Toledo union journal. [volume] (Toledo, Ohio) 1942-current, 1947-07-18
By
Clayton
Rusch
Chairman

of the nations conomi
wealth.
When their writings are
carefully analyzed we find
that most authorities on eco
nomics do not disagree with
this V lew. The economists,
from the days of Adam Smith
to the present time are more
or less students of the eco
nomic situation and therefore
more objective than the in
dustrialist and their literary
stooges who seek to justify
exorbitant profits.
1t is because of their OBJ
jectivity, which sometimes re-
suits in some scathing criti-
cisms of monopolies, that eco
nomists are often unjustly
criticized by apologists for the
monopolist's interests.
The contention that eco
nomic wealth is produced by
the applicat ion of labor
(manual and mentaD to the
raw materials has often been
alta cked by the Peglers,
Bromfields, NJ a | ! o n S, Law
renee and others of their ilk.
They attempt to prove that
the capitalists are not entitled
TO any profits. The claim is
rather that profits should be
in proportion to wages.
Labor leaders contend that
human rights are more impor-
tant than property rights; that
wages must be high enough
to enable the producers to buy
back what they produce; that
living wages must come out of
profits and that if wage in
creases are merely absorbed
by price increases, the work.
ers do not gain anything and
the economy is not stabilized.
STABILITY
While there Is plenty of
literature published by vari-
Gus branches of the labor
movement, explaining the fact
that in order to avoid the
causes of depressions and wars
we must have stable econ
omy (an economy in which
wages are balanced so that the
workers can buy back what
they produce and busin ess
operate on a profit sufficient
to keep the owners wealthy
and the plants operating) the
fact remains that the few big
industrialists who own most
of the wealth of this nation
are raking in gigantic profits.
Real wages, that is, purchas-
ing power, is declining,
1t remained for one Of the
better known monopolist apol-
ogists to demonstrate that the
reactionaries are also aware of
the basic econo m c facts,
Said Westbrook Pegler in
his column of June 9th 1947:
workers actually have no
right to holidays and vaca-
tions with pay. Why should
an employer give them pay?
Would 5000 employees think
of giving the company a days
work or two weeks work
free? OF course, it's possible
to write a clause into a con-
tract providing for pay for
holidays and vacations, but
actually other workers who
buy the products of the plant
pay this extra expense added
to the final costs. Yet some of
the people believe their union
agents when they are told
the boss is giving them some
thing, willingly or not"
In those words of course
Pegler admitted that the work
ers earn and pay for their
own holidays and vacations.
The conclusion is obvious that
unless the workers get paid
for holidays and vacations
they are being gyped out of
something they have earned
and paid for.
For years Westbrook Pegler
has attempted to prove that
the employers make wages
possible and the workers are
beholden to the industrialists
and bankers for their livli-
hood. Then he blunders into
the truth and knocks his
phony rgume ents into a
cooked hat.
In his column of June 9th,
Pegler lost in his own literary
entanglements wound up
by proving that the labor
leaders are right in their con
tention that the workers make
it possible for the bosses to
make a profit and are there