THE I. A. A. RECORD 



Page Five 



le 

 d 



IS 

 IS 



■e 



le 

 ,c 



IS 



•«> 



• »> 



.1 . 



:\'- 



I * > 



.t. 





'/. I V 



1^\ 



1928. These figures take no account of 

 the production of American owned fac- 

 tories located in Canada, Sweden, Ger- 

 many and France. The manufacture of 

 agricultural implements in these coun- 

 tries has greatly expanded since the war. 

 Notable among them is Germany, who 

 has almost literally beaten her swords 

 into plowshares by turning her great 

 Krupp Gun Works over to the manu- 

 facture of farm machinery. 



Facts Well Known 

 There is nothing new in all this. 

 Agriculture has been greatly expanded, 

 both at home and abroad. The facts 

 are well known. The question is not 

 as to conditions, but as to the method 

 of dealing with them. 



There are those who maintain that it 

 is the duty of the farmer to express 

 himself in the largest possible produc- 

 tion, that he who makes two blades of 

 grass grow where one grew before is a 

 public benefactor; that the farmer has 

 not only the right but the duty to pro- 

 duce as much of the crops which he 

 raises as the greatest possible acreage, 

 the most scientific methods and his own 

 best efforts will permit. 



A False Argument 

 If this theory is to prevail, then logi- 

 cally we should encourage a larger acre- 

 age per man; an increasingly scientific, 

 mechanized and intensive cultivation; 

 and the most efficient system of market- 

 ing. But before we embark on this pro- 

 gram we are bound to recognize that 

 enormous surpluses will be produced 

 which must compete for the markets of 

 the world. Inexorably they must be 

 sold on the basis of a competitive price. 

 This in turn means that American 

 farmers must produce at so low a cost 

 as to return a profit on the world price. 

 If this is our program, then we must 

 compete with a foreign agriculture, 

 which is also expanded, which has the 

 benefit of cheap lands, uses cheap labor; 

 and, in increasing degree, modern ma- 

 chinery. Such expansion would mean 

 ever increasing surpluses from America 

 meeting foreign competition in the 

 world market. No debenture, or other 

 scheme of subsidy, could equalize such 

 conditions. The American farmer can- 

 not, and ought not, be compelled to 

 meet the fierce competition of cheap 

 lands and low standards of living of 

 other countries. 



Under the circumstances, shall we 

 continue annually to pile up mountains 

 of foods and fibers, the very size of 

 which reduces the world price, breaks 

 the price at home, and leaves us poorer? 

 Shall we perpetually attempt to pile the 

 mountain higher? There is nothing 

 economically sound or socially desirable 

 about producing crops to sell at less 

 than the cost of producing them. 



We mix plenty of brains with the 

 soil in our production of crops, but we 

 do not consider the market before we 

 plant, nor can we follow our produc- 

 tion through in the market after it is 

 produced. We use scientific methods to 

 plow, seed and reap; we use no method 

 at all in regulating the size of the out- 

 put or the movement to market. We 

 have little voice in the sale of our own 

 products. 



Profit Determines Prosperity 

 But you say, shall we abandon sci- 

 entific methods, scrap our machinery 

 and let our lands lie idle while interest 



"We seek equality with indus- 

 try. But we have observed that 

 an ungovernable surplus pro- 

 duction has wrecked many an 

 industry 



"We work 365 days a year, 

 every fellow for himself, refuse 

 to co-operate with anybody, 

 produce a surplus, — and reap a 

 declining standard of living. 



and taxes eat them up? Certainly not. 

 Let us not forget that scientific prin- 

 ciples and mechanical farming should 

 apply to the method and cost of produc- 

 tion and not to the size of the crop. 

 Profit, not surplus products, will de- 

 termine prosperity. Interest and ex- 

 penses are met out of surplus profit, 

 and not out of surplus production. 

 Profit, not quantity of crop, determines 

 the standard of living, and supports 

 civic enterprises. What the nation 

 needs is not more crops or less crops, 

 but prosperous and contented farmers. 



Steel Men Organized 

 We seek equality with industry. But 

 we have observed that an ungovernable 

 surplus production has wrecked many 

 an industry. With the opening of 

 enormous deposits of iron ore north of 

 Lake Superior and the development of 

 the Bessemer converter, the steel in- 

 dustry expanded by leaps and bounds. 

 The production of steel was divided 

 among many independent plants which 

 could and did make steel cheaply and 

 rapidly. Production outran demand, 

 prices sagged and fluctuated under the 

 weight of the surplus. The solvency 

 of every steel plant in the country was 

 threatened. The answer was found in 

 the organization of a merger of steel 

 plants which controlled 65 per cent of 

 the production. Production was regu- 

 lated to demand, and the prices were 

 stabilized. The several independent 

 plants had used scientific and economi- 

 cal methods. They had been efficient, 

 but they over-produced and broke the 

 price. They merged. The resulting 



corporation has paid dividends for 

 thirty years, and has doubled, the value 

 of its properties out of earnings. 



For industry, regulated production 

 means profit, and the standards of hv- 

 ing of industry rise. For agriculture, 

 an immense volume of production means 

 lower prices, and our standards of liv- 

 ing decline. 



We look on admiringly while indus- 

 try regulates production, and labor cuts 

 its hours to eight per day. We are 

 urged to dispose of speedometers and buy 

 alarm clocks. It 



Work Too Hard 



Industry organizes, — assembles its 

 gigantic systems, welds them into great 

 producing units through the coopera- 

 tion of thousands of individuals, regu- 

 lates production, and pays high wages 

 and good profits. We work 365 days 

 a year, every fellow for himself, ref»ue 

 to cooperate with anybody, produce a 

 surplus, — and reap a declining standard 

 of living. 



Such being the problem, what is to 

 be done about it? First: there is the 

 tariff. Tariff lies at the very founda- 

 tion of all plans for organizing agricul- 

 tural marketing, planning crop produc- 

 tion, and surplus prevention. Ameri- 

 can agriculture is entitled to the 

 American Market. National policy de- 

 mands it. 



Our agricultural imports amount 

 annually to about $2,200,000,000. Of 

 these, silk, coffee, rubber, and sugar ac- 

 count for $1,200,000,000 or 56.2 per 

 cent. Chocolate, spices, and tea ac- 

 coxmt for $106,000,000 or about 5 per 

 cent. About 61 per cent of our agri- 

 cultural imports consists therefore of 

 products which we cannot produce at 

 all or of which we cannot produce suf- 

 ficiently. Except sugar, this 61% of 

 all agricultural imports may be dis- 

 missed from tariff discussion. Since 

 sugar accounts for one-fourth billion 

 dollars of these imports, the beet sugar 

 industry becomes important. The man 

 who can develop or propagate a rubber 

 producing plant which can profitably 

 be grown on the farms of America and 

 thus supplant the $312,000,000 of rub- 

 ber imports will be entitled to the 

 blessings of the American farmer. 



These Compete 

 The remainder of the imports, 39% 

 of the total, or $848,000,000 are com- 

 petitive with American Agriculture. 



Dairy Products — ^Total . $ 37,754,000 



Eggs 3,700,000 



Hides and Skins, exclusive 



of furs 146,423,000 



Wool and Mohair . 79,451,000 



Animals and Animal 



Products 86,159,000 



Grain and Grain Products 34,616,000 



