The people's voice. [volume] (Helena, Mont.) 1939-1969, 1951-04-27

back prices, and in December, 1914
= the cost of foods was actually 4 pc
5 cent below May, 1913, while farm
, production was 25 per cent owe
1889.
SUBSIDIES SLOWED SPIRAL
OF INITIATION
Had subsidies not been used, every
farm price increase would have been
progressively augmented by profit
percentage hikes at each stage of
marketing setting in motion an in
flationary cycle much like the pres
ent calamity which probably has al
ready cost the government more than
all the subsidies paid during the last
war.
Most city newspapers are directing
their fire not only against subsidies
but against parity, price theory
which seems yelled in mystery. Pari-
ty came into being to insure that
the farmers income would rise or
fall with prices which he pays for
the necessities of living and farming
The materials the farmer buys went
up Is per cent, a new record, from
February Is to March Is of this
year. His income dropped one per
cent in this same period. Parity seeks
to keep the balance in this situation.
1t therefore has an easy parallel in
the cost-of-living clauses in union
contracts and, in a sense, it operates
just that way, where it operates
PACKERS WINGS SHOULD BE
CLIPPED
Secretary of Agriculture Brannan
have never in all their history come
anywhere near parity" Right now
wheat is % per cent below the parity
figure; corn, 10 cents bushel under;
oats, II cents; and so it goes with
milk, chickens. eggs and other prod
ucts. Yet the prices of these foods, |
over the retail counter, are sky high. |
Meat, however, is not only above the
parity price, but it is almost out of |
reach at the butchers. Livestock |
prices should be regulated, and the
wings on which the packers and mid
dlemen are soaring should be clipped
The Department of Agriculture
has disclosed that the cost of bring
ng a pound of beef from the farm
o the retail counter is now nearly
,our times as high as it was in 1945-
he margin having increased from six
cents to % cents for every pound.
4or all meats the handling cost has
almost trebled, moving from eight
:ents to 22.5 per pound in five years.
The Department of Agriculture has
permitted the packers to upgrade
heir meats. "Commercial-grade"
oeef is now legally called good.
The consumer, spending 80 per cent
If her budget on meat, pays, as re-
ult, the same or more for an inferior
ut. What the Big-Four packers get
'ut of all this is explicit enough. In
$50, their net profits totaled SAB
million as compared to the S26 mil
ion which they earned in 1919.
Presently, the government seems
dDOuL real
rice control for meats than about
the Big Four packers
ontinuance of these record profit
evels. The government has barred
ny new packing or Strengthening
lants-the reason: the new plants
hight contribute to black marketing. {
n effect, this stymies the attempts s
f the South, now becoming a large c
Gale livestock region, from setting I
p independently owned plants-a b
oal already strewn with obstacles by b
re big packers. Nationally, the re- N
alt of this government edict is to t
rotect the vested interests of the big L
ackers everywhere. "
Over the entire food front, the ~
iddleman's share of the amount ~
aid by the consumer is overwhelm-
gly large, and the farmers share +;
small. Secretary Bran ~
an recently released some figures n
hich may help city people to under A
and just what this relationship is.
Xix doubles in price within a yerv