THE COST OF PRODUCING COTTON. 8) 
In view of this consideration, it becomes apparent that the cost 
figures here presented can not properly be used as a basis for deter- 
mining a fair selling price, since in that case the price of cotton would 
become an element in its cost with the result that the higher the 
price, the higher would go the cost, and the higher the cost, the higher 
the price, and so on, ad infinitum. 
ANALYSIS OF 1918 COSTS. 
In summarizing production costs they have been divided into three 
groups; namely, ‘“‘labor costs,” including man and mule labor; 
‘“material costs,’’ such as seed and fertilizer, etce., and ‘‘ other costs,’ 
embracing such items as use of land, use of machinery, ete.! 
MAN LABOR. 
Each grower visited gave a detailed estimate of the value of all 
farm labor utilized in the operation and management of the farm 
during the year 1918. This statement showed the total value of all 
family labor employed upon productive enterprises, the total value 
of all wage labor, and the total expense for labor performed upon a 
contract basis. The cost per unit of product is given for each farm 
irrespective of tenure. Cropper cotton and wage cotton on owned 
and rented farms have been combined in this analysis. Cropper 
labor was charged at the actual value for the share of the cotton 
received. A small amount of supervision was included with the total 
of the labor which has been specified. The man labor costs for the 
entire farm, as determined by bringing the above classes together, 
were distributed to the crop and live-stock enterprises on the basis 
of receipts from the respective enterprises. Inasmuch as cotton was 
the outstanding enterprise in each district, the bulk of the man labor 
costs for the farm as a whole was apportioned to cotton. The rate 
for man labor approximated 30 cents per hour in this study. 
MULE LABOR. 
No attempt was made to secure estimates for each farm on the 
cost of keeping work stock, nor did the schedule contain any questions 
relating to the number of days of actual work performed by mule 
or horse labor during the year. To approach the problem from this 
standpoint a special study would be necessary. A careful record 
was made of the mule or horse labor required with each field opera- 
tion in growing and marketing the cotton crop. These data were 
1Tt has been shown that some very striking differences existed in the unit costs that were determined 
for individua! farms in the severai districts visited. By bringing together the farms in each district and 
securing an average for this group, a comparison can be made with group averages in other areas. Sucha 
comparison reveals the fact that quite marked differences are also apparent between several of the groups 
used in thisstudy. In order to obtain a complete explanation for some of these group variations, it will be 
necessary to review the prevailing practices which were employed by cotton growers in the districts repre- 
sented. Methods of cotton culture are discussed in a section of this bulletin which deals with the normal 
man and mule labor requirements. 
397°—20 2 
