Parity, Parity, Parity. by John D. BlackReview by: M. K. BennettJournal of the American Statistical Association, Vol. 37, No. 220 (Dec., 1942), pp. 547-548Published by: American Statistical AssociationStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2279043 .

Accessed: 14/06/2014 23:39

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

.

American Statistical Association is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Journalof the American Statistical Association.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 185.44.77.82 on Sat, 14 Jun 2014 23:39:42 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

*BOOK REVIEWS 547

and especially by the officials responsible for the present flood of govern- mental propaganda for the guidance of the American people.

H. C. BREARLEY George Peabody College

Parity, Parity, Parity, by John D. Black. Cambridge: The Harvard Com- mittee on Research in the Social Sciences. 1942. xi, 367 pp.

This book treats not only of "parity" between agriculture and non-agri- culture, but of price policy in wartime and peacetime as well. The manu- script left the author's hands last May. But the substance remains timely, and will continue so for as long as the parity argument continues to be used in support of legislation aimed to enhance farm prices and farm income. The twenty-four chapters and two forewords are packed with historical facts noted at first hand, replete with ingenious statistical attempts to calculate rational parity standards, full of the shrewd observations on men and events that we have come to expect from Dr. Black. Style and organization- including italics and asterisks-are deliberately journalistic, and to this reviewer more confusing than helpful; but the index helps. Some of the charts are not easy to read on the printed page. The chapters on "Alterna- tive Parity Standards" and "Parity, Please" come closest to summaries of conclusions and warrant the closest reading, although the author describes his conclusions as "relatively the least valuable part of the effort."

Dr. Black is apparently troubled because notions about parity, so useful in gaining support for legislation that he would no doubt call "constructive" in times of peace, are now obstructing the war effort. His concern is justified. If anything is needed in furtherance of war effort now, it is sub-parity for some producers-of wheat, for example-and super-parity for others.

The author apparently dreads inflation more than the reviewer does. The general price freeze of April 28 is spoken of as "right in its objectives." The only reasonable price objective to the reviewer is inflation at a rate as slow as can be engineered while stimulating production for war. If painful postwar deflation must follow, it is nevertheless preferable to defeat. Produc- tion for war comes first, postwar deflation or not, parity or not.

Obviously the author does not agree with President Roosevelt in regard- ing parity for farmers based on 1910-14 as an "excellent objective," now or earlier. He suggests other bases as preferable (chapter xii); and so they are if parity must indeed be lived with. He "holds to the judgment that Agricul- ture during the whole 72 years has been underpaid relative to both Labor and Capital." But he fails to point out that such a situation is inevitable and desirable in the course of a nation's rise from poverty to riches. There must be an incentive to enlarge the proportion of population engaged in non-farm occupations; and where is the incentive to be found unless real incomes are smaller in farming than out?

This content downloaded from 185.44.77.82 on Sat, 14 Jun 2014 23:39:42 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

548 AMERICAN STATISTICAL ASSOCIATION

Obviously also, Dr. Black believes that "the essential principle of parity is sound." In the reviewer's opinion it is not, even in times of peace. The notion that "parity" between "agriculture" and "non-agriculture" ought to be an appropriate object of national economic policy is in fact the second biggest gold brick that has been sold to the American public in many years. Only protectionism is a bigger one-and it is the parent of parity.

In his concluding remarks on "Parity, Please," the author observes, "It is more than possible that within a year an aroused public will wipe the slate clean of all parities . . . " This is a consummation devoutly to be wished. It seems hardly to be expected, however, unless the public is willing to fore- sake its current idol of "equal returns for equal eff ort," returning to the older ideal of remuneration for individuals according to what society will pay for goods and services produced in a competitive system where property rights are respected, or fixing its affections on the current aim of getting the neces- sary goods produced so as to win the war.

M. K. BENNETT Food Research Institute Stanford University, California

The Control of Customer Returns, by Edgar H. Gault and Charles S. Good- man. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan, School of Business, Bureau of Business Research. 1942. 107 pp. $1.50. Customer returns is an ever present problem in the retail field. Buyers

blame salespeople for poor selling; salespeople maintain that customers should make up their minds when purchasing; customers criticize manage- ment if merchandise is refused for credit; and management blames buyers, salespeople, and customers when returns become an issue. To pin the tail on the donkey when blindfolded to all the facts is recognized by any retailer as a difficult task.

The Control of Customer Returns is a one-hundred page monograph in which the facts surrounding the return of merchandise are made clear. The study does three things. First, it discusses the nature of the return problem under the familiar headings of procedures in handling returns, causes, and costs. The relation of returns to markdowns and the philosophy of the ap- proval sale add new substance to an old subject.

Second, it indicates the policies for handling returns by calling attention to each store's responsibility in doing a better operating job. These policies, four in number, may or may not be a part of a city-wide plan but should be the basis on which an individual store operates.

Third, it discusses some of the procedures that can be used by stores in controlling customer returns.

Customer returns is not a new subject, but this study has a realistic point of view which should attract more than passing attention. Many retailers and commentators consider customer returns to be a liability. In this report

This content downloaded from 185.44.77.82 on Sat, 14 Jun 2014 23:39:42 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions