The Indianapolis times. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1922-1965, 1934-12-17
BY DIR. HARRY ELMER BARNES


lDREsDENT ROOSEVELT publicly dedicated
himself to the rehabilitation of the For
gotten Man" and the economic corolary OF this.
namely, driving the money-changers out Of the
national temple.
The Bureau Of Internal Revenue, quite un-
Intentionally no doubt, plays rather mean
trick on its chief by publishing the figures on
incomes during the calendar year 1888, the
first year of the New Deal These figures re-
veal the fact that the forgotten man became
even more economically obscure and submerged
than in the last year Of Mr.. Hoover. while the
rich hogged more of the social income than
they did during the last twelve months OF the
rule of that obdurate "Old Dealer"
We have had the situation before the de-
preston refreshed in our minds by the remark
able book of Leven, Moulton and Warburton on
Americas Capacity to Consume" This pointed
out that even in the boom year of 1929 no less
than II per cent of American families had in
comes of less than $4,000 year, while the 81 per
cent of families at the top-thoSe with incomes OF
income as the AZ per cent of the families at the
bottom.
NTHER careful statisticians such as Paul H.
~ Douglas, showed that comparable condi-
tons continued during the depression. While
wage payments fell off by more than one-haf
as did farm income as well, interest on bonds
any dividends at all held up remarkably we'll
1t was e-emnently the poor mans de-
preston, shared by some speculative brokers
who found the picking less lucrative after 1929.
Absentee owners of corporate property and
claims have suffered little relatively by COMPARE
son.
The income statistics just published for 1888
tell the same old sad story which portends the
inevitable folding up of capitalism unless draS-
tically revised edition goes to press right away.
Secretary Wallace, who knows what it is all
about, Immediately pointed out that the figures
indicate that the income Of the top $4,000 very
rich exceeds the income of the bottom 100000
who enjoyed any income at all
The fact is that out of a population of over
125,000,000 with an adult working population of
48000,000-at least 100000 who could work if
they had jobS-only 3,660105 reported any in
come at all. Of these only 1731116 had in
comes large enough to be taxable under the
Federal income tax law with its not too gen.
erous exemptions.
ONCE more the rich become richer and the
" poor become poorer Net incomes of cor
porationS increased by $6540000O0 or a 81. IS per
cent gain for absentee owners, while the net in
come OF individuals decreased by approximately
$340,000000.
Especially striking was the fact that those
with incomes of less than 900 suffered
considerable loss of income, as compared with
SZ5,UUU
increased both with respect to the number of
individuals and the total net income they re-
celved. Moreover, the number of those with
incomes in excess of 81 100000 increased from
20 in 1882 to IS in 1888
To those interested in saving capitalism in
the united States this is more dolorous ex-
hlolt than bound volume of all the annual
issues OF the Daily Worker or the financial sta
tstlcs OF Soviet Russia. Especially is this true
Wnen one couples with it the fact of the strike
OF capital in 1888 and realizes that those who
hogged the national income also refused to put
thelr dlsproportionate proceeds back to work
again IN the effort to revive prosperity. Thew
simply raked the kitty" and put in their socks
In a recent column presented elaborate sta
ClSClcS 10 SHOW that most of the national buv-
ing Is done by those with low incomes and that if
10 per cent OF American families could eniov
an income OF $4,000 each their demands would
SO increase that we could not even resist tenn
porary return of prosperity. The implications
OF tnls should be as clear and impelling to An
Grew William Mellon or j. Pierpont Morgan as
TO one OF the hundred neediest cases. of The
New York Times
The Administration spokesman have of 1ate
peen telling us that the New Deal does not nro-
pose TO tamper with business Well, this husi-
ness OF hogg1ng the social income must be tam
pered with, or there will be little legitimate busi
ness OF any kind in a decade. Such decIara
Con is not communistic babble but hard-boiled
capltalistic selfishnesS