134 INDUSTRIAL REVOLUTION AND WAGES

Conditions as to living costs and prices, tastes and
actual needs, it was further declared, were not the
same in all localities, and hence there should be no
standard “living wage,” established by budgetary
methods, for the country as a whole.
The use of the budget as a basis for the realization
of a living wage, it was claimed also, was a futile
means of fomenting industrial unrest and trouble, as
it had been made a powerful means of appeal to the
impossible desires and avarice of labor groups.
Finally, it was concluded that as an ideal humanitarian
 conception the living-wage principle was to be
commended, but as a practical proposition it was
fundamentally unsound and impossible of adoption
for the reason that the compensation of workmen
must be fundamentally based on their productivity.?
To these adverse criticisms and arguments, the advocates
of the “living wage” principle made reply, which, stated in
summary form, was as follows:
I. In answer to the claim that the productive capacity
of the country was not sufficient to assure a comfortable
 standard of living to each of the millions of
families in the country, an inventory was made of the
actual and potential productivity of the country, and
it was shown that the national industries could meet
the requirements for food, clothing, housing and other
commodities essential to a general living-wage standard,
 and that there would still remain more than an

R

L For the most comprehensive presentation of the objections to the living:
wage principle, see statement by John G. Walber, Executive Secretary, Bureau
of Information, Eastern Railways, before U. S. Railroad Labor Board, Maintenance
 of Way Employees Case, Chicago, 1922; Statement on Behalf of the
Railways before Senate Committee on Interstate Commerce, by Professor C. S.
Duncan, Washington, 1922; American Railroads, published by Association of
Railroad Executives, New York, issue of August 23, 1922 (Vol. III, No. 10);
Article by Ben W. Hooper, Chairman, U. S. Railroad Labor Board, Nation's
Business, June, 1923, entitled, “Living Wage and the National “Income”;
Syages and the Family,” by Paul H. Douglas, University of Chicago Press.