Keyword
in
Collection
Date
to
Facts Forum News, Vol. 5, No. 4, April 1956
File 038
Citation
MLA
APA
Chicago/Turabian
Facts Forum. Facts Forum News, Vol. 5, No. 4, April 1956 - File 038. 1956-04. University of Houston Libraries. University of Houston Digital Library. Web. November 20, 2019. https://digital.lib.uh.edu/collection/1352973/item/1119/show/1087.

Disclaimer: This is a general citation for reference purposes. Please consult the most recent edition of your style manual for the proper formatting of the type of source you are citing. If the date given in the citation does not match the date on the digital item, use the more accurate date below the digital item.

Facts Forum. (1956-04). Facts Forum News, Vol. 5, No. 4, April 1956 - File 038. Facts Forum News, 1955-1956. University of Houston Libraries. Retrieved from https://digital.lib.uh.edu/collection/1352973/item/1119/show/1087

Disclaimer: This is a general citation for reference purposes. Please consult the most recent edition of your style manual for the proper formatting of the type of source you are citing. If the date given in the citation does not match the date on the digital item, use the more accurate date below the digital item.

Facts Forum, Facts Forum News, Vol. 5, No. 4, April 1956 - File 038, 1956-04, Facts Forum News, 1955-1956, University of Houston Libraries, accessed November 20, 2019, https://digital.lib.uh.edu/collection/1352973/item/1119/show/1087.

Disclaimer: This is a general citation for reference purposes. Please consult the most recent edition of your style manual for the proper formatting of the type of source you are citing. If the date given in the citation does not match the date on the digital item, use the more accurate date below the digital item.

