The Indianapolis times. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1922-1965, 1934-12-15
Liberal Viewpoint
BY DIR. HARRY ELMER BARNES

by DIR. HARRY ELMER BARNES
ID The British Way to Recovery" BY Her.
bert Heaton. University Of Minnesota Press. 50.
20 International Economic Relations" By
Robert NJ Hutchins and others. University Of
Minnesota Press. So.
go Social welfare in the National Recovery
Program" Edited by James H. S. Bossard The
Annals Of the American Academy Of Political and
Social Science, 81.
THE alleged economic recovery of Great Brit
Il ain is a strong talking point with both
President Roosevelt and his opponents The lat
ter assert that England has recovered without
resorting to the supposedly bureaucratic and ex-
pensive methods of the New Deal. The Presi-
dent does not hesitate to use the assumption Of
British recovery as an example OF national CO.
operation with the Government, Including even
the cooperation of the bankers.
Professor Heaton examines tile actual facts
with respect to the recovery of Ems land, Australia
and Canada. Those who have been groaning
about American taxes should read his figures
with respect to the terrific tax burden involved
in the English recovery program. A man with
salary of $4,000 pays an income tax Of $1585.
In the place of two or four-cent tax on gaso-
line there is a Decent tax.
Instead of a strike of capital, however, such
as we have witnessed in this country, English
capital has made determined effort ito provide
cheap ana ABUNDANT CreQ1C 1Or LIE SGdtS anu 1OI
private enterprise"
The trade policy of England has been revo-
lutionized. Free trade has been abandoned and
protective policy introduced, mitigated only
by imperial preference. The farmers have been
paid bounty for producing more rather than
for curtailing their product.
But the fact remains, and this is what Pro-
fessor Heaton does not make clear, that Eng
land has not recovered. 1t has simply mitigated
the depression and made conditions somewhat
less severe than they might otherwise have been.
This has been made possible not merely by the
above measures but also by the fact that Great
Britain had a we'll developed system of social In
surance in operation before 1929.
DURING his visit to the United States in the
- early summer of the present year, H G.
Wells never lost an opportunity to assure his
American friends and audience that all talk
about British recovery was woefully misleading
Even the good showing of the budget was largely
due to the income derived from the drastic estate
taxes on two of the greatest OF British fortunes
The report of the important Committee on
international Economic Relations has now been
made available to the public. 1t is definite,
if restrained, rebuke to the current trend to-
ward economic nationalism. 1t presents series
of recommendations designed to strike decent
balance between national security and the drift
toward narrow economic nationalism. 1t de-
clares that:
I'm order to advance the recovery of the
world, the United States must promote the in
terchange of goods and services among nations.
We believe that this policy is indispensable to the
recovery and development of the United States
THE American government must labor TO
maintain peace. 1t should do everything in its
power to remove impedimentS to world trade.
1t should by action as rapid and dramatic as
possible endeavor to reverse the trend toward
economic isolation. Otherwise, it must be pre-
pared to accept drastic dislocation and reor-
ganzation of industry and agriculture, of capital
and labor"
DUBLIC relief appears to be the one stable
il and practicable element in the present Ad-
ministration policy and the relief program OF
the Administration under Mr.. Hopkins has been
it's most creditabe achievement. The volume
edited by Professor Bossard gives us the best
general survey that we have of the problems,
methods and achievements of federal relief
under the New Deal.
One of the most valuable papers in the col
lection is that by the eminent authority, Mr.
Homer Folks on Making Relief Respectable"
Perhaps the best point he makes is the exposure
of the fallacy that the recipient of public re-
lief is getting something for nothing. He points
out that the majority of those receiving relief
usually have already contributed a lifetime or
part of lifetime of labor in supporting the sys-
tenn which comes to their aid in the time OF an
emergency.
He logically attacks all elements in relief
system which tend to make it humiliating to
those in want, and emphasizes the fact that no
system of relief can take the place OF COM
prehensive scheme of social insurance.