◆ SpookStack

cps ees dy eee 2 Ab NR eaten Le go AE fe lie en NA ame Sal Ae SR eae cs ree ad — Sameer $ million to 29 million unemployed at a single time. These estimates vary according to the speed and amount of arms cuts. In certain parts of the country the problem is worse because some areas depend more heavily on these contracts than others, When the Skybolt project in Southern California was cancelied in January 1963, over 5,000 men, many of them technicians and engineers, were laid off within two months. In Los Angeles about 44 per cent and in Seattle about 43 per cent of the jobs depend one way or another on defense contracts. In Colorado the military budget provides one dollar out of every four of all personal spending. In New York State, Governor Rockefeller announced early in 1962 that Long Island was in danger of becoming a “distressed area.” The scheduled closing of a Republic Aircraft plant there meant a possible loss, including subcontractors, of 80,000 to 90,000 jobs. Region after region has either already been affected or may soon be affected by arms cutbacks. One economist has privately made the dire prediction that within a short time “Southern California will be West Virginia, with beaches.” The Federal Government and industry have learned a great deal about economic planning for military production. Now we must learn to plan to meet human needs and we must begin to convert our arms- centered economy into a peacetime economy. Military contractors are told to think about “reconverting,” but many do not know how; they were never in the civilian market to begin with. Many have never had to deal with civilian problems of cutting costs, finding new markets, and planning new products to meet public needs. Many don't know how to compete and are reluctant to learn. They have produced too long for a single consumer who guarantees profits out of an inexhaustible public purse. Some simply can’t understand that the end of the defense profit line may be approaching. Instead of finding ways to produce for civilian needs, they keep trying to get a bigger slice of the smaller and smaller defense pie. Within the government, while recently there has been an increase of hopeful talk, little actually has been done. In the Department of Defense, the Office of Economic Adjustment, which is supposed to keep watch over problems of shifts in military spending, as recently as No- vember 1963 consisted of three staff people and two secretaries—less than an army squad in size to care for a nationwide problem. The Arms Control and Disarmament Agency announced $3,800,000 worth of re- search contracts and grants in June 1963. Not a penny of that was for research on the domestic economic impact of disarmament. The Coun- cit of Economic Advisers, as late as May 1964, had limited its advice to tax reduction, improved labor market information services, and sim- ilar measures. Federal agencies have failed to speak up clearly and urgently for measures such as Senator McGovern’s 1964 Bill; it would require firms with 25 per cent or more workers employed on military