Evening star., 1934-10-21
New Deal to Cost SIS 5,OOO, 900, 900 by 1886;
Must Be Paid by Taxes, Says Observer

were returned to the people of New
York.
In Montana, on the other hand,
for every 81 of taxes paid, SIS was
returned to the people Of the State.
In Mississippi, for every 81 paid, SIG
was poured back into the State. In
Texas, for every 81 paid, SO was
poured back into the State. Vermont
received about 81 for every 81 paid
in taxes. New Hampshire received
about 81. On a population basis
similar conflicting figures are found.
Oregon, for example, received about
$50 per head of population, whereas
New York received only s32. The
average in the Eastern States was in
the neighborhood of $40.
That Subtle Touch.
While in the process needed relief
has been afforded to many of the
unemployed, it has been accompanied
by subtle generalization and by a
severe economic dislocation. wher-
ever Government pay has been higher
than the local wages, it has created
idleneSs, dissatisfaction and a break
down of morale. Unfortunately the
c. w. A. and P. w. A. played large
| part in this decentralization. Owing
| to the arbitrary fixing of Govern
ment wages by youthful theorists in
Washington, Uncle Sam arranged to
pay for relief work wages which in
many sections Of the country were
higher than those received in regu-
lar employment.
The result was inevitable-that
many people left regular work to get
the higher pay from Uncle Sam for
doing little or nothing. This hap
pened in the South and even in rural
New England. The effects on local
business and agricultural conditions
are easy to imagine
But even more subtle poison lies in
the fact that millions of persons
there are said to be nearly 10000, ,00O
individuals in the country receiving
to look to Uncle Sam for support
This means not only that many mil
lions are learning to accept the phi
losophy that society owes them q
living" regardless of whether they
give anything in return; but it also
offers the opportunity for the building
up of big bureaucracy to administer
the distribution of these funds.
In this lie three great dangers-one
that the life blood Of the nations eco
nomic system will be slowly drained
off to support large part of the pop
ulation in permanent non-productiv-
ity; two, that large political follow
ing will grow up supporting the Gov
ernment in power in return for ben
eflts received, and, three, that the bu-
reaucracy itself will become so great
that 1t will dominate the whole po-
litical system. History has shown that
bureaucracies end up by crushing the
political structure under the weight
of bureaucratic privilege and bureau
cratic ineficiency.
These by-products deserve separate
consideration. They should properly
be weighed in connection with the
advantages to the country of those
of the New Deal policies that are con-
structive. Here We are more concerned
with the dollars and cents aspects oi
the New Deal. These moral factors
bear on the problem, in so far as they
| tend to make it difficult for the ad-
ministration to reduce expenditures
The experience of Europe-and under
the scandalous American pension sys-
tem-shows that to cut of Govern
ment grants given for the support OF
political friends is almost impossible
In other words, we may expect to
see slow but steady increase in the
Nations taxes during the next decade
Unless the administration succeeds in
performing miracles, we shall find
that by 1886 for every 50 which the
taxpayer hands out to pay for the
liquidation of the World War, he will
be handing out 81 to pay for the New
Deal 1t may be that this is cheap
at the price-but the average tax.
payer would like to know a little more
about just what he is getting for his
money.