Mexico weekly ledger., 1917-05-10
FARMERS SIDE OF FOOD
SITUATION EXPLAINED

OuBBeSlioho die Iolnihb III last 10
the Government that they should fix
prices of food products. TO protect
consumers from excessive cost of
living, while the country is at war. 1t
may be necessary to do that IL the
war lasts long enough, but l do not
think present conditions warrant
such action on the part of the Gov
eminent now. To arbitrarily fix the
price of farm products, 10 to put all
the risk and all the loss on the stock
raiser. He has every chance to lose,
but no chance to make. The farmer
alone must bear the entire loss of
ravenous disease among stock-and
short crops. II hog cholera destroys
half the hogs in the country at pres
ent, the shortage would quicken the
demand, advance the price, and do
much to equalize the loss. If the
corn crop fails under the fixed price
regime, and it costs more to produce
beef and pork as a result, the stock
producer must assume all the loss,
for a pound of his product will bring
a fixed price.
A more effective plan would be for
the Government to aid the producer
in organization for the control of the
marketing of all food products and to
stop speculative buying and selling.
then food products would be sold on
the basis of supply and demand.
Practically all that has been done
along this line is a little publicity
work. Instead of talking about price
fixing, IL they were to that
the whole marketing machinery of
food products shall be supervised by
the Government, thus guaranteeing
the producer a fair profit and the
consumer a fair price there will be
no shortage of effort among farmers
to produce a bumper crop.
Moreover, there are two sides to the
agitation against the higher cost
of living. If food products, such as
leggs, poultry, potatoes and other food
products were the only things that
had advanced in price, it would be
different. Practically everything has
gone up in price Farming imple-
ments have almost doubled in price.
Other things that farmers require
have gone up proportionate
ly. The wages now demand
ed by farm help would have
been ~princely, five years ago. Farm
ing and stock raising today is not as
many suppose, a rose paved highway
to easy fortune. It is only fair to the
farmer to suggest that he is having to
pay more for what he buys and that
the cost of production, owing to high
err wages, and larger operating ex-
penses, has greatly increased.
Every newspaper one picks up has
a story to tell OF a food boycott on
some article, by individuals or organ
izations, to take effect temporarily or
on a given day in the week. Appar-
emily the fight and in some instances
the boycott is directed solely against
the things produced on the farm. Gas
oline has advanced, yet there is no
talk Of "a gasoline boycott. Shoes
have increased in price, from 40 to so
percent, but no one is proposing the
organization of a barefoot ~associa-
ton. Does anyone think this is fair to
the farmer?
Nothing individuals or the Govern
ment can do now will replenish the
world shortage of food. The real in
crease in food production must come
mainly from the corr crop and from
fruit and truck crops. The farmer is
respected, and ought to be patriotic
and grow more corn. The consumer
should be equally patriotic and pre-
pare to increase his consumption of
corn, thereby saving other foodstuffs
which are short.
Everything is higher in price. If it
is necessary to boycott something,
let us not center and direct our pro-
tests only against what is produced
on the farms. For strange as it may
seem to some. the farmer in this
community, yes in the State and Ma
Ition, has, for the last several years,
been having a PRETTY HARD TIME.
LESTER / MILLER