The producers news. [volume] (Plentywood, Mont.) 1918-1937, 1935-12-27
Comments on Weeks NeWs
(FrOm American Commonwealth FederatiOn)

Several times, recently, the daily
newspapers have featured front
page articles quoting some auth
ority or other to the effect that
Sharing the wealth" would only !
spread proverty to all classes. ;
Such statements can only be
supported by ignoring or pervert-
ing the meaning of serious pro-
posals for bringing about great
er equality of income among the
American people. In fact, we
have an engineering measurement
of the capacity Of Americas pro,
ductive resources, which shows in
disputably the possibility Of a
high standard of living for all
the people.
| But while the press has played
up the idea that a good standard
Of living is impossible in America,
it has totally ignored the study
which proves that it is possible,
presenting the most startling and
sensational mass of facts that has
ever been compiled.
This study, the National Sur
vey Of Potential Product Capacity,
Is in a sense a yardstick of the
inefficiency of capitalism and the
incompetence Of capitalists, a cir
cumstance which may explain the
reluctance of the newspapers t
print the findings. It is safe tt
say that when the American
people fully realize the extent o.
the sabotage practiced by the cap
ltalists-that is to cay, the large
owners of corporate wealth-upol
the processes of production, the!
will make a demand for q chang,
which will spell the doom Of tn,
capitahstic system.
TIGHTENING OUR BELTS
The effect of this sabotage i
best illustrated in one field O
production and distribution whic
happens to be very impol TAM
that of food. Sabotage in thi
field is possible, in spite of the e1
forts of the farm producers t
provide an abundance Of food, be
cause of q number of factors, il
Guiding financial control, the COZ
troll Of food processing, and
some extent the control of ma
keting by large capitalist int
ests. More recently, the govern
ment has had hand in the ga
otage Of production, and has jul
announced that the farmers a
prove Of the corn-hog reductiC
program.
However, Mr.. John Bosch, n
tional vice president of the Farr
ers Holiday Association has cha
lenged this Interpretation al
pointed out that the farmers
the government poll we're given
choice Of expression only betwe
controlled production and uncO
trolled production. eff the farm
had been given the opportuni
to vote between controlled mark'
ing and controlled production"
declared, che would certainly ha
voted for controlled marketing
In other words, the farmer dc
not want to sabotage productiC
In this instance, he is at
mercy Of forces which he cam
control.
According to the Broolings
stitute studies Of the subject, |
proximately 70 per cent of
people in the United States
1893 had incomes less than enou
to provide proper food for the
selves.
According to the National S
vey, it is possible to provide
great deal more of all kinds
( food than the people can posi-
consume; there is no good Tea
in other words. why every per
should not have the most heal
full and wholesome kind of d
In order to give an idea of W
is possible, as contrasted "
: what we had in the most prosI
Gus year, 1929, some of the
: ures of the National Survey
presented here. The first it
: meat, is particularly important
4 view of the governments hog
: duction program. It is to be !
. ed that although there was
than enough meat produced
n 1929, and production has ia
n drastically since then, the govt
f ment has found it advisable to
duce production still further.
Some of the figures follow
ing totals of production in L
and also what we need and
produce respectively:
Meats, $5,413,OOO,000, $5,9
L 600; Poultry, 1919, ZOO, 900, ST.
l. 100000; Milk, $2,58T,0 100000,