Tuesday, June 26, 1923. Harding in Utah, RAF Expands.

The Prime Minister of the United Kingdom announced that the Royal Air Force would add 34 squadrons, bringing its total to 52. The RAF, at that number, would remain smaller than France's air force, not surprisingly given the very large size of the French military.

This followed PM Stanley Baldwin's announcement that:

British Air Power must include a Home Defence Air Force of sufficient strength adequately to protect us against air attack by the strongest air force within striking distance of this country…. In the first instance the Home Defence Force should consist of 52 squadrons to be created with as little delay as possible.

35 of the squadrons were to be bomber squadrons, 17, fighters, showing an appreciation of strategic airspace well before World War Two.

The Tribune reported that President Harding's stop in Cheyenne had been a big success.

He was on to Salt Lake City, Utah.

He addressed the city, stating:

My Fellow Countrymen:

There is a suggestion of personal tribute in choosing my topic for an address in Salt Lake City. I have so long associated Senator Smoot with great problems of taxation, and have witnessed so much of his able and faithful endeavor to enforce economy and thereby lift the burdens of taxation, that I find myself involuntarily thinking, when I come to your state, of the menace of mounting taxes # and growing public indebtedness. The removal of this menace is not alone a federal problem, for we are recording gratifying progress so far as the nation is concerned, but the larger menace to-day is to be faced by municipality, county, and state. The federal Government is diligently seeking to prove itself a helpful example, but the improved order must come in the units of government into which federal Government never intrudes. There is no particular reason why I should speak of it, except that we are all concerned about general public welfare, and I have thought that possibly a recital of federal accomplishment would serve to encourage in a state and local work which must be done.

A short time before I became President, a trusted but cynical old friend said to me one day that he understood I intended to make a specialty of economy in administration. I admitted my aspirations in that direction, and he replied:

"Well, that's the right idea, but don't tell anybody about it. You may think it will be appreciated, but it will not. Every time you lop somebody -off the government pay roll or keep him out of a profitable piece of government business, you make him and all his friends and associates your enemies; and, on the other side, not a soul in the country will ever thank you for it. Everybody grumbles about taxes, and nobody ever demonstrates any appreciation of the man that tries to save them from taxes."

A short time before we left Washington on the present trip another friend said to me: "The Administration has saved the country a good deal by reducing its expenses and cutting down the tax burden. But take my advice, and don't talk to any of your audiences about it. People always grumble about taxes, but they don't want to hear anybody talk to them on that subject."

To which I replied that I believed, in the present state of affairs, all such rules were suspended, and any public man who had anything cheerful to say on the subject of taxes and Government expenses, would find plenty of audiences altogether willing to listen to him. I believe the American people are so profoundly interested in the subject of taxation and Government costs nowadays that an audience like this will even be willing to let me talk to them a few minutes on the subject.

One of the financial incidents to our participation in the war was to loan a vast sum of money to our allies. I wonder how many of you ever stop to think that the $10,000,000,000 which we advanced to our allies, after our entrance into the war, was just about the same as the total cost of the Civil War to North and South together. The Civil War lasted four years and strained every nerve and resource of the nation. Yet its actual cost to the Governments of both sides was considerably less than the amount we advanced to the Allied Governments during the World War.

And that was only a mild beginning of our financial transactions in war. For every dollar we loaned to our allies, we spent about three more on our own account. In a little more than three years, between the day war was declared and peace was signed, we spent twice as much money out of the public treasury as had been spent by the national Government in all of its previous history. I am not going to talk to you to-day about whether the money was all wisely spent. Whether it was or not, the results were worth all they cost, and a good deal more. What I propose to present to you now is some consideration of the fact that no matter how willing we were to make the sacrifice, no matter how cheerfully we incurred the obligations, we had to face at the end the big and very practical reality that these obligations must be paid.

You have inferred from what I said a moment ago that we spent roundly $40,000,000,000 on the World War. How many of us ever stopped to think that that was rather more than the total wealth of the nation at the time of the Civil War? We paid out of our current taxes, while the war was going on, more than 25 per cent of its cost; that is, as much as the entire national wealth so late as the year 1820. At the beginning of August, 1919, the public debt reached the highest point in its history, $27,500,000,000. That was just about ten times the amount of the national debt at the close of the Civil War.

We are still too close to the events of the Great War to be able to realize the enormous burdens placed on our country. Quite aside from the large operations of public finance which it necessitated, private finance has been tailed upon from the very beginning in 1914 to make special arrangements for financing the huge foreign trade that resulted from Europe's extraordinary demands. Long before we were in the war our financial machinery had been compelled to shoulder the financing of an enormously exaggerated export trade to the warring Powers. For a time Europe withdrew gold from us in great quantities, but presently it returned in yet greater, bringing to us and to the European countries the difficult problem of maintaining the exchanges and supporting the gold standard. Costs of everything rose to an artificially high basis, and in every direction expenditure was stimulated.

