manslup and courage-. We could, first
°' all, a,lo],i a constitutional amendment limiting federal taxation to 25 per
cent of individual incomes. This would
cllininale the worsl evil in our present
system- the- Communisl principle of
Sfaduated rates — and it would compel
lne governmenl to economize. Governmenl -imply wj]| not ,.,,i ,,,,1 wasteful
and dangerous spending unless II has to.
we would put a limit on the governments power to tax, your governmenl
ould have to slop giving your monej
lvay to foreign governments, spending
'0ur money on housing stuilii'S in
.. "<■■'■ anel publishing brochures on lhe
"e histories of North American wood-
**e could also adopt an amendment
making it illegal for lhe federal govern-
'it to compete in business wilh its
!'u" citizens. This would eliminate
Untless socialistic enterprises on which
Uoney has ben squandered for
' We hail these two amendments as
^ginning, we could cut the federal
-^'■riimciit back to legitimate size.
f'Ml"l il- activities to valid and legal
/""'""is. ami make substantial inroads
,||| "'"ing lhe national debt. We could
./'!' repeal ihe Income Tax Amen,I,noil
r.", rem°ve forever the possibility of the
'''"T-,1 „ ■ I e •
. "' governmenl s embarking on
s,!,'.' ,'.'r l,ilrr>' Hopkins orgy e.l' taxing.
' "'bug. and electing.
on,, Was one *'de- Now comes the
"liosit,, Bide — arguments of some
l"" I)0 N0T think lhal lhe Income
' * Amendment should he repealed.
I K "lea of repealing the Income Tax
j^nendmenl is preposterous.
_"niting the federal government's
r to levy taxes would place such a
fiscal slrail jacket on the- government
lhat it could nol meet lhe grave crises
of depression, inflation, and threats of
Every other major government on
earth has the freedom to raise taxes as
needed to nice! national emergencies.
How could our government compete
or even survive — in lhe present world
of continuing international tensions if
its hands were tied — if its most vital
power (the laving power) were
When the Sixteenth Amendment was
proposed, lhe country voted for it because il permitted the most equitable
kinel eif tax possible.
Il has enabled us lo create a modern
tax system, based on the principle lhal
people should be taxed according lo
their ability lo pay.
The argument that the progressive income tax has hurl lhe country is ridiculous. The gross naiiien.il product almosl
doubled between 1939 ami tin- first half
of 1951. rising from 179 billion dollars
le, 324 billion dollars. Employment rose
from 16 million lo 62 million. Weeklj
wages in manufacturing increased about
in prr cent. Corporate profits rose from
five billion dollars lo 18 billion dollars.1 '
PEOPLE JUST WORK HARDER
High tax rates do not reduce incentive. When taxes are high, people work
harder and assume greater risks in order
lo maintain a given standard of living.
If a man pays a lax of 20 per cent, he
must increase hi- income in order lee
have the same take-home pay he would
have without taxes. Obviously, a man
will work harder when he has to meet
larger obligations whether they are a
new car, a television set. a new baby, or
higher taxes. He will aim al a standard
of living which se-e-ms right to him. and
-Wide World Photo
lr,f,'Jn9 into i sennower distributed souvenir pens to congressional leaders Aug. 16 after
(B *° riot,, y tne new rQx hill granting reductions to many. Witnessing the ceremony were,
l»" ■'• R» ' S,yles Brid9« (R-N.H.l. Rep. Dan Reed (R-N.Y.), seated; Rep. Leo Allen
uV,Us°n Id '. JosePn VV. Martin (R-Mass.l, Rep. Leslie Arends (R-lll.). Sen. Homer
"Secre, •'• Sen- Levere'' Saltonstall (R-Mass.l, Rep. Charles Hailed, (R-lnd.l.
orY of the Treasury Marion Folsom. and Sen. Eugene Millikin (R-Colo.l.
°RUM NEWS, March,
—Wide World Photo
Harry Hopkins (right) shown as he talked
with reporters in Washington, D.C., prior to
reporting to President Truman on his mission
to Moscow. Hopkins' trip to Russia was as
the President's special emissary.
he- will work to achieve and maintain ii.
I lie- fad that lhe nation's output has
double,I during lhe past ten years proves
lhal individuals ami corporations carry
een economic activities at high levels of
efficiency even if taxes arc heavy,1"
I he opponents of the Income lax
Amendment argue' lhal il lends to discourage production. .Nothing could be
farther from the truth. Not only do the
revenues eli-rive-d from the income' lax
enable lhe government lo be Ihe largest
single consumer, which makes more
jobs; bul lhe availability of these re-
sources allows the government to control lhe economy in .-nil, a way as lo
avoid lhe- nlil "boom and bust ' lhat used
lo plague our system. Tin- largest consumer, following scientific principles,
can keep our economy running on an
,wi'ii keel ami can maintain a constant
high level of prosperity.
The conditions existing at the lime of
lhe Declaration of Independence and of
lie- framing of the Constitution have
vanished. Prior to 1900. Americans
could afford lo be "rugged individualists"; bul ih'- Industrial Revolution
brought in its wake such a highly interdependent seeeie-lv thai the rights of society became more important than the
rights of the individual. Society has the'
righl lo protest when one man amasses
great wealth while other men starve-.
Seicii'iv has the duly of protecting itself
and its members againsl ihe economic
anarchy eef a greedy few. Society grants
to ihe- individual equal rights with all
other individuals, but requires him to
exercise those rights as a responsible
member eef society.1"
Tin- w heeli' is greater than lhe sum
(Continued on Pug,- 63)