USA > Massachusetts > Middlesex County > Somerville > Report of the city of Somerville 1956 > Part 9
Note: The text from this book was generated using artificial intelligence so there may be some errors. The full pages can be found on Archive.org (link on the Part 1 page).
Part 1 | Part 2 | Part 3 | Part 4 | Part 5 | Part 6 | Part 7 | Part 8 | Part 9 | Part 10 | Part 11 | Part 12 | Part 13 | Part 14 | Part 15 | Part 16 | Part 17 | Part 18 | Part 19 | Part 20 | Part 21 | Part 22 | Part 23 | Part 24 | Part 25 | Part 26 | Part 27
..
b. Amount
355,853.12
13033
-5082
7951
..
1664
b. Amount
137,340.17
441.60
TOTAL DIFFERENCE IN MEDICAL COSTS FOR THE YEAR 1956 = - $13,145.30 AS COMPARED TO THE YEAR 1955
144
ANNUAL REPORTS
REPORT OF THE CITY PHYSICIAN
January 23, 1957
To the Board of Public Welfare Somerville, Massachusetts
Gentlemen:
I submit the following as the report of the City Physician for the year ending December 31, 1956.
Patients treated at the Clinic, January 1 thru December 31, 1956 (include Old Age Assistance, Aid to Dependent Children, Disability Assistance, General Relief, Veterans' Services, Recreation Department, Examination for Camp, Vaccinations, and Emergencies.) 4453
Patients treated at home, January 1 thru December 31, 1956 (include Old Age Assistance, Aid to Dependent Children, Disability Assistance, General Relief, Veterans' Services, Police and Fire Depts., Prisoners, Commitments to Mental Institutions, and Emergencies.) 1633
Respectfully submitted,
JOHN M. TAVARES, M.D.
City Physician
145
WELFARE DEPARTMENT
STATISTICAL REPORT OF THE CITY PHYSICIAN - 1956
Calls Made at the Clinic
Aid to Dependent Children
1692
Misc. Welfare (General Relief)
975
Disability Assistance
570
Old Age Assistance
331
Veterans' Services
180
Recreation Commission
150
Examinations for Camp
500
Vaccinations
54
Emergencies
1
4453
Home and Other Calls
Misc. Welfare (General Relief)
300
Aid to Dependent Children
618
Disability Assistance
168
Old Age Assistance
295
Veterans' Services
44
Firemen
76
Policemen
74
Station "'Prisoners"
27
Commitments
6
Retirements
18
Emergencies
7
1633
TOTAL CASELOAD BY SEX AS OF DECEMBER 1, 1956
Male Adults
O. A. A. 26.9% 524
A D. C. .4 % 3
D. A. 49.5% 102
G. R. 22.6% 62
TOTAL 20.3% 691
......
37.0% 361
......
23.6% 65
12.5%
Male Children
......
73.1%
27.8%
50.5% 104
37.4% 104
55.9% 1900
Female Adults
1422
270
34.8%
16.4%
11.3%
Female Children
100.0%
100.0%
100.0%
100.0%
100.0%
TOTAL
1946
972
206
276
3400
TOTAL CASELOAD BY WARDS AS OF DECEMBER 1, 1956
Ward
O. A. A.
247-12.2%
A. D. C. 53-19.1% 56-20.6%
D. A. 40-19.4%
G. R. 31-20.1%
TOTAL
1
.
.
.
.
.
.
2
·
·
·
·
.
· ... ....
3
303-15.6%
27-10.0%
30-14.6%
24-15.6%
384-14.9%
4
294-15.2%
78-28 -. 6%
31-15.1%
31-20.1%
434-16.8%
5
215.11.1%
30-11.1%
20- 9.7%
16-10.4%
281-10.9%
6
352-18.2%
17- 6.2%
20- 9.7%
11- 7.2%
400-15.5%
7
187- 9.7%
12- 4.4 %
14- 6.8%
5- 3.2%
218- 8.4%
Total
1857
273
182
154
2466
Outside-Cities & Towns
89- 4.6%
24-11.7%
..
