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:: 1831935066

URN:: urn:nbn:de:zbw-retromon-232142

Document type:: Volume

Title:: Agricultural relief

Volume count:: Pt. 7

Place of publication:: Washington

Publisher:: Gov. Pr. Off.

Year of publication:: 1928

Scope:: III S., S. 521 - 590

Digitisation:: 2022

Collection:: Economics Books

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

576 ( AGRICULTURAL RELIEF be paid for the crop in the domestic market, and, finally, a guess as to Beppe at which the surplus will be sold in the domestic market and abroad. Mr. Pur~NeLL. Mr. Anderson, in view of the existing machinery within the Department of Agriculture itself, would you designate that as entirely a guess? Mr. AnpErsoN. Well, let us call it an estimate, if you object to the word ‘‘guess.”’ Mr. PurnerLr. In truth can it not be a reasonably accurate estimate? Mr. AnpeErsoN. Would you consider an underestimate or over- estimate of a crop of 10 or 15 per cent a reasonable percentage of error? Mr. PueNeLL. I do not know that I would want to answer that. Mr. ANDERSON. We have had some that have been as far off as that. Mr. PurneELL. But I think there is a vast difference between a guess and a reasonably accurate estimate. Mr. AnpersoN. I think the purchase price and the sales price fall far more in the realm of guesses than they do in the realm of estimates. The amount of the crop, perhaps, at least if the guess were made along some time in May, might possibly fall within the proper realm of the term ““estimate.”” But it would be subject, I think, to an error of at least 10 or 15 per cent. Mr. PurNELL. 1 have been under the impression that the Depart- ment of Agriculture can, as a matter of fact, make a very reasonable estimate both as to the quality and quantity of any given product. Mr. ANDERSON. I do not think that is correct. Mr. FoLmer. You do not contend, Mr, Anderson, that there would be any more guessing under this machinery than we have now under the present system? Mr. AnpersoN. Well, you are imposing what I think is a tax and which Mr. Haugen thinks is a service charge. Now, you have got to determine what that is in advance, and in determining it, I say you have to make three guesses at least. Mr. FuLMER. Suppose they make the best guess possible, and they should put the equalization fee perhaps a little too large. They would have an opportunity in the next operating period to put the equalization fee less in that instance. Mr. ANDERSON. Providing you have the power to tax one set of farmers to pay for services, or whatever you may call them, which may be rendered to another entirely different set of farmers or largely different set of farmers the next year? Mr. FuLMEeR. Under the bill if we have to put the equalization fee on because of a surplus you would not want the fee with a small crop. You would have plenty of profit to take care of the small crop. In the case of cotton, if we had gone into the market during 1926 and taken over the 5,000,000 bales, instead of allowing the other fellow to take them over, according to the advance in price this fall to about $25 to $30 a bale, we would have had in the stabilization fund about $250,000,000, profit and I do not believe that we would have had to ask for an equalization fee perhaps in the next two or three vears.

Access restriction

Copyright

fullscreen: Agricultural relief (Pt. 7)

Multivolume work

Volume

Table of contents

Download

Volume

This page

Image fragment

Citation links

Citation recommendation