Evening star., 1961-08-13

concentrations of labor and indus
try power. 1t is time to halt this
trend by revising our basic eco
nomic laws to reflect the funda-
mental fact that the common in
terests of labor and management
exceed their special interests and
that the freedom of both depends
on industrial competition that
protects the general public.
Bosis for National Policy
In a free society, competition
and separate enterprise co-opera-
ton based on our proven principles
Of sharing economic progress
among consumers, employees and
stockholders must be the founda-
ton of national economic policy
and private economic activity.
If any group monopolizes all the
benefits of progress, the Nation
suffers from maldistribution and
imbalance.
This frequently happens when
the basis for future sharing by
one or two groups is determined
in advance without regard to the
interests of all. For example,
wages or dividend payments fixed
this year for the next three years
could be so far from the progress
results in 1864 that the labor or
stockholder share could be either
excessive or deficient. Needed is
an equitable method of sharing
actual progress, not hypothetical
progress with employees.
Here is the dilemma:
The collective bargaining laws
are promised on the principle Of
monopoly and compulsory Coop
Grafton.
The antitrust laws, and those
relating to industry, are promised
on the principle of competition
and voluntary cooperation.
Thus, we have built-in conflict
in our basic economic laws.
Both employers and unions mass
their Gargantuan economic power
or their not inconsequential po-
litical power for collective bar
gaining purposes. The collective
bargaining laws impose no real
limits on the power moves of
either side.
If we maintain this pattern, and
continue in this direction, the
government is going to step in and
control bargaining. This would
bring government control or de-
termination of wages. If this is
done, similar control of prices is
inevitable. This could prove fatal.
With such controls, believe the
economic freedom and flexibility
required for needed levels of prog
ress and progress sharing will dis
appear. Government control and
government decision will be sub
Stituted for the decision of free
organizations, and ultimately of
the people as consumers.
Anti Trust Lows Inadequate
Our antitrust laws also need to
be modernized and strengthened,
not relaxed. They miss today's
target. They fail to reflect ade-
quately the conditions of today's
competition. They do not provide
for economic birth in fully estab-
ished basic Enthusiastically for
economic death. Many such in
dustries are now dominated by one
or two companies. This excessive
concentration is experiencing
growing intellectual and political
attack and declining public con-
fidence.
Either the American people are
going to have confidence in the
ability Of the competitive principle
to protect their interests in the
market place, or they are going to
turn to their public servants for
the exercise of the type of control
they think is needed.
Our economic progress has been
Importantly the result of suf-
ficient number of sensitive power
centers free in their response 20
change. This has produced su-
perior industrial flexibility and
strength.
Capitalization of wage and price
control in government could prove
as inflexible as present agricul-
tural control.
In period when two-thirds of
the people in the world are still
hungry, we approach our agri-
cultural problem primarily on an
isolationiSt, nationalistic basis.
Our granaries bulge. Yet our pro-
grams deliberately curtail the pro-
ductivity of our land and arti-
ficially inhibit our advancing tech
nology.
internationally, we are an is
land of prosperity in the midst of
world poverty and starvation. We
are like rich man in very poor
village, who has more than he
personally can consume, but arti-
ficially raises costs and prices and
doesn't adequately help others to
help themselves improve their own
economic circumstances.
Fifty-five per cent of United
States farmers desire to be free of
all controls, according to the polls.
Whether or not such polls are an
accurate reflection of farm
opinion is not necessarily the i'm
portant point. The vital question
Is whether on centrally con-
trolled basis we are approaching
the agricultural problem soundly
from the standpoint of our present
world interest rather than from
the narrow past based on economic
nationalism and political interest.
The technology of agriculture
in this country has moved like
lightning in the last 20 Or 80 years.
Farm costs have been slaShed and
on a volume production basis
could be slaShed further. There