Yanks transform atoll into strategic base
By Robert D. Miller
…
Navy credits Blandy for its anti-aircraft
Oversees production at 10,000 plants – was commander of the Utah
…
Labor Day of 1942 presents big opportunities to workers
Organized labor, which has attained unprecedented strength through the liberal legislation and the policies of the present administration, is now advancing to greater power by reason of the industrial conditions of the war. Its ranks grow; wages rise; its treasury swells. Never before has labor been in a position to exercise such dominant influence in the affairs of this nation. Never has it possessed such power for good or for ill.
On this festival day of labor, both its leaders and the rank and file should ponder the opportunities and the responsibilities of this great host of workers, who, unlike their fellows in many other lands, enjoy the gift of freedom, who are their own masters, who are rewarded for every hour of toil, who command the respect of those about them.
The one thought and purpose with which the mind of the American workers should be preoccupied today is that of preserving this freedom. Inspiration to this end may be gleaned from a contemplation of the plight of the enslaved of France and Belgium, of Norway and Poland, of Greece and Czechoslovakia, of Yugoslavia and even of the Reich, where the triumphs of three years have brought neither freedom nor bread.
The thoughts of workers today, accordingly, should resolve around the cherished heritage of freedom because, when the conqueror comes, it is the worker who is first enslaved. The dark history of the people of Europe during these tragic three years proves that this is the case.
In this highly mechanized war of today, the contribution of workers to victory is second in importance only to that of the fighting men, but there is little comparison between the sacrifices of the two. The soldier, for relatively meager compensation, apart from the personal satisfaction arising from the knowledge that a duty has been well done, endures separation from home, privation and the danger of death. For millions of workers, war means financial gain.
But unless it means something more than that, unless the worker is animated by more exalted motives than those concerned with finances, he cannot give to the war effort the contribution essential to victory. There must, of course, be a burning patriotism, the same spirit that drives a soldier forward in the face of a rain of flame and steel and sends a flier aloft to contend against odds that spell certain death.
It is not enough for workers simply to put in their eight hours. They, together with millions of other Americans, must match to the best of their ability the sacrifices which soldiers and sailors are making.
Nothing less is acceptable if those who remain behind, who enjoy the comfort of their own homes, their customary associations and the security that is preserved by the men in uniform on remote battlefronts and points of danger, are to be worthy of the men whom they send forth to do their fighting. Loyal labor can play a part of inestimable value in the achievement of victory. And labor, of course, has always proved to be loyal.
The old bridge and the Fortresses
Maj. Paul W. Tibbets likens the United States Flying Fortresses to the Brooklyn Bridge, indicating their rugged construction. It is an apt simile. But the Brooklyn Bridge can boast of mellowed experience. It is the veteran of two other wars and in one won itself something like wound stripes.
In the last war, fears for its wellbeing were expressed during the Black Tom and Gillespie munitions blasts. Years later, the old bridge was partially closed when it was discovered a cable had slipped in its saddle atop one of the towers. Speculation at the time attributed this condition to the explosions.
Nevertheless, the Flying Fortresses, though of very recent vintage, have something else. They seem to be bridging a much greater expanse with effective loads of bombs.
President Roosevelt’s message to Congress
September 7, 1942
To the Congress:
Four months ago, on April 27, 1942, I laid before the Congress a seven-point national economic policy designed to stabilize the domestic economy of the United States for the period of the war. The objective of that program was to prevent any substantial further rise in the cost of living.
It is not necessary for me to enumerate again the disastrous results of a runaway cost of living – disastrous to all of us, farmers, laborers, businessmen, the Nation itself. When the cost of living spirals upward, everybody becomes poorer, because the money he has and the money he earns buys so much less. At the same time the cost of the war, paid ultimately from taxes of the people, is needlessly increased by many billions of dollars. The national debt, at the end of the war, would become unnecessarily greater. Indeed, the prevention of a spiraling domestic economy is a vital part of the winning of the war itself.
I reiterate the seven-point program which I presented April 27, 1942:
To keep the cost of living from spiraling upward, we must tax heavily, and in that process keep personal and corporate profits at a reasonable rate, the word “reasonable” being defined at a low level.
To keep the cost of living from spiraling upward, we must fix ceilings on the prices which consumers, retailers, wholesalers, and manufacturers pay for the things they buy; and ceilings on rents for dwellings in all areas affected by war industries.
To keep the cost of living from spiraling upward, we must stabilize the remuneration received by individuals for their work.
