Conversation 105-009

Transcript (AI-Generated)

This transcript was generated automatically by AI and has not been reviewed for accuracy. Do not cite this transcript as authoritative. Consult the Finding Aid above for verified information.

Well, this is really a pretty good day to have a meeting.

We have two more items on that problem, so we need to master ceremony on this issue necessarily.

So, Don, if you would just take over.

Yes, sir.

Please tell us what the situation is and where we are.

Before you do, I'd like to just have one other argument.

So, this group wasn't told me about this group.

The foreign reaction to the success of our program here.

I want to say something, just a word.

I have an idea.

I'm part of the price control.

Our central bankers speak the voice.

They like congratulations on our great achievement in the field of prices, which is unique in the world of the present time.

Now, they speak with a degree of enthusiasm and warmth of heart.

At the same time, I feel we're not really quite that good.

Nonetheless, it's most unpleasant to see us how others see us.

Now, this, I think, will serve us well, because, I guess, I don't follow, I don't call it more impressive in any detail, but I assume all this would be more impressive at present time, and must have representation in speech.

Thank you, George.

And I think people have...

I do recognize that what's going on in the American economy is extremely important for all of them.

And the more reasonable rate of price increase here than elsewhere, and also the strong growth in our economy is very important.

They recognize that.

There were a great many fine comments on your speech, and I appreciate the fact that you came to the United States.

I'm very excited to hear your quotations on the search list.

I think somebody should say so.

Man, let's find comments on Jordan's speech.

The U.S. illuminates extraordinary, and this can't possibly be described.

They expect the U.S. to indulge in pious venerealities.

We have venerealities, but we're not pious.

They expect, well of course, the co-barn rowing bridge goes that way.

I better not expect pirates, pilots coming around.

That's right.

And he wrote that, but I think after George and his speech changed his tune, I thought he wrote a rather erotic one, because that seems to be my recollection.

In any case, the praise of George

I don't know about the press, or I think it's been well received in the press, but the farm, the finance ministers, and the central bank are all saying yes.

The U.S. will be eating once again, and eating the world in an instructive direction.

All right, sir.

God bless you.

We'll be back.

Mr. Chairman, I want to talk first about the subject of those grants.

As you know, the Social Security increase is 20%.

It will be in the paycheck federal act on October 3rd.

I believe it's today.

And there are an estimated 4 to 7.5 million Social Security recipients who reside in rental households.

It's subject to the

Robert Weiler Kristoffer are in an institution, 500,000 are in an institution.

That's about to get picture number 65.

There's another important point, that these people tend to be owners of new parts and so forth, and rent one out.

So I've got a very interesting point.

The point I was making.

I said there were a million people over 65 who had incomes of $2,000 or less, who paid one-third of their income from the United States.

See, that's their homework.

These are mainly as though they're mainly concentration camps in the Northeast.

People that didn't get out and got their income is about $2,000, and 1 third of it, 30%, goes to property tax.

So they show you what a terrific fight it is for those people on the property tax.

It's the elderly that are hitting the hardest.

And one of the worst types of property taxes is that they assess the building, the home, the entire new land.

There's all these land costs that have been going up tremendously, which is the building cost.

This discourages maintaining these homes.

There are some people who are elderly and who receive a social security benefit increase who are living in rental housing that is not controlled by the rent control program, which is the other kind of issue.

Those who own their own homes.

That's right.

Four and a half to seven million

figure are the ones that we estimate are actually in housing that's rental, that is controlled by the rent and controlled regulations of the decriminalization bill.

As has been pointed out, people who rely on social security benefits tend to spend a large portion of their income on housing.

And there have been situations in the past where as benefits went up, just like when federal pay increases go up, the prices go up, the merchants and landlords tend to follow them.

increases and our concern is to see that in the coming period we inform landlords and tenants of their rights and responsibilities under the regulation and that we do everything we possibly can to protect the social security recipients interest from being impacted in an illegal rent increase and violation of our control program so what we've done is in cooperation with the internal revenue service developed a

rent watch and a rent suite that will be nationwide in scope.