113- 4.4%
Grand Total
1946-100.0%
273-100.0%
206-100.0%
154-100.0%
2579-100.0%
146
·
.
·
·
.
·
.
·
. ....
.
·
.
·
. .........
.
.
...
·
·
·
......
·
.
·
259-13.4%
27-13.0%
36-23.4%
378-14.7%
·
.
·
.
ANNUAL REPORTS
...
..
......
338
45
383
..
.. ....
371-14.4%
·
.
...
426
......
TOTAL CASELOAD BY WARDS AND PRECINCTS AS OF DECEMBER 1, 1956
PRECINCTS
WARD
1
2
3
4
5
6
TOTAL
1
114
66
70
79
42
371
2
52
58
72
47
71
78
378
3
83
105
68
64
64
384
4
65
48
101
60
62
98
434
5
29
44
59
49
57
43
281
6
50
77
101
33
139
400
7
54
60
27
54
23
....
218
TOTAL
2466
O.A.A. Cases Outside Cities & Towns D.A. Cases Outside Cities & Towns ..
24
GRAND TOTAL
2579
POPULATION AND GROSS EXPENDITURES, 1947 THRU 1956
YEAR
POPULATION
WELFARE
CITY HOME
A. D. C. $276,903.91
$1,128,792.45
$1,642,072.55
1948
105882
252,167.58
28,297.62
348,429.52
1,341,752.67
1,970,647.39
1949
105882
359,466.38
30,577.42
467,787.67
1,567,412.50
2,425,243.97
1950
105882
427,568.68
31,043.35
533,904.44
1,852,724.61
2,845,241.08
1951
105882
346,393.60
37,314.84
471,820.45
1,831,562.43
$
10,220.82
2,697,312.14
1952
105882
245,870.75
42,008.75
480,288.45
1,974,867.49
194,839.28
2,937,874.72
1953
105882
208,292.35
43,303.16
456,887.68
1,911,660.44
257,156.34
2,877,299.97
1954
* 102254
216,902.70
27,385.91
501,500.21
1,929,605.27
261,034.06
2,936,428.15
1955
* 102254
247,953.95
526,962.80
1,927,606.82
307,906.10
3,010,429.67
1956
* 102254
255,589.25
497,694.58
1,942,570.26
310,762.42
3,006,616.51
$2,771,620.97
$264,891.51
$4,562,179.71
$17,408,554.94
$1,341,919.02
$26,349,166.15
..
..
.
.
·
. .
.
.
.
...
..
..
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
·
·
·
·
·
·
.
.
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
.
.
·
.
·
·
· ·
.
.
.
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
.
..
·
WELFARE DEPARTMENT
147
* Federal Census 1950
TOTALS
1947
105882
$211,415.73
$24,960.46
O. A. A.
D. A.
......
.....
.
·
.
....
89
...
..........
