The sun. [volume] (Newberry, S.C.) 1937-1972, September 26, 1968, Image 2
PAGE 2—The Newberry Sun, Newberry, S. C., Thursday, Sept. 26, 1968
nn
1218 College St., Newberry, S. C. 29108
PUBLISHED EVERY THURSDAY
0. F. Armfield, Jr., Owner
"Whatsoever Things
By DONALD E WILDMON
Second-Class Postage Paid at Newberry, South Carolina
SUBSCRIPTION RATES:
Six Months $1.25.
COMMENT
on
Men & Things
By J. K. BKKKIUN
I quote with hearty approval
the following editorial from
The Wall Street Journal:
"Although everyone realizes
that the activities of the Fed
eral Government are mush
rooming, relatively little at
tention is paid to the nature
and meaning of the growth—
partly because it’s all so fast
and helter-skelter that it in
hibits analysis.
Now the Tax Foundation has
taken a crack at penetrating
the maze. In a useful little pam
phlet called ‘Growth Trends of
New Federal Programs: 1955-
1%8', it comes up with find
ings that ought to interest and
alarm the citizenry.
First, for an idea of the scope
of the activity: ‘In the past
seven years 78 new programs
have been initiated, and 16
others were proposed in the
budget message for fiscal 1968
submitted to the Congress in
January 1967. The large maj
ority have been put into oper
ation in the period beginning
in fiscal year 1965’. That does
not count the numerous and
substantial expansions of ear
lier programs.
‘In the corresponding period
of the 1950s,’ the study contin
ues, ‘only about one-third as
many new Federal activities
were initiated.’
What are some of these bur
geoning undertakings? In ad
dition to the big, fresh forays
into health, education and wel
fare, they pretty much cover
the waterfront. Everything
from the Asian Development
Hank to the Packers and Stock-
yards Act, from Great Plains
conservation to s u p e r s o n i c-
transport development, from
rural renewal to the Chamizal
Memorial highway. You name
it.
Obviously certain ones are
vastly more expensive than
others, but none, from the view
point <d the ordinary taxpayer,
is exactly cheap. The Tax
Foundation estimates the fiscal
IPuS cost of just those new
programs enacted in the past
seven years at 89 billioh. If we
take the full Id-year span sur-
veyed in the report, the cumu
lative cost of 119 new programs
will total $84.8 billion by the
end of the current 1968 fiscal
year.
The enterprises almost un
failingly cost more as time goes
by; initial figures are usually
no guide at all to future out
lays. For example, the Food
for Freedom program, started
in fiscal 1956 at about $121
million, is budgeted at $1.8 bil
lion in fiscal 1968. And The
National Aeronautics and Space
Administration spent $89 mil
lion in its first year, 1958; it
will spend more than $5 billion
this year.
The F emulation study even
discerns a general pattern char
acterizing the growth of new
programs: ‘Sharp increases in
the first two years as the pro
grams get into fuller operation,
relatively modest increases in
the third and fourth years, fol
lowed by a steep jump of the
$2.00 per year in advance.
sort depicting major expansion
or legislative extension of the
program’.
Small wonder the Tax Foun
dation observes that the ‘ex
penditure history of the new
Federal programs set up in
the period of this study sup
ports the familiar thesis that
new Federal Government activ
ities, once under way, tradit
ionally increase in scope and
cost. Few are ever reduced in
cost, and even fewer disappear.’
Small wonder, too, that ad
ministrative chaos prevails.
The projects are casually tossed
on top of older ones, with
scarcely any effort to examine
the relationships among them
or the effectiveness of any of
them. Duplication, waste, gross
inefficiency and mismanage
ment are inevitable—so much
so that a number of liberals,
heretofore devout believers in
FVderal omniscience, are de
crying the trend.
Many comments could, in
deed, be made about this scan
dalous condition. It is, for one,
a fraud on the public, to which
the Administration adds the in
sult of demanding higher taxes
without evidencing any inten
tion of cleaning up the disorder
which it perpetuates and inten
sifies.
But for the moment we will
merely remark that the Gov
ernment is bogging down. The
people are not getting good
Government; they are getting a
Government that threatens to
paralyze them in the grip of
its own indiscriminate growth.
As they used to say, wouldn’t
that jar you?
We seem to have government
by special groups, plentiful out
pouring of public money of one
sort or another, frequently
matters, plan, and so on, of no
special benefit to the public.
We are still freely spending
for this, that and the other.
And there are so many groups
with free spending proclivities
that we of the ordinary class
don’t know what it's all about.
How ma ,y men and women,
their friends and children, ride
on Government planes? How
many Government officials and
employees ride a few thousand
miles on Government planes?
Another thing: How many
men and women now in Eng
land, FVance, Belgium, Holland,
Germany, Italy on Government
pay? Why are they there?
How many enjoy special per
quisites because they have
friends in the service, with the
power to purchase things at
special prices?
Are we operating our services
for the good of the service or
for the special benefit of
friends ?
Of course living off the Gov
ernment is not a new practice;
is was the custom among the
sailors operating the Ark al
Ararat. But we are magnify
ing and multiplying all the ave
nues to the Government ex
pense.
"We talk about Guaranteed
Income for everyone, whether
he works or not. The British
called the same thing The Dole,
and it helped make FIngland
Socialist and destroy the Brit
ish empire.
We complacently watch un
ions demand and force un
earned wage increases w h i e h
destroy profits vital to national
growth. That’s only one step
from the Russians, who abol
Let’s legalize prostitution. Now be
fore your temperature rises, let me
present my case. For judging from
past experience, it has some valid ar
guments.
First of all, you can’t stop people
from engaging in it. We have tried,
and in many cases it has just made
lawbreakers out of otherwise decent,
law-abiding citizens. So if we legalize
it, we could stop making criminals out
of good, solid citizens.
Next, we could place a tax on it. And
we need money to educate our chil
dren. Our schools are hurting for mon
ey to provide good education for our
children. People are going to do it and
we cannot stop them from doing it. If
they have to slip and hide to do it, they
will. There is no possible way to stop
it. So let’s make it legal, put a tax on
it, and educate our children. We are
letting millions of tax dollars, much
needed, go down the drain every year
that we wait about making it legal.
If we could successfully stop people
from doing it, then we would be the
first to say let’s stop them. But it
has been proven that we cannot stop
them. All our present laws have pro
ven ineffective. So let’s let them do it,
legally, and get that much needed tax
for our economy. Our children need
those millions in our schools. We are
letting them down!
Next, by making it legal we would
stop our law officers from “selling
out.” For we all know that most of
the law officers try hard for a while
to stop it, but finally see that they
cannot and end up selling out to the
illegal prostitution traffic. We are
making criminals out of our law of
ficers by refusing to adjust to the
situation. Of course, where there is a
breakdown in our law enforcement, our
communities begin to decay. So we are
destroying good, wholesome, law-abid
ing communities because of our failure
to legalize prostitution. If we legalized
it, law officers would have more time
to enforce the law because they would
not have to be bothered with prosti
tution.
Then again, we could bring it out
in the open and stop making hypo
crites out of our good citizens. For it
is common knowledge that a large per
centage of people engage in the activi
ty, and by our refusal to legalize it we
only make hypocrites out of those who
engage in it.
And by legalizing prostitution we
could put government controls on it.
We could require those who engage
in it to fall under strict controls. Our
laws could be rigidly enforced. We
could rid our society of those who
“bootleg” the product. We could stop
the diseases that arise from prostitu
tion by imposing strictly enforced
health regulations. This would save
our country millions in health ex
penses arising from illegal prostitu
tion.
So our choice is between legal pros
titution or illegal. Let’s make it legal.
Well, that’s my argument. Silly and
absurd, you say. It can’t be all that
silly or absurd for we have already
fell—hook, line, and sinker—for the
exact same line from the liquor and
gamblng industry. And legalized pro
stitution will follow the same line. It
could be nearer than we think.
—Five Star Features
ished profits in favor of the
Workingman’s Soviet.
We watch our central govern-
mexit seizing more and more
power, destroying the authority
and self-respect of cities and
states. That’s what Germany
did—and out of it came Hitler.
More and more of our income
is taken in taxes to support in
dolence by people who won’t
work but who will support who
ever gives the most from the
public trough. That’s what sup
ports Cuba’s Castro.
Criminals are pampered, po
lice attacked. Success is sus
pect, poverty perpetuated. Gov
ernment runs amok in spending
money it doesn’t have, and in
destroying thrift and hard-won
security.
All this is the very opposite
of what built America. And,
continued, this won’t be Amer
ica long.”
PROPERTY
TRANSFERS
Newberry No. 1
My ile II. Purcell to Lillie
Ruth Gary, one lot on Benedict
street $5.
Newberry No. 1 Outside
Ethel Alston to Hazel Alston
Atchison and John W. Atchi
son, one lot, $5 love and affec
tion.
Carolina W. Padgett et al to
Newberry County, streets and
court at Country Club $5.
Cornelia F. Mayer et al to
Duke Power Co., 13.3 acres.
Whitmire No. 4
Reba Nance Scott to Leona
N. Huff, one lot, $5 love am
affection.
HELP WANTED Skilled &
unskilled; carpenters, electric
ians, plumbers, sheet metal
men, fina. finishers, needed
for increased production. Start
ing salary $1.60 and above, ac
cording to ability and exper
ience. Apply EMPRESS Homes
KINARDS, S. C. Augl-3t
Pomaria No. 5
Luther H. Spears Jr et a.l to
Duke Power Co., strip of land
$5.00.
Louis W. Kinard et al to
Sara K. Wicker, 5.8 acres, $5
and partition of real estate.
Erin T. Kinard to Louis W.
Kinard, 2 acres, $5 and parti
tion of land.
Little Mountain No. 6
Virginia A. Sandel et al to
Charles Shealy, one lot $5’.
THE INSURANCE AGENCY THAT GIVES
YOU THE BEST SERVICE ON ANY
TYPE OF RISK, BAR NONE.
THAT'S US!
“YOUR PRIVATE BANKERS”
1418 Main Street Phone 276-1422