31

of capital. The farm business is small, income is low and so are living expend-
itures. But any increase in farm capital must come by way of a reduction in
eash living expenditures. The upshot is that progress for a poorly equipped
settler can only be slow. In fact, he might find it difficult without assistance
ever to accumulate sufficient capital to provide a volume of business that will
increase net Income and permit an increase in the amount spent on cash living.

TABLE 20.—CASH FAMILY LIVING EXPENDITURES PER FARM ACCORDING TO FARM
RETURNS!, PRINCE GEORGE-SMITHERS AREA, 1943-45

Farm returns

ses= orto $1,000 $2,000 $3,000 $4,000 All
3099 to to to to Harris
Ra Mi $1,999 | $2,999 | $3,999 | $9,999 arms

$ $ $ $ $ $
TROY ite cla oe CRS Sa Me ENN oe eRe 275 329 426 365 698 326
Fuel and light..... -| 9 10 13 20 23 11
Auto, personal.... 16 33 35 48 21 24
Life insurance 4 6 16 11 6
Personal........ 82 106 87 140 161 95
Education 8 19 12 17 39 13
Church and charity..:................. 9 17 27 49 37 15
ERG ROD sion bistat see e a ohes eine nents 53 71 76 59 116 63
Glophing he Pe Acca ces wk Rcoaieere | 102 121 172 207 212 120
INewalurmishines ise cect sie ciena wrists 16 34 51 36 |: 55 26
BR tal caahili vane cers ese oN eerie si | 574 746 915 952 1,366 699
Cash food per adult month............. 8 9 8 9 13 9
BN ben Of FARMS 2.845 cnt) osama scdecee 141 86 17 7 12 263

|

Expenditure on living varied from $574 on farms with less than $1,000 gross
production to $1366 on the largest farms (Table 20). Food expenditure amounted
to $275 per farm on the small farms and increased to $698 on the largest ones. The
expenditure for food per adult month, however, was not significantly greater and
indicated that the larger farms also had larger households.

This was largely due to the fact that the larger farms employed labour and
hired farm labour was boarded on the farm. It was for items of living other than
food, then, that the operators of the larger farms and their families were able to
spend more money. ‘The significant fact, however, was that so large a number
(141 out of 263) of the farms were in the class which allowed only sub-average
expenditures on living. Moreover, an appraisal of the level of living over the
whole area pointed to the conclusion that apart from food and clothing the level
was quite low. Particularly noticeable were the very small amounts spent on
life insurance and education. Life insurance premiums, which averaged from
$4 to $16 per farm in the various farm returns groups, were small enough to
show that most farm families were entirely unprotected. The expenditure on
education provided the homes with a few books and newspapers. It amounted
to $8 per farm on the farms producing less than $1000 gross product to $39 on
those producing $4000 or over. Very little then could have been used to make
high school training available to the young people. Personal expenditures too
were fairly low. They amounted on the average to $95 per farm over the whole
area.

Auto expenses represented one-half of the operating costs of the family car,
the other half being charged to farm expenses. In addition, many had trucks
which to a certain extent took the place of a car. Nevertheless, 43 per cent of
the families had neither a car nor a truck for transportation.

1 Farm returns is the gross production of the farm for the year. It is total sales plus or minus
inventory changes in grain, hay and livestock.