~. JAMES WECHSLER-
IN
They ignored
the answer years
ago
THE CURRENT writhings of the
Administration's house , econ-
omists can provide no sustained
merriment for most of us in the
audience. What is finally being
conceded Is that those whom Mr.
Nixon deemed the best brains in
the economics business have been
dreadfully and stubbornly wrong.
But what is even more serious -
no man should be hung for proof
of his fallibility - is that they
seem resolved to compound the
debacle by refusing to acknowledge
that an irreverent heretic named
John Kenneth Galbriath may
have been right or even relevant.
It was Galbraith who long ago
warned that the Administration's
unwillingness to adopt any form
of price-wage controls would pro-
duce exactly the result now con-
fronting the country - the tragic
combination of continued infla-
tion and mounting unemployment.
Yet in all the reports now eman-
ating from Washington about
prospective shifts in Administra-
tion economic policy, there is no
intimation of any serious consid-
eration of a resort to controls.
That is seemingly still the dirty,
unmentionable word.
Now we are told that such cher-
ished slogans as a "balanced oud-
get" and other Nixonian verities
are; being quietly modified. It is
even suggested that the President
may be secretly relieved that Con-
gress declined to sanction his aus-
terity measures in health and ed-
ucation. The political specter of
widespread unemployment in 1972
is clearly haunting the White
House, and "expansionary" moves
long deemed unthinkable are now
on the table.
But not wage-price controls, or
any facsimile thereof.,
The new theory is that infla-
tionary pressures will somehow be
lessened in t h e coming months
even while unemployment is stead-
ily reduced by relaxation of rigid-
ities in spending. As one Wash-
ington dispatch put it, "they are
gambling - without too m u c h
precedent to guide them in this
respect - that as long as there
are idle workers and machines ev-
en an extremely rapid expansion
of economic activity will not gen-
erate new inflationary pressures.'
Will the steel workers politely
fulfill this prediction when their
contracts come up next spring?
SOME 15 MONTHS AGO - the
date was Sept. 2, 1969 - a letter
from Galbraith was published by
the Wall Street Journal. In it he
+ elaborated the case for selective
controls that he h a d began to
plead much earlier. Warning that
the Administration's orthodoxies
would produce "a slowing down in
output, an increase in unemploy-
ment ' and continuing inflation,"
he said:
"Price stabilization under exist-
ing policy cannot be expected un-
til unemployment is intolerably
severe. The only answer is to es-
tablish a mechanism of p r i c e-
wage restraint. This need not op-
erate over the whole economy; in-
deed, it should not. It is needed
only for that sector of the econ-
omy where there are strong un-
ions and where the enforcement of
wage restraint requires, as a mat-
ter of simple equity, that there be
price restraint.
"The machinery n e e d :lot be
very elaborate. There need only
be a determination of the increase
in wages, given the productivity
gains, that is consistent with sta-
ble prices, and a system of sanc-
tions against the few unions and
corporations that do not remain
within the allowable parameters.
"The price of inaction - of de-
fending the present economic the-
ology - is high. It is a tribute to
the practical sense of citizens gen-
erally and businessmen in ,artic-
ular that, as recent surveys have
shown, they are far more willing
to contemplate s o m e system of
wage and price restraints than ae
economists or the Administra-
tion .
WHAT HAS HAPPENED is that
the nation is now moving toward
the "intolerably severe unemploy-
ment" Galbraith forecast. As
might have been anticipated, the
Administration is unprepared to
carry on - at incalculable politi-
cal risk - to the point at which
such unemployment might create
the price "stabilization" that Mr.
Nixon was confidently predicting
a year ago.
Now come the assurances that
deficit financing (they will find
a prettier term for it like "expan-
sionary" economics) can be en-
gineered without a new inflation-
ary upsurge - and without in-
voking wage-price curbs. Unhap-
pily these assurances defy all so-
phisticated knowledge about the
pressures to which union leaders
will be subject if they cannot point
to any government action against
price profiteering. Indeed, espec-
ially at this late date, any wage
price program would inevitably in-
volve provisions, such as the Little
Steel formula of World War II
for "catching up" by groups that
have been left far behind. The
longer we delay, the more diffi-
cult and complicated the task will
become.
0 New York Post
S'
o"On" "
f
f
00010
i
w.
It
*N
I
r
or
E
s
,mp - " *
.. I=
" o
"Jawboning"
I
l
.a
. +
+
auG- ct '-r sl , ' t4 "n
.
"I wear the chain I forged in life," replied the
ghost of former President Hoover.
4I
fifirman nug
Eighty years of editorial freedom
Edited and managed by students at the University of Michigan
420 Maynard St., Ann Arbor, Mich.
News Phone: 764-0552
Editorials printed in The Michigan Doily express the individual opinions of staff writers
or the editors. This must be noted in all reprints.
