of letting this improvement come back on another speculative wave.
I do not want the people to believe that because of unjustified
optimism we can resume the ruinous practice of increasing our crop
output and our factory output in the hope that a kind Providence
will find buyers at high prices. Such a course may bring us
immediate and false prosperity but it will be the kind of
prosperity that will lead us into another tailspin.

It is wholly wrong to call the measure that we have taken
government control of farming, control of industry, and control of
transportation. It is rather a partnership between government and
farming and industry and transportation, not partnership in
profits, for the profits still go to the citizens, but rather a
partnership in planning and partnership to see that the plans are
carried out.

Let me illustrate with an example. Take the cotton goods industry.
It is probably true that ninety percent of the cotton manufacturers
would agree to eliminate starvation wages, would agree to stop long
hours of employment, would agree to stop child labor, would agree
to prevent an overproduction that would result in unsalable
surpluses. But, what good is such an agreement if the other ten
percent of cotton manufacturers pay starvation wages, require long
hours, employ children in their mills and turn out burdensome
surpluses? The unfair ten percent could produce goods so cheaply
that the fair ninety percent would be compelled to meet the unfair
conditions. Here is where government comes in. Government ought to
have the right and will have the right, after surveying and
planning for an industry to prevent, with the assistance of the
overwhelming majority of that industry, unfair practice and to