OCR Text |
Show The National Enterprise , October 6, 1976 Page eleven Shareholders Vote to Change Name f ss A vf Vfeu,I always open MButz Xs . S'- - XfT.'.W ? y, v j.:. .4 S Aw f r.vsfv: .V.- : . vw js?x s , X ' Dial-A-SlQ- JS y ' DENVER Shareholders of Control and Engin- eering Corporation (OTC 1 .75, 2.50) voted to change the name to Fremont Energy Corporation at a spec- ial meeting in Denver last week. According to W. J. Murphy, president, the name change culminates a the year effort to companys emphasis to the exploration and development of energy minerals, primarily uranium and to a lesser extent coal and oil and gas. Murphy and the com- - it 'XJ 'X ' i '' - SI 2-1- re-dire- .. .y ' ' X 2 ct panys present management turned its Poison Spider ium prospect in Natrona County, Wyo. to Wold Nuclear uran-Pollutit- ii Company for a $525,000 sideration involving cash and minimum advance royalties, and drilled five successful natural gas wells in Webb County, Texas. Fremont Energy Corp. also recently signed a letter of intent with a major northwest utility group. Murphy said, to undertake a SI. 5 million joint venture uranium exploration program on its 350,000 acre claim block in the Red Desert Area of Wyoming. Murphy said that he expects to con-compan- ys con-assum- ed control in April, 1974 dude definitive agreements he said, and since that time on the proposed exploration have finalized several trans- - program within 60 days, actions involving the company's coal and uranium pro- Beginning Uranium perties and initiated developd ment of a Pollution Control and gas field in south gineering Corporation had its Texas. origins as Fremont Uranium The company's first Corporation, a uranium transaction, ac- - ploration concern operating cording to Murphy, involved out of Wyoming from the the sale for $1 million plus mid-50- s through 1970 accord-royaltiof four federal coal ing to Murphy. Previous Conprospecting permits in management changed the verse County, Wyo. The sale company's name to Pollution was made to Western Fuels Control and Engineering a wholly-owne- d poration in 1970 he said, but subsidiary of the Missouri an attempt to develop technol-Basi- n Power Project, who is ogy for the reduction of pollu-noconstructing the Laramie tion from industrial stack River Station, a 1500 mega- - gasses was unsuccessful, watt coal fired power plant leaving the company essen-nea- r Wheatland, Wyo. tially dormant until April, Additionally, Murphy 1974 when present manage-said- , the company has also ment assumed control. En-natur- newly-discovere- al ful es Cor-Associati- w A good friend of mine writes a column for a local newspaper. Do you ever borrow from other articles you read? asked him. John, steal. he answered, 1 amateurs borrow', professionals Today I join the ranks of the professionals. Its just simply not my idea to lower the minimum wage. George Meany doesnt agree but I feel comfortable being on the other side of most of his positions. are now pushing hard to get George and the AFL-CIthe minimum wage up to the $3 mark. Then, they want to tie it to the cost of living. This theory reflects the best thinking of the 18th Century. It goes something like this: at any given moment there are only so many jobs to go around. So, if a person is hired at $2 an hour, another person making $2.35 will be fired. Unemployment would remain the same but there is an cents suddenly disappears increase in poverty. Thirty-fiv- e from the economy. If you feel comfortable w ith this logic why dont we go all the way? Why not raise the minimum wage to $10 an hour? The answer is obvious to almost everyone. At $10 an hour minimum, a lot of businesses couldnt stay in business. Obviously people would be fired. And w'ho do you suppose would go first? At this rate production would almost stop in this country. And the light wouldn't turn green again until inflation brought relative labor values back in line. Lets say that Mr. King wants to hire Mr. Brooks. Its not a big job but Mr. King is willing to pay $2 an hour. Mr. Brooks is agreeable but the government says no. It isnt nice, society says, to hire an employee for less than $2.35 per hour because an employee cant make ends meet at less than that rate. So as a result, Mr. King is denied the profits of employing Mr. Brooks and, therefore, consumes that much less in our economy. Society is denied the fruits of Mr. Brooks production. And, the worst of all, Mr. Brooks is invited to make ends meet by shoplifting, etc. The simple fact is that there is today a 38 unemployment rate among black male teenagers. If they cant be employed at a $2.35 minimum, what in the world think that a $3 minimum wage would get makes the AFL-CIthem back to work? O O The truth, as 1 see it, is that George Meany isnt really thinking of the young blacks. He is representing special interest labor unions. Anyone who tells me that labor unions are looking out for the general good cant be believed in other areas. There is a push pull contest going on in this country between Big Business and Big Labor. The rest of us are getting stretched out in the middle. All this becomes current when we listen to Jimmy He says his number one priority is to lower unemployment. He will, he tells us, take his chances with inflation. That at least is what he used to tell us. He now says that inflation is just as serious a problem as Nevertheless, one cant help but get the unemployment. feeling that he will be tempted to push for an increase in the minimum wage. Its often said that economists are "rarely right but generally believed. Most of them now agree that the higher the minimum wage, the harder it is for the unskilled person to find a job. Common 'sense tells you its true. I wish it werent, but it is. I wish that we could simply guarantee everyone $100,000 a year income and be done with it. And the answer. I might add, isnt always to be found in cutting business profits. Right now- a person with $1,000,000 No risk can buy government securities yielding almost guaranteed by the U.S. government. That sets a floor on profits. A person or company with $1,000,000 can be guaranteed $80,000 a year in income. no strikes. Again no risk. No Ralph Nader, No OSHA Again human nature is obvious. The harder it gets to make a reasonable profit on risk capital the more people will say, "To hell with it and lend their money to the government. The more businesses that give up, the smaller the tax base becomes and the larger the deficits grow. Thus creating the need for even greater borrowing and higher interest rates. Just look at New York for the end of the story. As of Its time to snap out of the hard as it is to swallow, the best thing we could do for the not raise young unemployed person wrould be to lower the minimum wage. Id like to thank Prof. Andrew Brimmer of Harvard and Wall Street Journal that made a great deal of this column the possible. The errors in logic were mine. Carter. The Prince Column by John Prince - 8. d make-believ- e. Partner, Prince, & Greer. |