To keep the cost of living from spiraling upward, we must stabilize the prices received by growers for the products of their lands.
To keep the cost of living from spiraling upward, we must encourage all citizens to contribute to the cost of winning this war by purchasing war bonds with their earnings instead of using those earnings to buy articles which are not essential.
To keep the cost of living from spiraling upward, we must ration all essential commodities of which there is a scarcity, so that they may be distributed fairly among consumers and not merely in accordance with financial ability to pay high prices for them.
To keep the cost of living from spiraling upward, we must discourage credit and installment buying, and encourage the paying off of debts, mortgages, and other obligations; for this promotes savings, retards excessive buying, and adds to the amount available to the creditors for the purchase of war bonds.
In my message of four months ago, I pointed out that in order to succeed in our objective of stabilization it was necessary to move on all seven fronts at the same time; but that two of them called for legislation by the Congress before action could be taken. It was obvious then, and it is obvious now, that unless those two are realized, the whole objective must fail. These are points numbered one and four: namely, an adequate tax program, and a law permitting the fixing of price ceilings on farm products at parity prices.
I regret to have to call to your attention the fact that neither of these two essential pieces of legislation has as yet been enacted into law. That delay has now reached the point of danger to our whole economy.
However, we are carrying out, by executive action, the other parts of the seven-point program which did not require Congressional action.
Price ceilings have been fixed on practically all commodities (other than certain exempted agricultural products), and on rents in war production areas of the United States.
This process of keeping prices and rents at reasonable levels constitutes one of the most far-reaching economic steps that this nation has ever taken – in time of peace or war.
Our experience during the last four months has proved that general control of prices is possible – but only if that control is all-inclusive. If, however, the costs of production, including labor, are left free to rise indiscriminately, or if other major elements in the costs of living are left unregulated, price control becomes impossible. If markets are flooded with purchasing power in excess of available goods, without taking adequate measures to siphon off the excess purchasing power, price control 'becomes likewise impossible.
Our entire effort to hold the cost of living at its present level is now being sapped and undermined by further increases in farm prices and in wages, and by an ever-continuing pressure on prices resulting from the rising purchasing power of our people.
Annual wage and salary disbursements have increased from $43.7 billion in 1939 to an estimated $75 billion in 1942. This represents an increase of 71%. To obtain a full appreciation of what that increase means, we should remember that $75 billion is more than our total national income was during any single year in the 1930s. Due to constantly increasing employment, overtime, and wage rate increases, the annual wage and salary bill for the entire country has been rising by more than a billion dollars a month.
It is impossible for the cost of living to be stabilized while farm prices continue to rise. You cannot expect the laborer to maintain a fixed wage level if everything he wears and eats begins to go up drastically in price. On the other hand, it is impossible to keep any prices stable – farm prices or other prices – if wage rates, one of the most important elements in the cost of production, continue to increase.
But even if the process of stabilization of all prices and wages at present levels were to be brought about, there would still remain the great upward pressure on the cost of living created by the vast amount of purchasing power which has been earned in all sections of the country. The national income has been increasing since January 1, 1941, at the average rate of 2% each month. This purchasing power now exceeds by an estimated 20 billions the amount of goods which will be available for purchase by civilians this year. The result obviously is that people compete more and more for the available supply of goods; and the pressure of this great demand compared with the small supply – which will become smaller and smaller – continually threatens to disrupt our whole price structure.
A recent study by the Bureau of Labor Statistics has shown very strikingly how much the incomes of the average of families have gone up during the first quarter of 1942. If we assume that the income for the first quarter of 1942 is a fair basis for estimating what the family income will be for the entire year, the results of the study show that whereas less than one-fourth of all families in the United States received as much as $2,500 in 1941, more than one-third will have $2,500 or more in 1942. This shows how much the purchasing power of the average American family has gone up as a result of war production and how essential it is to control that purchasing power by taxation and by investment in war bonds.
We also know that as the war goes on there will not be an adequate supply of all civilian goods; that only through strict rationing, wherever necessary, will these goods be equitably distributed. We are determined that no group shall suffer a shrinkage of its normal quota of basic necessities because some richer group can buy all the available supply at high prices.
In normal peace times, the ordinary processes of collective bargaining are sufficient in themselves. But in war times and particularly in times of greatly increasing prices, the government itself has a very vital interest in seeing to it that wages are kept in balance with the rest of the economy. It is still the policy of the federal government to encourage free collective bargaining between employers and workers; and that policy will continue. Owing to the fact that costs of production are now, in so many cases, being passed on to the government, and that so large a percentage of profits would be taken away by taxation, collective bargaining between employers and employees has changed a .great deal from what it was in peace times. In times of danger to our economy the government itself must step into the situation to see to it that the processes of collective bargaining and arbitration and conciliation are not permitted to break up the balances between the different economic factors in our system.
War calls for sacrifice. War makes sacrifice a privilege. That sacrifice will have to be expressed in terms of a lack of many of the things to which we all have become accustomed. Workers, farmers, white-collar people, and businessmen must expect that. No one can expect that, during the war, he will always be able to buy what he can buy today.
If we are to keep wages effectually stabilized, it becomes imperative, in fairness to the worker, to keep equally stable the cost of food and clothing and shelter and other articles used by workers.
Prices and rents should not be allowed to advance so drastically ahead of wage rates that the real wages of workers as of today – their ability to buy food and clothing and medical care – will be cut down. For if the cost of living goes up as fast as it is threatening to do in the immediate future, it will be unjust, in fact impossible, to deny workers rises in wages which would meet at least a part of that increase.
The cost of all food used by wage earners – controlled and uncontrolled – has been going up at the rate of 1.25% per month since the price ceilings were set in May 1942. If this rise should be permitted to continue, the increased cost of food to wage earners next May would be more than 15% over the level which existed when the ceilings were set.
This would be equal to imposing a 15% sales tax on all food purchased by wage earners. Obviously no one would consider imposing such a tax.
This drastic increase has been caused, and will be caused, chiefly by the fact that a number of food commodities are exempt under existing law.
In the case of these exempt commodities the increases are even more startling. The cost of such food used by wage earners has been rising at an average of 3.25% per month since May 1, 1942.
Prices received by farmers have risen 85% since the outbreak of the war in September 1939, and these prices are continuing to rise. Cash farm income, including Government payments, has increased from $8.7 billion in 1939 to substantially more than $15 billion in 1942. This is an increase of about 75%.
The movement of uncontrolled food prices since May 18, 1942, the date when price regulation became effective, has been so drastic as to constitute an immediate threat to the whole price structure, to the entire cost of living, and to any attempt to stabilize wages.
Within two months after the date that price regulation became effective, the prices of controlled foods actually fell 7/10 of 1%. But uncontrolled foods advanced 7.3% during the same period, and are still going up.
To give some specific examples: From May to August of this year round steak and pork chops, which are controlled, showed a slight decline; but during the same period lamb, which was uncontrolled up to July, advanced more than 10% and chickens have advanced more than 16%.
To take another example: Lard, which is a controlled product, dropped nearly 5%; whereas butter, which is uncontrolled, went up more than 6% or twice the normal seasonal rate. Oranges have gone up more than 25%, although the normal seasonal increase is only about 6 or 7%.
Uncontrolled agricultural commodities include some of the most important of the foods and include the grain foods necessary for livestock. When you consider that in this category are wheat, corn, oats, barley, rye, dry beans, cotton, sweet potatoes, apples, sheep, butter fat, wholesale milk, chickens, eggs, and oranges, you can realize how important these products are to the pocketbook of the housewife.
The greatest danger is in dairy products, which are, as you know, most important items in the American diet. Butter, cheese, or evaporated milk are exempt under the Price Control Act. The prices for these have been going up so fast that they constitute a serious threat to an adequate supply of fluid milk. Unless we are able to get control of butter, cheese, and other dairy products in the very near future, the price of milk in large cities is certain to go up.
If wages should be stabilized and farm prices be permitted to rise at any rate like the present rate, workers will have to bear the major part of the increase. This we cannot ask. The Congress must realize that unless the existing control over farm prices is strengthened, we must abandon our efforts to stabilize wages and salaries and the cost of living. If that occurs, workers and farmers alike will not only suffer a reduction in real income, but will bring upon themselves and the nation the unparalleled disaster of unchecked inflation.
The reason why price ceilings have not already been imposed on all food products is, as you know, that paragraph 3 of the Emergency Price Control Act prohibits such ceilings until farm prices as a whole have gone up beyond parity prices – far beyond – as high as an average of 16% beyond.