It will involve IRS investigations of over 50,000 rental units.

It will involve a priority treatment of complaints and inquiries from Social Security recipients involving rental activities in the coming period.

And the 300 offices of the IRS are setting up a special rent watch for that purpose.

The

Other types of things that are being done besides the IRS suite and the rent watch and the 300 offices involve some mailings and brochure distribution to landlords and tenants specifically direct to this question and going to the regulations.

There's going to be television and newspaper publicity that will be

The law is there, the law ought to be obeyed, and we feel that this kind of a fairly comprehensive educational effort, along with the rougher IRS enforcement, is probably in good balance to it, so that we can hopefully do a reasonably good job of keeping people from having that benefit taken away from them.

I don't know if there's anything else to change.

Do you have anything that you want to add on that?

It's pretty well covered.

Well, Don, aren't you going to get out and announce the vaccine?

This is being done.

Yes, sir.

After this meeting, Dr. Fleming and I plan to brief the press and describe this program in detail.

That will be also communicated out to all the Internal Revenue Service district offices.

And they are set and communicated simultaneously in a way that hopefully will get the maximum attention to it.

I think that will be a big issue.

John, one point to underscore.

When we get one of the biggest sanctions, the key control was the four family ownership, which was the mom and pop kind of thing.

So there are...

I don't know how you do this, but it's a delicate thing.

There can be a sort of a subtle warning that, look, if in this area you all take advantage of it, you may have to reconsider bringing mom and pop, so that humans back in under control.

But this is a store job.

Let me try to get the other side of this to be sugar.

I think this is a problem.

I take certain solutions to that question.

On the other hand,

I don't like to create an impression that the landlords are a bunch of gouchers and so forth.

You see the problem here, you know this subject well.

Aren't these pretty isolated incidents, or are we going to just take all the landlords and say they're just a bunch of guys?

I don't know what's happening, but there's certainly a good deal of gouging in this whole area.

All right, go ahead.

By the way, it doesn't bother me to take this thing on.

If you understand, you take this on.

The average person, if you are going to take it on, my landlord would be so-and-so.

I just want to be sure that we're not in a position of demagoguing unless there's... Well, that's a solid basis for...

For this, we ought to go after it.

I think Tom is right in saying that this needs to be done softly and subtly, and not in terms of attacking the landlord and so on, but simply indicating that it's in their interest to restrain themselves here and not take advantage of people, because otherwise it would be necessary to reimpose control over their rents.

The general atmosphere, though, in the country today, as a result of what's happened in connection with the housing program generally,

People have been taking advantage of them, and you know it, so people think it.

I have another contribution from us here.

Ours is a tri-partite board, if you will.

And I couldn't have asked for better cooperation from our landlord groups, and I think our tenants would appreciate this too.

They are willing, in fact they see it themselves, and they have gone a long way in helping to get an understanding among the landlord groups.

I know this would take that edge off.

They would be glad to cooperate in trying any way they can through their spokesmen to make the same statement.

President, I think the issue that you identify is very similar to the issue we confronted in the nursing home area.

We know that there are some good operators in nursing homes, and we've got to keep saying that all the time at the same time that we're after those that are not doing a good quality job.

And I meet just about every day with groups of older persons someplace in the country, and when I throw it over for question and answer, I'm sure to get a question linking up the social security increase with a possible rent increase.

They're fearful of this happening.

And this action, on your part, on the part of the council, will do a lot to allay those fears and will create the feeling all over the country that we're substantive to this kind of an issue and that we do care.

But I suggest that in addition to what you do here, it could be a very good one, George, for you to follow up on if you have an opportunity to do this.

You know, where it fits the subject of the political gathering, but there are occasions, because this has a really, basically a lot of our positions are older people, and they deserve it.

As a matter of fact, I'm talking to the senior citizens group out in Kansas City, in about ten days, so that's an actual, that's an actual, but they're very material persons.

