 Time for the Lawn Jean Chronoscope, a television journal of the important issues of the hour, brought to you every Monday, Wednesday and Friday. A presentation of the Lawn Jean Wittner Watch Company, maker of Lawn Jean, the world's most honored watch, and Wittner, distinguished companion to the world-honored Lawn Jean. Good evening. This is Frank Knight. May I introduce our co-editors for this edition of the Lawn Jean Chronoscope? Mr. William Bradford Huey, editor of the American Mercury, and Mr. Henry Hasloth, contributing editor of Newsweek Magazine. Our distinguished guest for this evening is Mr. Henry H. Fowler, administrator of the Defense Production Administration and the National Production Authority. The opinions expressed are necessarily those of the speakers. Well, Mr. Fowler, you are the man who is responsible, chiefly responsible for our defense production. How much on net balance did the steel strike set us back? The only real estimate one can give is in terms of the actual tonnage of steel loss, Mr. Hasloth, and that is approximately 20 million tons of steel, which we can never recover because it has been lost beyond recall. Now, to give you some picture of what that means, that would be roughly equivalent to the total production of Great Britain for an entire year. Well, is there any chance of our getting again into another strike situation? Well, I certainly hope not, but in this game, anything can happen and usually does. Have you any estimates on the prospects of a coal strike, for example? No, I'm afraid I do not, but I do not believe that at this particular time, the war economy or the defense economy could afford anything like the blow that we have suffered. Well, there have been some apparently conflicting estimates of how much the steel strike set us back or how much we're recovering. I think you made a statement saying that we had a remarkable start. The steel companies made a remarkable start in getting back into production, but I think Mr. Steelman made a statement saying that some items might still be delayed even a year from now. Now, are those two statements reconcilable? They are, because the steel industry has made a remarkable start in getting back towards what we call capacity operation. For example, this past week, they were up to 85% of what would be capacity operation. However, the breaks in the pipelines, in the flow of various forms and shapes of steel, various parts and components made of steel that ultimately may have their impact upon the production of some item, may show up any time in the near future stretching on out into the next four or five months. Mr. Fellow, what percentage of our steel production is now going into arms? The estimates vary, but usually we believe that about 10% goes into direct military production and perhaps an additional 5% goes into indirect military production in what we call the components and parts or B-primes. And do those percentages hold true in copper and aluminum? No, they're varying for depending upon the particular material. Estimates have run as high as around 40% for aluminum and around 35% for copper. Well now, in this vast production program of ours, a rearmament program, what is that costing the average American family? What's it taking away from us? Well, I can only give you that in terms of national dollar totals. There have been appropriated up to date for the military production and procurement construction programs a total of approximately $128 billion in the last three years. Well now, how does that affect the average American family? What does the average family listening to this program tonight have to give up as a result of that rearmament effort? Well, I think the main thing that the average American family has had to give up and will have to give up under this program is the tax dollar. The family today has not been deprived of any of the essentials and a very few of the luxuries due to the fact that the economy has been so strong, so rich and full of expansiveness in developing new supplies of these critical materials. Nobody has had to give up or not get an automobile or television set or refrigerator because of this rearmament program. I'd like to put that question in another way. How much has the automobile production been cut back, let's say? How much is it being cut back this quarter as compared with a pre-defense program production? Well, at the very lowest level of permitted production, the automobile industry for about two quarters was down to 50% of what had been its peak production in 1950. Was that as much as it was permitted to make? That's right. But even at that level, there was no great demand for cars because of the demand of also foreign office. Well, I'm told you might have to wait a few weeks or perhaps even a month for a particular model during some of this period, but there was no shortage of passenger automobile. And is there any consumers item that is in short supply as a result of your cutbacks that you know of? We keep a fairly constant check through the various distributive outlets throughout the country and we find that each quarter there will be threatened shortages of maybe a half a dozen consumer items. And the following quarter will beef up, as we call it, the allocations of materials that go to that particular class of producers. And by a little bit of manipulation of supply in that way, we tended to avoid any serious consumer shortages over a long period of time. Now, do you mean, sir, that our country is so rich and has such a high rate of productivity that our people can enjoy guns and butter and electric refrigerators and television sets? There's no sacrifice necessary on the part of the