The Waterbury Democrat., 1940-09-12

No one knows how this dynamite
was struggled into the text of the
bill. No one will admit knowing
anything about 1t. This is natural,
for the usefulness of any under
cover agent Is gone as soon as his
identity is known. The House has
already voted to repeal this part Of
the act, but the Senate has thus far
failed to cooperate. Therefore, the
power to confiscate any industrial
plant and decree the rental which
will be paid for its use still exists,
and it will continue as long as the
Senate does nothing.
Another Illustration of the tech
nique to promote collectivism is pro-
vided by the squeeze play that is
being built up to conceal the failure
Of defense production and to shift
the blame for that failure. It was
known months ago that special
amortization provisions would be re-
quired in large investments were to
be made for this production. Instead
of enacting appropriate legislation
promptly, as was urged by some
when the Revenue Act of 1910 was
under consideration the order went
out to delay it until an excess
profits tax could be passed. There
is no necessary connection between
the two subjects. When bill is
finally passed they will be in sep
arate titles, but there will be no evil
dence of a relationship which COM
PEELED them to be written or passed
together.
But the delay will provide an ex-
cellent alibi for the failure to get
defense production under way by
private enterprise. It will therefore
afford a stronger, case for still larger
government expenditures, advances
and loans to build an equip plants.
New Deal policy is thus running
true to form. BY sufficiently ham
pering and penalizing private enter
prise and activity, it can be shown
that immense public spending is
necessary, since only the govern
ment is free to act.
The delay has already provided
an argument for the -thumpers
who are carrying the oratorical ball
for collectivism. They are saying
that American business puts profits
before patriotism, and they are de-
manding that proper punishment
be melted out by CONSUMPTION of
wealth. The collapse Of the arma-
ment program is thus put off onto
business.
CONSUMPTION of wealth may sound
all right to those who may think
that they own none. But an amaz-
ing number of people have a stake
in this wealth. At least ten million
persons, or / in 10 of the popula-
ton, own stock in business corpor-
atoms. There are forty-two mil
lion depositors in savings banks.
or almost in every three persons.
One person out of every two has a
life insurance policy. Consumption
of American business will impair,
possibly destroy, the assets which
support these investments of the
great American public.
Wealth in the broad sense in
cludes more than land, buildings
and securities. The right to wages
is property right, and Il all private
property rights are abrogated, then
the right to ones wages will also go.
Wage earners will be told how much
they are to get, where and how long
to work, and how much to produce.
Strikers and loafers will be shot.
These are only a few of the I'M
pleasant things that viii follow
wealth CONSUMPTION.
The totalitarian objective is to de-
stroy democracy. Among the dicta-
tors most helpful assistants in do
ing this are the demagogues who
propose to destroy the right of the
individual to own property, to make
contracts, to receive and save or
dispose Of his wages or other income.
Wealth CONSUMPTION means the loss
Of these rights. hence it means the
end of democracy.