The star-independent. [volume] (Harrisburg, Pa.) 1904-1917, 1915-04-10

The following letter was received yesterday by
the editor of the Independent:
Editor, Star Independent.
Dear Sir: Your editorial in last evenings paper on the
bill introduced by for Graduated Income Tax,
somewhat amusing
You lead infer that you regard the welfare of the
State dependent its capitalists wealthy folk and
that should all move cautiously and speak very easy"
lest they the capitasts) take their kits
stances AS Pennsylvania with native pedigree of
generations do not think that the workers would
suffer much through the loss of the masters, whom they
now pay so handsomely. AS long have our noun
tans and valleys coal and other greath wealth
an energetic workingclass to plough and harrow
dig and delve and weave and fashion, very well
spare the kind of people whom you regard of great
dusrial consequence and regard otsam on our
social pool.
With thousands of workers around u.s. idle and suffer
ing with great accumulaton of wealth in the of
nonworkers, it is possible that the day predicted by
Macauey is within reasonable distance when the Huns and
Vandas generated among will rise and destroy nation
We aiming to prevent this We asked that two mil
lions of State be devoted to public employment to
give at least part of the idle chance to get through
lions for Constabuary but to relieve the hard
ships of its impoverished workers.
so friend, don't lament though the capitalists do
be forced to You and have courage and ingenuity
enough to get along without them And please
me of nsncerty of act in presenting the Income Tax bill
Never was more sincere in my lfe If there anything
connected with the bill that regret it is that it has been
made to pander somewhat to uppercass prejudice by
hxlnS the maximum income at ten instead of at two
thousand dollars.
If it don't pass this session, there's good time acoming
JAMES H. MAURER,
Socialist Representative.
Harrisburg Pa, April 9, 1916
We believe that SALARY of $4,000 a wear is
enough remuneration for any man s services in any
position-save perhaps in a few cases where the
recipient of the salary is required to pay out of his
own pocket certain expenses other than those of
maintenance of self and family, which his position
imposes on him; as, for instance, United States
ambassador abroad who must provide elaborate
quarters for entertaining, etc. If Mr. Maurer could
devise practicable plan to limit SALARIES to
that amount it might be good thing.
But SALARY by no means constitutes all Of a
man S income in all cases. A man might have
$oOO,00O invested in an industry in Pennsylvania
from which his income, at 5-per cent would be
$2o,OOO year, exclusive of any salary considera
tlon 1t law, such Mr.. Maurer proposes were
enacted in this state, this man would be required to
pay 900 of this $25 900 income back to the state
and whether or not this would be just to him. it is
certain that he would make haste to take his
100000 out of the Pennsylvania industrial field
and put it to work in another state where he could
get the whole of the $4,000 income
Such withdrawal of $5OOOOO industry from
pennsylvania would mean the throwing of large
number of Pennsylvania workmen out of jobs and
would make the present conditions of unemploy-
ment, which Mr.. Maurer most commercially seeks
to improve, only that much more serious.
We are entirely in sympathy with Mr. Maurer 3
ambition to help the unemployed of the state. but
we cannot see how this income tax plan would
serve to accomplish that end.
|