The Care and Protection of Farm 

 Equipment 



By M. R. I). OwiNGS 



Advertising .M:ina{fer, International Harvester Company (if Ainorir-: 







Since the arrival of dollar wheat, seveiity- 

 tive cent corn, and lifty cent oats, editors, 

 college professors, and economists have 

 taken a great deal of pleasure in speak- 

 ing of the present day farmer as a " busi- 

 ness man." They do not always deline 

 the term and on close scrutiny it looks 

 as if the so-called "business" farmer 

 is such sometimes largely because high 

 prices of his products have made him 

 prosperous, rather than because of his 

 adoption of more business-like methods. 

 It has been well depionstrated that a real business man is 

 successful as a manufacturer in so far as he is able to make 

 mechanical labor take the place of less productive hand labor, 

 and that a real business man as a farmer is similarly successful 

 in so far as he can do the same thing. 



But here, very often, is where the resemblance ceases. 

 The manufacturer invests so much money in labor-saving 

 machines, he allows so much for depreciation, and then proceeds 

 to see that his machines are well housed, well cared for, and 

 kept going. He figures that they must pay so much interest on 

 the original investment plus a profit sufficiently large to equal, 

 ultimately, the original investment. The longer the machines 

 can fulfill the duties for which they were intended, the greater 

 the money returns on the first outlay. 



When a farmer figures on the same basis in caring for his 

 equipment, the economic term of "businessman" fits him, and 

 generally you can call him an automobile owner as well. But 

 when he invests his capital in expensive machines— and many 

 of them — such as a modern farm nowadays necessitates, and 

 then leaves his plow in the fence corner, his binder in the 

 field, and his new wagon under the eaves of his cow shed, he 

 falls short of exercising the right kind of business methods. 



Perhaps he makes enough to be able to do all this without 

 noticing the drain upon his gross income. Some farmers figure 

 that way, but it is not good commercial doctrine. 



141 