A lot of them do talks and reports.

A paragraph, and then a longer one for others.

But that's part of the educational process.

Mr. President, I would add that Commissioner Ball with Social Security has already advised all the staff of the 800 Social Security district offices, as well as the 1,507 offices of this project.

So,

We'll have our public affairs and social security officers have information and referrals to the IRS.

I directed the Jewish saying that the social security officers should become current members of this court, but received a request for information and received complaints on all.

They like to be able to... One other item that I know that I didn't mention is we're also arranging to have the enforcement power delegated to IRS so that they can deal with some of these things administratively on the spot out in the field.

It's a long legal process and clog up a lot of courts, and so there's a delegation of authority to the Internal Revenue Service field offices to be able to impose some narrow

There have been several articles in recent weeks that have

Look to the period of 1973.

The calendar is heavier, just in terms of raw numbers.

In 1973, here it is in 1972.

It's something in excess of two tracks in 1972, and something in excess of four in 1973.

1973 would automatically be the government of the country to deal with the problems of inflation.

Simply because of the weight of numbers, George Goldstein, and I have been meeting with the assistant director of the council of staff for planning and analysis, and he's come up with some conclusions that are, number one, interesting, and number two, encouraging.

And I thought it would be useful to have a lot of those recommendations, too, and a lot of truth in them.

Tommy, I'm a bit on a statistic with regard to the things you've discussed with us over your time.

I have a recollection, something that I think ought to get the surgeons to get, that the amount of time lost by worse substances is the lowest in so many years.

Tell us about it.

More measurements.

Number one, the numbers strike lowest in years.

The number of strikes, the number of mandates lost because of strikes.

When you speak of the lower, that means over the last year, over the last ten years, what we speak of is during the period of your new economic program.

Two, the number of mandates lost because of strikes, lowest since the mid-60s.

Number three, the length of strikes are shortest.

Now that's a reflection of number two, but four,

Some people would like to explain some of these things on the basis that there have been fewer bargains made or negotiations conducted during this year.

There have been, but not nearly in the proportion that is indicated by the level of peace that we've achieved during this period.

So, in spite of the fact that there have been fewer negotiations, even that fact doesn't discount the fact that our industrial peace is at a real fine, low level during this period.

have been able to achieve a kind of stability.

Somehow, in contrast to usual constraints under wage and price controls, which is an unstable period from labor relations, this has proven to be a stable one.

And it's had its effect, as George has pointed out, frequently on production.

It's also, you have to really give an assessment to...

Part of the reason for the success, and frankly,

Part of the reason has been a sense of discipline among those that we have controlled.

Yes, and why they found something in it for them, you see.

We worked with the top leaders, and we were talking a little bit earlier about how others see us, and I noticed in the economic journals, in Britain particularly,

They contrast what is happening over there, not only in the economic sense, in the lack of controls or effective controls, but in the labor relations sense.

They have not handled either problem as well as this country has, and have pointed out that one of the reasons why is that labor there has been kept on the outside, rather than brought in and made a part of whatever is done.

Well, one of the principal leaders of this industrial piece are our friends in construction, who were just going off the board, as you know, all of a sudden.

The worst works.

Now they're on the bed.

Now they're going along, and less than one third of the question is, have you done it all with jawbone?

No.

What do you think, Archie?

No, I don't think so.

No, Archie, you don't think?

All of them.

See, this is the point of this election.

Another critic, another rather interesting issue, that...

I was looking at the poll here, and it's Harris or something, showing that 80% of the people that favor our controls probably want to get stronger.

But if you go to the other side, they're talking about, they want to go back, they said, to that wonderful period, and the guidelines.

What about that?

Do you have any answer to that?

You're not political?

Let's not do it.

There's another year running out.

Mr. President, I think you have to do it through control of the competition.

Yeah, oh yes, that's right.

Gotta have one of the others.

People have their interests have to be certified.

Go ahead.

