The morning Astorian. [volume] (Astoria, Oregon) 1899-1930, 1908-06-25
EVERYTHING FOR ALL,

Social reformers who want society
organized on the communal plan start
with a most attractive idea. The
world Is tending toward democracy,
the equal rights of everybody in every.
thing there is for human comfort and
welfare. But it is certain to occur TO
many people that the change from
private ownership to communal owner
ship would not make very radical
difference in the distribution of the
good things of life, yet 1t might lessen
the production of things. and in the
end the mass would not be the gamer.
For at least a century democracy has
had fair swing and progress has
been made under sharp private COM
petition. Under the reign Of competl-
tion the distribution has grown wider
and wider, and now, when competition
is fiercest, the distribution is the most
liberal in the history Of the modern
world. Everybody shares In about
everything that is of real Importance
in life.
Steam power was wonder worker
when applied to commercial activities.
Electricity supplements steam as a
power and also furnishes illumination.
There are few people in this country
today who are not benefited by steam
or electricity. or both. Yet no commu-
nifty invented these forces. Individuals
wrought out the wonders. The noble
man and lord of ancient days had at
command no such agents Of power as
the laboring man has today. A hundred
years ago musical instruments were
the property of the few. Today almost
every cottage has one or more musical
instruments. The phonograph gives
to the humbest toiler today what a
lord of the past could not have had
even by pawning his realm. The COM
munal plan would make the phono-
graph the property of everybody-that
is, If there should be phonograph
when the distribution takes place.
Perhaps there would be none, and none
of the various inventions which con-
tribute SO much to the worlds prog
reSs and comfort Inventors royalty
Is about all that stands In the way of
making the phonograph and other like
inventions as cheap and common as
the advocates of communal ownership
think they should be. But If Edison,
for instance, were to offer to forego
his immense royalties, provided his
physical burdens should be shared pro
rata by every user of his inventions,
would the public take him up? Here
is the idea in a nutshell. Things that
count in our lives are cheap consider
ing what it has cost somebody to pro-
duce them.
Money doesn't stay with the indi-
vidual now as it once did, perhaps.
The reason is that money will pur,
chase so much that Is worth having
for the work it will do Formerly all
kinds of machines, all kinds Of books,
of pictures, of works of art, were rare
and expensive. Only the fortunate
few could have them. Now these
things are common, they are cheap,
and almost everybody has all they
need and can use. ]. P. Morgan gets
no more delight looking at picture
which costs him a fortune than does
the man who buys a reproduction Of 1t
for dollar or two maybe less. Nor
gan owns it, of course-owns its ticti-
tious value-but may never see 1t more
than half dozen times in his life, for
he doesn't live in his picture galleries.
The other owner sees his copy every
day, If he wants to, and is the pos
SCISSOR of whatever real value there is
In the picture.
After all, there may be fallacy in
this idea that distribution of owner
ship will increase happiness. The
wider distribution of things, the In
finite multiplication of rare and good
things, bringing them within the reach
of the purses of the mass, has already
revolutionized life within century.
The end of this process of multiplied
tion and distribution is not in sight,
and it may reasonably be questioned
whether the competitive system is,
as some contend, inadequate to give
everybody a square deal in everything
necessary to human happiness.