Although that restriction upon establishing ceilings for farm products usually is referred to as the 110% of parity limitation, it is much worse than that. The statute provides other limitations which are more drastic. Ceilings cannot be imposed, under the statute, on any product at a level below the market price on October 1, 1941, or December 15, 1941, or the average price for the period July 1, 1919, to June 30, 1929, or below 110% of current parity, whichever of those four levels is highest. As a result, the lowest average level for all farm commodities at which ceilings may be imposed is not 110%, but 116% of parity – some of the commodities going almost as high as 150% of parity.
Even more important is the psychological effect of such unfair privilege. It provides fuel for fires of resentment against farmers as a favored class. After all, parity is, by its very definition, a fair relationship between the prices of the things farmers sell and the things they buy. Calculations of parity must include all costs of production including the cost of labor. As a result parity prices may shift every time wage rates shift. Insisting that the ceilings on no farm commodity shall ever be lower than 110% of parity is asking for more than a fair price relationship with other prices.
In fact, the limitations on agricultural ceilings are now being cited by other groups as a reason for resisting economic controls that are needed in their own fields. The limitations will be a rallying point for such opposition as long as they are in effect.
As I urged in my message of April 27, 1942:
…the original and excellent objective of obtaining parity for the farmers of the United States should be restored.
Our policy with respect to farm products should be guided by three principles: first, to hold the line against inflationary price increases; second, to get the required production of necessary farm products; third, to maintain the principle of parity for agriculture.
Agricultural ceilings should be permitted at either parity or at the price levels which prevailed at some recent date, whichever is higher. In most cases the formula would preserve the general structure of wholesale and retail price controls, and would also call out the volume of production needed. Also, it would preserve the parity principle.
In regard to increasing the total of our food production, one of the worries that a farmer has today is the shortage of labor for cultivating and harvesting crops. The time is soon coming when in many parts of the country we shall have to use seasonally the help of women and grown young people. I feel certain the nation will cooperate wholeheartedly.
It not only would be unfair to labor to stabilize wages and do nothing about the cost of food; it would be equally unfair to the farmer. For we must all remember that the farmer’s wife buys many articles of food at the store for the use of her own family, and high prices hurt her pocketbook as much as that of the city housewife.
What is needed, therefore, is an over-all stabilization of prices, salaries, wages, and profits. That is necessary to the continued production of planes and tanks and ships and guns at the present constantly increasing rate.
We cannot hold the actual cost of food and clothing down to approximately the present level beyond October first. But no one can give any assurances that the cost of living can be held down after that date.
Therefore, I ask the Congress to pass legislation under which the President would be specifically authorized to stabilize the cost of living, including the prices of all farm commodities. The purpose should be to hold farm prices at parity, or at levels of a recent date, whichever is higher.
I ask the Congress to take this action by the first of October. Inaction on your part by that date will leave me with an inescapable responsibility to the people of this country to see to it that the war effort is no longer imperiled by threat of economic chaos.
In the event that the Congress should fail to act, and act adequately, I shall accept the responsibility, and I will act.
At the same time that farm prices are stabilized, wages can and will be stabilized also. This I will do.
The President has the powers, under the Constitution and under Congressional Acts, to take measures necessary to avert a disaster which would interfere with the winning of the war.
I have given the most thoughtful consideration to meeting this issue without further reference to the Congress. I have determined, however, on this vital matter to consult with the Congress.
There may be those who will say that, if the situation is as grave as I have stated it to be, I should use my powers and act now. I can only say that I have approached this problem from every angle, and that I have decided that the course of conduct which I am following in this case is consistent with my sense of responsibility as President in time of war, and with my deep and unalterable devotion to the processes of democracy.
The responsibilities of the President in wartime to protect the nation are very grave. This total war, with our fighting fronts all over the world, makes the use of executive power far more essential than in any previous war.
If we were invaded, the people of this country would expect the President to use any and all means to repel the invader.
The Revolution and the War Between the States were fought on our own soil but today this war will be won or lost on other continents and remote seas.
I cannot tell what powers may have to be exercised in order to win this war.
The American people can be sure that I will use my powers with a full sense of my responsibility to the Constitution and to my country. The American people can also be sure that I shall not hesitate to use every power vested in me to accomplish the defeat of our enemies in any part of the world where our own safety demands such defeat.
When the war is won, the powers under which I act automatically revert to the people – to whom they belong.
In March and April 1933, this nation faced a threatening domestic situation calling for the most drastic measures. The Congress, alive to the needs of that day, formulated and enacted whatever was required to do the job before it – without long debate, without party politics, and without heed to the pressures of any special group looking for advantages for itself.
