New-York tribune., 1918-12-22
More of the Less

The opponents of price fixing are
finding now some of their predictions
verified. The main meaning of the
wheat guarantee turns out to have been
the shifting over of farm production
from other foods to wheat. So, no
doubt it had to be. There was no in
crease in the arabic areas. There was
a decrease in farm labor. There was a
shortage of fertilizers These were not
favoring conditions for large increase
in agricultural output. 1t was, indeed,
possible that the farmers should work
barder-only that during the crop sea-
son they always work about as hard
as it is within the capacity of the
human machine to stand.
Thus the guarantee price on wheat
assuming that it actually raised the
price of wheat, that it worked in some
degree as stimulus-must have
brought about the displacement of
other products by wheat and have
served herewith to raise the prices of
these other products. Only as much of
these alternative products could be pro-
duced as promised as attractive price
returns as wheat. So far, then, the
price programme meant merely redis-
tribution of farm products.
1t appears that the guarantee prices
for wheat did accomplish something IN
defending production against the COM
petition of those non-essential indus
tries which were in no appreciable de-
gree subjected to direct repression. But
the larger wheat production displaced
other farm products and allotted to
such of them as were produced prices
as attractive as those promised for
wheat But forthwith, obviously, it be-
came difficult to induce consumers to
substitute for wheat the dear and scarce
rye and barley and corn. And thus it
was at this point thta exhortation had
to be invoked
Economy in the consumption of such
foods as have been produced-a good
and important thing-the food admins
tration has, in the main, we'll and eff
GENTLY fostered. But the production of
food has not been guided with a CORE
spending wisdom. The wheat guaran-
tees were devised for the purpose-or,
at all events, with the result--of the
displacement of other products by
wheat. And thereupon, in the face of
the restricted supplies of the other
things, the consumption of these was
urged in place of wheat-more of the
less, less of the more. This was policy
adapted to defeat the very end that the
guarantee intended, with the result of
automatically raising the prices of sub
Stltutes. The next inevitable step was
mat the farmers must find their ad
vantage in growing less of wheat and
more of the other grains-a policy of
continuous and offsetting seesaws.
For the fundamental fact is that
hose farm products which the high
priced wheat was intended to displace
ard did displace are precisely those
products that in time of dearth should
receive especial emphasis in production
and consumption. Wheat is luxury
cereal, next in the order of dletetlc
prodlgality after butter, cream, eggs
and milk. AS policy of national food
economy in the face of inevitable
uearth, wheat was not the crop which
Saould displace others, but which should
oe displaced by Others Wheat affords
eSs nutrition day of labor than corn
VI rye or barley. 1t was these other
.rops that should have been stimulated
'y oounties into relative plenty and
'eative cAeapness The substitution of
N'em for wheat would then have been
''omatc, leaving no occasion for ex-
Aortation.
starvation faces Europe. We must
s'' conserve. But it is now evident that
:. is TOO late to attempt conservation
saiough the consumption of cheaper sub
s'''u'e grains. They are not here to be
"'en' Wheat as a crop was substituted
~ .hem. The net result is that we have
s'0uuced and must now consume the very
s''ouct that we ought in the interest of
'',, world economy of food to be going
without.
A'lie political economy is . dan