148
ANNUAL REPORTS
REIMBURSEMENTS FROM OTHER CITIES AND TOWNS - 1953 - 1956
YEAR
O. A. A.
MISC. WELFARE
CITY HOME
TOTALS
1953
$28,704.40
$9,857.10
$1,748.15
$40,309.65
1954
26,503.13
8,168.94
2,611.96
37,284.03
1955
45,141.85
18,917.33
2,548.22
66,607.40
1956
38,267.36
33,649.61
951.27
72,868.24
MONEY RECOVERIES FROM LIENS, ESTATES, INSURANCE AND OTHER SOURCES - 1953 - 1956
YEAR
O. A. A.
A. D. C.
D. A.
TOTALS
1953
$9,642.33
$ 212.00
$2,213.74
$12,068.07
1954
24,506.71
250.00
1,394.72
26,151.43
1955
39,603.30
1,780.00
1,470.39
42,853.69
1956
44,062.86
5,326.69
49,389.55
PAYMENTS TO OTHER CITIES AND TOWNS - 1947 - 1956
YEAR
O. A. A.
Misc. Welfare
TOTALS
1956
$60,571.19
$75,035.95
$135,607.14
1955
32,205.50
51,400.04
83,605.54
1954
40,477.03
20,504.95
60,981.98
1953
28,761.56
32,266.63
61,028.19
1952
51,902.94
34,610.97
86,513.91
1951
26,534.09
34,009.74
60,543.83
1950
41,132.06
57,025.52
98,157.58
1949
9,132.56
19,243.58
28,376.14
1948
20,511.22
22,434.06
42,945.28
1947
19,732.83
11,669.29
31,402.12
COMPARATIVE TABLE IV Showing Somerville's Municipal Expenditures, Gross and Net, Public Welfare Expenditures and Related Percentages 1931 - 1955
Year
Tax Rate
Total Municipal Expenditures
Gross Expenditures Welfare Depart.
Welf. Expend. = % of Munic. Expend.
Net Costs of Public Welfare to City
Net Costs = % of Munic. Expend.
1931
$30.60
$4,859,990.50
$466,120.00
9.5%
$351,625.53
7.2%
1932
40.10
5,516,629.51
792,574.52
14.3 %
591,024.69
10.7%
1933
32.60
5,064,738.84
751,254.90
14.8%
524,824.87
10.3%
1934
37.00
5,547,193.82
933,570.37
16.8%
656,011.63
11.8%
1935
38.60
5,511,071.44
777,729.03
14.1%
417,769.28
7.5%
1936
41.90
6,327,496.36
1,211,634.32
19.1%
868,229.74
13.7%
1937
44.30
6,702,517.60
1,435,975.26
21.4%
785,438.80
11.7%
1938
43.90
6,764,834.51
1,502,253.56
22.2%
783,381.66
11.6%
1939
41.40
6,485,756.51
1,542,443.07
23.7%
720,463.55
11.1%
1940
42.30
6,501,988.75
1,484,319.11
22.8%
558,053.27
8.5%
1941
39.90
6,551,470.71
1,176,345.88
17.9%
424,669.25
6.4%
1942
41.00
6,039,963.32
1,115,605.07
18.4%
293,680.04
4.8%
1943
40.40
5,984,602.52
963,136.82
16.1 %
236,456.70
3.9%
1944
40.30
5,947,164.95
964,190.22
16.2%
269,845.13
4.5%
1945
38.80
6,194,700.83
1,064,068.30
17.2%
314,186.68
5.0%
1946
42.50
6,854,836.25
1,345,062.26
19.6%
474,377.24
6.9%
1947
43.90
9,032,207.92
1,642,072.55
18.2%
542,695.27
6.0%
1948
49.90
8,972,531.48
1,970,647.39
21.9%
622,340.27
6.9%
1949
49.90
9,830,106.61
2,425,243.97
24.6%
783,876.01
7.9%
1950
54.90
10,302,611.25
2,845,241.08
27.6%
751,021.84
7.3%
1951
53.60
10,421,584.45
2,697,312.14
25.9%
534,465.98
5.1%
1952
55.60
11,011,388.72
2,937,874.72
26.7%
686,163.88
6.2%
1953
55.30
11,227,588.01
2,877,299.97
25.6%
606,232.81
5.4%
1954
63.20
11,829,901.98
2,936,428.15
24.8%
688,826.03
5.8%
1955
63.20
12,278,113.43
3,010,429.67
24.5%
662,279.53
5.4%
TOTALS
$191,760,990.27
$40,868,832.33
21.3%
$14,147,939.68
7.3%
.
.
·
.
..
.
·
.
WELFARE DEPARTMENT
149
......
.
.
..
.
150
ANNUAL REPORTS
COLLECTED FROM OTHER CITIES AND TOWNS
1954 1955 1956
$37,284.03 $66,607.40 $72,868.24
NET INCREASE 1956 OVER 1954 equals 95.4%
NET INCREASE 1956 OVER 1955 equals 9.4%
Refunds
1954 1955 1956
$48,389.46
$40,852.84 $58,530.68
NET INCREASE 1956 OVER 1954 equals 20.9%
NET INCREASE 1956 OVER 1955 equals 43.2%
Recorveries
1954 1955 1956
$26,151.43
$43,496.83
$49,389.55
NET INCREASE 1956 OVER 1954 equals 88.8%
NET INCREASE 1956 OVER 1955 equals 13.5%
TRANSFERS OF MONEY WITHIN THE WELFARE DEPT. DURING THE YEAR 1956
OAA
Aug. 27, 1956-Transferred $50,000 from OAA Personal Services to OAA Ordinary Maintenance.