I'd like to discuss some factors that we think will be important in the bargaining situation next year.

And one of the factors that we think will be important are the economic factors.

The situation of workers as they've fared in recent years compared to certain time periods when they worked in more difficulty.

That is what I will be discussing mainly.

There are some other factors, of course, that will be relevant.

One factor is that lower wage settlements, continuation of the trend toward lower wage settlements, will be necessary to make continued progress in reducing inflation.

Another factor that we have to keep in mind is the labor market is expected to tighten some in the coming year.

There are, in addition, some problem areas that I do not cover very much in what I'm going to do.

distorsions that are being worked out under the committee.

Public sector is a sector in which there has been some change in bargaining practices with emerging unionism and some distortion of relative wage patterns, and my data do not cover the public sector.

In addition, I will be looking at average behavior, and there will be special circumstances surrounding individual situations which make them different, of course, from what we might expect from the average.

One of the features that people have focused on recently is that there will be a large number of workers covered by new collective bargaining agreements next year.

In excess of 4 million, this number is likely to in fact be higher compared to some 2.8 million during 1972.

And as you can see, in recent years, first year increases have tended to be large, and when a large number of workers negotiate first year increases,

that effective wage change for all union situations is tended to be higher.

However, it is encouraging to note that 1972 so far is below 1969 in terms of overall effective wage increases, in spite of the fact that both years were approximately similar in terms of numbers of workers affected.

An additional factor for next year is that

Many of these situations are very large situations and highly visible situations.

As you can see, in these six industry sectors, approximately one-half of the workers will be negotiating.

Some of these are trucking, autos, rubber, electrical equipment, and some of those I'll be looking at in more detail later.

It's expected and widely thought that these situations are highly visible and may have a certain amount of pattern-setting influence in the overall wage level.

Not may have, they will come.

They always do.

Another factor that's noting at this point, and this gives rise to some of the concern that has been expressed, there's been a continuation in recent years of very large first-year wage increases

in spite of slackening in the labor market as shown by the unemployment statistics, which overall rose to 5.9 in 1971.

The apparent slight reduction here is mainly attributable to progress in the construction industry under the committee.

If we look at manufacturing, there's continued acceleration into 1971 in spite of an even larger increase in the unemployment rate.

The data that I'm going to present is essentially going to argue that much of the reason for this is not so much that slant in the labor market will have no impact on new first year increases, but rather that this pattern of acceleration is mainly a result of previous inflation patterns.

Workers who are not covered by long term agreements can get wage increases roughly concurrently with increases in the cost of living.

and this measures average hourly earnings increase for the average worker in the economy.

Those covered by long-term contracts, however, get wage increases that are built into those contracts, and in a period of accelerating inflation which we experienced prior to 1969 and 1970, those built-in increases tended to be lower than the average received by working men.

As you can see by this line of numbers indicating deferred increases economy-wide, and this line deferred increases in manufacturing, the percentage increases were lower in each case by average hourly earnings for the average worker.

However, when new agreements were negotiated,

The first year increase was larger than the average received by the typical worker, reflecting the catch-up that was needed as he had lower increases during the term of the contract.

Here are some individual situations.

Some of these are situations that we'll be confronting in 1973.

And, as you can see, in each of these cases, the increases received

during the term of the contract by these workers was lower than the average received by workers in the economy.

Similarly here, similarly for these other situations which we have confronted a couple of years ago.

In each case, the deferred increases built into contracts were lower than those received on the average.

When the new agreements were negotiated in these cases,

There was a tendency for these workers to catch up, and recovery increased more than was typical for the academy.

This holds true for almost every case, except for this one concerning steel, and this one concerning rubber over that four-year period.

This is even clearer when looking just at new first-year increases under major collective bargaining agreements, where in each case the new first-year increases were larger than the increases received by the typical worker in the economy.

It reflects the fact that the workers fell behind other workers, and they caught up when the agreements expired, and they negotiated new contracts.

