816 GENERAL FARM PROGRAM 



First, I want to say this, that farmers have come to the conclusion 

 that they are the only group that are selling their services or products 

 out on a free market, and that we just can't longer do that thing and 

 keep up with the other boys. 



We note that industry sets the prices on their products and either 

 lists the prices or cuts down the output if they cannot sell at the'price. 



Labor is organized and they are going to stay with the hours and 

 wage rate rather than reduce it.. 



We find in Ohio that all of our proessional people are organized and 

 really have what amounts to a closed shop whereby they regulate the 

 price charged for their services. So we are beginning to think that while 

 the farmers are thinking about it, the rest of the groups are going 

 ahead, and I am reminded of the old saying, "If you live in Rome, you 

 have to do what the Romans do." And so we have come to that con- 

 clusion although it is a little confusing to us, in the light of the abun- 

 dance of natural resources that we have and the know-how, that we 

 cannot work it some way so that we will all have a good standard of 

 living out of it, because I feel that is what is necessary for all of us, 

 to have a good standard of living if you work it right, and there are 

 plenty of natural resources and the know-how. So we feel we should 

 have some legislation that would permit us farmers to work together, 

 that we might regulate at least our supply to the needed demand. 



Since it has been indicated that the farmers are consumers of about 

 40 percent of the industrial output, we can't keep up that consumption 

 unless our return is kept up in line with the other fellow's. 



I can make this statement in regard to my own income. ^'V^len we 

 sold our hogs off this spring, we sold the same amount we did 2 years 

 ago this spring, and the income was some $1,800 less. 



Now, gentlemen, that means that I and hundreds of other farmers 

 in my county had a lot less money to spend in the county, and we 

 realize that if we had had that money it would have pyramided as 

 it went up through the business channels. That means there is 

 going to be less work for the fellows producing those things, and maybe 

 a less amount of money to buy our produce. 



We feel that it is O. K. to carry a large reserve of grains and fibers, 

 if that can be done without depressing the market so that we can't 

 receive anythig near what it costs us to produce the stuff. 



We also believe that it would be better on those products if we 

 could store, if there were some means that we could feed them to 

 people before we dump them. In other words, if it means lowering 

 the price on them, let us try lowering the price once and feed them to 

 the consumers. As farmers we don't like to dump things. We are 

 convinced sometimes if we dump half of it in the river we would get 

 a lot more for the rest of it than for all of it, but we don't like to do 

 that thing as farmers; but we would be interested in a bill that would 

 perhaps lower the price and see if the consumer could not consume it, 

 yet not ask the farmer to take the whole burden of the subsidies for 

 the consumer. 



We feel right along in all these years as farmers that we have been 

 subsidizing consumers; and it is no more than fair that some of those 

 folks who do not need that subsidy would refund part of that subsidy 

 back to us. We talk a good deal about the farmer receiving a subsidy, 

 but to me it is simply refunding a subsidy that has already been made 

 to th*e consuming group. 



