Mr. ANDERSON. Can you put such a table or statement in the record at this point?

Mr. WELLS. I have estimates for the last several years as to the proportion of each of the major commodities financed by foreign aid.

Mr. HORAN. That is very necessary, Mr. Wells, because we have a clamor for more trade and less aid. I am very much for it, and so are you, but it is not going to happen, and I think if we can supply some information as to how these exports were paid for it would be helpful. Mr. WHITTEN. And, let us not overlook the military expenditures which might not be classed as foreign aid.

Mr. HORAN. Yes. If we can get that into the record it will be very useful to us and everybody interested in this matter.

Mr. WELLS. I can give you the direct figures in the record. I have no way of estimating how much military expenditures may have also supplied dollar exchange, indirectly.

Mr. WHITTEN. With the chairman's permission, I would like to urge that you make a note that this information is available.

Mr. WELLS. Yes. I shall analyze and include the international wheat arrangements in this.

(The matter referred to is as follows:)

Estimates of total United States exports of cotton, wheat, and tobacco and the proportionate quantities financed by foreign-aid funds are shown below. In appraising these estimates, attention is specifically called to the fact that they relate only to direct foreign aid—that is, these estimates do not include any quantities which might have been financed or shipped as a result of dollar exchange created by military aid or other grant funds which were not directly used for the purchase of agricultural commodities as such.

The above estimates include wheat shipped to India under a special program. The amount shipped was 71 million bushels and the value was $170 million. Practically all of this wheat was shipped in the July 1951-June 1952 year.

The above estimates do not include all wheat shipped under the International Wheat Agreement, but only that portion for which foreign-aid funds were used

to cover the agreement price. Under terms of the International Wheat Agreement, 266 million bushels of wheat were exported in the year July 1950-June 1951 and 255 million bushels in the year July 1951-June 1952. The subsidy payments involved in these International Wheat Agreement exports totaled $178 million in 1950-51 and $167 million in 1951-52. Countries receiving United States foreign aid purchased 166 million bushels of wheat under the terms of the International Wheat Agreement in 1950-51. Of this amount 110 million bushels were financed with foreign-aid funds and 56 million bushels were financed with other funds. In addition, foreign-aid funds were used to purchase 26 million bushels outside the International Wheat Agreement quotas. Comparable figures for 1951-52 are: Total purchases by countries receiving foreign aid under terms of the wheat agreement, 171 million bushels; financed with foreign-aid funds, 61 million bushels; financed from other sources, 110 million bushels; financed with foreign aid outside International Wheat Agreement quotas, 58 million bushels. Mr. MARSHALL. Do these figures reflect an adjustment for the fluctuations in the purchasing power of the dollar? Mr. WELLS. No, sir, these are actual dollar figures.

VALUES AND QUANTITIES OF AGRICULTURAL EXPORTS AND
IMPORTS, 1930-51

Mr. MARSHALL. Do you have any statistics as to volume? Mr. WELLS. Yes, the Office of Foreign Agricultural Relations maintains those.

Mr. MARSHALL. I believe it is important in studying this to know just what the volume is from year to year.

Mr. WELLS. I shall be glad to supply that for the record also. (The matter referred to is as follows:)

Agricultural exports and imports: Value and quantities, United States, 1930-51

NOTE.-Supplementary agricultural imports are defined as all those similar to agricultural commodities produced commercially in the United States and all others that are interchangeable in use to any significant extent with such United States commodities, and include such commodities as sugar, apparel wool, grains, meats, etc.; complementary agricultural imports are defined as including all others, about 95 percent of which consist of rubber, coffee, raw silk, cacao beans, wool for carpets, bananas, tea, and spices. Source: Bureau of Agricultural Economics. Compiled from Foreign Agricultural Trade.

Mr. WELLS. Ten to twelve percent of our farm products are exported. At the same time about $3 billion of our farm income this year is going to be from exports. Since farmers are now on a higher price level they hate to see dollars disappear no matter what the purchasing power of the dollars may be.

Mr. MARSHALL. That 10 or 12 percent is the overall average which does not reflect the actual percentage exported of particular crops, for example, tobacco, cotton, and wheat.

Mr. WELLS. If you consider cotton, tobacco, wheat, rice, and California dried fruit the percentage averages closer to one-third. Mr. ANDERSEN. Are you going to give us the import situation now that you have given us the export situation?

Mr. WELLS. I do not have the import statistics with me.

Mr. ANDERSEN. I think it would be very valuable if we could see how much competing agricultural commodities have come in during the same period.

Mr. WELLS. Yes, sir; the Office of Foreign Agricultural Relations does maintain that.

NECESSITY FOR CERTAIN AMOUNT IMPORTATIONS

Mr. WHITTEN. I am like Mr. Horan, I really like slogans, particularly fine sounding ones, such as "More trade and less aid,” which certainly appeals to us on both sides.