Dec. 31, 1956-Transferred $35.25 from OAA Personal Services to Audit- ors Pension Account.
ADC
Aug. 15, 1956-Transferred $2,092.92 from ADC Personal Services to Miscellaneous Welfare Personal Services.
Aug. 27, 1956-Transferred $23,000.00 from ADC Personal Services to ADC Ordinary Maintenance.
DA
Aug. 27, 1956-Transferred $13,000.00 from DA Personal Services to DA Ordinary Maintenance.
Oct. 30, 1956-Transferred $425.00 from DA Ordinary Maintenance to DA Equipment Account.
GR
July 17, 1956-Transferred $496.50 from GR Ordinary Maintenance to DA Equipment Account.
Oct. 31, 1956-Transferred $586.64 from GR Personal Services to OAA Personal Services.
Dec. 17, 1956-Transferred $6,000.00 from GR Ordinary Maintenance to Veterans Services Ordinary Maintenance.
15T
WELFARE DEPARTMENT
BALANCES IN ACCOUNTS AS OF DECEMBER 31, 1956
Miscellaneous Welfare Ordinary Maintenance
$ 304.32
Disability Assistance Ordinary Maintenance
208.30
Federal Grant Dis. Asst. Administrative
1,297.22
Federal Grant Dis. Asst. OM
151.58
Aid to Dependent Children OM
250.00
Federal Grant ADC Administrative
1,465.18
Federal Grant ADC OM
14,965.93
Old Age Assistance OM
452.50
Federal Grant OAA Administrative
3,912.07
Federal Grant OAA OM
21,832.89
$44,839.99
TO MUNICIPAL EXCESS & DEFICIENCY ACCOUNT
OAA -O. M.
$27,041.45
OAA - P. S.
16,452.43
ADC - O. M.
2,572.19
ADC - P. S.
2,945.06
DA -O. M.
7,720.88
DA - P. S.
3,228.81
DA - Equipment
32.50
G. R. - O. M.
35,360.68
G. R. - P. S.
16.95
Misc. Welfare Special Items
Account (Bonus)
424.40
$95,795.35
152
ANNUAL REPORTS
1956 COMPARATIVE COSTS OF ASSISTANCE
State Ave. Per Case
Greater Boston Ave. Per Case
Somerville Ave. Per Case
January
.......
11
A.D.C.
129.57
131.68
123.65
D.A.
100.09
108.66
92.78
February "
..
A.D.C.
129.61
131.27
121.68
102.60
110.72
92.71
March
O.A.A.
81.79
84.99
74.18
11
D.A.
102.00
110.26
91.24
April
O.A.A.
81.40
84.86
75.08
A.D.C.
131.84
134.56
118.23
"
D.A.
102.79
111.02
103.91
May
A.D.C.
131.50
135.27
118.58
D.A.
103.72
111.78
107.97
June
O.A.A.
82.37
86.36
76.05
"
A.D.C.
132.69
135.81
126.86
11
D.A.
105.09
113.98
108.62
July
O.A.A.
83.54
86.29
76.51
11
A.D.C.
134.55
136.08
140.12
11
D.A.
103.66
108.74
102.15
August
O.A.A.
85.26
88.69
77.51
11
A.D.C.
139.68
144.85
143.12
D.A.
108.09
114.25
101.96
September
O.A.A.
84.56
88.39
79.69
11
A.D.C.
135.93
139.38
127.17
D.A.
105.28
110.52
106.06
October
O.A.A.
83.79
86.96
78.48
11
A.D.C.
136.43
139.66
128.51
D.A.
104.04
109.05
102.34
November
O.A.A.
84.96
87.80
81.54
11
A.D.C.
137.31
140.71
132.85
11
D.A.
107.35
111.56
114.41
December
O.A.A.
