The Washington times., 1913-04-01
GETTING FOOD PRICES DOWN.

For the advance in price of great many of our
food products in the last decade there is the very
simplest explanation 1t is that the nerds of cattle to
provide beef, for example, have not been raised in
this country rapidly the people have been raised
to consume beef Nor have bushels of grain multi
piled as rapidly as mouths to eat them.
In 1910 there was less corn for our population,
though in total bushels than there in 1900,
for in 1900 the yield of corn more than $4,000
bushels to every one thousand Inhabitants of the
United States, but in 1910 it was not quite $4,000
bushels
| So with wheat, which showed yield of s,665
bushels to every thousand inhabitants in 1900,
but only 7,430 bushels in 1910. Rye fell from 1856
bushels tc every one thousand inhabitants 32l 1t
remained for the humble potato to help out the Amer
can stomach with yield of 1896 bushels to every
one thousand inhabitants in 19OO increased to 23l
bushels in 1910.
With sucn a record as this country has been max
ing of fewer cattle sheep and hogs for meat products
and relatively less breadstufs, but with more and
more people every year to be fed, it is not entirely
apparent that Mr.. Wilson and his Democratic Con-
gress can lower the prices of food so much as they
have led consumers to believe they would if they
got the chance in the Government.
did not nearly keep up with the growth of population
when there every incentive to do so in the high
prices it is not very clear what will make them in
crease their output for the benefit of consumers if
there are not those rising prices to tempt them
We don't know where, outside of the United
States there is enough beef to supply American
consumers. We don't know where there is enough
wheat. 1t isn't in Canada That country, by all re-
ports, hasn't much more cereal and meat products
tnan it needs for its own consumers. We don't think
it is in the Argentine Republic, with very. scant
supply of both cattle and wheat, compared with the
worlds demand for both.
But if there were more cattle and wheat available
in Canada for than there are, and if there
were more in South America than there are, and If
distant Australia could contribute more than would
be possible from so far away, then the determining
factor of the supply for population and the prices
be paid by it would still be right here in the United
States, where we have been raising more cattle and
grain than any other nation the face of the earth
And if producers would not could not raise
enough for us at nigh prices, we ask, what possible
would there be for them to raise enough
for us at lower prices?
If they were falling behind in relative production |
before, would tney not fall still further behind in |
relative production after foreign imports were let
into this country if they could be drawn in?
This paper for one would like very much to see
the food of the American people cost them less of
their earnings or other income. We sloulG be very
glad if President Wilson and his Democratic Con-
gress could make the tax the dinner table of the
American consumer less, and the tax on the break
fast table, too.
But if the earnings and other income Of the con-
sumers are to be KEEP, up for the purpose of paying
for the supplies or the breakfast table and the din
table, are not overcondent that the food cost
of the American people will come down, as Mr. Will
son and his party led them to think it could come
down, without industrial commercial and financial
earthquake to shauer all values slash all prices and
shrink all wages.