Oxford Democrat. [volume] (Paris, Me.) 1833-1933, 1904-05-31
The Cost of Living.

iuc NOSt Vi LiSiuX.
II the farmers could more fully appre
ciate the support derived from the farm
for themselves and families the real in
come from the farm would be more
apparent. According to an official state
ment in government report the cost oi
food in an average American family OF
skilled laborers in 1902 was S345, or a
little less than one dollar day. The
average was taken from an investigation
of 2567 families in different parts of the
country. The investigation did not in
clude rent, which might be placed al
$50, making S4s5 year, or about Sl.5t
day, which the skilled laborer was
obliged 10 pay out every year. To this
may be added the cost of fuel, which
would be S75 year. Atleast nine-tenths
of these things are supplied by the farm
towards the support of the farmer and
his family, and should be taken into
consideration in computing the income
from the farm. The farmer may not
receive as much in. cash as the skilled
labOrer, but when the cost of living is
paid by the latter his cash is greatly de.
pleted, and although he may be receiv'
ing two or three dollars a day he has
less TO show for it at the end of the year
than the farmer who has enjoyed an in.
dependent life and perhaps had many
leisure days, including the use of team
for pleasure trips.
The reason why farming is not regard.
ed by farmers and others more remunera.
tive is because of failure on their part to
reckon the cost of living at its true value,
and chief reason why farming is not as
profitable as in former times is the in
creased expenses of the farmer for things
that were not enjoyed generation or
two ago. When farmer is asked how
much he can make a year upon a farm
the reply will not depend so much upon
what the farm is capable of producing
under skillful management, as upon how
little the farmer is willing TO spend be-
yond that required for the necessities of
life. The net profits in any occupation
depend as much upon the nature and
amount of the expenditures as upon the
income.
We would not deprive the farmer of a
single thing in the way of comforts or
luxuries, even, that he is able TO provide
for himself and family from the income
of his farm, for, in fact, we believe 1T is
the duty of everyone to live as we'll as
his income will allow, making due allow
ance for contingencies that may arise
and misfortunes that may come, but we
believe the business of farming should
be credited with such things as are ap-
propriated in this line. We like to see
the farmers home comfortably furnished
and the farmers table literally supplied.
We like to have the members of his
family well dressed and enjoy comfort
able carriage when riding for business
or pleasure. We like to see books and
papers upon the table and hammocks in
the ward. We like to see him take his
family and attend Institutes, grange
meetings, fairs and Old Home week
gatherings in his own and neighboring
towns. Many of these things he is doing
to-day, and we rejoice that he is able to
do them, but the farm should be given
credit for them. They represent money
that perhaps would have been deposited
in the bank in former times, and account
in some measure for the fact that the
net profits of farming are in some in
stances less than they have been. 1t is
not possible to spend money and have
it too.
The increased expense of living on the
part of the farmer is justified in his own
mind by the fact that people engaged in
other occupations have increased their
living expenses in like proportion and
he must keep up with them. To this
we make no objection, for we beiieVe
the farmer is entitled to as good living
as other people, SO Tar as his income
will allow. While it is probably true
that industrial people in general are saw
ing no more money than in former years
at less wages, they are living better than
ever before. They have more luxuries
in the house, better clothes and more
hours of leisure, more social enjoyment
and better carriages in which to ride.
The farmer is doing the same, and so
far as the farm allows it we see nothing
wrong in it.
The point we wish TO emphasize is that
these increased comforts and added luxu-
ries enjoyed by the farmer and his faml.
ly should be appreciated, and that II
they are willing to deny themselves
these things rs much money can be made
upon the farm as at any previous time.
There seems to be tendency to over
look this fact. No class of people have
more 60 enjoy than the farming class, II
the things we have mentioned are appre-
ciated. They have no cause to worry
over losing position or the demands
made upon the lower classes IN the
cities for things that the farm supplies.
OF course there are times when early
frosts, severe droughts or heavy floods
make serious inroads upon the farmers
crops, and reduce the income therefrom,
but he is practically sure of good liv-
ing, and is really much more prosper
Gus than many of those people whom he
enyies when the balance is made for a
term of years. This feeling, however
should not deter him from doing his
hest to increase the profits from the
farm. that the annual deposit, however
small, may be regularly made and the
comforts of life increased from year to
year.-Mirror and Farmer.