Altogether, the war was not only the greatest horror the world has ever known, but the greatest orgy of spending. This was inevitable, but that fact does not make the results any easier to deal with. The cost of government, of business, of every domestic establishment went up enormously. Every business man, and every householder, knows how it affected his personal concern. I want to suggest some of the ways in which it affected the whole business of government; government of the states, the cities, the nation, the expenses of every revenue-raising and spending division throughout the nation.

Recently I have been furnished with some specific figures on this subject of the cost of government by the Bureau of the Census. I am not proposing to impose upon your patience with an elaborate presentation of figures, but I want to suggest a few that will point my observations about the enormously increased cost of government everywhere. Take the cost of state governments. I am informed that the revenues of the states in 1913 aggregated $368,000,000, and that in 1921 they had increased to $959,000,000; that is, they had increased 161 per cent, and every dollar of that increase had to come in some way or other from the public. The expenditures of the states in 1913 aggregated $383,000,000, and in 1921 they were $1,005,000,000; an increase of 163 per cent. The indebtedness of the states in 1913 amounted to $423,000,000, and in 1921 to $1,012,000,000; an increase of 139 per cent.

Turn now to the cost of city government. The Census Bureau has compiled data on the governments of 227 of the large cities. It is shown that these cities in 1913 collected $890,000,000 in all revenues, and in 1921 they collected $1,567,000,000; that is, they were compelled to take 76 per cent more in taxes in 1921 than they had taken in 1913. The same group of cities expended in 1913, $1,010,000,000, and in 1921, $1,726,000,000— an increase of 71 per cent. The total debt of this group of cities in 1913 was $2,901,000,000, which by 1921 had risen to $4,334,000,000—an increase of 49 per cent.

County administration appears, from the rather limited information which at this time the census authorities have been able to produce, to have shown a much larger proportionate increase in cost and tax collections than did the government of cities. It is stated that for 381 counties, distributed among 38 states, and regarded as fairly typical, the increase in receipts from principal sources of revenue increased 127 per cent from 1913 to 1922; that is, for every hundred dollars of revenue collected in 1913, $227 was collected in 1922. And that is not all of it. The total indebtedness of these same 381 counties increased 195 per cent in the same period; that is, for every hundred dollars of debt in 1913 they had $295 of indebtedness in 1922. Statistics were not available dealing with cities and towns of less than 30,000 population; nor with townships, school districts, drainage districts, irrigation districts, road districts, and other subdivisions which exercised the power to raise revenues and incur debts. It is well known, however, that substantially similar increases have affected all these taxing subdivisions.

The figures of both the Treasury and the Census Bureau, in short, make it perfectly plain that whereas the cost of the federal Government is being steadily reduced, the cost of state and local governments is being just as steadily increased year by year. In nearly all of the states the cost of state and local governments increased from 1919 to 1922. The Treasury made up statistics on this point for one group of 10 states— Arizona, Connecticut, Michigan, Minnesota, New Hampshire, Ohio, Oregon, South Dakota, Washington, and Wisconsin. For this representative group it is shown that while federal taxes paid by these 10 states declined from over a billion dollars in 1920 to $650,000,000 in 1922, their state and local taxes rose from $728,000,000 to $965,000,000 in the same period. In another tabulation, covering 28 states, which was the entire number for which the statistics were available, it was shown that from 1919 to 1921 there were increases in local taxes in 23 states and reductions in only 5. In spite of the enormous burden of paying for the war and paying interest on the war debt, state and local taxes in 1922 represented 60 per cent of all taxes paid.

Let me present another aspect of the same matter. We hear much about the grievous burden of the income tax, and everyone of us who pays it is able fully to sympathize with everyone else who pays it. But it is fair to consider what our income taxes would be if we lived in some of the other debt-burdened countries of the world. A married citizen of the United States, with two children and an income of $5,000, paid $68 tax on that income in 1922. If he had been a citizen of Canada he would have paid $156. If the German tax rate had been applied to his income, it would have cost him $292. If he had been a Frenchman the French rate would have required him to pay $96, and if he had been a British citizen, instead of giving up the $68 which he paid to Uncle Sam, he would have drawn his check for $320.76. The same man, with an income of $10,000, would have paid $456 income tax in the United States and $1,128.32 in England.

The great burden of the war was, of course, imposed on the national Government. The Department of the Treasury states that in 1917 the federal Government's revenues were $1,044,000,000; in 1918 they were $3,925,000,000; in 1919 they were $4,103,000,000; in 1920 they were $5,737,000,000; and in 1921 they were $4,902,000,000. For 1922 the total dropped to $3,565,000,000, and for 1923 it is estimated at $3,753,000,000. Assuming continuation of the present basis of federal taxation, the receipts for 1924 are calculated at $3,638,000,000, and for 1925 at $3,486,000,000.