I need not argue the point that the situation facing the nation today is infinitely more critical than it was ten years ago. We are fighting a war of survival. Nothing can yield to the overall necessity of winning this war, and the winning of the war will be imperiled by a runaway domestic economy.
As a part of our general program on farm prices, I recommend that Congress in due time give consideration to the advisability of legislation which would place a floor under prices of farm products, in order to maintain stability in the farm market for a reasonable future time. In other words, we should find a practicable method which will not only enable us to place a reasonable ceiling or maximum price upon farm products but which will enable us also to guarantee to the farmer that he would receive a fair minimum price for his product for one year, or even two years – or whatever period is necessary after the end of the war. Every farmer remembers what happened to his prices after the last war. We can, I am sure, if we act promptly and wisely, stabilize the farmers’ economy so that the postwar disaster of 1920 will not overtake him again.
The farmer, instead of looking forward to a new collapse in farm prices at the end of the war, should be able to look forward with assurance to receiving a fair minimum price for one or two years after the war. Such a national policy could be established by legislation.
In computing parity, we should continue to use the computations of the Bureau of Agricultural Economics made under the law as it stands today. And in determining whether a commodity has reached parity, we should include all the benefits received by the farmer from his government under the AAA program, allocable to the particular commodity. For it is unfair to give a farmer a parity price, and, in addition, to pay him benefits which will give him far more than parity.
I have confidence that the American farmer who has been doing so much in the battle of production of food will do as much in this struggle against economic forces which make for the disaster of inflation; for nobody knows better than the farmer what happens when inflationary, wartime booms are permitted to become postwar panics.
With respect to point seven of the program of April 27, 1942, we have made certain credit rulings designed to curtail unnecessary buying; and whatever else has to be done along these lines will be done.
With respect to point six, rationing is now in effect on some commodities, and, when necessary, will be extended to others.
But with respect to point one – a fair tax program – that still waits upon the Congress to act.
One of the most powerful weapons in our fight to stabilize living costs is taxation. It is a powerful weapon because it reduces the competition for consumers’ goods – especially scarce foods.
The cooperation and self-restraint of the whole Nation will be required to stabilize the cost of living. The stabilization of the cost of living cannot be maintained without heavy taxes on everyone except persons with very low incomes. With such increases in the tax load, unfair tax distribution becomes less and less tolerable. We can rightfully expect the fullest cooperation and self-restraint only if the tax burden is being fairly levied in accordance with ability to pay.
This means that we must eliminate the tax exemption of interest on state and local securities, and other special privileges or loopholes in our tax law.
It means that in the higher income brackets, the tax rate should be such as to give the practical equivalent of a top limit on an individual’s net income after taxes, approximating $25,000. It means that we must recapture through taxation all wartime profits that are not necessary to maintain efficient all-out war production. Such provisions will give assurance that the sacrifices required by war are being equitably shared.
Next to military and naval victory, a victory along this economic front is of paramount importance. Without it our war production program will be hindered. Without it we would be allowing our young men, now risking their lives in the air, on land, and on the sea, to return to an economic mess of our own making.
The least that we at home can do for them is to see that our production increases every day so as to give them the weapons of war with which to fight, and to make sure that our economy at home continues to be one to which they can return with confidence and security.
President Roosevelt’s Fireside Chat 22
On inflation and food prices
September 7, 1942, 10:00 p.m. EWT
Broadcast audio:
I wish that all the American people could read all the citations for various medals recommended for our soldiers, sailors, and Marines. I am picking out one of these citations which tells of the accomplishments of Lt. John James Powers, United States Navy, during three days of the battles with Japanese forces in the Coral Sea.
During the first two days, Lt. Powers, flying a dive bomber in the face of blasting enemy anti-aircraft fire, demolished one large enemy gunboat, put another gunboat out of commission, severely damaged an aircraft tender and a 20,000-ton transport, and scored a direct hit on an aircraft carrier which burst into flames and sank soon after.
The official citation then describes the morning of the third day of battle. As the pilots of his squadron left the ready room to man their planes, Lt. Powers said to them:
Remember, the folks back home are counting on us. I am going to get a hit if I have to lay it on their flight deck.
He led his section down to the target from an altitude of 18,000 feet, through a wall of bursting anti-aircraft shells and swarms of enemy planes. He dived almost to the very deck of the enemy carrier, and did not release his bomb until he was sure of a direct hit. He was last seen attempting recovery from his dive at the extremely low altitude of 200 feet, amid a terrific barrage of shell and bomb fragments, smoke, flame and debris from the stricken vessel. His own plane was destroyed by the explosion of his own bomb. But he had made good his promise to “lay it on their flight deck.”
