The Waterbury Democrat., 1940-07-09

things they have concludes After this war is over it is al- most inevitable that the world will be divided into four great trading areas. They will be:
 1. Japan and China, comprising about 450,000, ,000 people and fall- ing under the totalitarian dom- ination of Japan.
 2. Germany, which will exercise life and death rule over about 400,O00,00O people, including all the nations of Europe.
 8. Russia, which will govern trade of about 100000, 1000 people.
 4. The United States, Canada and South America -- if we can still keep the latter under the Monroe Doctrine. These will re- present about 350,000,000 people. In the first three of these econ- omic areas, foreign trade will be completely controlled by govern ment monopolies. For instance, Germany operating on a slave wage scale and a socialized system, will be able to cut prices and under-sell the United States throughout South America. AL ready Germany is offering steel in Rio de Janeiro and Buenos Aires for September delivery far under prices quoted by U. S. steel mills.
 Japan, which is sure .o indus trialize China, also will pay slave wages, and will do the same. U. S. ALTERNATIVES
 Therefor the United States, in order to continue any kind of ex- port trade whatsoever, will have to do one of four things:
 l. Reduce wages to level ap- proximating the starvation stan- dards paid in Germany.
 2. Reduce profits, or eliminate them altogether, if German prices are to be met.
 3. Subsidize industry and virtu- ally take 1t over, as under the Nazi, Fascist, and Soviet sys- temS.
 4. Create a foreign trade mOno- poly. This is what the Russians have done for more than a de- cade, and what the Nazis have been doing more recently. All exports abroad arc sold through the government and imports are purchased the same way.
 It is this last system which New Deal advisers consider least ob- jectionable of the four, and upon which they are concentrating.
 Naturally, the handling of U. s. exports and imports through a government monopoly is a long, long way from the Hull trade trea- ties, which are based upon most favored-nation treatment, low tar- if walls. and the principle that every nation should treat the other as it wants to be treated.
 This highly laudatory principle, now so out-dated by Hitler, has been one of the chief bones of con- tention inside the New Deal. Sec retary of Agriculture Wallace has fought it from time to time, and once got into a row with Hull over the insignificant question of plac- ing a quota on French walnut sales.
 HULL'S ROWS
 Professor M0ley, when Assistant Secretary of State. had terrific rows with his chief over export import trade quotas and the right to barter. Even in 1883 Moley thought Hull's trade treaties were old-fashioned.
 Later George Peek, head of the Export-Import Bank. took up the cudgels with Hull and fought for government quotas which would fix the amount Of goods to be i'm. ported from certain countries.
 In each battle the veteran Sec. Fetary 0f State won. The fight with Moley resulted in his reslena. ton. Peek hung on for months, but finally was purged.
 New. however, New Deal Blas. ter minds have come around te exactly She same theories pre-. posed by eeley and Peek ss eKs eept that they so even further. They maintain iB this Aay and aee, with ihe fnli weight ef ibe German Government hsFleFing feg trade, Q single .. \. business