84.33
86.10
81.40
A.D.C.
136.24
138.49
141.50
11
D.A.
108.61
116.36
102.38
Average Month
O.A.A.
83.01
86.30
77.44
Payment on
A.D.C.
133.81
136.70
128.73
Yearly Basis 1956
D.A.
104.44
111.41
102.21
O.A.A.
$ 80.51
$ 83.85
$ 76.36
O.A.A.
81.47
85.09
75.30
D.A.
A.D.C.
130.39
132.62
122.48
O.A.A.
82.19
86.22
77.24
153
WELFARE DEPARTMENT
PUBLIC WELFARE IN PERSPECTIVE JOHN J. GRIFFIN, Agent Board of Public Welfare City of Somerville Massachusetts
Probably the question most frequently directed to Public Welfare Administrators today is: "Why do we have so many people receiving Public Assistance and such high expenditures for Public Welfare in this era of unprecedented prosperity?"
This interrogation, as you may observe, should be consid- ered a "leading question," since it simply assumes that we have an excessive number of persons on our assistance rolls and that the costs are exorbitant. A dispassionate analysis of the actual facts disproves this hypothesis. Let us examine the situation in relation to the general realities of our national economy. This is certainly the most objective way of making a realistic appraisal.
Before we discuss the scientific aspects of the subject, it may be advisable to refer, at least briefly, to a few philosophical principles and to glance in retrospect at the historical evolution of our present circumstances as they pertain to this matter.
First of all, our Public Relief programs have been designed primarily to cope with the problems revolving about economic indigence and dependency. Traditionally, in our American Republic, the concept of personal independence has been one of our most cherished ideals. The idea of the sovereign char- acter of the human adult constitutes, as it were, the very sub- stratum of our political institutions and concomitantly has conditioned, and, to a large extent, determined the develop- ment and patterns of our social-economic thinking.
Our Federal Constitution and the diversified legal struc- tures which derive therefrom, provide and protect the largest possible measure of individual freedom. Consequently, we expect the normal adult, in the ordinary course of events, to take advantage of the opportunities given to him so that he will be self-sustaining.
In considering the full implications of this fundamental recognition of our personal autonomy and liberty, we should
154
ANNUAL REPORTS
not overlook the basic truth that man's independence is not absolute, but rather, relative. The human person is both an individual and a social being. The essential fact, that he is not perfectly self-sufficient but must achieve his rational purposes as a member of Society, serves to indicate that a certain meas- ure of inter-dependence is inherent in the social nature of man. At birth, it is contingent upon the will of our parents and for the years of our minority, we are almost completely dependent upon them. Indeed, the process of emergence from a status of total dependency, takes a long time. Moreover, even as adults, we are dependent on others or their energies and talents and collaboration to supply most of our material and many of our educational, intellectual and spiritual necessities. We can- not survive apart from the community.
Indeed, it is the realization of this primordial truth which induces men to come together in civil Society, to establish governments and to work out their destinies, not alone, but in the company of their fellow men. Whether we care to con- template such varities or not, therefore, it becomes eminently evident upon the most casual reflection that we are all depend- ent upon others to an appreciable degree. The urbanite depends upon the farmer for vital foods and the rural agricul- turalist must rely upon the industrial mechanic for machinery which facilitates his labor.
The very social nature of man therefore conduces to a universal recognition of human inter-dependence. Hence, there are deeply rooted tendencies in our nature which urge us to reach out and alleviate the distress of our fellow men whether it be economic or otherwise.
But in addition to the intrinsic qualities and propensities of our human nature, we, who are beneficiaries of the cultural heritage of western civilization, are likewise prompted in our general attitude towards life by the spiritually rich traditions transmitted to us in the value systems which have come down to us from the Judaeo-Christian and Graeco-Roman origins. The New Testament is undoubtedly the supreme formative in- fluence in the cultural system of our western world. Accord- ingly, in the hours of crucial testing, the mere accumulation of material wealth has never been the ultimate criterion of human success. Furthermore, despite occasional and significant de- viations, we have remained firmly committed to the postulate that human personality is possessed of a transcendent dignity and that the virtue of sacred Charity obliges us to succor those
155
WELFARE DEPARTMENT
in need. It is well for us to remember that the foundation pillars of the great framework of our social legislation are grounded not in utilitarian standards of expediency but in the Christian concepts of justice and charity.