I have received a recommendation from the Secretary of the Navy that Lt. John James Powers of New York City, missing in action, be awarded the Medal of Honor. I hereby and now make this award.
You and I are “the folks back home” for whose protection Lt. Powers fought and repeatedly risked his life. He said that we counted on him and his men. We did not count in vain. But have not those men a right to be counting on us? How are we playing our part “back home” in winning this war?
The answer is that we are not doing enough.
Today I sent a message to the Congress, pointing out the overwhelming urgency of the serious domestic economic crisis with which we are threatened. Some call it “inflation,” which is a vague sort of term, and others call it a “rise in the cost of living,” which is much more easily understood by most families.
That phrase, “the cost of living,” means essentially what a dollar can buy.
From January 1, 1941, to May of this year, nearly a year and a half, the cost of living went up about 15%. And at that point last May we undertook to freeze the cost of living. But we could not do a complete job of it, because the Congressional authority at the time exempted a large part of farm products used for food and for making clothing, although several weeks before, I had asked the Congress for legislation to stabilize all farm prices.
At that time, I had told the Congress that there were seven elements in our national economy, all of which had to be controlled; and that if any one essential element remained exempt, the cost of living could not be held down.
On only two of these points – both of them vital, however did I call for Congressional action. These two vital points were: first, taxation; and second, the stabilization of all farm prices at parity.
“Parity” is a standard for the maintenance of good farm prices. It was established as our national policy in 1933. It means that the farmer and the city worker are on the same relative ratio with each other in purchasing power as they were during a period some thirty years before – at a time when the farmer had a satisfactory purchasing power. One hundred percent of parity, therefore, has been accepted by farmers as the fair standard for the prices they receive.
Last January, however, the Congress passed a law forbidding ceilings on farm prices below 110% of parity on some commodities. And on other commodities the ceiling was even higher, so that the average possible ceiling is now about 116% of parity for agricultural products as a whole.
This act of favoritism for one particular group in the community increased the cost of food to everybody – not only to the workers in the city or in the munitions plants, and their families, but also to the families of the farmers themselves.
Since last May, ceilings have been set on nearly all commodities, rents, and services, except the exempted farm products. Installment buying, for example, has been effectively controlled.
Wages in certain key industries have been stabilized on the basis of the present cost of living.
But it is obvious to all of us that if the cost of food continues to go up, as it is doing at present, the wage earner, particularly in the lower brackets, will have a right to an increase in his wages. I think that would be essential justice and a practical necessity.
Our experience with the control of other prices during the past few months has brought out one important fact – the rising cost of living can be controlled, providing that all elements making up the cost of living are controlled at the same time. I think that also is an essential justice and a practical necessity. We know that parity prices for farm products not now controlled will not put up the cost of living more than a very small amount; but we also know that if we must go up to an average of 116% of parity for food and other farm products – which is necessary at present under the Emergency Price Control Act before we can control all farm prices – the cost of living will get well out of hand. We are face to face with this danger today. Let us meet it and remove it.
I realize that it may seem out of proportion to you to be overstressing these economic problems at a time like this, when we are all deeply concerned about the news from far distant fields of battle. But I give you the solemn assurance that failure to solve this problem here at home – and to solve it now – will make more difficult the winning of this war.
If the vicious spiral of inflation ever gets under way, the whole economic system will stagger. Prices and wages will go up so rapidly that the entire production program will be endangered. The cost of the war, paid by taxpayers, will jump beyond all present calculations. It will mean an uncontrollable rise in prices and in wages, which can result in raising the overall cost of living as high as another 20% soon. That would mean that the purchasing power of every dollar that you have in your pay envelope, or in the bank, or included in your insurance policy or your pension, would be reduced to about eighty cents’ worth. I need not tell you that this would have a demoralizing effect on our people, soldiers and civilians alike.
Overall stabilization of prices, salaries, wages, and profits is necessary to the continued increasing production of planes and. tanks and ships and guns.
In my message to Congress today, I have said that this must be done quickly. If we wait for two or three or four or six months it may well be too late.
I have told the Congress that the administration cannot hold the actual cost of food and clothing down to the present level beyond October 1.
