The Durant news. (Durant, Miss.) 1882-1985, 1940-05-16
How Mississippi Ranks

" ohS III
state. We think it is the grandest place in the world
and we would not consider living anywhere else. AT
the same time we cannot close our minds to the heart
breaking fact that we are at the very bottom In many
things of all The states in the Union. These things are
important in that they indicate our people do not have
as high a standard of living as people in other states.
Only when we recognize that we are poor and seek
an intelligent solution to our problems can we ever
realize a more abundant life for all our people and ala
those who need help.
We must not lose sight Of the fact that we have a
beautiful state, a way of living and a culture all our
own, that nowhere else in the United States can be found
anything to approximate it. We have many things
to be proud of and a few things to be ashamed of. So it
behooves us to make the most of what we have.
If statistics bore you then skip the rest of this. But
if you want to see how your state ranks in various induces
of wealth as compiled by the u. S. Department of Com
merce, we invite your attention to the following publish
ed in the Oxford Eagle and written by a citizen of
Lafayette county.
With additional taxes confronting Mississippi ctizenry at this
time 1t is interesting to note that in the nations economic induces,
mississippi ranks number As among the several states in practically
every instance.
Recent publication of the United states Department of Com
merce reduces certain data to comparative bases. 1t shows for one
thing that Mississippi income is lower than that OF any other state on
a per capita basis.
Home ownership is n solid base for taxation. Wisconsin with the
highest ration per hundred families shows a 60 per cent home owner
ship. Mississippi, rank number 46 Cone per cent above South Carolina
and Georgia) has a favorable ratio of only 80 per cent. The United
States average in this regard is As per cent"
n Secon baSlS FOL analysis Is the Voun OF retail TRADE pei
capita TO the year 1885. The amounts range from $4s2Oo pr capita
in Nevada to $500 N Mississippi. In this instance Mississp-
pi was the only state in the union ranking below $4,000, with
Alabama next milne with $4,000 Der capita. The national average
zoe eo7oN o. nero thor th-on thnee tret of NTh~@ssirr'
Hiked income taxes have resulted this year in a effort to take
care of the administration program. The Department of Commerce
reports that Nevada with II returns per 1000 population was the
highest with 10 times the number recorded in Mississippi which
"a 7 out of 1000. Last again in the income brackets, Mississippi
was five times lower than the national average of SO per 1000
people.
One of the best indoes Of wealth and income, especially the dis
ssibuuon of wealth, is the number OF passenger cars per unit Of
population. In this regard California leads>al of the states with
s1s registered passenger automobiles for every hundred families
IN the state. At the otter extreme is Mississ ppi with 70 passenger
cars per 100 families. The national average was 10 per 90 families.
Distribution of radios is not necessarily a good measure of the
economic position of the respective states. but there does seem to be a
fairly high correlation between ownership of radios and other items
covered In the analysis. In 1898 Nevada had 112 radios per 100
families while Mississippi had A. The United States average was
80 per 100 families or twice that of Mississippi.
Nor is the distribution of residential telephones necessarily a good
index of the economic standing of the respective states. However. with
few exceptions, the distribution Of telephones somewhat parallels the
other items listed. Iowa for years as ranked at or near the top in
possession of telephones and still leads all the states with IS resi-
dontia, telephones per 100 families. Again at the bottom appears
Mississippi with 5 residential telephones per 100 families.
There has been a large increase In home classification. especially
first in the family Use of electricity with ss domestic electric meters
for every 100 families in the state. Connecticut followed closely with
Again at the bottom stands Mississippi with Is domestic electric
meters for every 100 families. The national average OF Ct per 100
families is almost Az times that of Mississippi.
A vital item to consider in a state as thoroughly agricultural as
Mississippi has been in the past and for the most part is today, is the
value of farm land and buildings per farm o a comparative basis.
This is perhaps the best single easur of the economic position Of
farmers in the respective states.
California has recently taken top position in the value of farm
property per farm, land and buildings alone being valued at s154e6oo.
For many years Iowa ranked first in this item but suffered q tremen-
dous slump in farm real estate values. At the bottom again comes
Mississippi with farm lands and buildings valued at $4,000 per farm
at the last agricultural census. This figure includes. the highly valuable
aat for."- i1a1 u IL DeG4.
1t is interesting to note that in $ of the 8 items Mississippi ranks
last among the states. Surely instead Of jeopardiuing industry and
business holdings by increased taxation. the primary need of the state
is o ncrease its economic wealth IN improve the situation If it's
thousands of tax-ree people 70 that they might help support old age
insurance, free textbooks and disqualification, all of which IRE fine in
principle and are to be hoped for when the state a support them.
1t is estimated that Mississippi has four million acres of sub
marginal land now bringing practically no revenue which an adequate
research program would make profitable to thousands of Mississippi
farmers. Introduction of industry compatible with agriculture and
industry which begets agricultural enterprise are other methods of
increasing the states wealth.