Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1929-05-21

1t used to be a favorite cry Of the
political speaker-especially the kind
known as 'ranting demagogue"-to an
nounce with a mournful expression,
THE rich are getting richer, and the
poor are getting poorer"
A very significant analysis Of the
trend of financial conditions has just
appeared from the pen OF DR.. Morris
A. Copeland of Cornell University, and
the kernel of it lies in the table showing
what proportion of the Nations total
income is received by 10 per cent of
the people-the richest 10 per cent
for 1t demonstrates that the pesSimtstic
orators cry is without substantial basis.
As DR.. Copeland puts 1t, IF the dis
tribution of income in any year were
equal, any 10 per cent of the popula-
ton would receive just 10 per cent OF
the total income. Hence the excess
of the proportion of income over 10 per
cent, which is received by the richest
10 per cent of the people, measures the
inequality Of the distribution in that
year."
The chart shows that the upper 10"
in 1918 received 1871 per cent OF the
total income of America. The per-
centage has fiuctuated from year to
year since then, but the highest pro-
portion was in 192l-the year of finan-
cial depression for the masses-when
the upper 10" received 1853 per cent
of the total. The following years
proved more nearly normal, and the
rich 40 per cent of population" re-
ceived in 1928 325 per cent of the total
income, in 1924, 32.4: in 1925, 32.9, and
in 1926, 32.9 per cent.
Since the proportion going to the
rich in 1918 was 33.l and in the last
two years reported it was 329, it does
not appear true that the trend greatly
favors the rich-it remains about level.
In short. the national distribution gives
the wage Garner fair proportion, as
compared with previous years, what
ever may be thought of ever letting 10
per cent of the people get 32.s per cent
of the total income. Socialists, of
course. will dispute the justice of such
an uneven distribution at any time, but
economists deny any injustice, provided
it can be shown that, even so, the So
cialists are getting more comforts and
luxuries than they would get if they
lived under purely Socialistic organiza-
ton.
No one can dispute the statement
that times have materially improved in
recent decades, not only in luxuries for
the rich, but in comforts and what pre-
viously were counted as luxuries for both
rich and poor. 1t is a familiar quirp
to say, Give us the luXurieS and we
will dispense with the necessities"
The world is growing more luxurious
in it's demands: so there is not the re-
hottest prospect of saturating the mar
ketS with overproduction, provided We
produce what the consumer wants
good food, good clothing, good trans
portation and radio and entertainment
and whatever adds to the joy Of living
for some. chewing gum; for others. to-
bacco or lipstickS or rouge. LuXurieS?
Yes, but necessities for the supplier of
the markets.
1t is indeed thriftlesS mechanic who
cannot ride to his daily work in a
chariot which no king could have boast
ed 80 years ago. He may use second
hand machine, but it runs, and he sits
at ease upon a cushioned seat. speeding
20 or 80 miles an hour.
y
Furthermore, there is no such inc
quality OF incomes of the various lines
of production as has been too often
argued by political calamity howlers"
In 1913. agriculture received $5,000.-
600, 900 out of total of $35. TOO, 900, 900
IA per cent. In 1926 agriculture re-
ceived So 900 600 900 and there were
leWer farmers Ill proportion lett on the
land to divide up that gross sum than
had been there In 1913. True it
amounted to only 10 per cent i'll place
of IA per cent OF the whole, but that did
not alter the fact of the concrete gross
income OF agriculture. Was it to the
detriment of agriculture that its home
market had increased in wealth beyond
its own increase? Would the farmers
have been better off II the rest of the
country had become poorer?
\ X X
Manufactures in 1918 received 81 per
cent OF the totai income and identically
the same percentage in 1925. but the
product of manufactures in 1918 sold
for only $1,000 100000, while in 1926
the sales amounted to $17,800 0o0, 000
New lines, "unclaSsified." amounted in
1913 to $7,1OO 100000 and in 1926 to
SIT, 800, 900, 900. Americas total in
comes In 1918 amounted to $35, 000.-
000. 900 and in 1925 To $85. 700 900 600 !
q clear increase of $4,000, 900, 900 a
year.
vance toward a most splendid achieve /,