Not all of this revenue is raised by direct taxation. The Treasury estimates indicate that in 1923 only $2,925,000,000 and in 1924 $2,850,000,000 will be produced by direct taxation; the remainder will come from various miscellaneous receipts of the Government. You will, I am sure, be interested in the Treasury's statement that whereas in 1914 the per capita cost to all the people of the federal Government was $6.97, in 1918 it reached $36.64 and in 1919, $37.91. It might reasonably have been presumed that with the war now long past taxes would have begun to fall off, but the statistics show the contrary. Instead of a reduction, taxes for the fiscal year 1920 rose to $53.78 per capita, which was the peak of the war burden. Even for 1921 they only fell to $45.22. But in 1923 they will be $26.29, or considerably less « than half as much as in 1920. Figures, especially the figures which represent such an authority as the Treasury Department, are conclusive arguments. These figures show that for two years after the war ended federal taxes continued much higher than at the height of the struggle. They show that in the first two years of peace the cost of Government was still continuing above the 1918 level, but that since the high point of 1920 they have been reduced more than one-half. It is a record of business administration to which the party now in control of the administration feels justified in referring with no small measure of satisfaction.

I have observed that the cost of the war to our Government was around $40,000,000,000. After paying a generous share, about 25 per cent, from current revenues collected while the war was in progress, we still had to borrow enormously. At its highest point, on August 31, 1919, the national debt was $26,596,000,000. I know you will be interested to be told that from that day, August 31, 1919, to June 30, 1923, we have reduced it to $22,400,000,000—a reduction of considerably more than a billion dollars a year. Moreover, we are now working under a program which involves extinguishing a half billion of the debt each year. No other country in the world has been able to make such a record.

In addition to all this, we have within the past year settled the British war debt to our Government, arranged for its funding and its gradual extinction over a long period of years. In recognition of the notable service of Secretary Mellon, his associates at the Treasury, and the members of the Debt Funding Commission and the American ambassador to Great Britain, I wish to say that this settlement of the British debt has been acclaimed all over the world as one of the most notable and successful fiscal accomplishments ever recorded. Not only does it insure that the regular quarterly payments which the British Government will make to our Treasury will correspondingly relieve the burden upon American taxpayers, but the more important fact, in a time of widespread uncertainty and misgiving throughout the world of business everywhere, that these two great Governments could get together and arrange such a settlement has been one of the most reassuring events since the armistice.

There had been too much talk of possible cancellations or repudiations of the war debt. Such a program would have wrecked the entire structure of business faith and of confidence in the obligations of Governments throughout the world. There was need, pressing and urgent need, for such a sign of confidence, assurance, and faith in the future as this settlement furnished. When the British and American Governments united in this pledge that their obligations would be met to the last shilling and the last dollar, there was renewed financial confidence in the world. I undertake to say that no event since the conclusion of hostilities has contributed so much to putting the world back on its way to stabilization, to confidence in its Governments, and to the established conviction that our social institutions are yet secure.

No consideration of public finances can omit the fact that the single item of interest on the public debt exceeds $1,000,000,000 annually. For the fiscal year 1923, this item, will be $1,100,000,000. Beyond this, we will reduce the public debt this year by $330,000,000, and next year by approximately $500,000,000. That is, over 35 per cent of the national revenue will this year go to paying interest or extinguishing the principal of the public debt.

I have not been able to gather conclusive statistics as to the accomplishments of states, cities, and counties, to compare with this showing of the federal Government. But with some general knowledge of the fiscal positions of states and cities in general, I feel quite safe in proffering my congratulations to any state, any city, any foreign country, which has made a better showing in the matter of reducing its public debt within the period since the war. I most earnestly regret that all have not been able to make a similar showing.

On this latter point I wish to say a word further. Taxation decidedly is a local as well as a national question. Prior to the war, federal taxation was an unimportant item; so small that in 1917 state and local taxes, in a group of 10 representative states, in all parts of the country, constituted 73 per cent of the entire tax burden.

The federal tax was indirect and unfelt. Then came the enormous cost of the war, which the federal Government had to bear, and in 1918 state and local taxes constituted only 42 per cent of the entire tax burden. In 1919 they represented 44 per cent of the whole; in 1920, 41 per cent. But in 1922, the last year for which figures are available, state and local taxes were again in excess and represented 60 per cent of the entire tax burden. The states represented in this calculation are Arizona, Connecticut, Michigan, Minnesota, New Hampshire, Ohio, Oregon, South Dakota, Washington, and Wisconsin.

The world, its Governments, its quasi-public corporations, its people, acquired the spending habit during the war to an extent not merely unprecedented, but absolutely alarming. There is but one way for the community finally to get back on its feet, and that is to go seriously about paying its debts and reducing its expenses. That is what the world must face. The greatest and richest Government must face it, and so must the humblest citizen. No habit is so easy to form, none so hard to break, as that of reckless spending. And on the other side, none is more certain to contribute to security and happiness, than the habit of thrift, of savings, of careful management in all business concerns, of balanced budgets and living within incomes. If I could urge upon the American people a single rule applicable to every one of them as individuals, and to every political or corporate unit among them, it would be to learn to spend somewhat less than your income all the time. If you have debts, reduce them as rapidly as you can; if you are one of the fortunate few who have no debts, make it a rule to save something every year. Keep your eye everlastingly on those who administer your governmental units for you: your t6wn, your county, your state, your national Government. Make them understand that you are applying the rule of thrift and savings in your personal affairs, and require them to apply it in their management of your public affairs. If they fail, find other public servants who will succeed. If they succeed, give them such encouragement and inspiration as will be represented by a full measure of hearty appreciation for their efforts.

