AGRICULTURAL POPULATION 253 



his labor as a drayman as he formerly got for his labor and capital, he 

 is likely to move to town and put his money at interest, thus increasing 

 his annual income. A young man in the country after gaining an 

 amount of schooling is ready to offer his services for sale. Where is 

 the best market? In the majority of cases he finds that it is in the 

 city. He follows the job. 



The steady and rapid drift of agricultural population to cities 

 implies the economic dominance of the occupations of cities. If the 

 population of cities tends to outstrip that of the country, it is evident 

 that wealth is relatively increasing rapidly in cities. Where wealth is 

 there will men gather. No amount of exhortation or solicitation will 

 avail to turn the tide countryward if the wealth pull is toward the city. 



But is the economic dominance of the city and the suction of life 

 out of the agricultural areas normal and legitimate or unnatural and 

 sinister ? Should we make up our minds to the steady continuance of 

 the cityward movement or set our faces against it? What is the 

 rationale of the matter ? 



In this connection perhaps the truest light comes from noting a 

 somewhat overlooked fact in regard to modern tendencies in consump- 

 tion. The things we buy are increasingly those of the city rather than 

 of the farm. A smaller and smaller percentage of income is being 

 spent for forms of goods associated with the farm. As standards of 

 living improve there arises an ever-increasing demand for things the 

 farm has little or nothing to do with, such as professional services, 

 classes of manufactured articles, and recreations. 



Suppose, for example, that a family with an income of $2,000 sud- 

 denly acquired a $4,000 income. Would the farm receive a larger sum, 

 provided the whole income were spent on living? Would this family 

 buy more eggs, potatoes or apples ? Possibly a little more. But would 

 not practically all of the increase of income go for the goods of the 

 city ? Suppose a man inherited a million dollars and set out to spend 

 it. How much more would he spend in which the farmer would 

 directly share? Even in hypothetical expenditures for rare wines and 

 fifty-cent cigars the grape grower and the tobacco raiser would share 

 but faintly, for manufacturing and distributing processes would absorb 

 the lion's share of the retail price. And as for automobiles, grand 

 pianos, works of art, travel and operations for appendicitis, city occupa- 

 tions would be the almost exclusive beneficiaries. 



With increase of purchasing power the prosperous consumer wants 

 but little if any more of direct farm products, while his desires for 

 other values soar. Agricultural products cater to a low range of fixed 

 wants, while non-agricultural goods satisfy wants which are ever in 

 advance of power to purchase and are virtually without limit. The 

 wants satisfied by agricultural products may be thought of as occupying 

 the space between parallel lines, while the wants satisfied by non-agri- 



