28 BULLETIN 1421, U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 
The farm labor, in this case, includes the hired labor that was 
boarded and the labor performed by members of the farm family 
(the operator included). Of the total farm perquisites, family-used 
perquisites constitute 63, 70, 59, and 66 per cent, respectively, in 
1919, 1920, 1921, and 1922. 
The principal items considered in computing the increase and 
decrease in inventories were work horses, milk cows, other breeding 
stock kept permanently on the farm, feed and supplies, machinery, 
and the farm buildings. If the combined value of these items at 
the close of the year was greater than at the beginning of the year, | 
the difference represented an increase in inventories. If the value 
of these items was less at the end of the year than at the beginning, 
the difference represented a decrease in inventories. Increases and 
decreases in inventories were chiefly caused by purchases, sales, and 
deterioration in value due to the year’s usage. In computing changes 
in the value of inventories an attempt was made to eliminate the 
influence of fluctuating prices except in the case of livestock produced. 
Input per farm.—Input per farm is presented in Table 7 under two 
subdivisions: (1) cash input and (2) noncash input. Cash input 
averaged, during the four years of the study, approximately 63 per 
cent of the total input per farm. During these four years the aver- 
age cash input decreased from $2,219 in 1919 to $1,559 in 1922. The 
principal items of cash input named in the order of their importance 
were: Labor, taxes, water, livestock bought, threshing and hulling, 
farm use of automobile, seed, and feed. 
The noncash input consists of the decrease in inventories (other 
than that of real estate), the operator’s labor and unpaid family 
labor. The method of arriving at the decrease in inventories was 
precisely the same as that used in determining the increase in inven- 
tories. There were decreases in inventories during each of the last 
three years of the survey. The estimate of the value of the oper- 
ator’s labor is intended to cover the expense that would have been 
incurred in hiring the services rendered by the operator in running 
the farm plus the cost of his board not furnished by the farm. The 
value of the unpaid family labor was estimated at going wages. 
Return to capital—Return to capital is output per farm less input 
(input other than of capital). When measured by this token, 1919 
was by far the best year financially for these farmers, 1922 the 
second best, and 1921 the poorest. The average net return to 
capital per farm dropped from $2,224 in 1919 to $322 in 1921 and 
then increased to $1,102 in 1922. The percentage return to capital 
follows much the same trend as total return to capital. The aver- 
age drop in the percentage return to capital, however, was much 
less proportionally than the total return to capital expressed in dol- 
lars. This, of course, is due to the fact that the average value of 
real estate decreased from $373 per acre in 1919 to $261 and $250, 
respectively, in 1921 and 1922. The variation in the financial returns 
of these farms during the four years, it is obvious, was due chiefly to 
aa in the prices received for the products sold. (Tables 2 
and 10. 4 