Therefore, I have asked the Congress to pass legislation under which the President would be specifically authorized to stabilize the cost of living, including the price of all farm commodities. The purpose should be to hold farm prices at parity, or at levels of a recent date, whichever is higher. The purpose should also be to keep wages at a point stabilized with today’s cost of living. Both must be regulated at the same time; and neither one of them can or should be regulated without the other.
At the same time that farm prices are stabilized, I will stabilize wages.
That is plain justice – and plain common sense.
And so I have asked the Congress to take this action by the 1st of October. We must now act with the dispatch which the stern necessities of war require.
I have told the Congress that inaction on their part by that date will leave me with an inescapable responsibility to the people of this country to see to it that the war effort is no longer imperiled by the threat of economic chaos.
As I said in my message to the Congress:
In the event that the Congress should fail to act, and act adequately, I shall accept the responsibility, and I will act.
The President has the powers, under the Constitution and under Congressional Acts, to take measures necessary to avert a disaster which would interfere with the winning of the war.
I have given the most careful and thoughtful consideration to meeting this issue without further reference to the Congress. I have determined, however, on this vital matter to consult with the Congress.
There may be those who will say that, if the situation is as grave as I have stated it to be, I should use my powers and act now. I can only say that I have approached this problem from every angle, and that I have decided that the course of conduct which I am following in this case is consistent with my sense of responsibility as President in time of war, and with my deep and unalterable devotion to the processes of democracy.
The responsibilities of the President in wartime to protect the nation are very grave. This total war, with our fighting fronts all over the world, makes the use of the executive power far more essential than in any previous war.
If we were invaded, the people of this country would expect the President to use any and all means to repel the invader.
The Revolution and the War Between the States were fought on our own soil, but today this war will be won or lost on other continents and in remote seas. I cannot tell what powers may have to be exercised in order to win this war.
The American people can be sure that I will use my powers with a full sense of responsibility to the Constitution and to my country. The American people can also be sure that I shall not hesitate to use every power vested in me to accomplish the defeat of our enemies in any part of the world where our own safety demands such defeat.
And when the war is won, the powers under which I act will automatically revert to the people of the United States – to the people to whom those powers belong.
I think I know the American farmers. I know they are as wholehearted in their patriotism as any other group. They have suffered from the constant fluctuations of farm prices – occasionally too high, more often too low. Nobody knows better than farmers the disastrous effects of wartime inflationary booms, and postwar deflationary panics.
So I have also suggested today that the Congress make our agricultural economy more stable. I have recommended that in addition to putting ceilings on all farm products now, we also place a definite floor under those prices for a period beginning now, continuing through the war, and for as long as necessary after the war. In this way we will be able to avoid the collapse of farm prices that happened after the last war. The farmers must be assured of a fair minimum price during the readjustment 'period which will follow the great, excessive world food demands which now prevail.
We must have some floor under farm prices, as we have under wages, if we are to avoid the dangers of a postwar inflation on the one hand, or the catastrophe of a crash in farm prices and wages on the other.
Today I have also advised the Congress of the importance of speeding up the passage of the tax bill. The Federal Treasury is losing millions of dollars each and every day because the bill has not yet been passed. Taxation is the only practical way of preventing the incomes and profits of individuals and corporations from getting too high.
I have told the Congress once more that all net individual incomes, after payment of all taxes, should be limited effectively by further taxation to a maximum net income of $25,000 a year. And it is equally important that corporate profits should not exceed a reasonable amount in any case.
The Nation must have more money to run the war. People must stop spending for luxuries. Our country needs a far greater share of our incomes.
For this is a global war, and it will cost this Nation nearly $100,000,000,000 in 1943.
In that global war there are now four main areas of combat; and I should like to speak briefly of them, not in the order of their importance, for all of them are vital and all of them are interrelated.
The Russian front. Here the Germans are still unable to gain the smashing victory which, almost a year ago, Hitler announced he had already achieved. Germany has been able to capture important Russian territory. Nevertheless, Hitler has been unable to destroy a single Russian Army; and this, you may be sure, has been, and still is, his main objective. Millions of German troops seem doomed to spend another cruel and bitter winter on the Russian front. Yes, the Russians are killing more Nazis, and destroying more airplanes and tanks than are being smashed on any other front. They are fighting not only bravely but brilliantly. In spite of any setbacks Russia will hold out, and with the help of her allies will ultimately drive every Nazi from her soil.
