Agricultural relief: Agricultural relief

Bibliographic data

Multivolume work

Identifikator:: 1831932415

Document type:: Multivolume work

Title:: Agricultural relief

Place of publication:: Washington

Publisher:: Gov. Pr. Off.

Year of publication:: 1928

Collection:: Economics Books

Usage license:: Get license information via the feedback formular.

Volume

Identifikator:: 1831934884

URN:: urn:nbn:de:zbw-retromon-232132

Document type:: Volume

Title:: Agricultural relief

Volume count:: Pt. 6

Place of publication:: Washington

Publisher:: Gov. Pr. Off.

Year of publication:: 1928

Scope:: III S., S. 429 - 520

Digitisation:: 2022

Collection:: Economics Books

Usage license:: Get license information via the feedback formular.

AGRICULTURAL RELIEF 441 Mr. Fort. And if they did operate at a 16 or 17 cent price on an 18,000,000-bale crop, how much in dollars and cents do you think we would be asking the Government to assume as a possible loss? Mr. KiLGorE. You are asking me an impossible question. Mr. Fort. Do you think it would run over $50,000,000? Mr. KiLGore. I just would not want to guess about it, and not because I do not want to answer your question. Mr. Fort. The board has got to get at it under the Haugen bill? Mr. KiLGorE. Yes; and they have got a protection in the equaliza- tion fee to make good any losses, and they can afford to make a more liberal guess in the interest of the producer than you can possibly make with the loan bill. That is the only thing I want—— Mr. Fort. You have got to guess either way. Mr. KiLcore. Yes; until you get experience in operation. Mr. Fort. Exactly, Doctor. But what I am trying to get at is you say the Crisp bill will fail because of first year’s losses—that is, the first year’s guess; and it is the first year’s guess under the Haugen bill, either way. Now, you are as well posted on this general subject as any man who has appeared before this committee on cotton. Your guess should be as good as the board’s guess, and I am asking you to make it. Mr. KirLcore. M+ operated under the 10- Mr. Fort. It would Haugen bill? Mr. KinLcore. Yes; we can assume that for the purpose of dis- cussion. But, under thie loan bill, if they did sustain a loss they might not operate any more. Mr. Fort. I know you did say that, and I am trying to see whether this loss is going to be big enough in your judgment. Mr. Kincore. I think the chances are it would. Mr. Fort. Then, what do you mean, $20,000,000, $30,000.000, or $40,000,000 it might be? Mr. KiLcore. I would not want to figure the amount. Mr. Fort. I do not think $10,000.000 would stop Congress from appropriating. Mr. KiLGcore. I do not think se. Mr. Fort. 1 do not think $20,000,000 would stop Congress. Mr. Kivcore. But it would not take much of a decline to run costs and losses up to $40,000,000 or $50,000,000. But let me remind you of this: We are talking about cotton where there is a greater possibility of operating under a loan bill. If you take wheat or the tariff-protected products, then we know we are facing tremendous losses. » Mr. Fort. We appreciate your position there. But we are talking about cotton. You are the cotton expert. Mr. KiLgore. May I just state this over—you were not here a bit ago? I stated—and I stated it as the result of my honest thought— that a mere cotton bill that might be effective for cotton and not for other crops would be merely effective temporarily with cotton. Mr. Fort. I agree with you. Mr. KiLcore. Because of the fact that any measure that does not interstabilize between the different agricultural commodities is not going to be permanent. R6160—28—SEKR E. PT 8—

Access restriction

Copyright

fullscreen: Agricultural relief (Pt. 6)

Multivolume work

Volume

Table of contents

Download

Volume

This page

Image fragment

Citation links

Citation recommendation