sharply relative to the U. S. Another increase in U. S. has levelled off in Kentucky since 1950, owing to _
beef cattle numbers brought the ratio between Ken- decreases i11 tobacco allotments and poor growing if
tucky and the U.   back in line with the longtime seasons in some years while nationally the output AN
trend. The combination of these factors resulted in of crops has continued to expand.
a relative decline in Kentucky income, but the decline Comparison of Net Farm Income ¢ ·
was from a short-run favorable position in livestock \\]hil€ Cash hum income h.Cmh,d upward hl Kew >*
and income appears to be currently in line with about tuck), mhlhvc to thc, U. S. during 1924_4() and has
1_111` 1`XPCC11`11 11111111 11S C11111p1111°11 W1111 11111 1111111111111111 remained about stable since, the total net income of 711
lor the past 30 y€z11'S- Keutrrcky farmers trended slightly downward 1‘€lz1tiV€ ni
The following tabulation shows average cash re- to the U. S. during tlle Pwiod 1929-40. Since 1940
°1`1l11S 11111111 11111111 111111111°111111S_111 K€11111C11y 11S 11 P°11` there appears to be no trend in relative net income rw
centage of the United States for selected periods. {Ol. Kentucky (Fig. 4)· Kentucky farmers received J 1
[924-28 1937-41 1953-57
<:mps ........................ 1.58 2.17 2.16 "E“°“”  41 1
Livestock .................. 1.-17 1.57 1.55 /NET MOM;
Total .......................... 1.53 1.85 1.84 50 1  
Production Relationships f   J 3
\Vith the exception of income from tobacco, cash U,
111001ne 1‘e121ti011S11ipS lwetweeln Kentucky and the U. S. ______________..»"""·—···— ---- ·---.-. *“ {
are detvrinined largely by production relationships. LO "' '-.-· -"1-1_0 1`~,,RO,,Uc,,ONE,,,E,,SEs 1 (__ " 
Kentucky is the major producer of burley tobacco, · 
and fluctuations i11 burley production or prices have 0 *11*
a very large effect o11 Kentucky farm income. Total 1930 1915 1940 YE,-@1945 MO 1955 _,·°_
01111-1111 011 1lg111c1111111111 111 K11111:11C1{y was 40 Percent Fig. #1.—Tota1 nct farm income and total production ¤
l11i—1l1"1` (1111111*11 1953*57 1111111 111 192-tt’28· Thc l11(!i`€%1$'$(1 expenses, Kentucky as percent of United States, 1929-57. 1T` _ )
total output resulted from increases in both crops _ _ _ _ _ _ A-Mr
mu] ]h,(.Sh,Ck_ Tho ,.(.]nh(,hS]hh hctwcch Kchmcky 3.19 percent ot the nations net farm income during s -
production and U.   production was fairly stable 111211311* 261 P°11°F;11 111111111g 11)111)`411’ 111111 268 PCP 7:*1
over the 192-1-57 period. with no indication of a pro- C1`111 1111111111 1953*11* 11 1S S11111SW11111 11 P;1_11111Ox 111111 ,,,,,3
h(,hhu.(] h·(.h(] hl ,.(.],lh\.(. (mthhts (Fig.   Khhthckv while cash receipts were increasing relatively prior A ·
1 to 19-10 net farm income was declining. The reason ev
:22;* or****4‘4f‘m‘—"4‘"*?’_’""n' was an increase in production expenses. Total pro- t
U”"€'°$“““ duction expenses for Kentucky averaged 1.29 percent `1
l _~_,·"` of the total for the U.   during 1929-33, 1.-19 percent -$n~ 
1101 'I‘~_ 1 during 19-11-45. and 1.57 percent during 1953-57. gw 
,·"·*°‘} Family labor is not included as a part of production ` 
no Kwm, expenses .and family labor has been used extensively we
1 __,· 1 _ in tobacco production in Kentucky. As the farm popu-  
‘°°‘ _ »· _ 1 lation was declining and burley production increas- •1  1
1/ ",".   ing. more hired labor was needed in tobacco. Pro- C•4‘  V
wr " ’ duction expenses for labor, fertilizer and lime, interest _ V 
¤»· n'_·b··~gis--1jj?~1E_j46i’4?—G’$*E‘j·* on farm mortgages. and maintenance and operation ,4 
"”"” of machinery have increased in Kentucky relative to 4··‘
1'ig. Ii.- lndex of total agricultural production. Kentucky thy U_   whjlp tuxog mh] not ypht to h(mfm·m hun],
and Utiiletl $l<t‘S. 1921-57 (11135*:111 i1"(`Yi‘}—{(`= 10111- lords liave (lccllttctl. ,\llll()llQQl1 Pl`<)(11lCt1()11 (`XP(`11$(`$ `~
Hw.h_ulhlml Output was high l.(\h1th.(, th th,. U_ S_ have increased in Kentucky relative to the U.   9-»\ 
(hlmlg thv huh h)_m~S· hut U_ S. hmdm_h(m has hh produetiovn expenses relative to cash receipts are still kr  .
(_I.(_lm_(l Imwh mon, mhidh. thm] that or K(,hhK.k>. less i11 lxentucky than for the Nation as a whole. {
Siuw hwy -l—h(_S(_ (m·h_l.(_m_(_S ].(_Shlh,(l muhlh. hom owing to small farms and the heavy use of family ·*x 
relatively high crop production during the 19401s in 111111111 111 1<1`11111C11}1 1111_111°111111111`· ,‘__ 
Khhhwk}. and mm`. mph] im.l.(.,N,S hl h\.(,sthL.k hI.h_ The comparison of cash income. production. and
duction nationally since 1950. .-\lso. crop production ((3,,,,,;,,,,,.] W, ;>(,m. [2; 11*, 
|*•.
10 l{|CX'|`l`(`KY Fxnxi xxn lloxir-: S(T11·YX(YI·j~lr.·\1,I. 1958
»·°~