This brings me to a brief reference to what has proven so helpful to the federal Government in effecting the approach to the expenditures of normal times. For the first time in our history we have the national budget, under which there is an effective scrutiny of estimates for public expenditure. More, we have coordinated Government activities in making the expenditures which Congress authorizes.

It seems now unbelievable that we should have been willing to go for a century and a third without this helpful agency of business administration. But we did, and only now have we come to an appraisal of the cost of this great neglect.

It has been no easy task to establish the budget and make sure of its acceptance. Out of long time practices the varied and many Government departments felt themselves independent institutions, instead of factors in the great machinery of Government administration. They often got all they could from Congress, and made it a point to expend all they got.

Under the budget plan we were able to reverse the policy and awaken a sprit of economy and efficiency in the public service. We not only insisted that requests for appropriations should stand the minutest inquiry, but after reduced appropriations were granted, we insisted on expending less than the appropriations. There was no proposal to diminish Government activities required by law or demanded by public need, but there was first the commitment to efficiency and then commendable strife for economy.

We effaced the inexcusable and very costly impression that Government departments must expend all their appropriations, that no available cash should return to the Treasury. And we sought to inspire as well as exact in the practices of economy.

One illustration will not be amiss. On June 8, 1921, before the budget was in operation, word came to me that the business head of one of our institutions, far from Washington, was puzzling how to expend $42,000 which he had in excess of actual needs. Ordinarily such a matter would never reach the chief executive. But this one did, and I wired a warning, and followed it with a letter reciting the need of retrenchment everywhere, and expressed the hope that every Government official with spending authority would aid in reducing the Government outlay. The appeal was effective, and this one Government agent not only saved most of his available $42,000 for that fiscal year, but in 1922 he saved $81,000 more. He proved what could be done, and we are seeking to do it everywhere.

Do not imagine it has all been easy. It is very popular to expend, and there are ruffled feelings in every case of denial. But there are gratifying results in firm resolution and the insistent application of business methods.

The Budget Director is the agent of the President, and he speaks on the authority of the Government's chief executive. One day last winter the director came to me in great anxiety, telling me that a department chief would not sanction an $8,000,000 cut in his estimates. At that time we were seeking to prevent a threatened excess of expenditures over receipts amounting to $800,000,000 for the next fiscal year.

I sent for the department head, and he was still insistent in his opposition to the reduced estimate. I called for a conference of the department experts and the budget experts, and told them that if they could not agree, I would decide. They conferred, and instead of returning to me for decision, the estimate was cut more than $12,000,000. The point is that we have introduced business methods in government, and instead of operating blindly and to suit individual departments which had never visualized the Government as a whole, and felt no concern about the raising Of funds, we are scrutinizing, justifying, coordinating, and not only halting mounting cost, but making long strides in reducing the cost of Government activities.

Perhaps the budget system would not accomplish so much for taxing and spending divisions smaller than the state, but a resolute commitment to strike at all extravagance and expend public funds as one would for himself in his personal and business affairs will accomplish wonders.

It is largely unmindfulness that piles up the burden. Able and honorable men often press for a federal expenditure to be made in their own community or in other ways helpful to their own interests which they would strongly oppose if they were not directly concerned. This is true of federal appropriation as well as municipal, county, and state expenditure, and I know of no remedy unless public officials are brought to understand the menace in excessive tax burdens and indebtedness, beyond extinguishment except in drastic action, and resolve to employ practicable business methods in government everywhere, and resist the assault of the spenders.

It is too early to know whether there is a republic of ancient times with which appropriately to parallel our own. We know of their rise and fall, and we may learn the lessons in their failures. A simple-living, thrifty people, with simple, honest, and just government never failed to grow in influence and power. The coming of extravagance and profligacy in private life, and wastefulness and excesses in public life ever proclaimed the failures which history has recorded.

I would not urge the stingy, skimpy, hoarding life of individuals, or an inadequate program of government. The latter must always rise to deliberate public demand. But private life and public practices are inseparably associated.

I would have our Government adequate in every locality and in every activity, and public sentiment will demand it and secure it, and require no more, if we have the simple and thrifty life which make the healthful nation.

These reflections, my countrymen, are not conceived in doubt or pessimism. We have so nobly begun, we are so boundless in resources, we have wrought so notably in our short national existence, that I wish these United States to go on securely. I would like developing dangers noted and appraised and intelligently and patriotically guarded against. A nation of inconsiderate spenders is never secure. We wish our United States everlastingly secure.

War brought us the lesson that we had not been so American in spirit as we had honestly pretended. Some of our adopted citizenship wore the habiliments of America, but were not consecrated in soul. Some to whom we have given all the advantages of American citizenship would destroy the very institutions under which they have accepted our hospitality. Hence our commitment to the necessary Americanization which we too long neglected. The American Legion, baptized anew in the supreme test on foreign battlefields, is playing its splendid part.

Those who bore war's burdens at home have joined, and all America must fully participate. It is not enough to enlist the sincere allegiance of those who come to accept our citizenship; we must make sure for ourselves, for all of us, that we cling to the fundamentals, to the practices which enabled us to build so successfully, and avoid the errors which tend to impair our vigor and becloud our future.

