THE LEVEL AND COST OF LIVING 



185 



consumed by the average family might rise from 

 $160 to $200. Second, there is a difference of 

 prices. A comparison of prices in Panajachel 

 (Appendix 2) with those prevailing in the American 

 community might well show that the $160 or $200 

 is the equivalent of two or three times that much. 

 The Guatemalan quetzal and the American dollar 

 are pegged Ln value in international exchange, but 

 a quetzal buys much more in Panajachel than a 

 dollar does anywhere in the United States. And, 

 third, there are important cultural and social 

 differences that make difficult, if not futile, any 

 very broad comparisons. Indian houses are crude 

 (and cheap) structures not necessarily because 

 the people can afford nothing better but also 

 because their culture requires that kind. They 

 use no dairy products (which are expensive) 

 partly, at least, because traditionally they do not 

 like them. They pay little in taxes partly because 

 they get little, but partly because their community 

 is supported largely by their labor. Finally, of 

 course, such wants as for automobiles, radios, 

 motion pictures, electric appliances — while cer- 

 tainly beyond their means — are still quite beyond 

 their culture. 



Results of the food survey (table 75) show that 

 the Indians are not grossly undernourished. Ex- 

 cept for riboflavin (and lime?) they average at 

 least the recommended quantity of every item 

 analyzed, although this may well be because a 



Table 75 '. — Comparison of average food intake in 

 Guatemala per nutrition unit per day - 



rural 



' From tabulations supplied by Miss Emma Reb, of Institute de Nutricion 

 de Centre America y Panam4. 



!" Family units are expressed as nutrition unit equivalents of the moder- 

 ately active male, according to the 1945 National Research Council's recom- 

 mended allowances for specific nutrients by sex, age, and activity." tQuoted 

 from note to table 2B in unpublished F. A. O. report by Emma Reb.) 



* Numbers in parentheses indicate the number of people who partook of 

 the family food during the week, subtracting fractions for meals missed and 

 adding fractions for guests. 



minority have a better diet and a majority con- 

 siderably worse. Certainly the poorest families 

 fall far short of standard (table 65). 



In comparison with neighboring towns, there is 

 reason to believe that the standard of living in 

 Panajachel is higher than in most."' Of the lake 

 towns, only San Pedro probably has a definitely 

 higher standard."* Probably Panajachel is also 

 better off than such communities as Solola and 

 Chichicastenango. An indirect way of judging 

 such differences is to note how the towns make 

 their living. The Panajachel Indians rarely go to 

 the plantations to work, or to other towns as day 

 laborers. The people of such towms as Santa 

 Catarina and Solola work outside much more. On 

 the seemingly sound assumption that people are 

 forced by economic necessity to work outside, this 

 is evidence that Panajachel is richer than most 

 neighboring towns. Another way to judge is to 

 examine the day-labor basic pay. In Panajachel 

 it was 16% cents m 1936, in Atitlan only 10 cents, 

 and in Chichicastenango 12 or 13 cents (and down 

 to 10 cents in 1935-38). I do not know of any 

 place in the neighborhood where wages are higher 

 than in Panajachel. If the Indians earn more in 

 Panajachel, they probably spend more. Another 

 point that may be made is that in the past years 

 the Panajachel Indians have not been losing much 

 land to outsiders while in neighboring Santa 

 Catarina, at least, lands were being sold and lost 

 at a high rate. 



It is also probable that from 1936 to 1940, at 

 least, the standard of living was improving in 

 Panajachel. This was in part due to world 

 economic conditions. In the late twenties Guate- 

 mala (with high coffee prices) was relatively 

 prosperous, and every town got its share — Pana- 

 jachel, certainly, because it grew coffee. When in 



"1 Comparisons in table 75 indicate that the Panajachel diet is consistently 

 richer than the average Indian diet in the several communities studied. 

 Indeed, it falls very little short of the average Ladino diet, and of that of the 

 Ladinos of Panajachel. The only two Indian communities (of 10) that bad 

 higher caloric intake were Santiago Chimaltenango and San Pedro la Laguna. 

 By some coincidence the three "nutritionally best" towns are the only three 

 in the sample for which we have general studies of the economy. Santiago 

 Chimaltenango is the subject of Charles Wagley's monograph. The Eco- 

 nomics of a Quatemalan Village, 1941. San Pedro was studied independently 

 by Juan Resales and by Benjamin Paul. A volume en the economy of San 

 Pedro, prepared with the collaboration of Julio de la Frente, will soon be 

 published (in Spanish). 



>" This is a judgment based on general observation. The nutritional data 

 (for a sample of 14 families) bear it out. The results, following the order of 

 table 75: 3,320; 81.3; 322; 1,1.14; 26; 5,702; 68; 3.8; 1; 16: superior to Panajachel 

 in every item. Curiously, two poor families in San Pedro had a poorer diet 

 than the averages of the poorest families In any other conununities, with 

 only 2,449 calories and 54.3 gms. protein. 



