ffie Nebroskan
Monday, Oct. 31, I960
Page 2
4. V
- 4
. - '.vA
V
11
..it.'
5
1
n
, 1
. ;s
y i
' - k
' ?
s
,
. , f
. n
. :. t
' it
..1
41
At fit
fc -17.
.41
it.
' t
EDITORIAL
The Daily Nebraskan editorially endorses the candi
dacy of Sen. John F Kennedy for President of the Uni
ted States. The decision has been made after careful con
sideration of both Mr. Nixon and Mr. Kennedy the men
themselves and their stands on the issues involved in this
critical campaign.
The overriding issue in this election is the answer to
.the question, "Who can best provide the leadership dur
ing the crucial 1960's?" This means a man who can direct
the United States foreign policy most effectively and,
also, most perceptively. Sen. Kennedy has demonstrated
that he is capable of this job.
Vice President Nixon has denied that the United
States has lost and is continuing to lose prestige abroad.
He is able to provide little evidence of this. Mr. Kennedy,
however, as John Fischer, editor of Harpers, writes,
"demonstrates a broader understanding of the upheavals
now shaking the world and the steps to cope with them."
He has consistently cited examples of the fact that this
country does not command the respect it once had. The
rumblings of discontent among our European allies should
serve notice that all is not well, as do the recent reports
Of the USIA.
At home, the question of whether our economy is
growing fast enough is a major issue. Those who say we
must give up our freedom in order to grow faster distort
the facts. Mr. Nixon has taken so many different stands
on economic growth that it is difficult to know how he
would react to this problem if he were elected. Mr. Ken
nedy has made clear his stand on this subject. He feels
the economy must grow at a faster rate. Here again, we
feel that Mr. Kennedy's position recognizes the neces
sity of never being content with the status quo, if there is
such a thing these days.
There are many dther issues which have played a
part in our endorsement, such as Mr. Nixon's frightening
stand on Quemoy and Matsu, the fact that with a Demo
cratic majority in the Congress likely, a Democratic
President is highly desirable and the previous record of
Mr. Nixon, which, as Walter Lippman says, "raises seri
ous doubts whether he has within his conscience the
scruples which the country has a right to expect in the
President of the United States."
In nearly every instance, Mr. Kennedy has demon
strated himself to be better equipped for the tremendous
task that awaits the next President. His "moderate, re
sponsible liberalism," as one observer describes it, leads
us to believe he will be a strong President with the ability
to lead the country during this most critical period our
nation has ever experienced.
More Comment
To the Editor:
Within the last two weeks
two lengthy articles dealing
with the critically impor
tant subject of economic
growth have appeared in
The Daily Nebraskan. The
first of these on October 18
was by Professor Henry
Wallich of Yale University
and constituted a short es
say dealing with the gen
eral problem of economic
growth, but which con
tained, nevertheless, the
dual implication that the
recent rate of growth of the
American economy is sat
isfactory and that we could
only purchase a more rapid
rate of growth at the price
of a loss of freedom. Pro
fessor Wallich presumably
equates the latter with
more governmental inter
vention in the economy. In
a commentary published
October 26 Professor Stuart
Hall of our own Depart
ment of Economics at the
University of Nebraska
dealt ably with both the
latter point and other facets
of Professor Wallich's an
alysis. My own purpose in
writing this letter is to di
rect attention toward the
question of whether or not
the American economy has
enjoyed a satisfactory rate
of growth in the post World
War II era.
At the onset I wish to
point out, first, that eco
nomists do not possess a
wholly objective crlteriarof
what constitutes for any so
ciety a satisfactory rate of
economic growth; and, sec
ond, measurement of the
average rate of growth that
a society has experienced
over a period of time is a
tricky thing because quite
obviously the value of the
average will depend upon
where you start and what
you include. Thus, any at
tempt to measure our prog
ress and, further, to ascer
tain whether or not it has
been satisfactory cannot
escape being in greater or
lesser degree a subjective
venture.
In spite of the limitations
inherent in any quantitative
measurement of our eco
nomic progress, I believe
that available statistical
Daily Nebraskan
Member Associated Collegiate Pres. International Press
Representative: National Advertising Service, Incorporated
Published at: Boom 20. Student Union, Lincoln, Neb'aika.
SEVENTY-ONE VEAE8 OLD
14th & R
Telephone HE 2-7631. ext. 4525, 4228. 4227
HnhMHptlmi rata 3 jwt mntn r SB for the mnilrmte Vrar.
m.JLIt'LTUT" to L"-,n'
m. TJlL ""'"'"' PoMUhe MmMit, Tnmter. WAimi m m.
n ol pair, nrept Jurtnc vwuttlonn and nun wrlodn hi
fnrlwlimB ml the ttnbmmnvimw on gtudrnt PnhHratlmu hxll fee lm from
MiwrM MMMf th mrt Of the hm.n,l(t. or on th, wit f S5J
EDITORIAL
,
'
I . .
KAItor ,
Maaarinr. editor .
Mown .mr
ftmrta Killtar . . . ,
An Mow Mdltor, .
tnpr r.Attntn ....
Ntaff IVHIm
BUNINKSS
BnffhwM Manager
r!lT,:J':Jt'lm':"" M"n
OPINION
Daily Nebraskan
data pertaining to the per
tormance of the American
economy in the post World
War II period shows con
clusively that we have not
achieved a satisfactory rate
of economic growth. In fact,
I believe that in view of
the enormous economic and
military challenge pre
sented to us by the Soviet
Union and its allies that
our own economic perform
ance has been dangerously
inadequate. To support this
thesis I .will draw some
comparisons between de
velooments in the postwar
years 1945-1959 with de
velopments in the war
years of 1940-1944. The sta
tistical entities I will use as
indicators of economic
growth are gross national '
product, personal consump
tion expenditures, the labor
force, and employment
levels. Gross national pro
duct and personal consum
tion expenditures will be
discussed on both an abso
lute and a per capita basis,
and are measured in real
terms, which is to say in
constant prices.
There are many ways in
which economic progress
can be defined, but the
most generally accepted
measure among economists
is that of a rising level of
output per person. This is
so because, economists are
concerned with the basic
problem of the material
well-being of a society, and
if a society is to achieve a
rising standard of material
well-being, its average per
person 0 u t p u t of econom
ically valuable goods and
services must also rise. If
the population of a society
is increasing, then attain
ment of material progress
means that the total output
(or production) of goods
and services must rise at
rates greater than that at
which population is rising.
If It does not the society
may stand still or even
retrogress, even though to
tal output is increasing. For
material progress it is not
enough, in other words, for
total output simply to In
crease. Given these considera
tions a strong case can be
made for saying that the
United States has experi-
STAFF
H'rb ProhMiw
0f (Jalhoun
Knrm Ixmg
linl Brown
: 0mll Umhrrni
n. Ann MwfT, flrrtrhcn HhrlHwrK
Mmm I .. .1.
Norma Bmtty
STAFF
. km,
'P KuVli,;. jh Krhn-d"
..:'.":,.:.:".i.,,".oh
IT'S
enced practically no eco
nomic progress of any sig
nificance since the end of
World War II. This is a
startling statement and one
that may astonish in view
of the evidence of our own
eyesight which tells us that
not only are we consuming
more, but also a greater
variety of goods and serv
ices than we did fifteen
years ago. Certainly all the
new automobiles, television
sets, and homes that have
spread over the American
ianscape are not an optical
illusion. One might well ask
with considerable bewilder
men.t.if this is not economic
progress, what is?
To explain this apparent
paradox we need to exam
ine the statistics -of our na
tional output during . the
postwar period. For the
fifteen-year period 1945
1959 real gross national pro
duct rose at an annual av
erage rate of 2.1 percent.
This rate of growth is to
be compared with our his
toric long-term average of
about 3.0 percent. Professor
Wallich, incidentally,
achieves a somewhat higher
average rate of growth for
the postwar era by lopping
off the years 1945 and 1946,
which, admittedly, were
years of adjustment from
a wartime to a peacetime
economy. There is no need
to quibble over this, how
ever, for my key thesis is
that the American economy
experienced a really mas
sive surge of growth during
the war years of 1940-1944,
and it has been this growth
surge rather than postwar
developments which pro
vided the basis for the real
gains in our living stand
ards that we have known
since the end of the war.
To bo more specific, the
nation's real gross national
product rose at the astonish
ing annual average rate of
11.5 percent during the
period 1940-1944. Most of
this increase in output went
into the war effort, but
this is not the important
point. What is important is
that this wartime experi
ence demonstrates that the
American economy can ex
pand at an extraordinarily
high rrate if the need is
present. This very high rate
of growth in our gross na
tional product was not, as
some may think, the con
sequence of putting the un
employed of the depression
era back to work in war
time production. Employ
ment rose at an annual
average rate of only 3.3
percent during the war
years; in the same interval
the labor force actually de
clined at a fate of about
one-half of one percent per
year.
The contrast between the
great surge of growth we
experienced during the war
and our more mediocre
progress since 1945 is made
even more pointed by an
analysis of the gross na
tional data on a per capita
basis. During the war
years (1940-1944) total out
put per person rose at an
- I9M
THAT SEASON AGAIN
Letter ip
annual average rate of 10.2
percent, but in the last
fifteen-year peacetime per
iod (1945-1959) the nation's
gross national output per
capita has increased at an
annual average rate of only
0.5 percent! This means,
in other words, that the
rate of increase in the total
output of the economy has
barely remained ahead of
the rate of increase in our
population. In the postwar
period the nation's popula
tion expanded at an annual
. average rate of 1.8 percent, .
a figure slightly less than
the growth rate of the gross
national product in this
same period. To pat the
matter in still another light,
the data show that the
gross national product per
person in 1959 was only 5.6
percent higher than the
gross national product of
1944. On a per person
basis, in other words, we
had available for all uses
only a little over five per
cent more in the way of
goods and services than in
the year of our peak war
time effort, 1944.
The problem and the
paradox is to square
these figures with the evi
dence of our own eyesight,
for, as stated earlier, we do
see all about us convincing
indications that real stand
ard of living has improved
drastically since the end
of World War II. And curi
ously enough the statistics
of national income and pro
duct tent to support the
contention that living stand
ards have risen since the
war. If we look, for ex
ample, at what has hap
pened to real consumption
expenditures on a per capita
basis we get a very dif
ferent picture of our situa
tion! Consumption expendi
tures measured in constant
prices are probably a bet
ter indicator of our living
standards than total output
per capita for the simple
reason that our standard
of living is essentially a
matter of what we are able
to enjoy in the way of ma
terial goods and services.
Thus, we find that real
consumption per capita in
1959 vas 41.7 percent higher
than real consumption per
capita in 1944. There has
been, in other words, a
more than 40 percent gain
in our standard of living
in the last fifteen years if
we use real consumption
per capita as a measure .
of the standard of living.
On an annual basis real
consumption per capita has
risen over this period at an
nverage rate of 2.4 percent.
This is certainly not a bad
rate of growth, for such a
rate if compounded would
mear an approximate doub
ling of our real living stand
ards in about thirty years.
The question now is this:
Where did this real gain
come from if our over-all
rate of growth of the na
tional output has been so
;ow as to keep us barely
ahead of the growth in pop
ulation? The answer is de
MtMNBAPOMfr -IWfOOMff-
ceptively simple and in a
way provides the answer to
our original question con
cerning the adequacy of our
, postwar rate of growth. We
have been able to enjoy an
enormous advance in our
living standards during the
past fifteen years primarily
because World War II is
over and we have been able
to use the extra output that
came from the wartime
surge of growth for peace
ful rather than wartime pur
suits. If we had had "to de
pend upon the actual rate
of growth experienced by
the economy in the post
war period tot real gains
in our standard of living, it
would simply have been
impossible to experience the
more than 40 percent rise
in real consumption on a
per person basis that has
actually taken place during
this period. The over 50 per
cent increase in the na
tion's gross national output
that took place in the rela
tively short period of the
war years of 1940-1944 is
the real source of our post
war consumer prosperity!
The above thesis is sup
ported, too, by a compari
son ot some of the uses
made of the gross national
product recently and during
the war. In 1944, which was
the peak year of our war
effort, almost half 47.9
percent to be exact of
the real gross national pro
duct was absorbed by the
governmental or public sec
tor. The bulk of this obvi
ously was for war purposes.
The government took, in
other words, nearly half of
a total output that was
some 50 percent greater
than the output of four
years earlier.' When the war
ended in 1945 the needs of
the government fell dras
tically, and consequently
much of this real expan
sion could go to support
peacetime activities. We
could have had a real in
crease in our consumption
standards even if there had
not been any expansion at
all in the output total in
subsequent years. In any
event the government's
share of the output total
has fallen to an average
of less than 20 percent for
most of the postwar years.
.In 1959 it totaled 18.7 per
cent Since the government
n6w absorbs a much
smaller proportion of an
output total that rose very
sharply in response to war
time needs, it should be
obvious that herein is a key
factor in the real increase
that we have experienced
in our postwar living stand
ards. In view of this and
in view of an average an
nual rate of growth of total
output of only slightly more
than two percent for the
whole postwar period (1945
1959) I shall leave it to the
reader to judge whether or
not we can be complacent
about the rate at which the
American economy is ad
vancing. Wallace C. Peterson
Associate Professor
of Economics
Staff Views
BOVINE VIEWS
Another page in Univer
sity history was written ov
er the weekend as thou
ands of alumni gathered for
the traditional festivities.
As usual, Ag campus
again participated in the
event However, its total
sum of spirit was chalked
up into one display. The
Ag campus, notoriously
known for its poor, Home
coming participation, has
in the past had some floats
in the homecoming parade.
" One reason for the lack
of spirit this year was the
cancellation of the home
coming parade. Several of
the Ag houses and organiza
tions had planned floats un
til the parade was abol
ished. This decision came
after the entries for dis
plays had closed.
This left little choice for
those -that planned floats.
They had only two alterna
tives of promoting home
coming spirit. They could
either build a display or
do nothing.
The Homecoming parade
was abolished after the en
tries were closed for
house displays so none of
the previous float-builders
could not enter display com
petition. Any spirit at all
bad to be for the sake of
spirit alone.
These houses could have
built displays which would
have welcomed the alums
back to campus. Although
not eligible for competi
petition, these displays could
have been less elaborate
than those entered hi com
petition. Even a meager
tiger rolling over dead
could have showed some
spirit to the alums. How
ever, there were no dis
plays other than the one en
tered in competition.
Although lacking in Home
coming spirit, the Ag cam
pus is not lacking in the
spirit of Sadie Hawkins.
One of the bigger events
for the year at the Ag Un
ion, the dance this year
. has also been expanded to
include a queen contest.
Dogpatch attire will
spark the general girl ask
boy date affair which has
been an annual feature
since Sadie first caught her
man. Last year the Ag Un
ion featured Marryin' Sam
who invaded the dance and
married off all the eligible
bachelors.
the mm
Shades of Aladdin's lamp the genie is badcf And
Esterbrook is the sorcerer that turned the trick . with
the Esterbrook Classic fountain pent It works
inquiry
with ink! Makes it write smoother . makes writing
with it easy to read I
But that's not all! The Esterbrook Classic Fotrotaia
Pen offers you a choice of 32 points. Pick the point that
suits you best and presto I-begin writing the way you've
always wanted to write !
Choose from as many colors as you'd find in an Ara
bian Street Scene ... six in all! Put magic in your hand
writing .', . with an Esterbrook Classic fountain pen!
THI A rHrNT OHOICl Of
by Jerry Lamberson
Lil' Abner will get little
publicity at this . year's
dance as most of the at
tention will be focused
around Queen Sadie. Of
course this has been natur
al for him as Sadie has al
ways seemed to have the
upper hand in their very
romantic relationship.
Sadie Hawkins history
has established that for
once the female sex should
have their way and that
the males should follow
suit. Sadie proved this by
catching Lil' Abner, wrap
ping him around her little
finger and carrying him off
to Marryin' Sam, who had
no choice but to marry
them.
Lil' Abner's defensive ef
forts were futile and he
was stuck with the freckle
faced, pigeon-toed and bare
foot Sadie Hawkins.
Queen Sadie will again
relive all of these happy
moments as she carries on
her annual chase Nov. 11.
The scene will be the same;
only the time has changed.
NHSPA To Be
Here This Week
The University of Nebraska
School of Journalism will host
the annual Nebraska High
School Press Assn. conven
tion Friday and Saturday.
About 40 to 55 high schools
will be represented by 600 to
700 students.
Art Junge of Scottsbluff will
preside over the first general
assembly Friday. The key
note address, "New Direc
tions for NHSPA," will be
given by Margaret McMartin
of Omaha, president of NH
SPA. Career Workshops will be
conducted by journalists from
The Lincoln Star, The Lincoln
Journal, the Schuyler Sun and
the Nebraska Fanner. Clinics
will follow.
The convention banquet will
be held in the Nebraska Un
ion Friday at 7 p.m. Warren
Cook, mayor of Norfolk, will
preside and William Staffer,
editor of the York News
Times, will give the address.
An Awards Luncheon at
12:30 p.m. Saturday will close
the convention. Sweepstakes
awards to schools rated
highest in the clinics will
be presented by Joe W. Sea
crest of the Journal-Star
Printing Co.
Tkt lunMMI OMMkl
2.05
Otaor CMMoroat
froM
-ONE IB CUSTOM-PITTKD TO VOOI