The Tribune also reminded people that starting on July 1, they needed to have licenses for automobiles.

Edith Smith, age 46, the UK's first fully powered police officer, killed herself with an overdose of morphine.  She had been retired from police work for five years, but was working in nursing.  She had been heavily overworked for years, working seven days out of seven, and was low on funds.

Oklahoma Governor Jack C. Walton but Okmulgee County, Oklahoma, under martial law in order to investigate Ku Klux Klan activity.

Interesting radio ad from this day:  MacMillan Arctic Expedition.

Saturday May 6, 1922. Before the invention of safety.

I don't know what the article had to state about "safe farming", but a kid with a straight razor sure isn't safe.

Safety razors had existed for some time by the time this cover was out, but they were slow to gain widespread acceptance.  The turning point had been World War One, as the Army had issued them to troops and allowed them to keep them when they left the service, so the straight razor was in fact on its way out as the principal shaving tool by 1922.

Gillette's patent for their safety razor from early in the 20th Century.

The safety razor was a factor in the rise of women shaving, something that had not been at all common until the World War One era.  The introduction of the safety razor coincided with women shaving their arm pits, the new tool obviously being much more suited to that task than a straight razor, which would be down right dangerous.  Women also started shaving their legs, somewhat, in the 1920s, but the introduction of nylons limited that practice. With their shortage during World War Two, the practice greatly expanded.

KSL in Salt Lake City, Utah's first licensed radio station, when on the air.

Related threads:

Shaving

Shaving sure has gotten expensive.

100 Years Old This Year. Barbasol

Lex Anteinternet: Shaving

Roads to the Great War: Shaving, Disposability and the First World War

Looking like a bum. A "No Shave November" Rant.

Caffeine in shaving cream?

August 20, 1919. Salt Lake City to Orr's Ranch, 8th Cavalry in Mexico, White Russian amphibious landing at Odessa.

On this day the Motor Transport Convoy traveled from Salt Lake to Orr's Ranch

Conditions were bad.

Orr's Ranch wasn't a town.  It was a stop in the road.  A gas station, basically.

Meanwhile, news of the crossing into Mexico made the headlines again.

On the same day, White Russian forces conducted an amphibious landing at Odessa.

The Allies had withdrawn, and not under fire, on April 7.  On this day, the White Russians took the town on an amphibious landing.

And that, in 1919.

August 19, 1919. Trouble on the road and a big welcome in Salt Lake City, Trouble on the Border.

Salt Lake City in 1908.

While plagued with mechanical troubles, the Motor Transport Convoy made good time, doing 73 miles from Ogden to Salt Lake City in 8.25 hours.  Upon arrival, the command was treated to a parade attended by dignitaries.

The large celebratory nature of the arrival reflects the fact that upon arriving in Salt Lake the command had arrived at the first substantial city since leaving Cheyenne in eastern Wyoming, or perhaps even since leaving Omaha in eastern Nebraska.  They were arriving toward the end of their trek and while perhaps the worst was yet to come, getting to Salt Lake was a major accomplishment.

While the arrival of the Motor Transport Convoy was obviously a big even in Salt Lake and elsewhere, the big news on that day is that American troops were back in Mexico.

The occasion had been the holding for ransom of two American military aviators. A portion of the ransom had been paid and then the 8th Cavalry crossed the border at Marfa in pursuit of the Mexican bandits.

Perhaps somewhat ironically, on the same day the U.S. re-adopted the briefly adopted star roundel for its aircraft.  It had done this early in World War One but abandoned it in favor of one more closely resembling the device used by the British and the French, which made sense at the time.  Now it re-adopted its earlier insignia, just in time for the aviators to join the pursuit of their own captors in support of the 8th Cavalry, although the insignia used by those aircraft is unknown to us.

Sunday Morning Scene: Churches of the West: Japanese Church of Christ, Salt Lake City Utah

Churches of the West: Japanese Church of Christ, Salt Lake City Utah:

This is the Japanese Church of Christ in Salt Lake City,. This is a Presbyterian and United Church of Christ church in what was formerly "Japantown" in Salt Lake City. The church was built in 1924.

Sunday Morning Scene: Churches of the West: Holy Trinity Greek Orthodox Cathedral, Salt Lake City, Utah.

Churches of the West: Holy Trinity Greek Orthodox Cathedral, Salt Lake City, Utah. 

This is Holy Trinity Greek Orthodox Cathedral in Salt Lake City. This Greek Orthodox Cathedral was built in 1923, and is located in downtown Salt Lake.

The Cathedral is one of two Greek Orthodox churches in Salt Lake, both of which are part of the Metropolis of Denver. Salt Lake has at least three other Orthodox churches, however, including a Russian Orthodox Church and a Antiochian Orthodox Church. The Greek Orthodox Church in Salt Lake City also has a school.

Of interest, two of the three Greek Orthodox Churches in nearby Wyoming, which are also part of the Metropolis of Denver, are named Holy Family,including the church in Casper.

Issues In the Wyoming Election. A Series. Issue No. 1 (e). What about those other industries?

