Daily capital journal. (Salem, Oregon) 1903-1919, 1913-06-26
Diminishing Crops Lay Heavy Tax on
Man Who Buys Fin
ished Product
BY ELLIOTT FLOWER.
Who gets the money!

Taking two five-year periods, just
five years apart, statistics show that
the average highest price for wheat
on the Chicago Board of Trade has
jumped % cents bushel
Who gets it' The consumer pays,
but where does his money gof
1t has really gone up fraction Of a
cent more than that, but for the pur-
poses of this article such fractions may
be omitted.
twenty-five cents ism u much, twenty
three is a by-word-but in this case
it represents about 20 per cent in
crease in this staple, and 20 per cent
is good lift in the price of any ar
ticle.
If the consumer thinks an average
highest price does not fairly represent
actual conditions, he has only to turn
to the average lowest price for the
same two periods and he will find that
the increase has been 25 cents. Either
way he sees an item of his cost-of.living
bill staring him in the face, and a very
little thought will show him that it Is
a big item, too
The average highest price of wheat
for the five years from 1908 to 1912 in
elusive was 1927 For the five years
from 1898 to 1902 it was $1.05, and this
hardly represents a fair average for
the latter period, for a deal in 1898
saw it soar to $1.S5. Without that ex-
ceptional and brief jump the average
would have been well under dollar.
Still, as the figures stand, there was
ar increase of 90 cents in the average
high.
The average low for the same two
periods was SS and SO cents, an increase
of 25 cents bushel
###R
If you think wheat alone showed this
increase, you have only to look at corn.
The average high for corn for the same
two periods shows an increase of 81
cents, nearly 3S per cent, and the aver.
age low for corn an increase of II
cents, little over 81 per cent.
These increases, of course, are re-
Elected in the wheat and corn products
that you buy, but who gets the money!
The farmer says he does not-and
he ought to know On the other hand,
certain incredulous people point to the
fact that the farmer is riding in his
own automobile, as if that were sort
of crime that he was called upon to ex.
plain. Whether it is or not, he is ready
with his explanation.
$50 are others,' he says, $50 are a
great many others who have much less
use for them than have"
"But few years ago" retorts the
skeptical Can airship would have been
as much beyond your means. It's
proof of prosperity-that you are get.
ting the money"
"Since when has an automobile been
a proof of prosperity'" dtmands the
farmer scornfully. "Pve heard that in
the city people are riding in automo.
biles who can It pay their grocery bills.
] pay mine"
That usually floors the septic, for
there is a lot of truth in it. We all
know people with touring cars who
seemed to find it difficult to live at
all not long ago, and even errand boys
somehow seem to have motorcycles. So
the automobile really has ceased to be
proof of any exceptional prosperity, but
may it not have something to do with
the high cost of livingi Gasoline burns
up a lot Of money. However, that
will be considered at another time.
=44##
The farmer is quite right in his main
contention: He has more real use for
an automobile than most of those who
use them, and it is quite absurd to
point to that one thing, as is frequent.
ly done, as an evidence of particular
prosperity in his case AS a matter
of fact, the inefficient farmer wastes
much more in neglected and unneces.