GENERAL FARM PROGRAM 



853 



Surplus is not the problem; control of imports and proper distribu- 

 tion of oiu- own production is the problem. 



For many years now we have known that farm income sets the 

 economic pace for the great majority of our citizens. 



Farm income is the barometer that reveals in advance the threat of 

 a coming storm, or the promise of clear skies in our economic weather. 



Mr. Carl H. Wilken, common-sense economist of the National Raw 

 Materials Council in Sioux City, Iowa, the Honorable Tom Linder, 

 commissioner of agriculture of the State of Georgia, along with a few 

 others who have studied the relation and effect of farm income upon 

 our national economy, have revealed theii' findings to the various 

 congressional committees, and I am here to tell you gentlemen of this 

 committee that the United Farmers of America, Inc., are sincere when 

 they say that we are thoroughly convinced the findings of these gentle- 

 men are correct and worthy of serious consideration by the Members 

 of Congress if we expect America to remain strong and solvent. 



To lower farm prices would indeed be dangerous to the welfare of 

 America for the simple reason that national income is always approxi- 

 mately seven times gi'oss farm income. This ratio has been found to 

 be true to within a fraction for the past 25 years, good years or bad, 

 peace or war, prosperity or depression, and even through OPA and 

 Government controls. 



Therefore, you cannot reduce farm income without reducing national 

 income, as every dollar of gross farm income automatically creates $1 

 of factory pay roll and, approximately $7 of national income. This is 

 known as the 1-1-7 ratio and has never been refuted. 



At this point I wish to insert a reproduction of a statistical record 

 from Government figures of 1921 to 1938, inclusive, showing agricul- 

 tural income, factory pay roll, and national income in billions of dollars. 



You will notice how closely the factory pay roll corresponds to the 

 agricultural income. If you will multiply the gross agricidtm-al income 

 of any year by seven you will arrive at approximately the same figure 

 as quoted for national income of that same year. 



If you will take the total sum of agricultural income for the entire 

 18 years and multiply it by seven you will notice that the total 



