The Indianapolis times. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1922-1965, 1933-12-06

! w
ington that the professors were I'M
happy because he was not listening
to them enough.
But what really had happened
was reasonably clear The reforms,
however desirable in themselves
and for the long run, were not pro-
noting recovery. In the absence of
sufficiently rapid recovery, the
reforms themselves did not prosper
and we're becoming inordinately diff
flcult to apply.
The charge which is most fire.
quently brought against the Presi-
I dent is that he is an opportunist
who veerS now to the right and
now to the left, following no single
course intellectually and clearly.
Those who bring this charge do
not, I believe, appreciate as we'll as
he does the circumstances which
compel him to work out, step by
step, a combination of an ordinary
capitalistic recovery and a rather
preaching social reconstruction.
What is the principle of an ordi-
nary capitalistic recovery? It is, r
believe, that private initiative based
on the expectation of private profit
revives when the deferred demand
for goods exceeds the accumulated
supply, and the cost of producing
new goods is low enough to be
profitable.
Obviously, measures which dis
courage initiative or raise costs be-
fore there is an increased volume of
profitable sales must delay a CAPT.
talistic recovery.
NTOW what is the premise of the
l. social reconstruction, 1t is, 1
believe, that uncontrolled private
initiative produces excessive profits
that are distributed badly for a few
boom years, followed by devastat-
ing unemployment and no profits
in the ensuing depression.
How to stimulate initiative for
immediate recovery and yet to con-
|
| been the Presidents problem To |
| find way of stimulating and yet |
controlling has not been easy, nor
has he been entirely successful. |
But no one can fairly judge his |
| administration who does not take !
/ into account the dual nature of his |
/ task
The question naturally arises
whether he is right in attempting
| to find workable blend of Stimu-
latiOn for recovery and control for |
reconstruction. My own view is
! that he had no choice but to make !
the attempt. In the first place, had !
he concentrated EXCLUSIVELY on the |
orthodox measures of recovery, he |
would not, I believe, have achieved |
much of it.
1t is the fashion to point out that |
Great Britain seems, to be recover |
ing without resort to drastic and |
novel measures. The example is
misleading. Great Britain has
relatively simple industrial economy
compared with the complex indus
trial and agricultural economy of
the United States. If comparisons
are to be made with foreign coun-
tries, one would have to take Great |
Britain, plus Canada and Australia, |
imagine them far more closely in |
ter-related than they are. and then |
ask whether the measures which |
have been taken in the United
Kingdom would have sufficient in |
| Australia.
THAT is the fairer view, and
l. looked at this way, what do
we find? We find that on such
fundamental matters as the value
of money, the treatment of debts,
fixed charges, and wages, there have
been different policies pursued in
Britain and in Australia. Stanley
Baldwin and Montague Norman do
not have to make policies that work
equally we'll at both ends of the
empire. But Franklin Roosevelt
does have to make policies that
work in New York and in Iowa.
But it is not merely that the Or
binary measures suitable to an in
dustrial recovery are inadequate to
cure the naladjuStmets of the ag-
ricultural depression one must also
remember that the industrial crisis
in the United States has disclosed
moral failures in the financial and
industrial world which a popular
leader could not ignore even if he
wished to.
Thus there is an emotional i'm
petus behind the reforms, an in
sistence from the conscience of the
people, that inexorably compels far
reaching reforms.
We then may ask whether it was
possible for the President to con-
centrate on reform and proceed I'M
hesitatingly to more socialized
economy? 1t was not possible for
him to do that. Unless his reforms
are accompanied by an economic re-
vival, they will be resisted and dis
credited and if persisted in will in
the end provoke an extreme con-
sentative reaction. without an &C
companying revival there is only
one way in which a social order
can be radically and quickly re-
constructed.
That is by dictatorship which
ruthlessly suppresses manifestations
for discomfort Therefore, the en-
thusiasts for the new deal are hide
ously shortsighted when they COM
plain that the President shows too
much concern for those things
which would stimulate private mi
tiative and promote confidence.
They do not realize that economic
improvement is the tide which alone
can keep the ship of the new deal
afoat
Copyright. 1888. by The Tines