The Denison review. [volume] (Denison, Iowa) 1867-current, 1919-02-05
The PRICE OF. WHEAT

.ts THE PRICE OF WHEAT
Il. New York Times: Must the price OF
bread to all people be controlled by
the standard price Of s2.26 per bushel
|of wheat which the government must
|pay to the farmers?. Its a grave
Question; it has many sides, ethical,
fiscal economic. 1t will not do for
the government or for the food admin
istratiOn to make mistake about it.
The government must pay the price
! tpromised to pay nowhere is there
any question about that. It made the
pledge in order to. enc courage the farm
ers to increase their acreage OF wheat.
The ending of the war could not then
be foreseen; 1t was the governments
purpose to assure the abundant pro-
duction In order that our own needs
and the needs of the allies might be
met. The pledge Of $2.26 per bushel
had the desired effect. 1t is expected
that we shall harvest more than 1,OOO,-
000, 000 bushels Of wheat this year. But
1.-THE war is over and. in the worlds mar
|kAts the price of 9wheat is now lower
than the price the government must
pay England has cancelled her CON
tracts here because she can get wheat
cheaper Ia Australia and the Argen-
|tine. Blu tfor the governments guar
|antee It is believed that there should
be q material fall in prices here. The
|ques tiOns Is whether the government,
having kept. faith with the wheat grow
|ers by paying 1925 per bushel will
then let wheat seek its natural price
level in the market. It is very Inn
portant question for consumers. A
lower price for bread would materially
reduce the cost OF living. IN
| But Mr. Barnes, president Of the
grain corporation of the United States
food administration, says this is not
to be. He insists that, broadly speak
ing, tits not true that the world 81 price
tor wheat is below the price level fix
led by the government here; that the
demands upon this market; will ex-
haust all the 1918 crop surplus. There
| fore, the food administratio is not In
|cfned to. adopt the policy of lispos-
| ing Of the surplus at a loss to the ma
ltional treasury. Mr.. Barnes evidently
feels that he is confronted with both
a condition, and theory. The condi-
ton is q matter Of fact, to be, deter
mined by time and inquiry. If, not
outstanding our. enormous crop of
wheat the price in the free markets
Of the world shall be maintained at or
near the government level, that would
mean that there is still great scare
lily Of wheat and the government s
problem would be solved at once.
There would be buyers enough to take
the wheat at the spegged z price and
the treasury would not need to con
Germ itself about any loss. The ques-
tiOn whether the treasury should as
sumo the possible loss is one of theory
and we do not think the solution Is
difficult. L; ~ sss, I5
/ The offer to the farmers was q war
measure. u, after the government has
bought all the wheat at $226 per
bushel, the market price declines and
the loss falls upon the treasury, that
loss should be counted as part of the
costs of war and should be betrayed
like other war costs out of the taxes
and proceeds or bond sales. The ar.
glment is that it would not make much
difference to the people whether they
made up the treasury loss by paying
high prices for bread or by paying
taxes and buying bonds is nat sound.
That would be equivalent to putting a
special tax upon bread to defray the
expense OF the war. 1t would be waste
ful because the profits of middlemen
must be considered, which would ma
tenially increase the levy m