Evening star., 1940-12-19

years the farmer has been encour-
aged to go in for modern machinery,
but the payoff is that he stands to
lose money in the process and may
lose his farm by hitching its for
tunes to the hope of steady cash
income. Machinery wears out and
does not replace itself by breeding.
Machinery consumes oil, gasoline
and metal, instead of hay and oats.
Machinery produces no manure for
the enrichment of the soil. All this
has been known, but until now 1t
has been believed that machinery,
being tireless and more efficient,
was more economical.
However, the Bureau Of Agricul-
ture Economics has made an analy-
sis of the comparative cost OF run
ming the average 320-acre wheat
farm with horses or with tractor.
Reckoning the price of wheat at 80
cents a bushel, the bureau finds
that the net profit is less on ma
chinery than on horsepower and
hired labor. In the latter case the
farmer stands to make $644 . year
profit, instead of $633 profit on
tractor farming, and supplies in
addition 10 more days of hired labor
while reducing the capital invest
ment by $500.
Advantage in Corn Belt.
In the case of a 200-acre corn
belt farm, the figures are almost
equally convincing. Here the trac-
tor farmer does actually make more
money in net income than does the
horse. farmer. But the difference
between the two methods is only $55
year and the horse farmer in the
corn belt gives over 1000 more man
hours on the crops than does the
tractor farmer. AS the bureau
points out, ITO achieve q saving
through the use of mechanical pow
er, the farmer must accept higher
degree of economic risk" although
! the investment in equipment and
horses is almost the same ($2,265
and s2,445).
When you come to cotton, these
are three separate systems: Crop
per labor and mules, hired labor
and mules, hired labor and tractor
power. Here is the whole story of
the South. With cotton selling at
II cents a pound and labor getting
81 a day, the cropper plantation
makes a net profit of s4,898, the
hired labor plantation makes 5000
the tractor plantation makes $13,03l
a year. (These figures are for cot
ton plantations on the rich lands OF
the Mississippi Delta) But when
the price of cotton drops to 6 cents
a pound the cropper- mule planta-
ton incurs a net deficit of only $939,
while the tractor plantation loses
S4,318 Only if the price of labor is
halved to so cents a day can the
tractor plantation pull out of the
red, while the croppers are still
losing money.
From these facts it appears that
in a period of f1uctuating farm
prices it is safer for the average
corn. wheat and cotton farmer to
stick to mules and hand labor, and
to leave the tractors alone. It also
appears that only the Federal Gov
ernment's system of conservation
and farm parity payments stands
between our farmers and the re-
ductio ad absurdum of the machine
age.
Based on 8O-cent Wheat.
For example, the figures on wheat
farming were based on 80-cent
wheat. The present price on May
futures is about that figure. But Of
this price, 18 cents per bushel con-
sists of conservation and parity pay
ments and the real price is u cents
bushel. Seventy-two cent wheat
means that the 320-acre horse farm
in the wheat belt would clear $484
a year, while tractor farm Of the
same size would clear only $444 a
year. Due to the corn-hog ratio
it is hard for an amateur to calcu-
late the difference for corn farming,
but it is to be noted that of the
present price of go cents a bushel
for corn, IA cents represents Federal
payments, so the slight margin Of
profit on tractors over horses in corn
belt farming would be wiped out.
AS for cotton, prices average about
1920 cents pound, but Of this
nearly 2 cents Q92 cents, to be
exact represents Government pay
ments. The economic price of cot
ton is, therefore, around 8 cents a
pound. This means that If the
Federal subsidy were withdrawn,
tractor plantations which are now
clearing about $500 a year would
be making a bare $1,100 a year,
while cropper-and-mule plantations
which today earn around $2,950 a
year would be clearing about $1,000
year.
All in all, 1t looks as though the
case for power on the farm under
our present price system had been
decided in favor of horses and mules
and man power, unless we are pre-
pared to remodel our entire economy
to meet the requirements Of the
machine age.
(Released BY Consolidated News Features,
1nc.)