So much for the more remote background of our subject. It is a much easier task to point out quickly the milestones in the advancement of Public Welfare legislation in this Com- monwealth. Most of us, who are in the middle years of life, can scarcely recollect any references to Public Welfare before the unforgettable Stock Market Collapse in 1929; and the eventual bank closings in 1933. Only those who are profes- sionally concerned, perhaps, are familiar with the fact that the history of Public Assistance in Massachusetts actually dates from the very beginnings of the Bay Colony here in 1620, when the Pilgrims landed. Indeed, the central core of our Public Assistance legislation is traceable to the Elizabethan Poor Law enacted by the English Parliament at the close of the 16th Century when the traditional economy of that country was experiencing radical transitions. Until the time of HENRY VIII, the burden of poor relief fell on the Church rather than the State and monastic institutions were the principal centers of alms-giving. Moreover, the obligation of personal charity was an inherited concept and it was translated, not only in terms of individual benefactions, but in the fraternal benevo- lence of the craft guilds. The entrance of the State into the picture on a significant scale followed the disillusion of the medieval economy, when unemployment became extensive and uprooted peasants roamed the highways in search of work for bread.
The English Poor Law was written from such a constricted viewpoint, that it is now difficult to discern much worth in it. Perhaps its main virtue was that it represented an official rec- ognition by the community that personal distress is a matter of common concern. The early settlers on our shores, immersed as they were in biblical lore, appeared to have been almost wholly ignorant of the Parable of the Good Samaritan. These pioneers, struggling for their own survival, were interested only in the inhabitants of their own hamlet or village and looked upon all travelers or transients with suspicion and ill-concealed hostility. It is this peripheral mentality which was expressed in the atavistic settlement laws framed by the provincial colo- nists. In fact, the practice in the early days revealed little adherence to ancient notions of hospitality, for transients who fell in need were pre-judged as unproductive vagrants and were unceremoniously ejected from the town which they dared to
156
ANNUAL REPORTS
traverse. It would probably come as a startling discovery to most of our contemporaries when we state that it was not until 1926 that any person who accepted Public Assistance was not automatically disenfranchised. The reception of Public Assist- ance, up to that time, was legally tantamount to pauperism and entailed forfeiture of the right to vote.
In focusing advertence upon these facts, we are not un- mindful of the more important developments which made Massachusetts the acknowledged pioneer in Social Welfare legislation, nor can there be any doubt that the Government represented the will of the common people.
Massachusetts was the first sovereign State of the Union to establish a continuing centralized authority, entrusted with the responsibilities of providing adequate care for special cate- gories of indigence. The State Board of Charities became operative on October 1st, 1863 and its statutory functions in- cluded care of the insane, the deaf and blind, and the depend- ent poor. Nine years earlier in 1854, the State had established three alms-houses in various sections of the Commonwealth.
The annaled record evidences a succession of memorable milestones in the evolution of Social Welfare in Massachusetts after the institution of the State Board of Charities in 1863. Thus, in 1865, provisions were made for non-settled sick per- sons and, in 1866, a statute was adopted requiring an annual accounting from the private charitable agencies. In 1877, an enactment was provided for reimbursement to local commu- nities for temporary Aid to the non-sick unsettled poor. Other important dates associated with relevant progress were 1879, when a separate State Board of Health was established, and in the same year, a separate Board of Commissioners of Prisons was established. In 1886, a separate Board of Health was re- established, after the lapse of a few years, when its functions had been temporarily absorbed by other agencies. In 1898, the State Board of Insanity was established.
In 1916, Massachusetts adopted a new State Constitution and finally on December 1, 1919, the present State Depart- ment of Public Welfare came into being.
