GENERAL FARM PROGRAM 795 



Labor and in CIO labor circles. But we livestock feeders wonder who 

 in the Department of Agriculture is looking after the interests of the 

 farmer. 



LOW AGRICULTURAL PRICES A NECESSITY 



It would of course be necessary for agricultural prices to break to 

 levels far below their normal exchange value for other commodities 

 if Air. Bramian's plan were to become effective. It would be neces- 

 for them to break so low that farmers were entirely dependent for 

 profit, or even to break even, upon the dole handed out by the Govern- 

 ment. Otherwise there would be no incentive for farmers to acdept 

 the controls on marketing, on land use, even on the size of the farm 

 one might be permitted to operate. 



In fact, the whole program seems built around lowering prices to 

 such a level that the theorists can take over the job of running the 

 farms and the farmers will be but hired men, to do the bidding of the 

 Secretary of Agriculture. According to the press reports, he has 

 acknowledged this by saying that no price-control legislation wiU be 

 necessary if his program goes into effect. 



This whole program smacks to us of a continuation of the effort 

 of the labor unions to have the Government pay a part of their cost 

 of living through subsidies. Dm'ing the war there was also a subsidy 

 on meat. It was supposed or advertised as being of benefit to the 

 farmers. But of that subsidy farmers got $15,000,000 and packers 

 $2,283,269,000 to indemnify them against loss in their sales of meat 

 at less than cost to the consumers. Farmers fought against that 

 subsidy them. And they are going to keep on fighting to stop it now 

 from again going into effect. 



Not only is the plan designed to lower prices and make the farmer 

 subservient to the Secretary of Agriculture, it is designed to lower 

 the quality of the meat the farmer produces. Instead of producing 

 juicy steaks, this program, if carried out to the ultimate, would lower 

 the quality by taking away the incentive to produce them. If this 

 program was so successful that cattle prices declined to levels pre- 

 vailing in 1943 and yet the parity remained at $16.90, as used by 

 Secretary Brannan in his presentation, then all who sold cattle would 

 be given a subsidy or dole of $5.10 a hundred, regardless of grade. 

 Under such a subsidy and market selling price, instead of Good grade 

 cattle being 86 percent of the return on Choice grades, such as pre- 

 vailed during 1943, those Good grades would bring 89 percent; 

 instead of Common cattle bringing 71 percent of the price of Choice 

 cattle, such as they actuaUy did in 1943, those Common cattle under 

 this plan would bring a net return of 79 percent of the return on 

 Choice cattle. And instead of old dried up cows, cripples, and the 

 other kinds that sell as Cutters and Canners bringing only 46 percent 

 as much as Choice cattle, like they did in 1943, they would bring 

 59 percent. So the incentive would be to lower the quality of the 

 meat the farmer offered to induce the consumers to eat it. And 

 lowering the quality never yet has caused an increase in consumption, 

 other things being equal. But lowering the quality has caused loss 

 of demand for many a product. We livestock feeders do not want 

 that to happen to meat even if Mr. Brannan does. 