URL
Embed Image
Compound Item Description
Title Facts Forum News, Vol. 5, No. 4, April 1956
Series Title Facts Forum News
Creator
  • Facts Forum
Publisher Facts Forum
Date April 1956
Language eng
Subject
  • Anti-communist movements
  • Conservatism
  • Politics and government
  • Hunt, H. L.
Place
  • Dallas, Texas
Genre
  • journals (periodicals)
Type
  • Text
Identifier AP2.F146 v. 5 1956; OCLC: 1352973
Collection
  • University of Houston Libraries
  • Facts Forum News
Rights No Copyright - United States: This item is in the public domain in the United States and may be used freely in the United States. The item may not be in the public domain under the copyright laws of other countries.
Item Description
Title File 038
Transcript merely by comparing the number of families or the number of people with the number of dwellings or the number of rooms. The 1950 census reports an average of 3.5 persons per occupied dwelling unit in the United States, compared with 3.7 persons at the end of World War II, 3.8 persons in 1940, and 4.8 persons in 1900. The total number of dwelling units in 1950 was 2.3 per cent greater than 1940, whereas the same period saw a population increase of less than 15 per cent. These figures certainly indicate that most of the so-called housing shortage stems from disruption of the market mechanism rather than from a decline in dwelling facilities. Such a comparison of persons per dwelling, of course, tells nothing specific about the condition of the dwellings or the happiness or health of the residents. It has been charged that some Americans are now forced to live in slums and substandard dwellings. And it undoubtedly is true that some Americans are living in homes which other Americans would classify as uninhabitable. But it is equally true that some Americans eat and drink food and beverages which other Americans consider unfit for human consumption. Some farm operators till soil so unproductive that other farm operators would classify it as unfit for farming. Some persons dress in a manner seen by others to be inadequate or positively indecent. Even the manner in which some Americans worship God is frowned upon by others. Who is to determine which ones of us are living in substandard fashion? And then what? is exercised by those who occupy more stately mansions. Their idea seems to be that force occurs or has been exercised whenever there develops the least deviation from a condition of absolute equality of material possessions. By such "reasoning" they conclude that it is a proper function of government to provide a standardized dwelling unit for every citizen. Any individual who might attempt to disturb this dream of social equality by improving his own unit would have to be taxed back into line! PARTIALLY EQUAL The foregoing illustration will be challenged by the majority of social levelers as going beyond their objectives. They will say that their goal is not absolute equality — that only the lower 5 per cent or 10 per cent or one- FORCED TO BE INDEPENDENT Aside from the occupants of prisons and other places of detention, how many American citizens actually are being forced to live in any particular place? Just what is the nature of this so-called force over those who dwell in the "slums"? Am I being forced to live in my own modest home just because there are others living not too far away in homes which are castles by comparison? .... There may be those who will say that any person who eats an apple is forcing all other persons to do without that apple. And perhaps there are some who then go on to conclude that the eating of a single apple forces all others to do without apples. At least this seems to be the logic of persons who say that people are being forced to occupy slums and substandard dwellings.'They imply that such force Page 36 third of the population really deserves to be equalized upward. A favorite stunt of politicians who want to be known as defenders of private enterprise is to argue that, of course, we don't need one hundred thousand units of public housing a year — we only need eighty thousand units! But this kind of a breaking point leaves no stopping place in principle. If all the people are to be taxed to build the new homes which some of the people cannot afford, this very tax will drive others down into the eligible "substandard class." There will always be a lowest 5 per cent, until absolute equality is reached. And the disrupted market place will not be allowed to indicate by way of price changes just who wants what. If 5 per cent of the productive efforts of individuals are diverted, through the taxing powers of government, to the building of housing which a free market would not justify, then it must follow that something otb than housing will not be made av* able for consumption. . . . There much to indicate that some persi" ^ ■ , live in the "slums" by choice rato ti,,,.. than necessity. It is conceivable th these occupants consider other tlii"! more important than improved ho" ing, so far as their own spending concerned. Streets filled with park' oyer a automobiles and roof - tops jam°jj time \t ■ with television aerials suggest tJ tbe Dl,,-M„ possibility. And if a man wants in tj)( spread his earnings by a formula so* hi some led-car 1 J"Pplv (.1 bnd • ""le us a a better li For pur ?ssitme th |Be mav i peri it is .'e buildei jt"t,iu »"-> '-'"""'fe-j aaj a. i«x...u.« — ^ -(en sells i what different from the average > Pect to se the community, is that necessa" for aDout ■ wrong? If the majority, by way of gj "lent cost ernment, is to prescribe the kind * house in which a poor man is to IP, #-l-**-fc»-i 4-rt 4-l-\*-* eniYin i I . -.t i i-/ ., ■ ^171 I I then to the same degree wi aid majority prescribe how the we* and even the citizens of ordii* means are to live. If it is a new ho1! CtM today, will it not be an adequate <J In 0t|10r on every table, or a new car in csl jjttorrj onlv garage, tomorrow? And, of course, "0,0oo or of these things would be quite ^ i^Oiint' — t ^;i lie™- I, % new h or inese tilings wouiu oe qtuiu - , derful, except for the fact that government cannot thus provide ^ P*native single item of goods or service^ *Jtl, rt,].lt]N the he hoi text «ntv residc NhJy'h sixtv Out' yea al yea these persons except by taking it "V TSttis from someone else who has workc' ttj,|(. i)()^ produce it. There is no denying that an **J teet's drawing of the bright and en ful new homes of a proposed hoi>* project is more beautiful than a pn, graph of the "slums." "And it *', cost the community a cent," the) I ally say. Such clever devices infl"e| L " opinion in favor of the project- . t these tire the things which CM seen. AN UNPLEASANT SIDE a vj.this is , There is another side of this p>c™ if.^' do th. however, an unpleasant side wh'c ,t \^ "W'ul ]{( picture-painters prefer to keep t«\ t^ '" 195 the wall. It depicts the taxpayer ^ ers 0f p; the "favored" community and °^ «l|^'lrul entire nation whose property v/'.^ }'t;i'lrs in us, taken to finance such housing P'"L *e| "hi. Tl •at th, ns reast 5f"nst c *°*e of „ NO < P" point AvV1,ousc v'rdi- l.And as quart 01 us lb nev * li vel thus taken mighty \ rtra household hel| overburdened mother. Or it The money tnus ttiKcn niig"-,. •■«. hired some extra household help >'; |'Patroni. conse EC "f« have brought the doctor in time> . Johnny developed pneumoD'l might have been invested in the and facilities which provide i'1I might have provided real empl"^ opportunities for those who are ■ put "on relief" instead. These ai'1',- of the things which are unseen- which cause "slum" conditions j pand until they become unive'""^ Sii°yv,.,„ljc|< developing as the unforeseen J ! f,'r: quences of a public housing pr°' Facts Forum News, A/"'"' 'Inowi '"!»»<! fa, Koiply b fjfallfa, Hi It "I1IVI
File Name uhlib_1352973_v005_n004_038.jpg