In 1913, the State Legislature laid the legal foundations for the Mothers' Aid program, which eventually, in 1936, con- sequent upon the passage of the Social Security Act, was broadened into the present Aid to Dependent Children pro- gram. We might also mention for the record, that the Massa-
157
WELFARE DEPARTMENT
chusetts Old Age Assistance Plan became effective on July 1 1931, some five years before the adoption of the Federal Social Security Act.
The principal reason for reviewing this calendar of histor- ical dates is simply to indicate the constantly enlarging scope of the community's interest and the corresponding response of the Legislature to the increasingly articulate demands of the citizenry.
Before the financial and industrial collapse of 1929 plunged this nation into its worst economic depression, there was no sustained focus of public attention on Public Welfare. Both case loads and costs, up until that time, were relatively and correlatively not particularly significant but during the dec- ade, 1929-1939, the entire social-economic picture changed completely. Indeed, the paralysis which overwhelmed business was most dramatically revealed in the number of persons un- employed. These ranged from Thirteen Million to Nineteen Million persons. These figures, moreover, should be viewed in the light of these two facts: first, the entire population of the United States in 1930 was 122,775,000 and the total labor force was 48,594,592.
On the other hand, twenty years later, that is in 1950, our total population was some Twenty-eight Million more or, to be exact, 150,697,361; and our civilian labor force had risen to 59,642,990. By 1955, our total population, which is now over One Hundred Seventy Million, was in the neighborhood of One Hundred Sixty-six Million and our civilian labor force had mounted to 67,465,000.
The vast implications and ramifications of the economic changes, which have taken place over the course of the last quarter-century, may be considered to be reflected particularly in the spectacular alterations which have marked the composi- tion of our national labor force. For example, of the Forty- eight Million persons in the labor force in 1930, almost Thirty-eight Million were men and a fraction over Ten Million were women. In contrast, of the Sixty-seven Million Plus, in the 1955 labor force, some Forty-six Million were men and Twenty-one Million were women. In other words, while the male contingent increased less than 25%, the female comple- ment rose more than 100%.
We refer to this latter phenomenon especially in order to draw attention to the remarkable character of our present so-
158
ANNUAL REPORTS
cial economy and its accompanying culture. Few of us seem to realize that, as a nation, we are now in the almost unique position of having our economy based on the production of luxuries rather than necessities. A comparative minority of our workers are engaged in providing us with food, shelter and clothing. The bulk of our workers are concerned with pro- ducing so-called durable goods. Indeed our whole psychology of advertising, which is so important in the field of distribution, is premised on the notion of getting us to believe that luxuries are necessities.
Furthermore, our economy is relying, to a considerable extent, on enormous Governmental expenditures. This fact has been sufficiently dramatized by President Eisenhower's pre- sentation of the 1957 National Budget to Congress, calling for appropriations of $72,800,000,000. Nor should we overlook the very important transition which has been going on whereby an increasingly large percentage of our labor force is employed in the provision of services rather than production of goods. Indeed, it is this shift of emphasis which has contributed most significantly to the entrance of women into the labor force on a vast scale.
The magnitude and prosperity of our present social econ- omy makes it almost impossible for us to visualize in retrospect the conditions which prevailed in 1933. It was soon discovered, you will remember, that we were ill-prepared for any such crisis. Our cities and towns quickly found that they could not cope with the tremendous problems which confronted them. The numbers of families which found themselves in dire dis- tress mounted daily, as did requests for Public Assistance, at the very time that tax revenues were being curtailed, because unemployed property owners and rent payers were without funds. In their desperation, the cities turned to the States. The States soon found it necessary to petition the Federal Gov- ernment for Aid, with the result that the Federal Government, for the first time in our history, entered the realm of Public Welfare on a large scale.
Most of us are acquainted with the succession of the stop-gap measures which were initially introduced. These in- cluded the Civilian Conservation Corps. for our youth; the N.Y.A., or National Youth Administration; the E.R.A., or Emergency Relief Administration; the Works Projects Admin- istration, better known as the W.P.A .; the P.W.A., or Public Works Administration; and similar enterprises. But Govern- ment officials, Business and professional leaders became
Need help finding more records? Try our genealogical records directory which has more than 1 million sources to help you more easily locate the available records.