December 7, 1935 - Editorial - Leap Before You Look, by George Lorimer

It is only in the past month or so that even the more-informed sections of the public have begun to realize the staggering financial burden which the Social Security Act of August 14, 1935, has placed upon the country. It is said that only a handful of men in Congress understood this complex, far-reaching and stupendous undertaking. The words "social security" were enough in themselves.

But only three days later A.J. Altmeyer, assistant Secretary of Labor, went before a subcommittee of the House Appropriations Committee to ask for a deficiency appropriation to organize the work of the Social Security Board set up under this legislation, and more especially for the old-age benefits division. The chairman of the committee challenged this request, in view of the fact that no benefits will be paid until 1942. But Mr. Altmeyer replied:

"This is the most colossal undertaking the Government has ever embarked upon. It will involve the expenditure of four or five billion dollars" [a year] "when it gets into full operation, and we must be absolutely certain that our actuarial estimates are sound and that our system of reports is correct. Otherwise it would be fatal. How will we keep track of these 25,000,000 people who will some day qualify? We will have to know what their contributions were and what their employment records are. They will transfer from one employer to another and from one state to another. We will need very elaborate records."

For business executives, lawyers, accountants, and the like, the act is especially important because it imposes new forms of taxes upon business operations and because the Federal Government steps into relationships between employer and employee heretofore considered beyond its powers. The taxes begin at a low rate in 1937, but increase by successive stages for 13 years, when the total upon employers will be 6% and upon employees 3%.

Comments: Before social security, there was no income tax upon labor and it wasn't in the Federal Government's power to interfere with your right to contract your labor with an employer. Your right to contract your labor and receive compensation for that labor is supposed to be free according to the Constitution. The Social Security Act of 1935 removed this landmark that had stood since the end of the Civil War. Here is where the Federal Government got its foot in the door when it comes to using the income taxing powers to tax the labor of working people; and most states, seeing that the federal Government was getting away with taxing labor, joined the labor feast. They have all embraced labor Cannibalism. As Chancellor William Harper of South Carolina told us on page 552 in Cotton is King and Pro-Slavery Arguments (1860): "He who has obtained the command of another's labor, first begins to accumulate and provide for the future, and the foundations of civilization are laid. We find confirmed by experience that which is so evident in theory. Since the existence of man upon the earth, with no exception whatever, either of ancient of modern times, every society which has attained civilization, has advanced to it through this process." As far as the religious leaders who regularly condition the minds of their flocks that they have a Christian duty to pay income tax on their labor, the words of the Reverend Dr. Thornton Springfellow found on page 476 of Cotton is King apply, where he said that "the slave is the master's money." Social Security is nothing new. It is old - very, very old. Every institution of slavery is complimented by some type of social security system. E.N. Elliott, in the INTRODUCTION of Cotton is King describes the social security system of the South in pre Civil War America on page vii. He stated:

"Slavery is the duty and obligation of the slave to labor for the mutual benefit of both master and slave, under a warrant of the slave to protection, and a comfortable subsistence, under all circumstances. The person of the slave is not property, no matter what the fictions of the law may say; but the right to his labor is property, and may be transferred like any other property, or as the right to the services of a minor or an apprentice may be transferred. Nor is the labor of the slave solely for the benefit of the master, but for the benefit of all concerned; for himself, to repay the advances made for his support in childhood, for present subsistence, and for guardianship and protection, and to accumulate a fund for sickness, disability, and old age. The master, as the head of the system, has a right to the obedience and labor of the slave, but the slave also has his mutual rights in the master; the right of protection, the right of counsel and guidance, the right of subsistence, the right of care and attention in sickness and old age. He also has a right in his master as the sole arbiter in all his wrongs and difficulties, and as a merciful judge and dispenser of law to award the penalty of his misdeeds. Such is American slavery, or as Mr. Henry Hughes happily terms it, Warranteeism."

Back to Old Weekly Press Table of Contents

Home