SATURDAY, JANUARY 23, 1971
NIGHT EDITOR: LARRY LEMPERT
Dorm seeurity measures:
Male help not reliable
THE SECURITY problems that have
been plaguing dormitories recently
are increasing. Incidents of voyeurism
and assault occurring in South Q u a d
last week were renewed this week along
with a rash of thefts.
It has been suggested that the prob-
lem results from the visitation policies
in the women's houses which allow 24
hour male visitation, seven days a week.
Whether this is the cause, of the prob-
lem is irrelevant. Students, having fought
long and hard for these policies are not
going to be willing to change the rules
of visitation.
Rather, it is important that some solu-
tion be found that can reconcile the idea
of unrestricted access to the home of over
1,000 people with the obvious fact that
people without legitimate purpose are go-
ing to have that same unrestricted access.
JN RESPONSE to the problem a letter
was circulated around South Quad
yesterday informing the residents of
"South Quadrangle security measures".
"In the event of an intruder, i.e. thief
or otherwise," the letter stated, "immed-
iately run or call for male help." It con-
tinued by suggesting that one 'should
first seek help from any male visitor on
the corridor or run to the nearest male
corridor and call for assistance. Finally
the letter suggested that students contact
security offices and locate a staff mem-
ber.
The letter ended with the following
dictum:
WOMEN: THIS IS WHAT YOU SHOULD
DO!!!!!
MEN: OUR GIRLS DEPEND UPON THEIR
MEN!!!!!
Besides the blatant sexism apparent in
this memo, it offers no solution to the
problem. First of all, alerting a group of
girls on the hall will be just as effective
and a lot quicker than running to a
male corridor fer help. Secondly, there
Editorial Staff
MARTIN A. H1RSCHMAN, Editor
STUART GANNES JUDY SARASOHN
Editorial Director Managing Editor
NADINE COHODAS Feature Editor
JIM NEUBACHER Editorial Page Editor
is no guarantee that anyone on that cor-
ridor will come to help, or if someone
does respond, the intruder by that time
may well be gone.
Thirdly, it is only after all this is
done that the letter suggests security be
alerted. By this time several minutes have
already gone by. But the problem is
greater, since once the security desk is
alerted, it takes even more time to locate
the security guard, who could be any-,
where in the building.
By the time this whole process is com-
plete, one might as well forget catching
the intruder.
THE BURDEN to find a solution to the
problem lies on both the University
and the residents. -
The University should be able to pro-
vide some type of security system more
efficient than the one outlined above.
One major improvement would be to
supply the guards with "beepers" so they
could be located relatively quickly andbe
alerted to where the problem is.
Secondly, part of the burden is on the
residents themselves. Most women's hous-
es have an escort policy which requires
all men be accompanied by a woman in
the halls. It is up to the residents them-
selves to start enforcing this policy in
order to decrease the number of people
just roaming the halls.
Also, most thefts occur from doors that
were left open. It is up to the residents to
realize that life in a large dormitory
cannot be as easygoing as elsewhere and
as long as thefts occur, doors are going
to have to be locked.
With a concerted effort by both the
University and the residents, the dormi-
tories can again become a place in which
students can live free from fear.
-GERI SPRUNG-
HihChief!?
THE FOLLOWING conversation was re-
portedly overheard at the Ann Arbor
Police Station yesterday afternoon:
DET. SGT. HICKS: I can't seem to get
off on this stuff. Are you high yet Walt?
CHIEF KRASNY: I don't feel a thing.
How the hell do these kids get stoned on
+hic weird AnnP9
Men's Lib?
By JIM HYATT
(Reprinted with special permission from the Wall Street Journal)
IT WAS A cause that was bound to gain momentum,,
and it has. Across the country, a group of oppressed
people have begun to proclaim its rights vigorously and
vociferously.
Their cause is known as "men's lib."
It's no joke. "Men's lib has become a real cause, and
it's gaining some real victories. Men from coast to coast
say that they are being discriminated against by em-
ployers and others and the discrimination is illegal under
the new laws that bar discrimination based on sex.
The laws, of course, were designed to give women equal
treatment, but the men say they're the ones who need
the protection.
"It's about time we men got our rights," militantly
asserts Robert H. Burns. "Fairness is fairness all around.
Men can't be a doormat." Mr. Burns is a lawyer who
represents a young man who wants to be a steward with
Pan American World Airways. Pan Am says its passeng-
er's prefer pretty girls, and it won't hire the young
man. A court has sided with Pan Am, but the case is
being appealed. (Despite all his tough talk, Mr. Burns
works both sides of the street. Not long ago he won
the right for his cousin, Barbara Jo Rubin, to become
a jockey.)
SOME MEN HAVE won lawsuits, and these cases and
others that are pending could prove significant - and
costly - for American business. An engineer has sued
Illinois Bell Telephone Co. to force it to allow men to
retire at age 55, when women can. Currently men can't
retire till they are 60, and the Bell System figures that
equal treatment system-wide would boost its annual
pension costs by nearly $50 million. The case is pending.
