OCR Text |
Show r.lONEY DECLINES IN EFFICIENCY Inormous Addition to the National Na-tional Income Is Not Real Wealth Increase. CUE TO , RISE IN PRICES National Bureau of Economic Research, ' After Exhaustive Study, Makes Public Pub-lic Figures Showing Variation In Dollar's Purchasing Power. i ' New York, Oct. 27. The total national na-tional Income of the United States In 1018 was 01 billion dollars, as compared com-pared with 34.4 billions in 1913; but this increase in dollars did not represent repre-sent a like increase In production. Most bf it was due to the rise in prices, for the dollar of 1018 and 1019 was a much less efflctent dollar than that of 1913. The actual total of commodities pro-Cuced pro-Cuced increased very little, If at all, ftnd a large part of those which were produced were war materials, not of e kind really benefiting consumers. . Consequently, individual incomes, Estimated on a per capita basis, rising Irom $340 in 1010 and $354 in 1013, ! to $5S0 in 1018, represent more dollars but little or no real Increase, because the $586 of 1018 is equivalent to only $372 la terms of the purchasing power of 1013. 1 These are the most Important findings find-ings of the National Bureau of Economic Eco-nomic Research, made public today In advance of the formal publication Df the results of a year's study of Income in the United States:" This Itudy, the most exhaustive ever made 01' the Income question in this country, has been conducted by Wesley Clair Mitchell, Wlllford I. King, Frederick B. Macaulay and Oswald W. Knauth, Under the auspices and direction of a )oard of nineteen directors, Including tnen prominent in many fields of business, busi-ness, education, labor, agriculture, economics eco-nomics and practical statistics, and representing many divergent points of ylew. This table exhibits the main findings, find-ings, , Including the equivalent value -. of - per capita Income in terms of the 1013 purchasing power: Total Na- Per Capita Per Capita tlonal Inc'e Income Income in ?rr (Billions) In Dollars "1313 Dol's" 909 $28.8 J319 333 1910 81.4 340 349 1911 Sl.J 333 33S 1912 33.0 846 848 1913 34.4 854 864 1914 33.8 336 - 833 1616 86.0 868 850 1916 46.4 446 400 1917 63.9 623 396 1918 61.0 686 372 Distribution of Income. The report says that only one out tf a hundred (1 per cent) Income receivers re-ceivers in the United States in 1918 Vd incomes of $8,000 or more, and that this one per cent had 14 per cent of the national income. Five per cent, representing incomes above $3,200, had 26 per cent of the total. Ten per cent. Including Income above $2,300, had nearly 35 per cent of the total ; the most prosperous 20 per cent, Including In-cluding income above $1,750, had about 47 per cent. Eighty per cent of the Income receivers had incomes below 51,750, receiving about 53 per cent of the total Income. Shares of Labor and Capital. In most of the years since 1912, the bureau finds that In the principal organized or-ganized industries, wages and salaries were about 70 per cent of the total Income; In-come; while capital (including management) man-agement) received about 30 per cent, put of which were paid rent, Interest and profits; but these proportions varied va-ried materially with relative prosper, lty and depression. In 1916, for example, ex-ample, the share of capital increased to about 35 per cent, with 05 per cent to labor, while In 1919 capital's share fell to about 22 per cent, irhile labor ot about 78. Of the total payments to employees In the highly organized Industries, about 92 per cent goes to the manual workers and clerical staffs, while 8 per cent goes to officials. Share of the Farmer. The farmers, who during the past decade have made up about 16 per cent of the total of gainfully employed, had from 12 to 13 per cent of the national na-tional Income in the years between 1910 and 1916 inclusive; since 1017 they have been receiving 10 to 17 per cent, or a somewhat higher proportion, propor-tion, as the following figures from the report show : Per Cent 1910 12.9 1911 11.9 1912 123 1913 12 6 1914 12.9 1916 13 1 ' 1916 12.8 1917 163 1918 17.0 , 1919 16.5 Sources of Production. As for the sources of national income, in-come, the bureau finds, taking a general gen-eral average since 1910, that agricul ture contributes about 17 per cent of the total, munufucturlng about 30 per cent, transportation about 9 per cent, government about 5 per cent, mining a little more than 3 per cent, banking a little over 1 per cent. The many miscellaneous employments, professional profes-sional men, retailers, Jobbers, merchants, mer-chants, domestics, etc., too numerous to