THE GUARANTEED PRICE FOR DAIRY PRODUCE

Otago Daily Times, Issue 22999, 30 September 1936, Page 6

THE GUARANTEED PRICE FOR DAIRY PRODUCE

10 IHE EDITOR. Sir—A letter appeared in the DailyTimes on September 7 over my signature in which I said I would therein conclude my arguments for guaranteed prices for dairy produce. Since that date I have received letters asking me to continue to carry on the debate, and there has been a further contributor to your columns —one W. M. Clark, of Gatlins. His or her letter appeared in the Daily Times of September 18. I have made inquiries from all the stock agents, and he is not known. As there 'is no post office designated Gatlins, I now ask the person by name of Clark to come right out into the open and tell your readers who he is. Some of my friends and also my opponents said I had taken “the count” after reading Mr Renton’s letter of September 9, and as (in wrestling parlance) W. M, Clark came at me with “ a flying tackle,” I believe it is up to me to reply to each of the aforementioned letters. From the budgetary point of view I will present a verbatim statement supplied to me by one of the foremost farm economists in New Zealand, and surely there will be no question as to the ability and desire of this man to present, as far as is humanly possible, a statement, absolutely free from bias, based on revenue and costs taken from a large number of farms in* New Zealand and a fair average arrived therefrom. - The extraordinary feature of the statement is that the net return to the farmer in both the economist’s statement and also in my statement published by you in the issue of September 3 is almost identical. The net result Is really what counts. The economist shows £245 net income, and if we put on to that amount, say, £52 for house rent, this will make an income of £297. Readers will remember that the debate is to show whether the dairy farmer can or cannot get 16s per day for his labour. The 16s per day man has to pay rent out of his wages, but the farmer has had his rent paid in his farm costs. Readers will also remember that my statement showed a net income to the farmer of £292, or 16s per day for 365 days each year. The economist arrives at his net return in a more detailed and concise account than I presented on September 3. Still, the net result is so amazingly near that I am very pleased to publish the following:—

The foregoing ought to satisfy any reasonably-minded person who is not connected with farming operations, but is interested in guaranteed prices. The dairy farmer should not require any information from either Alexander Renton, W. M. Clark, William Bradfleld, or the writer. In answer to W. M. Clark, there is little to say except that I thank him for telling me we require a bull and a dog on a dairy farm. I notice the expert farm economist does not show any costs for a bull, two bulls, and a dog. Still, I believe we require a bull after reading what W. M. Clark has to say about farming costs. As to his 17 points, they can all be answered in a brief statement. The argument was first started on a basis of 100 acres, £3O per acre, and a 50-cow farm, and an attempt to drag me into a debate on 10 cows, 15 cows, or 100 cows will not receive any further attention from me. Stick to the point in debate and you will arrive at the same conclusion as 1 have done. It is possible for a man with an assistant to milk 50 cows, feed pigs and fowls and do a little S gardening. I say it is possible and in fact it is being done on hundreds of dairy farms in New Zealand to-day. To Mr Renton I must say that I rather resent his suggestion that I might be a slave driver. I can prove I am not such. I try to carry my political principles to my men on the farm. Of men living in this district one worked for me for 10 years, one for four years, one for three years, and one for two years. I am sure any of those men will give me a testimonial as being what the worker calls a good Boss.” The economist supplied the details at my request and was asked to show the costs of revenue of a 50-cow 100-acre farm at £3O pelacre, yielding 2401 b butter fat 8t134d, with one assistant to work with the owner. I think he knows his job. In closing, I must ask Mr Renton to look at the respective met return: £292, £295; and Mr Renton's net return, £3O. Oh, what a difference!—l am, etc., ’ C. H. Taylor. Awamangu, September 26.

COSTS AS APPLIED BY THE ECONOMIST £ s. d. Interest on 100 acres at £30 per acre, at 4 p.c 0 0 Interest on stock mortgage, at 5 P.c 25 0 0 Wages costs ■ < 0 0 Total Interest and wages costs 295 0 0 Maintenance costs .. .... 0 0 Total expenses .. .. .. .. .. £505 0 0 INCOME £ s. <L From factory butter-fat at 2401b per cow. 50 cows, at 13Jd . 675 0 0 From pigs, bobby calves, etc., __ at lid butter-fat .. .. .. 0 1° Total income . £750 0 ,0 NET RETURN • £ s. d. Total Income 0 0 Less total expenses . 505 0 Net Income £245 0 0

ESTIMATED MAINTENANCE COSTS ON 50-COW FARM Per cow, £ s. d. 6s 15 0 0 Grass and other, seed 4s 10 0 0 14s 35 0 0 Fencing repairs.: .. 4s 10 0 0 0 0 Water supply .. ... .. .. 2s 2s 5 5 0 0 Cow covers and veterinary 2s 5 0 0 Shoeing and Implement 2s 2s 0 0 •* repairs .. .. .. .. .. .«• Milking plant repairs . .. 5 5 0 Milking plant power .... 8s 20 0 Milking shed material .. 2s 5 0 0 Depreciation on imple6s 15 0 0 Depreciation on farm 10 4s Depreciation on milking 6s 15 0 0 8s 20 0 0 6s 15 0 0 6s 13 0 0 Total /• 84s £210 0 0