The daily Nome industrial worker., 1917-09-18
MORE REVENUE STUFF.

The discussion on the Revenue Bill found two classes of senators, each with two pet theories for pay ing for the war.
 One was the Lafollette theory that the war should be paid for during the war by taxation impos-d for the required amount and the other that it should be let drag along through the coming y2ars and the expences of the war met by loans.
 Lafollctte ran up ag2inst the ad- min:stration policy; the admiH.scra- ton having decided at the out break of the war with Germany to float loans. It is likely this policy was adopted not from any inherent approval of it as a matter Of finance but because of the fact that the Entente nations needed urgently the money or. which is the same thing the re-establishnent ot their credit ill this country.
 The Senate Finance Committee adopted the administration policy and proyid, ip the present revenue bil. as they reported it no way ot meeting the annual costs Of the war expect by leans. The taxation nolicv is not sufficient to meet the expenditures and the deficit must be met by loans
 Most economists for reasons hereinafter to be referred to oppose this policy as unwise. They ins.st ,hat the proper policy is to pay for the war as the war proceeds and only are loans justifable when the country $ unable 10 meet the pay mcnt he-e and now.
 T>c estimated wealth Of the country is something over $22O.- O0O.OOO.OO0 and of that amount two percent of the American people own l7S,OOO.O00,000 This en Jrm- ous w,alth owned by those who con trol the country is in itself more than sufficient to finance tie w&r for an indcfn tC period, even with ont taking stock of the annual ln- cremelt which productive lebor adds ther,to. But it is because Of the fact that it is impossible to raise taxation equivalent in amount 10 the payment of the war eXpendl- lures as We go along without tax ing care that this two per cent of the people will pay @ per cent oI the war costs, this fortunate sec ton of the nation as represented in Congress ins:stG that th2 loan system be preferred.
 Indeed it hes already received the official approval of Wall Stre2t, The main objection to extending the payment of these expenditures through a number of years is the fact these loans which will be used to meet immediate expenses will in the form of bonds be held by the few in the country and to pav them, the nation will be taxed at large, the many paying tribute at a definite rate of interest to the few. It further saddles the power that comes from money centraliza- ton in the hands of the few and adds to the power and prestige of the Money Trust indefinitely.
 There is the practical objection urged also that nov when the gov ment is in a position to extract war profits and high income tax ation it is the time to do it.
 If peace comes tomorrow the war profits so abnormally high will sooner or later vanish and this very real taxable entity is no longer existing and the government cannot get its hands upon it.
 It is that reason which makes abnormal profits at the rate of eighty per cent
 There is vet another reason why the government should establish the principle of paying for the wal while the war is on. Every loan raised to meet the pay ment of the wGr tends to further .ntiata prices. It unquestonably cheapens gold by intensifying the supply. II infatcs values by sym