The shaded stool of Wyoming's other economic sectors.

More economics?

Yep.  We still haven't covered it all.

But then the candidates haven't either, and that's the point.

In the June 24 issue of the Star Tribune there's an article over concerns in the tiny Carbon County town of Rock River about a lack of housing there that threatens to soon become a problem due to an economic boom.

Coal coming back to Carbon County, you might be thinking?

And indeed, the last time southern Carbon County had a boom that's what brought it about.  But that one skipped Rock River.  Rock River last was doing really well a long time ago, although it still did well enough at some point that a relatively new modern school was put in there since the 1970s.

What the anticipated boom in this case would be caused by is an expiration in Federal wind power subsidies which is causing companies that put in wind farms to rush to try to get theirs in, and qualify, before the subsidy expires, which it is likely to do.

Wind turbines have been used for power generation since houses were first wired with electricity.  Indeed, one of the missions of the Rural Electric Administration was to get farmers and ranchers off of windmills in their yards and on to the grid.  Granted, the grid was probably safer than the wind generators of the time, but, none the less.

Now, this isn't an article on wind power.  I've had others on that topic. Rather, this is an article on the topic of "the other" industries that candidates in the election will vaguely reference, but rarely specifically actually address.

It's odd.

In part this doesn't occur as, at least now in the GOP, you just can't say "well. . . oil and gas is doing fine and coal isn't going to get better, so we better look at . . . .".  The official mantra is that coal will recover and oil and gas wouldn't be boom and bust if only the Federal government would stay out of things.  That's naive.

And we know that its naive at that, but we don't want to say too much.  It's sort of based on the power of wishful thinking thesis, but nobody wants to really deal with the decline of coal.

Which is all the odder when we consider that Wyoming at one time had a lot of other extractive industries.  Wyoming was an iron producer, for example, and was well into the second half of the 20th Century.  And Wyoming was a major uranium producer.  All that is no longer the case, due to market forces. Uranium, I'm pretty convinced, will come back.  But you only have to go to Shirley Basin to see that its gone.  There's no town there, where once there was a mining town there.

But there are windmills there, that's for sure.

Wind mill installation has become a big deal in Wyoming. That doesn't mean you could plan an economic future on it, as installation is like petroleum exploration.  It isn't really steady.  It goes in, and then you have the infrastructure.  So, for places like Rock River and Medicine Bow, you have to deal with the boom in construction followed by a bust, but the infrastructure and the jobs associated with it, remain.  And they remain for a very, very, long time.

Now, this post isn't the "why aren't the candidates speaking about wind power" post, although so far they don't seem to be.  It's the "what are those other economic areas" they vaguely reference?

This is probably too broad of category to make a fair post about, frankly, but some attention does need to be given to it. There are a lot of economic activities in Wyoming and we've addressed a lot of them.  But not all by any means. When candidates speak of "improving the economy", what are they talking about.

Some candidates, to be fair, have made specific references to other areas.  Galeotos and Throne have both spoken about technology, although oddly Galeotos was sort of uncharacteristically hostile to the topic in one instances, assuming the Tribune is reporting that accurately, as Throne seemed to get to it first.  Having said that, Throne and Galeotos both have spoken about trying to harness the computerized technological advances of recent years to Wyoming's benefit, and they seem to have some concepts, vague though they may be, about how that would work.

Hageman seems outright hostile to any discussion that doesn't involve 100% application of Wyoming's traditional industries, by which she is pinning her hopes on the extractive industries.  That doesn't seem to show much vision at all, but she's not the only one who likely looks at the economy in that fashion.  If you are in a line of work, and most Wyomingites are not, which is somewhat insulated from booms and busts, that is in fact an attractive way to look at things. . . somewhat.  It has its own problems no matter what, but suffice it to say if you are a small business owner or a laborer, this view really has its problems.

Other candidates simply promise to fix the economy.  Foster Freiss, for example, notes that he's a successful businessman and he can be trusted to fix the economy. Well, being so successful that you can keep a home in Jackson and another in Arizona means something, but what it doesn't mean is that you know anything whatsoever about Wyoming's economy.

And a lot of things go into an economy.  You can't just "fix" them.  Economies are natural in a way (although the corporate capitalist model we have is not a "natural economy" in the pure sense).  That's a big aspect of the economy that the candidates haven't really addressed in a full on way, although some have topically.

As an economic unit, the state, the state has to play to its strengths and attempt to build some where they are lacking.  Some have noted that, and that's particularly noted by people who are strongly reliant on the extractive industries. But it is missing in regards to other things, such as agriculture, in the discussion.

Be that as  it may, there's been little (some, but not much) reference to our weaknesses. Those weaknesses are specifically what the ENDOW study looked at.

There's a lot about Wyoming that makes development of its economy outside of the existing areas its strong in tough.  We lack good transportation and we lack intra state air travel nearly entirely.  We have no passenger rail at all.  Travel during the winter season can be death defying. . . or in fact deadly.

It's also popular to note that we have no major urban areas, but in fact we do.

Wyoming does have a major regional city.  Or actually two such cities.

