Evening star., 1933-07-14
Country Now Needs More
Workers at Higher Pay
To the Editor of The Star

To the Editor of The Star:
Many letters have appeared recently
IN the Star approving and disapproving'
CT the marriage clause regulating mar
rled workers where both are employed
In the Government service; those who
approve of the claWe contend that it
will provide more jobs for people and
that II there is one bread winner in the
family, 1t isn't as bad as there being
none. Being without a job is a great
misfortune, but + don't quite see how
the wife or husband getting out of the
civil service will provide more jobs. For
this reason: The majority left out
were in the lower salary scale. those
with large salaries supposedly being in
Key positions and their respective mates
couldn't be spared. The lower salary
scale Is plenty low for living expenses
in Washington. But, where husband
and wife's combined salaries amount to
say $500 or $4,000 year, on one-half
that amount all they could buy was the
actual necessities OF life and carry very
little insurance. On the Joint amount
they could buy a modest home, a
modest car and radio. Perhaps these
aren't necessities to life, but the chaps
in the factories, the statesmen, the
manufacturers, the bricklayers carpen-
terS and such, who make and sell and
build these things have to have buyers
for these commodities or else their jobs
go out of existence and their families
Starve.
This country. in my opinion, needs
nothing SO badly as more people in the
salary class between $4,000 and $4,000.
That class can buy modestly the things
on the market that make for the daily
bread Of these who produce them They
might even allow some one once in a
while to clean their house, maids and
such needing an existence, too. What
may seem q luxury for some people to
CWn, is the Sustenance Of life to those
that have them to sell. All 1 can see
that forcing these lo"salaried married
people on half their income does is to
provide Jobs for people who want to do
the particular line of work that those
married workers do. but it takes away
livelihood frCm those who have to de-
pend for their living on the things a
calaried person between S3.500 and
$4,000 can buy. YoI can't buy a home
and car and take out insurance and
at the same time support a family on
81 ,620 to 81 900. You can exist on
bun and a glass of milk il necessary,
but with the wealth of this country
should this be necessary?
Most of the married couples working
nave learned from experience the hdrd-
ship of having their income diminished
by having to support old parents, mostly
because these parents didn't earn dur
ing their working years sufficient to put
aside some for their old age. Credit
should be given those in their efforts to
break up this cycle. which would mean
in turn that their children support
them. or that they go childless. An old
age pension. widows pension and per-
haps a disabled pension might help I
honestly believe if the Government
would offer a bonus to the salaries Of
married men if their wives would re-
sign. the hinges would be broken on
most doors of Government Offices in
the wives haste to get out and give their
husbands the chance for the larger
salary. The majority are working from
necessity and not pleasure.
MRS GEO. w. COOPER.