Evening star., 1939-05-09

Guy M. Gillette OF Iowa,
.tional Radio Forum.
ventive genius rapidly developed
new methods of processing raw ma
terials, there followed more rapidly
the development of new standards
of living, hundreds of new uses and
hundreds of new needs. The
astounding development of means
of transportation and contact with
distant regions opened many mar
kets at home and abroad. More and
more our people became engaged in
the processing and distribution
fields, as distinguished from the raw
material production fields. Methods
Of production to meet these new
needs for raw products Of the farms
stepped up our agricultural produc-
ton to point where two-thirds OF
our people and the needs of these
two thirds were to be served by the
production of the other third.
To meet this situation and to en-
able our farmers to live the same :.
standard of living as their fellow
citizens, 1t became necessary for a
large percentage of our raw material
production on the farm to be sold
in the general market, rather than
to be consumed at home. Because
of this wide field Of home and for
eign marketing. and because of the
dependence of the farmer on 50
many conditions Of production over
which he had no control, such as
climatic conditions and destruction
of crops by the elements and in
sect enemies, an attractive field was
opened for the speculator to operate
in anticipation Of crop production.
From this came a situation which
made our farmers absolutely de-
pendent on both domestic and for
eign markets, in large measure
speculative, for what they had to
sell and in determining the price
they were to receive.
Offer Price Is Sale Price.
It has been well and often stated
that our farmers do not sell q
nickel's worth Of their products We,
as farmers, pay what we are asked
to pay, II we can, for the industrial
things we need, and we take what
the purchasers are pleased to offer
us for the products we sell. The
farmer cannot be expected to meet |
all the hazards of his arduous work
and then be compelled to look for
his market under conditions and
contingencies over which he has no
control whatever. To meet q de-
pressed market, he tries to raise
increased amounts and further de-
presses his own market.
Thousands give up in despair and
leave the farm production field.
Until, then, we have definitely solved
this particular problem, our agri-
cultural difficulties will and must be
of perennial nature. We cannot
expect any part or portion of our
people to continue in the work Of
producing the raw materials Of food
and fibre absolutely essential to our
industry and life itself unless they
can be assured Of doing so at q
reasonable profit that will enable
them to live as American citizens are
entitled to live, and with the same
standards as pertain to their neigh
bors engaged in other lines of enter
prise!
Now, may I briefly refer to some
comparatively recent history relative
to attempts to solve these Difficult
ties. The agricultural problem has
been a major political national issue
since 1920. 1t is this disparity that
has existed since 1920 between the
price which the farmer received for
the products he sold and the price
which he had to pay for the products
he bought that has continually
forced the matter to the attention Of
our law-making bodies, and, particu-
larly, the Congress Of the United
States. This disparity has been
greatly increased and the difficulty
much enhanced by three definite
elements:
l. The expansion Of agricultural
acres during and Immediately fol-
lowing the World War, because OF
the war needs. This expansion
brought into cultivation more than
Al, 900 900 agricultural acres.
Export Market Shrinks.
2. Since the World War, approx
mately one-half Of our export trade
In agricultural products has been
lost and, many believe, irretrievably
lost.
3. While substitutes for agricul-
tural products have been and are
constantly being developed, little
progress has been made in develop
ing and finding new markets and
uses for agricultural raw materials.
One Of the first attempts to raise
the price of farm products and thus
remedy the disparity was the enact
ment of the emergency tariff law Of
1921, followed by similar attempts In
1922 and 1890. Each Of these tariffs
raised the duty on imports of farm
products, with the hope that the
home price Of such products would
be correspondingly increased. Rats
ing the tariff, however, did not solve
the problem for the very definite
reason that many Of our leading
agricultural commodities, such as
cotton, wheat and hog products,
were on an export basis. It is al
most self-evident that a tariff can
not raise the price Of q product
which is on an export basis, since
the tariff change only becomes efYec-
tive when the products to which 1t
is applied are imported. The net
result Of these attempts was largely
to increase the price Of the products