EDITORIAL 



"Of Course, Farm Prices Will Go Down" 



IF FARMERS ever had convincing proof of their need 

 of a still greater organization, they should find it in 

 the current attitude of many government leaders and 

 industrial and labor groups about post-war farm prices. 

 That attitude, boiled down, is simply this, "OF COURSE, 

 FARM PRICES WILL GO DOWN." 



Less than a year ago, officials were reassuring farmers 

 that there was no need to worry about post-war surpluses 

 of food and- fiber, what with potential European demand 

 and the pledge to maintain prices at parity for at least two 

 years after the conflict. Today, the attitude seems to be 

 that a sharp decline in farm prices is inevitable. 



That would be serious enough, but at the same time, 

 industry is predicting higher prices for its post-war prod- 

 ucts, and labor is demanding that wages be maintained 

 at wartime levels, with a guaranteed annual wage, or "take 

 home" pay adjusted high enough "to make up for the loss 

 of overtime." The OP A is apparently using 1942 prices 

 as a standard. Automobile makers have told us, in a long 

 series of statements, that cars will cost 15 per cent to 30 

 per cent more than they did in pre-war days. Yes — 

 labor's wages will be maintained, and industrial prices 

 upped to compensate for increased costs — but "Of Course, 

 Farm Prices Will Go Down." 



Is that attitude fair.' Does it make sense? And what 

 can farmers do about it? Those are questions upon which 

 the farmer and the non-farm population need to do a lot 

 of thinking. 



Why should farm prices be singled out for decline, 

 while others are to be maintained? Is it the old and per- 

 sistent campaign of some groups for cheap food and a 

 peasant agriculture? Is it the shortsighted thinking of 

 some business and labor groups who persistently fail to 

 recognize that the farmer is their best customer? 



Part of it is just that. Another part is the persistent 

 idea that farm prices are unjustifiably high. Anti-farm 

 groups take the depressed farm prices of 1939 — the lowest 

 period for agriculture in twenty years except for the 

 depths of the depression — as their basis for figuring. 

 Then, lo and behold, they say "farm prices have increased 

 more than wages." In August of 1939, farm prices stood 

 at 74 per cent of Parity; farmers were able to realize an 

 average of less than $5.50 per hundred for hogs, less than 

 $6.75 for cattle, less than 55 cents per bushel of wheat. 

 During the year 1939 farmers received only about 9 cents 

 per pound for cotton, 1 7 cents per dozen for eggs, 24 cents 

 a pound for butterfat, and 57 cents a bushel for corn. 

 Are comparisons based upon such a price level fair and 

 reasonable? 



What are Some of these groups thinking of? Are 

 they indulging in the old fallacy that dominated the fateful 

 1920's, that prosperity can be maintained for industry and 

 labor by exporting huge quantities of industrial products, 

 and importing a vast amount of agricultural products in 

 return? That, of course, could only mean another crash 

 in farm prices. Then the old pattern of depression would 

 inevitably repeat itself: a depressed agriculture, a drastic 

 cut in farmers' buying power, industry and labor deprived 

 of their farm market, and the country facing another 

 catastrophe like that of 1929-32. 



It is up to the farmer, and to sound-thinking business 



men and labor leaders, to correct this dangerous and mis- 

 taken line of thought. Farmers have two enormous tasks 

 before them in this connection. One is to convince non- 

 farm groups that the parity standard, which insists upon 

 prices for farm products sufficient to give farmers a fair 

 exchange value for the products of industry, should be 

 maintained. This is agriculture's one basic protection in 

 the law, and it must be clearly explained and vigorously 

 defended. The other is to prove again to industry and 

 labor — before it is too late — that the mass buying power 

 of the six million farm families of America constitutes the 

 most important single market for the products of industry. 

 If that buying power is destroyed, national prosperity will 

 go down with it. 



Full national production and a high national income, 

 upon which depends our ability to recover from the effects 

 of war and to build a sound peace, rest upon productivity 

 and prosperity in the cities — and neither industry, labor, 

 nor agriculture can prosper imless all groups prosper. 



Let's correct the false and dangerous thinking implicit 

 in the statement, "Of course, farm prices must go down." 



New Cooperative Frontiers 



IN PREVIOUS issues of the Record we have outlined, 

 especially for new members, the array of cooperative 

 services which the Farm Bureau makes available to them. 



Substantial and important as past accomplishments and 

 present services are, however, the movement is not standing 

 still. The Farm Bureau member through his county, state, 

 and national organization is exploring new frontiers of 

 cooperation. He is finding where the needs of the post-war 

 period are, and is planning what to do about them. 



Two current developments in Illinois are the Service 

 Brand Feed program and the Plant Food program. Serv- 

 ice Brand feeds are complete mixed feeds. In the Service 

 Brand Feed program, a high-quality pre-mix, containing 

 the vitamin carriers and other important essential ingre- 

 dients, will be made by Illinois Farm Supply Company in 

 centralized mills. This pre-mix will go out to the county 

 distributor who will grind and mix with it certain quanti- 

 ties of grain and protein feeds, obtained locally. Quality 

 standards will be controlled by a well-chosen committee, 

 and maintained by constant check upon the mixing at the 

 plants of county distributors. The savings involved in the 

 first county in which the Service Brand program is in 

 effect have exceeded previous estimates. 



The Plant Food program is one of processing and 

 distributing mixed fertilizers and plant food ingredients. 

 Quality control is again a paramount consideration. Illi- 

 nois Farm Supply Company, with similar organizations in 

 Indiana, Wisconsin, and Minnesota, is setting up an 

 acidulating plant and enlarging a mixing plant for this 

 purpose. The acidulating plant will turn out 40,000 tons 

 of superphosphate per year, from which Illinois will re- 

 ceive more superphosphate than any of the other coop- 

 eratives involved and as much mixed fertilizers from the 

 mixing plant as Illinois Farm Supply's potash allocation 

 will make. When sufficient allocations of potash can be 

 had, it is contemplated that the service will be expanded. 



Thus, on two vital frontiers, cooperative endeavor is 

 making plans and taking action. Farmers, working to- 

 gether, can solve their problems. 