The Pacific Ocean area. This area must be grouped together as a whole – every part of it, land and sea. We have stopped one major Japanese offensive; and we have inflicted heavy losses on their fleet. But they still possess great strength; they seek to keep the initiative; and they will undoubtedly strike hard again. We must not overrate the importance of our successes in the Solomon Islands, though we may be proud of the skill with which these local operations were conducted. At the same time, we need not underrate the significance of our victory at Midway. There we stopped the major Japanese offensive.
In the Mediterranean and the Middle East area the British, together with the South Africans, Australians, New Zealanders, Indian troops and others of the United Nations, including ourselves, are fighting a desperate battle with the Germans and Italians. The Axis powers are fighting to gain control of that area, dominate the Mediterranean and the Indian Ocean, and gain contact with the Japanese Navy. The battle in the Middle East is now joined. We are well aware of our danger, but we are hopeful of the outcome.
The European area. Here the aim is an offensive against Germany. There are at least a dozen different points at which attacks can be launched. You, of course, do not expect me to give details of future plans, but you can rest assured that preparations are being made here and in Britain toward this purpose. The power of Germany must be broken on the battlefields of Europe.
Various people urge that we concentrate our forces on one or another of these four areas, although no one suggests that any one of the four areas should be abandoned. Certainly, it could not be seriously urged that we abandon aid to Russia, or that we surrender all of the Pacific to Japan, or the Mediterranean and Middle East to Germany, or give up an offensive against Germany. The American people may be sure that we shall neglect none of the four great theaters of war.
Certain vital military decisions have been made. In due time you will know what these decisions are – and so will our enemies. I can say now that all of these decisions are directed toward taking the offensive.
Today, exactly nine months after Pearl Harbor, we have sent overseas three times more men than we transported to France in the first nine months of the first World War. We have done this in spite of greater danger and fewer ships. And every week sees a gain in the actual number of American men and weapons in the fighting areas. These reinforcements in men and munitions are continuing, and will continue to go forward.
This war will finally be won by the coordination of all the armies, navies, and air forces of all of the United Nations operating in unison against our enemies.
This will require vast assemblies of weapons and men at all the vital points of attack. We and our allies have worked for years to achieve superiority in weapons. We have no doubts about the superiority of our men. We glory in the individual exploits of our soldiers, our sailors, our marines, our merchant seamen. Lieutenant John James Powers was one of these- and there are thousands of others in the forces of the United Nations.
Several thousand Americans have met death in battle. Other thousands will lose their lives. But many millions stand ready to step into their places – to engage in a struggle to the very death. For they know that the enemy is determined to destroy us, our homes and our institutions – that in this war it is kill or be killed.
Battles are not won by soldiers or sailors who think first of their own personal safety. And wars are not won by people who are concerned primarily with their own comfort, their own convenience, their own pocketbooks.
We Americans of today bear the gravest of responsibilities. And all of the United Nations share them.
All of us here at home are being tested – for our fortitude, for our selfless devotion to our country and to our cause.
This is the toughest war of all time. We need not leave it to historians of the future to answer the question whether we are tough enough to meet this unprecedented challenge. We can give that answer now. The answer is “Yes.”
Völkischer Beobachter (September 8, 1942)
„Weltgouvernante Nr. 1“
Was in Roosevelt-Amerika noch zieht, zieht im neuen Europa nicht mehr!
Brooklyn Eagle (September 8, 1942)
Second front imminent, Churchill, Roosevelt hint
Parallel statements reveal agreement on full war plan
…
Treasury’s spendings tax rejected by Senate group
‘Victory’ levy now under consideration
…
Japs drive back Allies, advance upon Moresby
Breach mountain gap in New Guinea – major battle for port looms
…
Kuhn sues to keep status as citizen
Fritz Kuhn, one-time Führer of the German-American Bund, who is serving a prison sentence as a common thief, today challenged the government’s right to take away his American citizenship.
Out of 27 Bund members and affiliates against whom denaturalization proceedings were begun July 7, Kuhn was the only one to file an answer thus far. The deadline for answers is 4:30 p.m. today, when the government is expected to move for civil trial of the denaturalization complaints.
Kuhn, in a handwritten letter from Dannemora Prison, asserted he always had expressed belief in the principles of the United States Constitution.
Jap plane toll is suicidal in Solomon Isles
Some troops landed to join others in jungles, Navy says
…
U.S. Flying Fortresses sweep across Channel again
Continue daylight offensive with big fleet of fighter planes
…
Ecuador islands occupied by U.S. to guard Canal
Advance bases set up in the Galapagos and on Santa Ana
…