As you can see, this is a period in which the rate of inflation was increasing.

There was increasing concern about the consequences of inflation for real wages, and an increasing number of workers became covered by cost-of-living escalators.

This reflects their increased concern about inflation, but for the future, it would mean

that fewer of these workers would need to catch up for passing increases in the cost of living, and it has implications for 1973 in that manner.

Another important question is whether deferred increases in the oldest expiring agreements have been lower than those negotiated more recently.

And here, these numbers abstract from industry mix changes,

You can see that there's a tendency for deferred increases to remain constant over the last three years, so that those workers who have the oldest agreements, which will be expiring in 1973, will not have, on the average, received smaller increases than others who have negotiated since then.

Here is a chart reflecting the pattern of increases under collective bargaining agreements for the various industry sectors.

For 1972 so far, as you can see, significant progress has been achieved across the board.

New wage increases have been brought up during 1972 compared to recent years.

Particularly noteworthy is the decline in construction to about 8% here compared to about 18% in 1970.

And I'm told that when this number is revised, it may be about 6.5% rather than 8, reflecting even better progress.

One of the important factors with regard to the improvement of construction, of course, is that smaller new wage increases there will tend to have a much less provocative influence on other industry sectors when those increases are very large.

This indicates how workers have fared who are receiving wage increases under collective bargaining agreements that will expire next year.

And as you can see,

These workers in 1971 and so far in 1972 have received wage increases larger than those received by the typical workers.

That is, in contrast to the previous period, they are no longer falling behind other workers in the economy.

In addition, with the improvement in inflation, their real wages have gone up along with those of all other workers in the economy.

In summary, there are two factors that are focused on here that we think have a big effect on the environment for bargaining next year.

One is what has happened to wage increases for those who are going to be bargaining compared to the cost of living.

And here we have been in a period in which the rate of inflation has been declining rather than increasing.

The other factor is how have these workers fared compared to other workers in the economy.

And to summarize the prospects for 1973, wages have increased faster than the cost of living has increased.

Relative wage positions have been maintained or improved for those who will be subject to new agreement.

A slower rise in the cost of living has resulted in real wage increases for all workers, including those who have been under long-term agreement.

For this reason, economic pressures to catch up should be significantly less severe in 1973 than they have been in recent years.

It took about a two-hour presentation.

One of the tasks is to get it down to two paragraphs.

Two sentences.

But I think that in contrast to the articles that are now starting to appear, and I've seen two or three in recent weeks about the same thing, these facts do give a good substantive reason why they're

Workers who were on those contracts, circumstances are going to be very different from what they were three years ago when they were bargaining, because they've been on the short end, bargaining early, and then cost of living going up.

This time they bargained for three years, and the cost of living went down, and their position in terms of real earnings has improved, and their position in terms of their relationship with the other workers has improved.

That fact, it seems to me, ought to create an improved bargaining atmosphere for 1970.

That's a factor.

Mental set, they won't be anticipating inflation the same way they did previous bargaining for it.

Well, now about food.

Well, very briefly.

They would not be anticipating it, but there was as well.

There was an art in all the papers in this country.

According to that, the United States Department of Agriculture's monthly release concerning

...spreads.

And there's been a good bit of question lately, and I just wanted to report that the data that Agriculture reported yesterday or the day before was the data for August.

That is the data that led to the actions by the folks living there.

First on August 4th, as I recall, because there was the anticipation of it, and secondly on September 7th.

when the council wired all the large food chains, pointed out the fact that the carcass prices of beef were coming down, that in fact retail prices had not started to come down, and that we felt they should have come down.

And regrettably, this article that now appears this week indicates that the spread got larger.

That, of course, is true, but there's a lag in the report, and the up-to-date information, which I'd like to report, is that

The carcass retail spread on bacon has in fact come down since the data that was announced yesterday was collected.

And it came down for a variety of reasons.

In other words, you're saying the figures that you have for the month of September show an improvement over the figures for the month of August?

Yes, sir.

