Attention is invited to the diverging range of distribution. Territorial and community economics account for this very largely. For example, an analysis of three sections will show a decided variation, say for New York (with one automobile for 15 voting men); Arkansas (with one automobile for every 54 voters); and Alabama (with one automobile for every 43 voters).
The state of New York is very largely industrial, and one might commonly infer that, due to the great wealth represented in this state, the ratio should be much smaller. States like Arkansas, Kansas and Iowa are distinctively rural sections—where the population is not so clustered as in cities like New York, and automobile transportation is more utilitarian than a luxury or pastime. For this reason it is estimated that practically every voter, almost, in Kansas and Iowa is a possible prospect in figuring future consumption.
Still another diversion notably exists in the ratio shown for the Southern states, and this is readily explained by reason of a paucity of buying power, since the majority population is negro.
To indicate how the various types of automobiles have been distributed in three different states, the following chart is included in this report.
The following chart shows the distribution of leading motor cars in different states:
The following factors may be instrumental in the automobile industry in preventing the reaching of an absolute saturation point:
(1) Increase in earning or buying power of those now unable to support an automobile;
(2) A very low average price;
(3) Production finally being held at the point where it keeps pace with the increase in population;