list specifically, contribute 33 per cent. In other words, our lilghly organized or-ganized Industries, even If we include all manufacturing, mining, transportation, transporta-tion, banking, and government activities activi-ties such as education and road-build-lng, produce only about half of the national na-tional Income. The rest Is due to the efforts of small independent workers. Income Tax Dlscreoancles. The report estimates that the number num-ber of persons in 1918 having Incomes over $2,000, was 5,300,000, and that their total Income was over 23 billion dollar j. Income tax returns, however, showed only 2,008,000 persons having over $2,000, and their total reported Income was less than 14 billion dollars? dol-lars? This discrepancy is due in part to technical evasions and straight illegal ille-gal withholdings, but also in part to the existence of tax-exempt income. What this nieaiws In terms of the income in-come tax is that the government received re-ceived In 1918 about half a billion dollars dol-lars less than It would have, If all persons receiving $2,000 had paid their full amount. Contribution of Housewives. The contribution of the 20,000,000 American housewives is not included by the bureau In the national income because they are not paid. In money. But the report points out that If they were paid at the lowest possible .figure (the average recompense of personal and domestic service) their addition to the total national Income would be about one-third, or 18 billions. On that basis, the bureau gives the following follow-ing conjectural figure as to the fluctuation fluctua-tion of the housewife's contribution to the national income since 1909: Total Individual Contribution Contribution (In Billions) Tear (In Dollars) of Dollars) 1909 J5O0 88.85 1910 600 9.00 1911 .600 9.20 1912 '625 9.82 1913 6M 9.98 1914 525 10.19 1915 660 10.84 1916 600 11.94 1917 650 14.30 1918 750 15.30 1919 900 18.45 Income In Other Countries. Both the total national Income and the per capita Income are larger Id the United States than In any othe country. The report estimates this a4 the relative standing of the four countries coun-tries named at the outbreak of th war : Nat'l Income Income (Billions Per Capita 1914 of Dollars) (In Dollars) United States 33.5 8338 United Kingdom .. 10 243 Germany 10.5 146 Austria 1.8 263 The report Is in press, and will bfl published early In November. How the Bureau Is Constituted. The National Bureau of Economio Research was organized after the waj by a group of persons who had corns to realize the need for accurate anq scientific collation of statistical inform matlon as a basis for intelligent solution solu-tion of national problems. The dlreo tors of the bureau are T. S. Adams, advisor to the Treasury department! John R. Commons, of the Unlversitj of "Wisconsin; John P. Frey, editor ol the International Holders' Journal Edwin F. Gay, president of the New York Evening Post ; Harry W. Laldler, secretary of the Intercollegiate Socialist Social-ist society ; Elwood Mead, professor of rural Institutions, University of California Cali-fornia ; Wesley Clair Mitchell, New School for Social Research ; J. E. Ster-rett, Ster-rett, of the firm of Price, Waterhouse and company, accountants ; N. I. Stone, labor manager, HIckey-Freeman company com-pany ; Allyn A. Young, professor ol economics, Harvard university ; also, the following appointed by the organizations or-ganizations named : F. P. Fish, of the National Industrial Conference board ; Hugh Frnyne, American Federation of Labor ; David Friday, American Economic Eco-nomic association ; W. R. Ingalls, Engineering En-gineering council ; J. M. Larkln, Industrial In-dustrial Relations Association of America ; George E. Roberts, American Ameri-can Bankers' association ; Malcolm C. Rorty, American Statistical association associa-tion ; A. W. Shaw, Periodical Publishers' Publish-ers' association; and Gray Silver, American Federation of Farm Bureaus. Bu-reaus. It Is a rule of the bureau that each director must approve the findings of the research staff, or state his specific spe-cific objections as part of the report. In this way. bins Is eliminated, for methods and results are under coo-stant coo-stant supervision from men whos points of view are dlsslmllnr. Williams Press Congress President. - Honolulu, Hawaiian Islands. Walter Williams, University of Missouri School of Journalism was re-electe4 president of the Press Congress of th4) World by acclamation. The cop greos passed a resolution petitioning President Harding to admit repro. sentatlves of the press to the disarmament disarma-ment conference deliberations. |