with year-round work by multiple family earners. Previous Tier D used $11.00/week from the Missouri guide.
Source note: Free on Internet Archive. Contains population, labor, prices, housing, and diffusion series spanning colonial times to 1970. Essential for pre-1940 decades where no dedicated survey exists. Predecessor to the Millennial Edition.
Assumption: The composite family
Assumption: Values are shown in period money

A day's work buys · 1900s

$58.65 surplus ($827.19 income - $768.54 expenditure)A

Income vs expenditure surplus, 1901

USD per year, nominal

Measured2,567 wage-earner families in 33 states, head earning <=$1,200/year, year 1901

provenance

BLS Bulletin No. 49: Cost of Living and Retail Prices of Food (18th Annual Report of the Commissioner of Labor)
U.S. Department of Commerce and Labor, Bureau of Labor, 1903 · source
Confidence: A — Official series
Curator note: Computed from primary source: average income ($827.19) minus average expenditure ($768.54) = $58.65. Families saved about 7% of income on average. This is a thin margin — sickness or unemployment could quickly push a family into deficit.
Source note: Primary source for 1900s room. Average income $827.19, average expenditure $768.54, food $326.90 (42.54%). Rent 12.95%, clothing 14.04%, fuel and light 5.25%. Average family size 5.31. NOTE: the University of Missouri guide cited average income as $749 — the primary source says $827.19. The $749 figure is WRONG; this is the correct figure from the report itself. File: bls_v08_0049_1903.pdf (268 pages, text-extractable via pdftotext).
Assumption: The composite family
Assumption: Values are shown in period money

A day's work buys · 1900s

$650 (Oldsmobile Curved Dash, best-selling) to $750 (Ford Model A)C

New automobile price, 1901–1904

USD, nominal (manufacturer list price)

MeasuredManufacturer list prices for the US market

provenance

Early American Automobile Manufacturer Prices (1901–1910)
Manufacturer records compiled by automotive historians, 2008 · source
Confidence: C — Reconstructed from period surveys
Curator note: The Oldsmobile Curved Dash Runabout was $650 from 1901–1904 and was the best-selling car in America (425 sold 1901, 2,500 in 1902, 3,924 in 1903). The Ford Model A (first Ford, 1903) was $750–$850. The Rambler was also $650. These are manufacturer list prices from primary company records, compiled by automotive historians. The previous Tier D figure ($750–$1,500 from Frank Leslie's Popular Monthly) is consistent but less precise. A $650 car = 51 weeks of manufacturing wages ($12.74/week) = ~80% of annual family income ($827.19).
Source note: Oldsmobile Curved Dash Runabout: $650 (1901–1904), best-selling car in America. Ford Model A (first Ford): $750–$850 (1903). Rambler: $650 (1902–1913). Prices from manufacturer records compiled by ConceptCarz, RM Sotheby's, and PreWarCar. Tier C: manufacturer list prices verified through multiple automotive history sources.
Assumption: Values are shown in period money

Confidence & flags

A — official statistical series

B — official microdata, computed by this project

C — reconstructed from period surveys

D — scholarly estimate

Gap — no reliable record; shown as the gap it is

Reading the museum

Every fact is behind glass: its placard names the source, the year, who was measured, and how sure we are. Chart points and stage glyphs deep-link to their placards.

Falling metrics render in copper, rising in brass. Absent technology isn't drawn — a bare house says more than ghosts.