Albuquerque morning journal. [volume] (Albuquerque, N.M.) 1903-1926, 1919-09-04
Would Not Limit it
to LabOrers for Wages

| Editor Morning Journah
May / question one. sentence in yoIr
editorial in this mornings Journal in
which under the caption Labor Day
you say many good things? Here in
Albuquerque, broken down by too
ardous work as an employer of labor,
am only one among, suppose thou
sands of health seekers. At home
was an active executive officer in a
manufacturing business in an eastern
state, which must be my excuse for
| asking for a hearing.
I The sentence referred to is this:
E'Labor should have insurance against
lill-health, accident and old age" /
| Will say nothing about accident in
lsuranee. One by one the states are
taking it up, and seem inclined To
lido at least ample justice to the work
| ing people, laws always being framed
SO as to carefully protect those who
are sure of returns in their pay en-
yelope for time and energy expended,
and leaving out those who, while they
and their dependents might be equal
| ly Inconvenience and suffer no less,
from injury, Gripping or death, look
to no paymaster but are obliged to-
| depend on their own business ability
| for returns from their time and en-
ergy.
III health is by no means confined
to laboring people, and old age is
manifestly the common lot of all
classes and of every individual for
| tunate enough to live to attain it.
am not contending that no provision
should be made to help really needy
| people who are Ill or too old to work.
But / do contend, most emphatically,
that there is no reason for drawing
the line at laboring people Why, IN
the name of common sense, should
! labor-mcaninb presumably those
people who work for wages that must
| be paid by their employers whether
their labor is productive of profit or
not, who are free to change their JOB
at q moments notice or without
notice if they see anything that looks
more attractive or more tempting to
them, who carry no burden of respon-
| sibility for the success of the business
that is. furnishing them their live
| lihood ana who would lose nothing
except their having to look up a new
job if that business should totally
collapse--why, | repeat, should this
class of citizens be singled out for
insurance against i'll health and old
age? Why should the man, for in
stance. who drives a milk wagon for
| pay, receive financial aid if he is
| taken sick, and the man who drives
his own milk wagon and sells his own
milk, who has to replace the bottles
/ lost or broken, stand the loss when
the milk sours or is split, comply with
all of the health and sanitary regula-
tons and pay the farmers their price
for their milk even though all these
things cuts his profit down to less
than the paid milk mans sure wages
| or even at times cuts it out altogether,
gets no assistance however i'll he may
| be, or however his family may suffer
therefrom Let the government if 1t
| will, provide for those whom i'll
health or old age has rendered in
capable of providing for themselves,
hnd who from incompetence, eX-
travagance, bad luck or any other
cause, have failed to accumulate
enough to tide them over the lean
days, and let the entire public he
taxed to provide the necessary funds.
Fut do not do this thing for labor,
! but for everyone alike who needs it,
and for no one who does not need
lit
/ Let me add one more thought and
7 am done. You say Labor should
have full days pay for full days
work" Yes, and capital should have
a full days work. for full days pay
| The one is no more fair and just and
self-evident than the other.
A READER.
At Southwestern Presbyterian San
itorium.