And those cities are Denver Colorado and Salt Lake City Utah.  Maybe more than that.

Now, that may sound like I'm missing something, but the opposite is true.

Wyoming does have its own culture within the regional culture.  But we have to acknowledge that it is still part of the Rocky Mountain Region and the Northern Plains. And that matters as, at the end of the day, while the states and provinces (did I say provinces, as in Canadian provinces, why yes I did) have their own cultures, their boundaries are not natural ones, for the most part, and therefore they do not have the geographic impact of natural boundaries.  The line separating Wyoming from Colorado, in other words, is not the Rhine River or the Atlas Mountains.  It's just a line.  That line is real in various ways, but you can cross it and never know.

Indeed, as an aside, when a student in Laramie I had a deer license in southern Wyoming and the only really good place I could find to hunt was so near Colorado in those pre GPS days that I constantly worried about crossing into Colorado.  I'm really good with a topographic map, but none the less I worried about it.  Oddly enough, I was hunting in an area where there was a very large stream, a proto river, present and instinctively you found yourself thinking that "across the river is Colorado".  Not so much.

Anyhow, we live in age of increasingly improved transportation and communications. And we live in an age in which economic consolidation has moved towards the cities.  It's been often noted by demographers that, over a long period of time, indeed a period of time exceeding a century, Americans have been leaving rural areas for cities, and leaving towns and small cities for big cities.

Whether this is good or bad is another matter.  Frankly, I feel its nearly universally a negative trend. But it being a negative trend doesn't mean it isn't a trend.  And in our region, that has meant that for much of Wyoming Denver Colorado is the regional hub. For far western Wyoming, that hub is Salt Lake City.  And that's the way it is.

That may be more fine with most Wyomingites than we care to admit (and I'll have more in that in an exciting conclusion to this series) but the truth of the matter is that our major hubs are regional. Denver and Salt Lake City.  If you expand out just a bit, the hubs also include Calgary, St. Paul, Minnesota and Houston Texas.

If you feel otherwise, consider the evidence.  I've worked with and for people in the oil industry who worked in Denver and had bosses in Calgary or Houston.  If you grew up in Wyoming and have an advanced degree, other than in medicine, veterinary medicine, dental medicine, law or accounting there's a really good chance that you moved to Denver, Salt Lake or St. Paul.  Shoot, a lot of Wyomingites end up moving to Denver or Salt Lake simply due to economic reasons, irrespective of their educations.  That includes individuals with nearly no education, and those with advanced degrees.  One friend of mine with an advanced degree grew up outside of Hanna, worked in the mines for awhile, before ended up with what will be a life long career in Denver.  Pretty typical.

And this is the way it is, and we're not changing it.

So, when we speak of those other areas, we have to accept the geographic and economic realities, including that we can't really change a lot of that.

So what are our plans, really?

Orthodox Easter, 2018.

St Peter and St. Paul Orthodox Church, Salt Lake City Utah

Sunday Morning Scene: Painted Bricks: Virgin Mary Mural in Salt Lake City

Painted Bricks: Virgin Mary Mural in Salt Lake City:

I'll admit that this is a bit unusual for this page, but this is a spectacular mural of the Virgin Mary in downtown Salt Lake City. These photos, taken on my cell phone, do not do it justice in any sense.

This building serves as an art gallery and a pizzeria.

Holscher's Hub: Utah State Capitol. Inaugurated on this day in 1916.

Holscher's Hub: Utah State Capitol:

The Utah State Capitol was inaugurated on this day in 1916.

When you are a business traveler, you see things when you see them. Early morning photo of the Utah State Capitol building.  Taken with an Iphone.

Monday at the Bar: Courthouses of the West: Frank E. Moss Federal Courthouse and United States Courthouse for the District of Utah

Courthouses of the West: Frank E. Moss Federal Courthouse and United States Courthouse for the District of Utah, Salt Lake City.

Built in 1931, the last year of the Hoover Administration, this classic courthouse is nestled in downtown Salt Lake City.   The current name is much more recent, coming from a long serving Utah Senator who retired in 1977.

Just behind this classic revival style courthouse is a large modern office building which is the current United States Courthouse for the District of Utah, which has the local nickname of the "Borg Cube" due to its modern architecture, and in obvious reference to the characters from Star Trek.  That also forms a fairly effective commentary on what the public thinks of modern style courthouses, so I don't need to add to that, and could hardly do so more effectively.

Detail from the Frank E. Moss Courthouse

While most of the court's functions have moved to the new courthouse, the old one continues to house the bankruptcy court.

Lex Anteinternet: Marathon, Peabody and the airlines

This thread appears immediately above:

Lex Anteinternet: Marathon, Peabody and the airlines: This past week the state received the bad news that Marathon Oil Company, formerly Ohio Oil Company, which was once headquartered in Casper...

The only reason it appears here as an additional link is that there topics, or "labels", that pertain to this topic, that the system won't let me enter them all in. So, I'm adding this second item here to cover all the labels that pertain to the topic.

The existing labels in the entry above are:


 

Sunday Morning Scene: Churches of the West: St. Patrick's Roman Catholic Church, Salt Lake Cit...

