The Birmingham age-herald. [volume] (Birmingham, Ala.) 1902-1950, 1910-08-16
THREE LEADING
CAUSES OF HIGH
COST OF LIVING
CONFINED FROM PAGE ID

CONTINUED FROM PAGE ID
--~>>~~~~~~>~-~-~--~-~--
tural localities which enable farmers to
hold their crops and market to the best
advantage This results in steadying
prices but also tends to advance prices.
Reduced supply convenient to trans
sportation facilities of such commodities
as timber.
Cold storage plants which result in
preventing extreme fluctuations of prices
tof certain commodities with the seasons.
but by enabling the wholesalers to buy
and sell at the best possible advantage,
tend to advance prices
Increased cost of distribution.
Industrial combinations
Organizations of producers or dealers.
Advertising.
Increased money supply.
Overcapitalization.
Higher standard of living.
{ Let us consider these seriatim
l. Increased cost of production of farm.
products by reason of higher land values
and higher wages
We concur in what has been so well
said as TO this cause by DR.. Thomas
Nixon Carter. professor of political econ
omy, Harvard university:
student would fail to pass the intro
ductory course in economies in Harvard
university who would make such blunders
as are contained in this majority) re-
port.
AS to the first cause, he says:
This is d perfectly clear case of put
ting the cart before the horse. Every
student of economics knows that the high
price of land is not a cause, but the eff
feet of the high price of farm products.
Let the price of farm products fall to the
unremunerative level and land values will
disappear, for tie simple reason that
farm land then becopes undesirable
property Let the prieesbf farm products
rise still higher, and farm land becomes
more desira BILE and its price will rise still
higher. There is no reason why land
should command high price for farming
purposes, except a rise in the price of
farm products or fall in the cost of
,cultvating the land. To say that farm
products are high because land values
are high is quite as foolish as saying a
tree is tall because its shadow is long.
The majority carefully omit the in
creased cost of blankets, clothing, house
hold furnishings, shoes, farm implements
and machinery, labor and fertilizers,
which was well established by the farm
ers called to testify before the commit
tee. Compare this statement also with
4he findings of the majority that in Min
nesota-
allowing the farmer his wife. and chill
performed. the net profits. during the
years 1905 to 1907, was only 400 per cent
and this profit advanced to about per
cent for the two years, 1908 and 1909
about the average interest on farm mort
cages i'm that state.
So II will be seen that, notwthstand-
ing the large increase in the price of
farm products, the farmer has realized a
small net return on his labor and invest
h,r-r of bp in or n
IN earticles necessary for him to pur-
chase to carry on his business.
We should like to discover one single
farmer in all the United States who was
ever asked by the buyer the cost of pro
duction of his wheat. corn. hogs or cot
ION when he was bargaining for them.
The manufactures may consider this
question when he offers his product for
sale. and he may limit his production TO
meet receding prices, but no such oppor-
tunity comes to the farmer; usually he
must sell one crop before he commences
raising another. and he can never con-
slider shutting down his plant.
q Increased demand for farm products
We admit that increased demand, the
supply not responding will increase
prices, but we call attention to some
facts in regard to the supply:
Our supply of wheat In 1900 was over
h22,O0O,O00 bushels, a per capita of 6.7l
ItSHtlS, III i5H' phI tIOD was iots1N'tvF
bushels, an increase Of over 40 per cent,
and a per capita of S22 bushels.
Our crop of corn in 1900 was over 2,105.-
100000 bushels per capita of 27Sl bush
els in 1869 1t was over 772,000 bushels, an
Increase of over 80 per cent, and a per
capita of 1892.
In 1900 our crop of potatoes was about
e1l,0O0.0oo bushels, a per capita of ia
In 1909 it was over 376.00o,000 bushels, an
Increase of nearly 80 per cent, per cap
lta of 4.20.
The production of other cereals was: