THE NATION ; By TIM BUCK ~ Economic facts puncture government's inflated ‘prosperity’ iy obedient efforts to justify the confidence that the monopolistic masters of *big business place in them, Humphrey Mitchell and C. D. Howe each issued New Year statements calculated to assure the majority of Can- adians that “everything is lovely”. The keynote of each of their statements was “‘prosperity’’. Each emphasized the strides made by our national economy but neither admitted that the ill-effects of one of the bad features of that really tremendous advance is now becoming evident; namely, the steady decrease in the proportion of the national income that goes to the’ working class and the resulting relative decline of mass purchasing power. Each assured the people of Canada that the coming year will be a “‘prosperous’’ one; neither admitted that the signs of approaching crisis are now unmistakeable in our national economy. The monopolists didn’t want the aver- age man and woman to know that—at least not until a great volume of speculative stock has been unloaded at prevailing high prices. It is significant however that th pressure of facts impelled Howe to warn the capitalists against over-optim ism. He was careful to couch his warn- , ing in double-talk, such as: “Special area and special industry problems will continue to ‘arise. Adjustments will have to be made, some drastic, some painful.” For the benefit of those advisers to big business who think, he added to his rosy assurance of a high level of new investment and construction the warning that in- vestment in manufacturing and commercial establishment has declined. That warning is important. When expansion of manufacturing and commercial establishments stops the expansion of employment and pro- duction stops.and, because Canadian economy is a capital- ist economy, that means that employment and production are due to turn down. To capitalists who are analyzing his words, Howe’s double-talk was a warning that new capital investments and construction won’t be maintained during 1950 without huge governmental expenditures. To make sure that people who don’t read the daily papers will not escape the government’s misleading hokum about rosy prospects for 1950, the CBC put on special programs about it. ' The one originating in Toronto on New Year’s day was performed by an economics teacher at Toronto uni- versity, an insurance company executive and a CBC em- ployee. It was presented to the radio audience as a ser- lous examination of the Prospect ahead for Canada’s na- tional economy. How “‘serious” it was, its real purpose in fact, was illustrated by the studied way in which it was used to give the absolutely false idea that the num- ber of jobless is 100,000. \ It’s impossible to believe that a prominent Insurance executive, or even an economics teacher in Toronto uni- versity, did not know better because the Dominion Bur- eau of Statistics reported 208,000 unemployed persons registered with the National Employment Service as far back as October. The DBS reported a‘further decline in employment on November 1, and there are tens of thous- ands of unemployed workers who are not registered with the NES. That program was a striking illustration of the man- ner in which Canada’s publicly owned broadcasting sys- tem is used against the interests of the people—whose taxes and fees maintain it. ©@ In marked contrast to the eyewash dished out to rank and file Canadians by cabinet ministers and the CBC, the presidents and general managers of the char- tered banks warned the capitalist class against such illu- : J sions. H. L. Enman, president of the Bank of Nova Scotia, declared bluntly: “Tt is possible that the current atmosphere of optim- ism is somewhat overdone.’ He reminded his hearers that some of the most important measures adopted during the election year just past to jazz up the national econ- omy, “are of a temporary nature and their sustaining in- fluence is already waning.” As examples of the means by which the national economy was bolstered up temporarily during this year he mentioned the $450 million of war- tinie compulsory savings and participation payments on the previous four wheat crops and exports. Now it is evident that the distribution of $450 mil- lion was bound to have an important influence upon pur- chasing power. Even if there were no decline in employ- ment or of income from farm production, the non-recur- rence of that huge disbursement would tend to make pop- ular purchasing power considerably smaller in 1950 than it was in 1949, _ But there is a decline in employment. Furthermore, “as A. C. Ashford, general manager of the Dominion Bank warned that institution’s shareholders, “‘It seems certain that the present level of exports cannot be main- tained . . .”” His advice to the capitalist class was that “It would seem advisable not to count too much ‘on a continuation of the present volume of purchasing power.” The above are only a few of the numerous wamings voiced by the presidents of the chartered banks to Can- adian capitalists in their annual statements. Their presi- dential addresses show that the 900 unemployed workers who have been forced to seek shelter in one Toronto pol- ice station alone during the past two months typify the situation throughout the the country. ad There are 300,000 workers unemployed already; there is serious danger that there may be half a million unemployed before the first of April. The time to press for governmental action is Now. CIGARETTE PROFITEERING One-cent hike means millions for Imperial C IGARETTES have gone up in price once again, one . cent per package of 20—an increase of 17 cents since 1939 for B.C. smokers, who must also pay one cent pro- | vincial sales tax. That will m@n added profit of several hundreds of thousands of dollars for Imperial Tobacco, manufacturers of more than 75 percent of all the cigarettes, tobacco and cigars sold in this country. i The actual retail price of a package of cigarettes will now be 14% cents. The other 21% cents is taxes collected by the federal government, which collected $17,000,000 from this kind of indirect taxation. In addition, there are provincial taxes in many provinces, The last time cigarettes went up in price, just two years ago, it yielded an increase of just over a million dollars in profits for Imperial Tobacco. Profits for that giant corporation were $5,999,153 in 1947. After the two- cent increase which went into effect in December, 1947, profits in the following year hit $7,193,011. Imperial-owned - Tucketts of Hamilton added $489,402 profit in the same year. Imperial also controls the United Cigar Stores chain. . * At the rate of 21144 cents a package tax, a person Who smokes an average of one pack a day hands the government $78.50 a year—and a fantastic profit to the manufacturers. (W. C, MacDonald is the only other man- ufacturer Imperial has not yet gobbled up.). Reason for the price boost given by Earle Spafford, Imperial president, is the increased price of tobacco pur- chased from Ontario tobacco farms. The price increased from 41.25 cents per pound for leaf tobacco in 1948 to 42 cents this year. That’s three-quarters of a cent per pound. No information is available as to how many pack- ages of cigarettes can be gotten from one pound of leaf. LABOR FOCUS J. B. SALSBERG How red-baiting serves reaction HERE may be some who still question what red- baiting is for. There are undoubtedly quite a few who do not yet see what the capitalists use right-wing social democracy for. But there are, of course, count- less examples to prove what they have in mind. Such examples are abundant in the field of international rela- tions, in national affairs as well as in civic and commun- ity matters, -This time I shall describe an event in the Toronto civic elections of January 2—a glaring example of the treacherous role the red-baiting leaders of the labor move- ment are playing. It is symptomatic of all such events at heme and abroad. In the long years of labor’s struggle for representa- tion in the Toronto city council no better labor spokes- man and no more fearless champion was eleeted than Charles Sims, the alderman for Ward 5 for the last six years. Aside from being an outstanding authority on mu- nicipal, affairs and civic adminstration, Charlie was also a watchdog for labor’s interests and an outstanding .op- ponent of reaction in the city hall. He was a thorn in the side of big business and their stooges. Charlie was fully appreciated by the labor voters of his ward and was reelected year after year. Last year, despite the opposi- tion of the entire daily press, he headed the polls. Big business was determined to eliminate him from council and—yes, you guessed right—they turned to their right- wing red-baiting labor elements to achieve their pur- pose, Big business found one who was willing to serve as the instrument for the defeat of this outstanding labor man. He was Moses McKay, who works in the Toronto Massey-Harris plant and who is the spokesman of the right-wing, red-baiting section of the CCF. To the shock and amazement of honest CCF’ers, the two Tory news- papers in Toronto, the Telegram and the Globe and Mail, put McKay on their slate. In fact, these two newspapers dropped a sitting Tory alderman from their slates and threw their support behind a so-called “labor man”. To show his dependability to his Tory supporters, Moses McKay announced:*“I’m a socialist, but I say that it isn’t the big capitalist people who are exploiting the working man now. It is their fellow workers, through ex- orbitant rent. The working man is just as much to blame as big business for exploiting his fellow man.” r This, my friends, is a quotation from the Tory Tele- gram of December 22 and is a report of an “anti-Com- munist meeting” held December 21, Fine fellow, brother McKay, deserving the support of the Telegram, to be sure! : : Came election day and.Charlie Sims was defeated. ‘iis vote was 8,462—almost the same as a year ago, and the vote for the Telegram’s McKay: 3,116. This after the most violent attacks that all big business dailies made on Charlie Sims because of the support he gave to the - unemployed of Toronto in the formation of an organiza- tion of the unemployed to fight‘ for ‘shelter, food and un- employment insurance. This, after the daily support — which the two Tory dailies gave to McKay. e€ But if anyone should still be in doubt as to the pur- pose of Tory support for a right-wing, red-baiting “labor” candidate of the McKay caliber, it was dispelled on the moyning after the election: by the Globe and Mail itself. It’s true that Toronto reaction could not boast of too great a victory against labor and the left-wing in par- ticular. All the left-wingers of the 1949 council and board of education were reelected with bigger votes than before, with the sole exception of Charlie Sims. : Stewart Smith, who ran for board of control, also received a higher vote than in 1949—no less than 45,251 Toronto people voted for him. But reaction did gloat over the defeat of Charlie Sims, the man who exposed them and fought them for so long. And here is what the Globe and Mail of January 3 had to say: : ara ire unsuccessful in his bid for a seat in | Ward 5, labor council candidate Moses McKay drew enough votes from Sims to bring about the defeat of the Communist alderman, — “Sims, who headed the poll last year with 8,500 votes, fell short of that mark this year, losing his place on council to Joseph Gould. McKay polled just more than 3,000 votes. Had these votes gone to Sims they would have assured his reelection.” There you have it, my friends, as plain as plain can be. I ask you to apply this experience to broader fields of labor and democratic action and you will understand why big business has forced its “cold war’’ policies into the labor movement; why it gives support to labor red-baiters — and labor-splitters. This lesson should convince every honest worker why he must turn his back on the red- baiters and labor-splitters, why he should fight and de- feat them within the labor movement. A hard, but meaningful lesson. You should bring it to the attention of your fellow workers. Show them this column and help them start the new year right. PACIFIC TFRIBUNE—JANUARY 13, 1950—PAGE 9 {