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.

142 AGRICULTURAL RELIEF Mr. Fort. I heard you say that. Mr. KiLcore. Therefore, I would say that in the case of cotton the chances of operation under the loan bill are greater than these others. The losses might not be very great, but then what would such a bill do for the other commodities? Mr. Fort. I am asking you, Doctor, as a cotton expert, as I believe you to be, and I should ask the same questions as to wheat or the same line of questioning to a wheat man—now, then, you might run up $30,000,000, or $40,000,000 or even $50,000,000 as possible loss? Mr. KiLGorE. It is a mere guess, and I am not trying to figure it out; it might. Mr. Fort. If that is the possibility, we are figuring the difference at the same price under either bill. That is the only case in which you think there is that much possibility of loss. If there is that much possible loss under the Crisp bill, there would be that much possible loss under the Haugen bill. If that is true, then what would your equalization fee have to be on cotton? Mr. Kincore. Well, an equalization fee of $5 a bale on an 18,000,000-bale crop would be $90,000,000. Mr. Fort. That 1s a cent a pound? Mr. Kircore. That would be a cent a pound. Mr. Fort. And you figure then that that would be entirely ade- quate at that price? Mr. KiLcore. I do not know what the board would do. I would not imagine under conditions we have had that they would levy an equalization fee in excess of $5. I would think it would likely be considerably less than that. Mr. Fort. You feel second, that the equalization fee under the Haugen bill will help the cooperative associations? Mr. Kirgore. I think it will help them, not by any compulsion in forcing farmers into cooperative associations, but it will help them because it will make conditions even, and possible for them to go into cooperative associations and get as good prices or better through cooperative associations than the man on the outside gets, and with- out the disadvantages they have been under in the past, which have tended to offset the advantages of cooperative marketing. Mr. Fort. Do they not now get better prices through the co- operatives than on the outside? Mr. KiLcore. Three of the five years, when we had around a normal production, they got more. But during these two surplus years they have gotten less. And there is where our difficulty has come. Until we run into these surplus years we got along nicely and we had a growth in membership and in volume of business that was very satisfactory. Mr. Fort. Now, are your cooperative associations strong enough % Jinedis this stabilization problem for the Government under either Mr. KiLgore. I think so. I believe they would under the McNary- Haugen bill; just what they would do under the loan bill, I do not venture to say. Mr. Fort. Do you think they are strong enough? You think they are sufficiently representative of the croo to be able to handle it? Mr. KiLcore. I think so. Mr. Fort. At 6 per cent?

Access restriction

Copyright

fullscreen: Agricultural relief (Pt. 6)

Multivolume work

Volume

Table of contents

Download

Volume

This page

Image fragment

Citation links

Citation recommendation