I would like to point out, for what it may be worth for the purpose of this discussion, a set of facts which were set forth in an article appearing in the Reader's Digest some years ago. This article pointed out that the United States has gotten to the point where it is almost 96 percent self-sufficient. A few years ago we paid $10 million a year to France for cigarette papers and we make our own. We used to spend billions of dollars a year for dyes and now we make our own. The same is true of optical lenses, where we were importing millions of dollars worth of those a year, and now we make our own. Rubber, mica, optical equipment are other examples. We formerly got nearly all our nitrate fertilizers. Now synthetic fertilizers have largely taken the market. Due to necessities which have caused us to supply our own needs we have gotten from about 60 percent self-sufficient to in excess of 95 percent. So, as much as we may wish to get rid of surpluses we have, we must figure out some way to buy something from other countries. Strategic materials is a partial answer. I believe we might well 'mport more raw materials and thereby slow down the depletion of our own.

Mr. HORAN. I think that is very helpful in the discussion.

Mr. WELLS. I am not trying to answer the policy question as to what you should do. I think this chart shows this is a desperately important subject for people who are interested in agriculture.

It is only during prosperous periods that we ship meats and dairy products abroad, and as purchasing power comes down our exports come closer and closer to being restricted to the staple commodities, cotton, tobacco, and wheat.

RETAIL FOOD PRICE AND CONSUMER INCOME

This seventh chart, Congressman Cannon, shows what 1 hour of factory labor would purchase at retail of certain standard foods in 1929, 1939, and for the first 11 months of 1952. Factory wages have climbed a little since 1952 and retail food prices are down a little, so that the current comparison is more favorable than this.

The first set of bars [indicating] shows how many loaves of bread an hour of factory labor would purchase.

QUANTITIES OF FOODS ONE HOUR OF FACTORY LABOR WILL BUY

Mr. ANDERSEN. First, so that it gets into the record, Mr. Wells, bring out a few of those facts as to what that chart does show.

Mr. WELLS. In 1929, for example, an hour's factory labor would buy 6.4 loaves of bread.

In 1939 it would buy 8 loaves of bread, and in 1952 it would buy 10.4 loaves of bread.

Mr. ANDERSEN. In other words, today the average factory worker can purchase 10.4 loaves of bread for 1 hour's work whereas in 1929 he could purchase only 6.4 loaves of bread for an hour's work?

Mr. WELLS. Yes; and I might add one small statistical correction. This is based on direct wages paid for factory labor. In addition, over the last several years certain retirement and other benefits have been added which are not included in current wage statistics.

FARMERS' PORTION OF CONSUMERS' DOLLAR

Mr. HORAN. We know that the farmer got not in excess of 3 cents in 1952 out of the cost of those loaves. As you go down that list in pointing your pointer to where the actual return to the farmer exists point out to us what the rest of the cost of that loaf of bread is, indicated by the cost of distribution and the other factors involved.

Mr. WELLS. Currently, the farmer gets no more than 20 percent of the price of a loaf of bread.

Mr. ANDERSEN. I doubt if he gets that much, but go ahead, Mr. Wells.

Mr. WELLS. It is actually around 18 percent. In the case of round steak 1 hour of factory labor would buy 1.2 pounds in 1929. In 1939, it would buy 1.8 pounds, and in 1952, it would buy slightly less than 1.5 pounds. I am under the impression that when I get the retail prices for February, you will find an hour of factory labor will buy at least as much as it bought in 1939. In studying these comparisons, remember, 1929 was a prosperous year for the United States while food was really at bargain prices in 1939.

Milk: An hour's factory labor bought 7.8 pints in 1929 at retail, 10.4 pints in 1939, and 13.8 pints in 1952. The farmer gets about half of it. About half of it goes to distribution costs.

Bacon: 1.3 pounds in 1929, per hour of factory labor, 2.0 pounds in 1939, and 2.6 pounds in 1952. The farmer may get as much as two-thirds of this.

Mr. ANDERSEN. That indicates, Mr. Wells, that the laboring man today can buy twice as much bacon for an hour's labor as he could in 1929, is that not a fact?

Mr. WELLS. Yes, sir.

Mr. ANDERSEN. And he can buy approximately one-third more bacon today than he could in 1939 with the same hour's labor.

Mr. WELLS. That is right.

Mr. ANDERSEN. Personally, I do not see what the consumers have to kick about when you study this chart.

Mr. MARSHALL. Mr. Chairman, it also indicates that from the commodities on the chart, that the greatest advantage, as I can read it, is shown to the consumer of those commodities that we have support prices for.

Mr. HUNTER. Mr. Wells, when you speak of steak, do you speak of the whole beef?

Mr. WELLS. I am talking about round steak. These are based on retail prices reported by the Bureau of Labor Statistics and this is round steak, not the whole beef.

Mr. ANDERSEN. I think you were on the subject of bacon when I interjected.

Mr. WELLS. Eggs: Whereas an hour of factory labor in 1929 would buy 1.1 dozen eggs, and in 1939 would buy 2 dozen, in 1952 it would buy 21⁄2 dozen. Farmers got about two-thirds of the average retail egg dollar in 1952.

Potatoes is one of those commodities where you could buy slightly less in 1952 with an hour's factory labor, about 22 pounds compared to 25 in 1939. You are aware that the potato situation fluctuates widely from year to year. Farmers got about one-half of the average retail potato dollar in 1952. And finally, oranges. An average hour of factory labor would buy 1.3 dozen in 1929, 2.2 in 1939, and 3.3 in