The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission
has already determined that a small-loan company's
profit sharing plan was discriminatory. It paid women
their share any time they quite, but men got nothing
unless they ware at least 50 years old or disabled. The
company vainly contended that women merited special
treatment because their working careers were often
shorter because of marriage or because their husbands
were transferred out of town.
The Labor Department filed its first equal pay case
on behalf of men last August. It sought higher pay for
male teenagers taking orders at two Illinois restaurants.
The boys were getting less than women who were doing
the same job. The case was settled in October when
the restaurant owners agreed to raise the wages to the
higher level.
Specialists in civil rights and labor matters say the
issues are likely to increase and to become more com-
plicated as more and more men realized that the sex
University s
You
bet your boots,
toots!
to pry open jobs previously limited to women. The first
such case filed by a man with the New York City Com-
mission on Human Rights involved an employment
agency that had refused to refer him for a job. The
agency claimed the employer wanted a female clerk, but
the commission found its refusal discriminatory.
"You'll probably see more men, coming forward with
problems like that," says a spokesman for the New York
commission. "If a man needs a job, he's going to press
for it."
Some legal experts think that men will soon be com-
ing forward with problems other than job discrimina-
tion. They say men are likely to challenge alleged dis-
crimination in such areas as divorce law and property
rights. Indeed, late last year a court in Waukesha, Wis.,
ordered a woman to pay $25 a week in child support
to her former husband. He had been granted custody
of their four children two years earlier but he since has
been laid off from his job at a machine tool shop.
And in Boston, the lawyer for four men charged with
refusing to submit to induction has revived the claim
that the draft is unconstitutional because it excludes
women. Such a claim was rejected in 1968 by a Federal
district judge in New York. At the time, he wrote: "Men
must provide the first line of defense while women keep
the home fires burning."
But discrimination in employment will probably re-
main the chief battle ground. Telephone companies
across the nation have been under mounting pressure
to hire men as well as women for jobs as operators, and
Ohio Bell Telephone Co. not, long ago hired its first
male operator. In some states, men are challenging hos-
pital rules that bar the hiring of private duty male
nurses for female patients, except on request; women
nurses are routinely assigned to male patients they
note.
MEN ARE ALSO challenging - and overthrowing
- rules that bar them from wearing long hair in their
jobs. No such rules exist for women, they assert, and
they want equal treatment. Thus, a challenged Cali-
fornia employer has agreed to a single, unisexual stand-
ard "somewhere around the collar area," a Federal of-
ficial says. Elsewhere, men have been allowed to keep
jobs and their hair - if they agree to wear hairnets
like those the women wear.
What do women think of all this talk about men's
lib? Women militants, at least, say "right on",
"When laws are good laws, they should be applied
to everyone," declares Lucy Komisar of the National
Organization for Women. But, getting in a word for
women's cause, she adds, "If it's not a good law, it's
probably used to keep women out of jobs."
C@1971 Dow Jones & Co.
ping money
4
discrimination laws work both ways. Some states pro-
vide minimum wages for women but not for men, says an
official of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commis-
sion, and he sees these laws being challenged before
long.
Other states require employers to pay women for work-
ing overtime but say nothing about men who work more
than 40 hours a week, he says. And he expects some
men to demand the same meal and rest periods that
women are allowed and to seek lounge facilities as nice
as women's.
MEN ALREADY ARE using the legal ban on sex bias
tes w uatch for esca
Al
By MARK DILLEN
The recent controversy over Sheriff
Harvey's plan to start an undercover
squad has rightfully disturbed many-in-
cluding those who hoped the matter
wouldn't catch the public's attention.
However, that plan has recently been
revealed as nothing more than an attempt
to cover over a far more insidious plot-
A University financial intelligence squad.
In an exclusive interview in his chamber
offices on the second floor of the Adminis-
tration Building, the silver-haired gentle-
man told me of a heretofore undisclosed
plan:
"Yes, I think I'll call it the Committee
on Excommunications," he began, bespec-
tacled and bedecked in a Brooks Brothers
suit. "It's purpose, as I have written on
this proposal right here, would be to "in-
vestigate union requests for higher wages,
faculty unrest and the illegal flow of money
rat; from the T nivrsitv."
hard cash-mainly, because
of it."
"But, but wouldn't that
everywhere?" I queried.
we want more
mean spies-
At this he shot upright, looking almost
offended by my question. "I have no un-
dercover men, (a pause) of course, we have
informants all over--in the offices, the
unions, in Lansing." Then, his voice rais-
ing, "But we have no paid undercover men
-too expensive."
"I see," I said, not really seeing at all,
and wondering if the Regents really ap-+
proved of such a plan.
THEY DIDN'T. Calling up one regent
(who asked to remain nameless-let's call
him Regent Cutlip) I asked what he
thought of the Excommunications Com-
mittee.
"What do you think of the new pro-
posal?"
"Uh . . . What's it doing on the ex-
change?" he answered.
"No it's not connected with your busi-
f w .;" rarM