The weekly times-record. (Valley City, N.D.) 1912-1922, 1920-02-19
THE AMERICAN FARMER CAN
SET EUROPE UP IN BUSl-
NESS AGAIN

Frank Vanderlip hits the nail on the
head when he says that if Europe her
self cannot work out her own saliva.
ton with food and raw material no.
body can work it out for her. To go
to work and stick at work men must
have enough to eat. But being physl-
cally able to do their work they must
have the work to do. This is the mean
ing of the Vanderlip prediction-food
on which to work and raw material at
which to work. If Europe gets it, the
rest depends upon Europe.
The British, as one example, have
been able to get cotton from us by the
hundreds of million of dollars. They
have been able to get food from US and
from the British colonies sufficient to
the needs of the workers in the Unit
ed Kingdom. The result has been that
for every million dollars of cotton I'M
ported from US as raw material the
British spinners have sold abroad
about a million and a half as finished
product.
The British spinner, in short, in ad-
dition to supplying the cotton goods
needs of the home consumers out OF
the purchases of raw cotton from
America. is cleaning up for his coun
try, as far as concerns international
balance. hundreds of millions of dol
lars. Great Britain, in truth, since
the post-bellum scramble began for
readiusted foreign trade, has thus
been beating US out of our boots.
What Great Britain has been doing
with cotton any industrial country can
do with some other raw material IN
the manufacture of which it is par
ticularly profcient-provided it can
get it.
Mr.. Vanderlip estimates that a bill
lion dollars of food and raw material
would give Europe good start on the
road to self-support. If that is fair
estimate the task is not so much su-
perman's as child's play. The requir
ed food and much of the raw material
would be obtainable in this country. if
there were no other source, from the
American farmer-and on credit.
There are two reasons why the far
mers of the United States can do the
iob-why, when the alternative is pre-
sented to them, they will do it. The
first is that they have the essentials
both the food and the raw material.
The second is that it will cost them
more if they don't supply the foreign
needs than if they do.
With American farm products
wheat, corn, cotton, beef, mutton,
hides. wool and the restraining an
nua1ly to a value Of eight, ten, twelve
billion of dollars. a 10 to IS per cent
shrinkage of market prices would
amount to all the billion dollars Mr..
Vanderlip says would start Europe up
again.
But who thinks that if their foreign
markets were lost to them the prices
of American farm products would fall
only a beggarly 10 to Is per cent?
Who doubts that without that foreign
demand American farm product pric-
es would fall at least Is per cent?
They might be, more likely would be,
cut in half.
The farmers Of the Uniteds States
would not have to think twice over the
choice Of cashing in ten billions Of dol
lars on their annual output and lend
ing billion Of it at home or abroad
on securities or on 'tick", as against
cashing in on merely five billions or
six billions or seven billions or eight
billions, or any sum short Of nine Blk
lions in cool coin.
As for the practical side of the ques-
ton involving the lending by this far
mer of fifty bushels of wheat, by that
farmer of bale Of cotton and by an
other farmer Of load of hides, all Of
it would simply be a matter of detail
for the local and the general banks,
the boards of trade and the export or
CARNATIONS, working together under a
common impulse on joint program.
And what is true of the farmers
with their products is true of the 9TH
ers with theirs. We are not going to
get out of the export business for the
good and sufficient reason that we
want to stay in it and stay in it pro,
digiously, while at the same time the
greater part of the world needs US in
it and needs us desperately.