Evening star., 1946-01-12
Letters to The Star
Offers a Further Contribution to
Southern Wage Problem


To the Editor of The Star:
The January column by Lowell Mel
lett discussed Richard A. Testers ar
ticle in the Virginia Quarterly Review
pertaining to the Southern wage diff
ferential. After quoting long passage,
the columnist seems to conclude that
the author says argument for a low
wage economy in the South is bunk"
While Prof. Lester contends that ira
ditional arguments for Southern wage
differentials have been weakened in the
past decade, find no evidence in his
article that a differential has no JUS
tification whatsoever. Indeed, the econ
omist suggests that the most impor-
tant factor underlying North-South wage
differences is the high rate of popu-
lation growth that causes rapid ex-
pansion in Southern labor supply. He
points out that this seems to be con-
firmed by Canadian experience where
Quebec's population has been increas-
ing faster than Ontario's and the level
OF wages also has been lower in Que
bee. 1t would be interesting to see how
a restudy of the whole wage differen-
tial question (as proposed by Prof Les
teri in the light of recent experience
would improve our knowledge of ex-
panding and equalizing postwar job
opportunities, irrespective of regions.
For example, would the higher mini
mum wage level seemingly favored by
Prof. Lester) retard or facilitate the
needed expansion Of an estimated half
million jobs in the South during the
next five years?
The major problem of the South re-
mains its low average annual income,
however interesting it may be, to re-
mind ourselves that statistical averages
pertaining to this question are mere
composites of irrational variations. Pre-
sumably, a more complete study might
prove undeniably that value of output
per man-hour in the South as an aver
age condition Is lower than in the
North. What are the causes? Low
capital equipment per worker, lower
efficiency of Southern workers and lack
of an optimum distribution of South
ern population as compared to that of
the North are reasons commonly ad-
vanced. Prof. Lester discounts the i'm
portance of the first two factors prob
ably based on his recent studies financed
by the General Education Board. How
ever, it is doubtful if his conclusions,
regarding capital equipment per work
er, are final since careful inventory
Of productive property by States pre-
viously lacking would be needed.
If purchasing power is to be raised
adequately in the South during these
postwar years, we must become better
informed on how far the differential
rate of growth in Southern population
represents the proper approach to solv-
ing the problem. Taking this approach
might help reveal the need for equal
izing provision for education. 1t would
shed more light and less heat on wheth-
er trade union policy, as applied, deters
or facilitates full employment in the
South. For example, how far does
trade union policy set barriers to I'M
skilled workers becoming trained and
retrained for semiskilled and skilled
occupations? The answer to this ques-
ton already has been needed in the
South in connection with certain skilled
workers displaced by machinery and in
need Of mobility blocked by trade union
policy. W. P. M.