What the department's reporting on was the figures for the month of August, correct?

That is absolutely correct.

And then after you, when did you draw on the retail?

We did it first in early August, and the second time was in early September.

And it was spread out, just to mention it briefly, in that period in August, it was...

in the neighborhood of 38.4, between carcass and retail, on feet.

It got up to as high as 42.7, and it's now down in the low 30s, around 33.

So the spread has closed as retail prices have come down in actual cents per pound.

Specifically, retail value of beef was up at $1.17, say, in mid-August period.

It's now down to $1.10 per pound.

So the retail price has moved down.

The spread did get larger.

And that was the point that we moved in, and retail prices have now started to move down, are following the carpenter's price, and the spreads are squeezing.

I'm going to be fair and say, time-wise, that the next month for the fourth agriculture, which will report this, will come out about four weeks from today.

That's right.

That's correct.

But it's not insignificant.

It's, you know, we all...

But we can easily see how it happened.

I mean, you can see on that now, obviously, what, they have their prices, and so the prices and feedlots go down, and that is never reflected in them, immediately.

I mean, they hold them up there, and eventually, by the time it's processed, it gets in there, and so forth, and they go down.

A little competition comes along the way.

Mr. President, you've got to say the same time, time like for them, and the absolute, too.

But at that point, it doesn't seem unfair.

Well, I suppose it's true.

That is, they'll be selling a certain amount.

And out there, down the line, there'll be paying a lot more for this than beef, or at least beef losses.

And they have to catch up.

But I think the important thing is that these figures are going to look pretty good in four weeks.

I know.

I would say, though, that it's very important not to wait for that one-day story three or four weeks from now.

So the important thing is to start talking about this story immediately, and put out weekly reports if necessary.

Wow.

I'd almost interpret this as saying that some time ago, we pretty much had the information that the Agriculture Department was announcing us.

We didn't have it.

So we saw that coming, and we did something about it.

The results of the actions taken are now apparent, and the kind of things that Don has, a near full statistical power to be announced, but nevertheless we can see that result, so that there was an analysis, and there was some action, and there was some result.

Of course, the most important thing is that what we say about it is pretty good.

We want to fight these stories.

And as you know, the most heavy retail situation is in California.

There have been huge changes by each other.

And I know the drivers driving.

Thank you.

Getting a lot of heat from others because they don't want to spend the money.

So as long as the stores are advertising that they are moving down, this is what has the effect.

We can make all the speeches we want, but if the person, that housewife who goes in there, buys things for these people who raise the prices for them, that speaks louder than any speech.

One of the things that Don did was nasty.

We had information on this, but some chains had dropped their prices down, so he named the ones that had behaved.

And then everybody climbed down the list.

They were treated unfairly, but they dropped their prices down.

One outfit called up and wired and said, we had behaved too.

And I said, well, you ought to tell people that.

And then we had full-page ads, wires saying, Costal Living Council, we've been good too, look at what we've done.

And of course that is the same kind of healthy competitive effect.

Looking at the business, what is the situation?

We're going to have this temporary, but the long-range prospect is really, is not very good, is it?

For me, yes.

We're increasing our hurts currently about 2% on the manual rate.

I think we'll take care of the growth curve all right.

The basic problem, of course, is that we're not as exposed to empty man.

Right, right.

Momentarily, as we increase your hurts, you hold back.

She's talking to you as you press your current slider as you increase your hurts.

It's an important situation.

I just this morning signed a report to you, a quarterly report I have to do, that...

Imports are up, I think, about 35 million pounds over the chart report that we had initially sent.

This action we took probably has had the effect of increasing imports to a magnitude of 70 to 100 million pounds, something like that, which is still one pound per person that's been issued.

Do you really think there is a problem in bringing in feed from Argentina?

You'll go for that?

Oh yes, absolutely.

Our birds went in to see, right after you talked to them about it, they think we're being a little rough on them.

They don't have the lead down to themselves right now.

Because of this.

