Alma record. (Alma, Mich.) 1878-1928, 1922-01-26
>fEP0RT GIVEN
BY ANDERSON
PRICE DIFFERENCES BETWEEN
TIE PRODUCER AND CON
SUMER GIVEN.

Report on the betterment of agri-
culture in the United States as inves-
tigated by the Joint Commission OF
Agricultural Inquiry created by the
Harding administration is made to
Congress by Representative Sidney
Anderson, Of Minnesota.
Since the creation of the commits
sion in June it has reported upon
The causes Of the present condi-
ton Of agriculture.
The cause Of the difference between
the price of agricultural products
paid to the producer and the ultimate
cost to the consumer.
The comparative condition Of indus
tries othcr than agriculture.
The relation Of prices of commodi-
ties other than agricultural product
TO such products.
The banking and financial resourc-
es, especially as affecting agricultural
products.
The marketing and transportation
facilities Of the country.
The statement follows:
On determining the causes for the
present condition Of agriculture, it is
obviously necessary to determine
what that condition actually was. The
condition Of an industry is not statia
and, consequently. the condition al
any given time must be determined
with reference 60 the condition a
some other time. IN general the COM
mission assumed 1913 as representing
normal year and as representing
the normal price relation between the
prices Of agricultural products and
tho prices Of other commodities. IN
determining the condition of agricul-
ture upon this comparative basis, we
sought 10 apply four tests. The first
OF these tests was the purchasing
power Of Che farmers dollar; the sec
cnd, the relation OF the absolute prices
of agricultural products 10 the price
Of other groups Of commodities; third,
the quantity production in agriculture
rs compared with the quantity pro-
duction ia other industries; and
fourth, wages and incomes in agricul-
turc as compared with the wages and
incomes in other industries. In other
words and perhaps more accurately
the reward for capital invested and t.
labor employed in agriculture as com
pared with the rewards for capital in
vested and labor employed in othe
industries. Very briefly, in May Of
this year, IS compared with 1913, the
farmers dollar was worth 90 cents
In other words, it would purchase g.
per cent as much of other commodi =
ties in May 1921, Is it would have
purchased in 1918. That represents
reduction in tho barchasing powe,
OF the farmers Of the country Of some
thing more than 81 per cent. Thi3
represents . lower purchasing power
than has existed at any time in the
last 80 years. So it is fair 70 say
that in purchasing power, or as indi,
Gated by the purchasing power, the
farmer was worse Off in 1921 than he
was in 1920, or than he has been any
time in the last 80 years. Now, the
relative position Of an industry as in
dicatcd by the prices may be affected
by the fact that the price of ona
group Of commodities rises or falls
more quickly or 1t more rapid rate
than the prices OF another group OF
commodities.
The prices of agricultural COM
modities began TO decline in the fail
OF 1919, end they were the first Il
feel the effect Of the coming depres-
sion, and because they fell earlier
and more rapidly Than the prices Of
other commodities the farmers sit
uation in 1920 and 1921 was relative
" worse than it would have been hal
these commodities all fallen at tho
same rate and to the same degree.
Now. come 70 the farmers con
1ition rs determined by quantity pre-
iuction. IL seems sound to assume
nat the progress Of an industry NAV
&c measured, in part at least, by the
l1antity production Of that industry
IS compared with the quantity pro
}rction of other industries and AZ
oinparcd with the growth Of popula
ion. We sought to set up an index
which would indicate the increase in
icantity production of agriculture as
'ompared with the increase in GUAM
" production, for instance, from
nines and from manufacturing estab-
ishmonts. These indexes show that.
y tAc whole, quantity production of
agricultural products has just about
.ept pace with population. In grains
has slightly exceeded the growth
population, while in live stock as
whole, with the exception of pork,
has not quite kept pace with popu-
alton. Comparing quantity production
agriculture with quantity produc-
ion in other industries, we find the
uantity production in agriculture has
lgged far Behind the quantity pro-
uction both Of manufactures and of
hines.
"The declines occurred first in agr-