The Washington times., 1935-02-28

49, game.
l. An alleged
Lewis Haney "emerge ncy''
sum of eight hundred and eighty
million dollars was tackled on to
the four billion dollar relief, and
Congress was told that they must
act quickly to save people from
starving. But it soon became
evident that no such sum as
eight hundred and eighty million.
dollars was needed, and that
there was no emergency. So that
rider" didn't work.
2. There was the old "blank
check" confidence game-"just
sign and trust the President,
Farley, IckeS, ct al"
But this time, our representa-
tives wanted to know why it was
for exactly four billion, and what
it was going for.
At matter of fact, there is no
particular reason for four billion.
Apparently the argument is that
three and a half million employees
are to be given work at $50 a
month. That makes 81 billion
a year. Then you allow double
that amount for materials and
overhead, which makes about
four billion. But you can't prove
that the $50 is the necessary
amount. nor that four billion is
the limit for the total.
3. Then there is the haIf-cOn-
cealed Santa Claus stuff. No
plan or list of projects is sub
mitted-prObably there is none!
But a list of millions of dollars
that might be expended in each
State is published in the pa
pers-bait!
When Senators want facts,
and hold up the bill, they are
told (frOm Hyde Park that they
will hear from home. What is
meant? 1 think that sinister
suggestion is that various
mayors, governors, and others
who want money spent on local
projects" will bring pressure to
put the bill through. The smell
of pork"
Now this game doesn't work so
well. First there was a tight
squeeze on the question Of substi..
tuting direct relief for the waste
full work relief" scheme, thus saw
ing 2 billion dollars a year to the
nation. Then there was a move to
have the proposed work done
under private contract, thus pre-
serving some Semblance of "busip
ness" and private initiative.
Finally came the defeat Of the
Administration on the $50 "Secur-
ity wage" point. Organized labor,
inflationiStS, and SentimentaliStS
combined in favor of larger spend.
ing, and demanded that work re.
lief" be paid at the prevailing
wage" rates.
The A. F.. of L. argues that the
proposed relief wage would tear
down existing wage scales. Well,
that is just what is needed in the
building trades. But, more than
that, labor fails to see that noth-
ing would hurt labor more than
paying regular wages for such re-
lief work. It would make the
whole wages system meaningless.
to pay real wages for unreal
work"
The only justification for wages
lies in products made which can
be sold and bring in earned in.
come. Therefore, to demand that
regular wages be paid for relief"
Is to confuse earned income with
charity, and to turn labor into an
economic joke.
Furthermore, the more you
increase the cost of this "reIief
work." the more you push the
government into debt, and
hasten infIatiOn-which would
certainly hurt the wage Garner.
(Of course, the government
might reduce the number Of
persons receiving this wOrk-re.
lief dole, but this is unIikely.)
Now there is talk of COM
promise by paying the prevailing
wage" and having the individual
workers" work only long enough
to earn $50 a month. This illu.
strates how empty high wage rates
are, when laborerS can't find EN-.
ployment at such rates. What's
the use of saving your face" If
you can't fill your stomach.
Both parties are wrong. This
is a relief proposition. Relief
should be given directly, and as
cheaply as possible. Work relief''
under present conditions, is an
economic monstrosity. It ruins
business. 1t ruins the nation
financially.
Nn