THE NEW DEAL

Evening Star, Issue 21630, 27 January 1934, Page 4

THE NEW DEAL

FARMER S VIEWPOINT NEED OF MORE MONEY STRIKES DISAPPROVED The farmers in the Middle West are among the severest critics of the New Deal; but they have not yet lost their confidence in President Roosevelt, says the. American correspondent of the ‘ Manchester Guardian.’ The “ farmers’ strike,” which is now going on in a few States —notably in lowa, Minnesota, and the dairying districts of Wisconsin—is important as the symptom of a state of mind; but it has the active support only of a small minority. The farmers generally are better off than they were a year ago, hut not enough so to content them. They feel that the Agricultural Adjustment Administration. which is the medium through which they are being helped, has lagged behind the National Recovery Administration —the medium, as they see 'it, for enabling industry to raise its prices and thereby make things more difficult for them. Many thousands of them are in a mood of angry despair. Too much was promised them too quickly ; and in too many cases the promises have proved illusory. The farm strike was inspired (though it is no longer controlled) by the Farm Holiday Association, of which Milo Reno is the leader. _ This association demands the regulation of farm prices by the Federal Government. _ Its supporters are probably a minority of the farmers of the Middle West. The rest are also desperately hard pressed, angrv, and despairing: but such hope as thev have they pin to Secretary Wallace and President Roosevelt. NOT EFFECTIVE. The leaders of the Farm Holiday movement recognise frankly that it is hopeless, at present, to use the farm strike as au effective economic weapon. In so far as they encourage it, they do so for its propaganda effect, because it gets the farmer “ on the front page,’ makes Washington conscious of the gravity of the problem. Whether the strikers themselves have' any belief ini this movement one can only guess. Some wild spirits among the farmers are in a sufficiently ugly temper to do a little smashing of property without caring whether it accomplishes any special purpose or not. In its destruc- , tive phase the farm strike Is pretty completely out of Milo .Reno s. control and a matter of local and temporary inspiration. In part it is presumably being supported by those extreme Radicals whom Reno hates and who hate him. ~ , So far as I know, only one attempt has been made on an important scale to find out what the farmer of the r-orn and pig area actually thinks, ine ‘ Des Moines Register and,. Leader has sent a icrew of competent and carefully instructed reporters out across the State of lowa to talk to hundreds of farmers and find out their views. They took a number of counties m widely separated parts of the State, and talked to scores of farmers in each. VERY ACCURATE.'* Statisticians know that an unprejudiced random sampling ot this sort * usually accurate to a high degree m finding out the truth about the situation as a whole. After reading a mas| of these reports and checking them against my own observations 1 am con vuiced that they give a truthful picture of the farmers’ state of mind. In their replies to the questions 7 7 per cent, of the.farmers expressed disapproval of the farm strike; they were equally divided in regard to the corn and pig reduction programme; two to one in favour of the proposal' for the Government to, lend money to the farmer oh unsold corn. The amount suggested when the inquiry was madewaf GO cents • a bushel, Rut this has since been out down to 45 cents. The next question was what tnei thought of the N.11.A. as it had affected themselves; 60 per cent, were opposed to it, 26 per cent neutral, i ind 17 per cent, in favour. Asked whethei thev approved in general of President Roosevelt and what he is trying to do. the farmers gave the following answers; —ln favour 76 per cent., ueutial H per cent., opposed 10 per cent. Beginning in a few weeks and co - tinuing for at least a year, the hedeial Government will provide help for the farmer on such a scale that in n judgment most of the present protest will subside. Into the corn and pig region alone about 500,000,000d0l will be g sent, increasing the cash income oi the average fanner by at least l* r cent., and, if prices rise as they should, 100 per cent. the test. The real test will conle , a ,^ ea , r , more hence, when we shall know whether the allotment plan has actual!} succeeded in reducing production bj the stipulated quotas—or, mdeed, .t all. There are wheat experts m Chicago not connected with the Government who insist that the 15 per cent, curtailment of acreage under Government contract will not cut down the coming year’s wheat crop b} a bushel. This is because many farmers who refrained from raising wheat for the past two years and are therefore not eligible for the agreement are going hack into production nest year, lured by the hope of higher prices. There is a good deal of talk in the Middle AVest about boot-, leg production, about leasing the Government vour poorest land and increasing the yield per acre of the rest, and so on. It will “be many months before we shall know the truth. . In its simplest terms the agricultural dilemma is this: Either we must produce for the domestic market only and protect the fanner against foreign competition, or we must produce for the world market. If we produce for the world market we must accept foreign goods to the value of our exports, or else make loans to foreigners with little chaiice that they will ever be repaid. Moreover, if we intend to produce for the world markets we must get our costs down to a point where they are •comparable with costs in, for instance, Argentina, where land and labour are i both cheaper than here. We must also,

of course, persuade foreign countries to accept our products—a thing that they are at present increasingly, unwilling to do. If wc want to confine our production to our domestic needs we must either raise the purchasing penvoi of our consumers enormously' or cut down the number of producers greatly —in the case of cotton by one half.