St. Patrick's Roman Catholic Church, Salt Lake City Utah

Sunday Morning Scene: Churches of the West: Salvation Army Church, Salt Lake City Utah

Churches of the West: Salvation Army Church, Salt Lake City Utah:

This poor photograph was taken from a moving car. It depicts the Salvation Army Church in Salt Lake City Utah. I believe this to be the only classically styled church belonging to the Salvation Army that I have ever seen.

Churches of the West: First Baptist Church, Salt Lake City Utah

Churches of the West: First Baptist Church, Salt Lake City Utah:

Sunday Morning Scene: Churches of the West: First Presbyterian Church, Salt Lake City Utah

Churches of the West: First Presbyterian Church, Salt Lake City Utah:

Saturday Morning Scene: Churches of the West: B'nai Israel Temple, Salt Lake City, Utah

Churches of the West: B'nai Israel Temple, Salt Lake City, Utah:

Sunday Morning Scene: Churches of the West: First Methodist (First Methodist Episcopal), Salt Lake City, Utah.

Churches of the West: First Methodist (First Methodist Episcopal), Salt ...:

Sunday Morning Scene: Churches of the West: St. Mark's Episocopal Cathedral, Salt Lake City Ut...

Churches of the West: St. Mark's Episocopal Cathedral, Salt Lake City Ut...: \

Ethnicity, rise, decline, and regeneration. A study of Salt Lake City

I've posted here a couple of times on ethnic neighborhoods in posts inspired in part by the City of Denver. I happened to be in Salt Lake the other day when the same thing occurred to me. That is, ethnicity and how it strongly impacted urban areas and regions in the past.

Salt Lake is a city which, if looked at in terms of demographic groups, is normally associated with the Mormons for obvious reasons. That's so strongly the case that we just don't think of it being a big urban area with strong ethnic neighborhoods, but apparently that''s just flat out wrong.  Around the turn of the last century, it definitely did.

The first time I became aware of that is when a friend of mine pointed out the impressive Catholic cathedral there.

The Cathedral of the Madeline, Salt Lake City Utah.

The Cathedral of the Madeline is a huge beautiful Gothic cathedral. Built in 1900, it is just off downtown in a hilly area.  The cathedral, I learned, was built due to the large Irish Catholic population that was working in the mines and plants just outside of the city.  Building the cathedral, in some ways, showed that they'd really arrived, and were doing well.

But that's not the only, or even the most surprising, example.  Just recently I was in a part of the city down by the old railroad station.  Located in that area of the city is a Greek Orthodox cathedral.

Holy Trinity Greek Orthodox Cathedral, Salt Lake City.

Holy Trinity Greek Orthodox Cathedral, which still has its own school, was built in the 1920s, just a bit later.  That Salt Lake City had a significant population of Greeks was surprising.  More surprising, however, is that they were the largest immigrant ethnicity in Salt Lake City at the time, and the part of the city that the cathedral is located in was called "Greek Town".

 

Greek Town was in a part of the city which was quite industrial at that time, so the location of the cathedral reflects that condition that existed in many urban areas of the time, that being that people lived, went to church, and worked, all in a concentrated area.  They apparently weren't the only immigrant group working in that area.  Only a couple of blocks away from the cathedral is a church built specifically with the immigrant Japanese population in mind.

Japanese Church of Christ, Salt Lake City.  This church was built in the same year as the Greek Orthodox Cathedral.

That Salt Lake City ever had such a significant population of Japanese immigrants that a church would have been built with them in mind is a surprise.  But obviously it did.

Salt Lake by the late 19th Century had a sufficient population of Jewish residents that they had two synagogues built in the last decade of the 19th Century and the first decade of the 20th Century just off of the downtown area.  Presumably the existence of two synagogues within a block of each other reflected some division in faith.  Here too, this was a bit of a surprise to me when I first learned of it.  That the two synagogues were so close to each other would also suggest that the neighborhood they were in was Jewish at the time, although this assumption could be in error.

B'nai Israel Temple, Salt Lake City.  This building is no longer a synagogue, but rather is an architecture firms office.

St. Peter and St. Paul Orthodox Church in Salt Lake City, which was originally a synagogue.

All of this shows a much more diverse ethnic diversity in Salt Lake City a century ago than I would have expected, and it stands in contrast with the common presumption about the city.

 Former Firestone facility in Salt Lake City.

Of interest as well, while some of the buildings shown in this thread have been kept in their original uses, the neighborhoods have clearly gone through changes.  Greek Town, as noted, was once very industrial and was associated with a Firestone Tire Company plant.

 

 Firestone plant location, now a restaurant, in Salt Lake City.

 California Tire & Rubber Company building, Salt Lake City.

This area of Salt Lake is no longer industrial, and its undergoing some changes. It clearly fell into a state of dilapidation, and there are still some areas of it that can be pretty rough.  I'd be careful walking around this area at night.  Nonetheless, during the day there's some trendy cool looking restaurants and bars in the area.

That Salt Lake's history apparently reflects a pretty common urban story probably shouldn't be surprising, but in some ways it is.  It isn't a city we really think in an industrial context, with immigrant populations, but it was.