Are we doing an adequate job of being of assistance to them?

Or is the only answer to the disease the slaughter of the cattle?

I remember when we had it 30 years ago in California, it was such a tragedy.

It just killed them all.

Is that what you do now?

What are your research with the Department of Agriculture?

Just like the kill bees, you know?

You're working on pictures on top of this?

All the flash grants?

They kill healthy bees.

All right.

They're a better balance.

Australian Finance Minister, who probably knows about as much about beef as I do, which is much, but anyway, that's a big thing in Australia.

He commented to me on the removal of the quantitative restriction.

I think Australia has responded more than any other country, and he says that if they had any real assurance

I have the feeling, I know this is a very sensitive problem with our people, but I have the feeling and view of this increasing demand that Erland...

We're going to have to take a hard look about putting more in here.

I mean, you go up and down, I mean, I know that the cattlemen and all the rest of the sheepgoers say, oh, no, no, no, we've got to keep this stuff out.

But when you see this curve, they're going to do real well, aren't they?

Yeah, they're just going to do it.

They're just going to do it.

Because this is an interesting thing to grab the table here.

This is sort of the bellwether that the price of food in the retail market is.

Our per capita consumption of beef this year is an all-time high.

It's double what it was 20 years ago.

Double what it was 20 years ago.

Yeah, it's the per capita consumption.

It's double what it was 20 years ago.

So the price is not to result in a short supply.

No, it's a lot of heart.

It's a lot of heart.

But our people forecast that by the end of this decade, we'd like to be eating 130 pounds of beef per capita, contrasting 116 now.

When you factory any increase in population, that means a fourth more beef we will need by 1980 than we have now.

Now where's it going to come from?

You can't get many more cows in the inter-modern area.

We're using all the rainfall there is.

You can't put many more in the corn belt, because corn and soybeans are king there, except in the rough areas you can put some more there.

You can put some more on this top, but not too many more.

We've completed our reduction of dairy cows and substituted beef for that.

There is much more slack there.

We now feed every animal that will take a bite of feed.

So two-thirds of feed today is 20 years old.

One-third is just.

There is much more room for increasing feed.

So what I'm saying is that the increase in feed will come from marginal cost areas for increase.

I quite agree with you looking down the road.

I think we're going to have to increase the animals.

I understand that.

If we go too fast, we're going to get the same reaction from Congress that Pete Peterson got on Hyde Express.

Sure.

But I think we can play this thing.

Let me say this.

Of course you can't say this publicly.

The Congress will just seize the issue immediately.

I mean, they'll go back to having a heartbeat and so forth and so on, or the way they might.

But the point is that we cannot, I mean, the most stupid thing you can do is not to see future trends and plus more than now.

And I would say that within a very small circle you ought to talk about this.

I mean, I'm taught.

Don't write any memorandum.

I don't know.

I've never seen a memorandum.

I've just written one to you, Mr. President, this morning, in which I've said that the current level of imports that seek to trigger plants up in Congress...

And then I didn't recommend any action.

I said the situation remains unchanged.

But you had to take the action.

That's right.

But the part of the trivial relative to our domestic supply, I'm sure that's going to be determined by the supply of feed.

We're still holding down the supply of feed, aren't we?

No, we agree on the supply of feed.

You may be essentially the first out of a rough future.

As I said, you can't bring the whole country in a mountain area.

We're using all the rainfall there is there.

The world won't send any more in the short run.

Now you see they blame it on the Lord.

Those farmers are expected.

Mr. President, those farmers are salivating back in the audience.

Well, yeah, or we could get... We might do that.

We gotta get some group that doesn't need it, you know, to subsidize them, and they make some concrete.

Well, that's right.

We could expand pork production.

The plain truth is, we don't need to have as much pork as they would prefer to be.

I'll tell you what you can do.

You can import some people from India.

Have a little flour by the plate that's supposed to be if you want to have the vegetables.

They can fix vegetables so they taste like meat.

It's not bad.

