GENERAL FARM PROGRAM 631 



Mr. Hope. Is it not more or less implicit in the plan that you have 

 in mind that there might be no necessity for any allotments or controls 

 but rather that the price of the part of the crop that had to go into the 

 world market would itself regulate the amount of wheat that might 

 be produced? In other words, the supply-and-demand situation in 

 the world would either stimulate or depress the acreage. You would, 

 of course, have to have an allotment to each farm of a certain per- 

 centage which would receive the support price based on domestic 

 consumption, but if it worked out as I have suggested, without any 

 other controls, then joii could simply do that by giving each farmer 

 his share of the national percentage which went into human consump- 

 tion. 



Mr. Pace. Does the gentleman mean that his idea would be that 

 the Secretary would make an estimate of the crop? We will say for 

 round figures that he estimated it was 1,200,000,000 bushels. The 

 idea, then, would be to give each farmer full parity on five-twelfths of 

 his production? 



Mr. Hope. Yes; that is the idea that I was suggesting. I know 

 that has been discussed in connection with a plan of that kind. Is 

 that not what you have generally talked about when you were discuss- 

 ing this program? 



Mr. Kaseberg. Yes. I think perhaps I am wrong in this, but I 

 think we are showing a little too small percentage of domestic con- 

 sumption when we speak of the 1,200,000,000 or the 1,400,000,000 

 crops. Those have been record crops. I think it might even be 

 stretching the point a little to say that it might exceed 50 percent of 

 our production. I do not think we will average billion-bushel crops 

 in the long run. 



Mr. Pace. Assuming a billioii bushels, if a farmer would get full 

 parity on 50 percent of it, how much encouragement would that be to 

 him to double his acreage in order that he might have the benefit of 

 this price support on 50 percent of it? 



Mr. Kaseberg. His acreage would depend on the world price. 



Mr. Pace. No; I can see a situation where the parity price would be 

 $3 a bushel and the world price would be $1 a bushel. My experience 

 leads me to believe that there would be many wheat producers who 

 would say, "I can almost produce this world portion for nothing, if I 

 can get $3 on half of the crop." 



Mr. Kaseberg. Mr. Pace, I think you are assuming that the man's 

 allotment would be a percentage of his crop. 



Mr. Pace. There is no allotment at all. 



Mr. Kaseberg. All right, let us not call it an allotment, but his 

 portion of the national consumption. It would have to be a fixed 

 figure based on the history of the farm, because you are only going to 

 have your fixed national consumption. 



Air. Pace. That is not what Mr. Hope said. 



Mr. Hope. No; what I suggested — and I am not saying it wiU 

 work — is simply giving each farmer each year a support price at 

 parity on that part of his crop which would go into domestic consump- 

 tion. If you figured that 50 percent of the crop would go into domes- 

 tic consumption for human food, then on 50 percent of his crop he 

 would get a support price at 100 percent of parity and the rest of it 

 would go just where it happened to go in normal marketing channels 

 and at world prices. 



