EDITORIAL 



The Assessor Catches Up 



y^N ONE area of Chicago, Hyde Park, personal prop- 

 (ij erty taxes this year will be increased 41 per cent 

 \Jy says the Chicago Tribune. 



"Intangibles jumped from $1,585,417 in 1936 to 

 $20,526,617 for 1937," the Trib says, "an increase of 1,- 

 195 per cent. The increase may be ascribed to the fact 

 that income tax returns were available this year for inspec- 

 tion by the county assessor's office." 



The lAA has long insisted that owners of intangible 

 property have not been paying their just share of the cost 

 of local and state government. The farmers' lands, build- 

 ing, livestock, and machinery are listed item by item on the 

 tax rolls but heretofore the stocks, bonds, and mortgages 

 hidden away in vaults have largely escaped. 



Now the tax assessor is catching up with the owners 

 of intangible property. Strict enforcement of the tax laws 

 of the state with all classes of property treated alike, is 

 promised. Such enforcement will do more than all other 

 efforts combined to bring about a constitutional revenue 

 amendment and a more equitable taxing system for the 

 state. 



AAA and Farm Exports 



INCE the passage of the Agricultural Adjustment 

 Act of 1938, the city press has been full of 



immature criticisms of the new farm program. 



The old cries of "regimentation" and "control" are heard 

 again as if these things are new to American life. 



Nearly all of this ill-considered comment fails to take 

 any account of the wide differences in the outlook for 

 farm exports today compared to the situation existing be- 

 fore the war. 



Even casual mention of present-day barriers to the 

 sale of American pork, lard, wheat, cotton, fruits and 

 vegetables abroad is generally omitted. 



Shortly after his return from 11 European countries 

 in 1936, where he conferred with leaders of foreign gov- 

 ernments and trade, Chester C. Davis, then AAA adminis- 

 trator, said: "The European controls (over foreign im- 

 ports) are amazing in their extent and authority. They 

 include strict and unbeatable quotas; government monop- 

 olies in which all trade is centralized by law; licenses for 

 every step of business operation; barter trades between na- 

 tions with government allocation of business among private 

 firms; compulsory production control; subsidies for produc- 

 tion; licenses covering every individual transaction and the 

 necessity of permission before exchange can be used for the 

 buying of goods from abroad. In some countries an in- 

 dividual trader can export only if the government mo- 

 nopoly or bureau will give him permission. I hope we 

 never have to adopt such a system here." 



One may well ask why farmers have gone along with 

 acreage adjustment? Why have they supported a surplus 

 storage program.' Is it because they enjoy the extra effort 

 and bother entailed in carrying out these programs? 



The answer is NO! 



Farmers would rather throw caution to the winds and 

 operate their farms to capacity. But they have learned by 



bitter experience that it is disastrous to keep piling up 

 goods for which there is no profitable market. Whether 

 exports are large or small, it is still true that world prices 

 fix domestic prices on any of our products of which we 

 produce a surplus. While there has been a slight gain 

 recently in exports of farm products, the conditions de- 

 scribed by Chester Davis two years ago still largely obtain. 



American agriculture has lost a substantial part of its 

 export market, but these markets were not lost because of 

 any production control or price programs. Farm exports 

 dropped BEFORE acreage adjustment was even considered. 

 In fact, the decline began shortly after the world war when 

 the United States had become a creditor rather than a 

 debtor nation. This is an old story to informed persons. 

 But it is ignored by opponents of the farm program. 



The following figures clearly show what has happened 

 and why agricultural adjustment is needed: — - 

 EXPORTS OF AGRICULTURAL COMMODITIES BY YEARS 



1910-11 



1914-15 



1918-19 



1922-23 



1926-27 



1929-30 



1932-33* 



1934-35 



Com 



1000 bu. 



65,615 



50,668 



23,019 



179,490 



19,819 



10,281 



8,775 



2,324 



Wheat 



1000 bu. 



71,338 



335,702 



287,402 



224,900 



219,160 



153,245 



41,211 



21.537 



Pork 



1000 lbs. 



879,455 



1,106,180 



2,704,694 



1,794,880 



1,012,668 



1,138,588 



686.462 



355,072 



Lard 

 1000 lbs. 

 476,108 

 475.532 

 724,771 

 952.642 

 675.812 

 787,160 

 560.299 

 225.112 



Beef 

 1000 lbs. 



265,924 

 394,991 

 591,302 

 194,912 

 151,531 

 102,080 

 74,000 

 40,882 



* Note that in 1932-53 when prices were exceedinglT low and farm supplies 

 reached new heights, exports were far below those of earlier years. 



Many farm prices are too low today when compared 

 with non-agricultural prices. The bumper crops of 1937 

 started the price depression which was immediately re- 

 flected in reduced farm buying power, lower consumption 

 of industrial goods, and more unemployment. 



The Agricultural Adjustment Act of 1938 is an at- 

 tempt to solve a troublesome problem. Its purpose is to 

 stabilize prices of basic farm crops at fair levels. The cities 

 will profit as much by the achievement of this goal as agri- 

 culture. Without money in the farmers' pockets to buy fac- 

 tory products there can be little employment or prosperity 

 for the industrial worker. 



Up and Down Together 



\ATTLE feeders are losing money and fluid milk 

 producers are facing an increase in production and 

 _ lower prices. The drastic drop in corn and small 

 grain prices plus unemployment in the cities are held to be 

 chiefly responsible. 



"Prices of manufactured dairy products have declined 

 sharply, mainly as the result of the pickup in milk produc- 

 tion and slump in buying power among consumers," says 

 the U. S. Department of Agriculture in a recent outlook 

 report. 



Com and wheat growers took their cut early and the 

 livestock and dairymen can't escape going the same route. 

 Here is an object lesson proving the interdependence not 

 only between farm and city but also between grain, live- 

 stock, dairy and other agricultural producers. Far sighted 

 cattle feeders and dairymen realize that they have as much 

 to gain from stabilized prices at fair levels for corn and 

 feed grains as the grain producers themselves. i- 



J 

 Si 



34 



L A. A. RECORD 