Yeah, but I still prefer the beef.

What we didn't like was when Schultz and Stein met with the ambassadors and told them we wanted more B importing in the United States.

He said, that sounded like they meant it.

George, is that 35 million more pounds of beef imported?

What percentage is that?

35 million pounds.

What percentage of ours?

We've got 210 million people.

What's all the years for this?

35 million pounds is a... 35 million pounds has come in, and that's all good.

It's not fair for me to go to Pittsburgh, Virginia.

We won't have you in the same city at the same time.

I'll have that arranged.

Well, Mr. President, I think the cattlemen, there was a little slack when we took these imports, but not much.

They know, they're very smart.

Let me say that I'm most grateful to all of the staff gathered around here for what we've done in this area.

George has put his finger on a key point that, of course, without economic factors,

no control program over a long period of time will do work.

I mean, we get to work over a short period of time.

We must also know that, gee, these controls, aren't they wonderful?

And that's how we've got prices down.

I think we have to remember that over a longer period of time, unless the marketplace is balanced in such a way that the prices are controlled,

The controls are going to blow, so I don't want us to be too sad about the future in this respect.

That's why these marketplace factors and the briefing on wages are so important.

But between now and the election, I think we should perhaps be rather proud of what has happened.

The members of this council should make this a good record.

And the way I summarize it, I think it's something that you take and it's worth repeating.

To simply say that, in generalizing that, when I was speaking to 124, recognizing 124 nations, that I was able to say that the United States had the lowest rate of inflation, the highest rate of growth, the highest increase

The lowest rate of inflation, the highest rate of growth, the highest increase in real wages,

That's been our record over the past year, and that's quite a record of any industrial nation in the world.

Better than Japan, better than Germany, infinitely better than the British, even better than the French, who are quite stable at this point.

And we can say that, and we may not do it.

All of you have done an excellent job, and we trust that you will continue to do so.

The other thing I should mention is the need for constant repetition here.

We who are now experts in this field, because we wait until the CBI figure comes out, or the WPI figure comes out, or the unemployment figure comes out, and it goes down by a tenth of a point, or this or that, it goes up by a tenth of a point, or it goes down by a tenth of a point, it doesn't make any difference, because it's a one-day story.

The point we have to remember is that in this whole area of politics, that you have to just repeat.

You've got a good figure that's a month old.

Use it until the next one comes out.

If it's bad, don't use it.

Somebody else will.

But that's their right.

And the thing that we sometimes do is that we're a little reluctant to repeat.

But if it's something that is legitimate, then we'll have to repeat it, repeat it, and repeat it.

Some of those solicitors, let's say, repeat it, and they'll say, well, we just want you to print it.

But you're bald.

recognizing within our own shop that we're not home free.

We got here by taking the long view.

We're going to continue to take the long view.

But to clean out November 7th, that's about five weeks away, we have to take a short view in terms of presenting it, and we've got to be non-apologetic, very affirmative.

Don't talk about the weaknesses, talk about the strength.

And the weaknesses come up and say, well, sure.

They say, well, what about a movement?

Well, we're not satisfied with the situation, but let's make this point.

That we haven't had, and this is the key point, we haven't had what we describe as bold employment.

Bold employment means anything in the 4% rate law.

We haven't had bold employment without war.

and without significant inflation since 1955 and 6, throughout the 60s.

There's not a great deal of unemployment in the early 60s before we involved Vietnam, an average of 5.7 to 8.

Unemployment, of course, in the Vietnam period doesn't matter.

But now we have Vietnam going down and out with inflation cut in half at least,

Now we can really look forward to achieving the goal that we had last during the Eisenhower administration.

It just happens that was the case, but it's true.

And that is a full employment for a full prosperity, call it what you like, a full prosperity without war and without financial inflation.

That's the goal.

In the meantime, talk about the fact that we're on the way, because it's never perfect.

Even when we get that far, it's like that.

Thank you for your time.

Well, do something about it.

You know what I mean.