Use of the various export “tools” available to us has resulted in a
gratifying increase in farm product exports. From a low point of 2.8
billion dollars in fiscal year 1953, exports climbed to an all-time
high of 4.7 billion dollars in fiscal year 1957. Export volume has
stayed relatively high to date, averaging over 4 billion dollars in the
past three years. In the face of these exports we might well ask our-
selves the question of what our domestic surpluses would be like if we
had not stressed exports.
Two things are certain: Our exports have helped to strengthen
prices and incomes of our farmers. At the same time, our shipments
have bolstered American foreign policy by helping to meet urgent
human needs in some areas where communism was and still is a threat.
Existing surplus disposal programs are not perfect. But neither is
a bucket-brigade—and many a fire has been put out by stout-hearted
men who made effective use of whatever was at hand. In many situa-
tions, time is of the essence. We have surplus problems that must be
faced today. The hunger of millions of people throughout the world
needs to be satisfied today. Our export programs, however imperfect-
ly, have filled an important need both at home and abroad.
Most of us will agree that economic development is the only real
salvation of many countries now the beneficiaries of our surpluses. We
know that hunger results from low incomes. And incomes are low
because enough fertilizer and irrigation water are not available for the
land, because transportation is poor, because industry is primitive,
because human resources are employed inefficiently. Under such cir-
cumstances, food can be only a palliative, not a cure. The basic need
is development of those countries.
Since 1954 some 2 billion dollars or over half of the foreign cur-
rencies obtained from sales of U. S. surpluses under P. L. 480 have
been or are scheduled to be turned back to importing countries as
loans or grants for economic development. But economic development
takes time. Some of the Communist countries have learned that. Red
China, with her much-publicized “great leap forward,” seems to have
stubbed her toe on back-yard foundries and agricultural communes.
Soviet Russia has been carrying on a program of forced economic
development since 1917. Today, over 40 years later, Russia’s program
finally is showing results—because output of consumer goods has been
subordinated to production of capital goods.
Many countries need economic development, but “crash” pro-
grams are not likely to work—for there is some truth in the saying
that it takes money to make money. A good base is necessary to achieve
31