Milford chronicle., 1955-11-11
PULL OFF SHEEP CLOTHING

PULL OEF SHELF OLO1
The socialist-minded groups in and out
of the government have marshaled all their
artillery in fighting the Administrations
partnership plan Of electric power develop
ment-a plan which holds that the primary
responsibility rests with local people and
local groups, with the federal government as
sisting in such non-cOmmercial factors as
food control.
The officials who advocate partnership
have come in for a hail of bitter political
attack. But, to their great credit, they have
not run for cover Instead, they have been
making a successful effort to explain part
nership, to show why it is a sound way to
meet this country's vast power needs, and to
show, in addition, the kind Of thinking that
underlies the socialist position.
AS an example, Undersecretary Of the
Interior Davis recently said: The time has
come to start getting down to facts, to strip
away some of the political bunk and to pull
the sleeps clothing off some of the Social
lists who are utilizing this issue (poWer) to
achieve political detectives" He pointed out
that partnership is method OF utilizing the
best efforts of all concerned, on the federal,
state and local levels alike. He added: "Ours
is the method that will utilize all OF the pO-
tentialities of all of us. Theirs is the method
of a narrow restriction to a single source
the Federal Government-and failing in that,
power shortage. :"
Mr.. Davis was speaking particularly of
the Pacific Northwest, but his views apply
with equal force to the rest OF the country.
It should be emphasized that this is not just
a fight between public and private power
interests. The nothing groups are
as much opposed to major hydroelectrlc de-
velopment by state and local public bodies as
they are to development by. the tssspaylng,
business-managed utilities. They want a So
cialized, tax-subsidized federal monopoly and
they won't settle for less. If their objective is
ever reached, this country will be well along
the road that ends in total government.
&~1O&&
Mr.. PENNEY COULD REPEAT!
A short time ago j. C. Penney, founder of
the chain store system which operates some
I $50 outlets in all 48 states, celebrated his
8Oth birthday. Mr.. Penney opened his first
little store half a century ago, with mini
mum of financial resources.
The anniversary caused Godfrey M. Leb-
har. editOr-in-chief of Chain Store Age tC
ask and answer this question: Gould Mr.
Penney Repeat?" Mr.. LebhaF said, IN part
Certainly retailing has made great strides
physically in the past so years. When we
| look at the great stores we are putting uE
today. we may well wonder how they cOulC
! be much improved But we still don't have
enough of them, in the first place, and GER
tainly the last word has not yet been said OF
how to design stores to meet the public neeC
most effectively. Of far greater significance
however, is the fact that we still have far t'
90 inreducing the costs Of retail distribution
i through more efficient merchandising meth
Il ods and further operating economics.
"COuld Mr.. Penney repeat his success to
dav? We haven't any doubt about it
many young men, now coming up in variou
chains, will demonstrate, we feel sure, tha
the gates of opportunity in the field OF retail
i ing are still wide open"
What Mr.. Lebhar says applies with equa
force to retailing other than chain. In re
falling no one has monopoly on intelligence
innovation, advertising and promotions
ideas, the willingness to work, or anything
else. The wise old adage that nothing i
constant but change" fits retailing to I
Great frontiers Of progress remain to b
opened and explored.
&GD&&
WHY RETAILERS FAIL
XVbv dO retail businesses fail?