American people. We can arm the free world and still have everything we're accustomed to having in our way of life. In terms of our material and productive resources, I think I would agree substantially with that statement. I would want to qualify it in one respect that in a time such as we have been through, it has been necessary to hold off, for example, various types of construction activity in our desire to give the right away and to put first the new type of industrial expense. What about homes, sir? Has anybody been denied a new home because of the re-armament program? The rate of construction of homes has been on a relatively high level all during this period. There have been conservation practices in the types of copper materials that are used in a home, the number of pounds, the number of uses, but the number of units, housing units as such, has not been substantially curved. I should say on both of your questions, however, in order to be rounded out that there were credit restrictions imposed not by the NPA or DPA, but by other parts of the government apparatus that may have artificially constricted consumer demand during this period for many of these projects. Looking at the question the other way, what have been the objectives of the defense program, of the positive defense program, and how far along have you gotten now, have we gotten now in reaching those objectives? Well, there have been four basic objectives from the beginning, and one might say that those objectives were the objectives of the Congress in passing the Defense Production Act, and they've been held too firmly, and they are these. Number one, to increase very substantially the production of new military weapons and end products to adequately arm our forces in Korea at home and at the various other points on the periphery, and to provide a military shield behind which we might affect total mobilization if total war should come. Objective number two has been to build a military mobilization base or the standby capacity or plants that would enable us to very rapidly increase the production of planes and tanks and guns beyond the levels, the minimum levels that are necessary for the current period. Thirdly, to expand the capacity of our basic resources, steel, copper, aluminum, electric power, transportation, and finally, to do all three of these things in such a manner as not to substantially damage or impair fundamentally the civilian economy. Well, on an overall basis, how far along are we in reaching those objectives? Well, we're about half through, either in terms of time or in terms of the quantity of military end products that have been delivered or in production, the amount of the industrial expansion, the amount of the standby facilities. American public has gotten an impression I'm very much afraid that we're further along than we are because we have managed to leak some of the most difficult material shortages and the mobilization effort hasn't hurt. That doesn't mean we're through. Mr. Fowler, I'm sure that every member of our audience would like to have an answer to this question. Suppose after we expand our facilities as you plan to expand them, and we increase our production to this point that you envision, and then we don't have any war. What will happen to us? Well, the answer that I think I should make to that question is that in that event, I wouldn't want to be around in charge, but I will give one further answer. I think that with the resources and facilities that will be available, the dynamic system of American competitive enterprise will be confronted by the greatest challenge to do what I believe it can do is to greatly enrich the standard of living of America and perhaps other parts of the world. Well, thank you very much for being with us tonight, sir. The editorial board for this edition of the Laun Jean Chronoscope was Mr. William Bradford Huey and Mr. Henry Haslett. Our distinguished guest was Mr. Henry H. Fowler, administrator of the Defense Production Administration and the National Production Authority. The Laun Jean Wittner Watch Company salutes the American National Retail Jewelers Association on the occasion of its 47th annual convention. The jeweler is one of the oldest and most honored of merchants. The first goldsmiths were also the first bankers. And today's retail jeweler is qualified by both experience and by training to give you expert advice whenever you need a diamond or other gem, a piece of gold jewelry, silverware, or, of course, a fine watch. The excellent reputation of Laun Jean, the world's most honored watch, is due in no small part to the highly qualified services, which more than 4,000 authorized Laun Jean Wittner jeweler agencies render to the purchasers of our fine watches. It's their responsibility to assure that your Laun Jean Watch reaches you in the same perfect condition in which it leaves the factory to assure you that it's a worthy representative of the only watch in history to win ten World Fair Grand Prizes, twenty-eight gold medal awards, and innumerable honors for accuracy in fields of precise timing. Here are examples of the Laun Jean watches now on display by Laun Jean Wittner Jewelers. So when next you need a watch, either for yourself or an important gift, your jeweler will tell you that throughout the world, no other name on a watch means so much as Laun Jean, the world's most honored watch, premier product of the Laun Jean Wittner Watch Company, since 1866, maker of watches of the highest character. We invite you to join us every Monday, Wednesday, and Friday evening at this same time for the Laun Jean Chronoscope, a television journal of the important dishes of the hour, broadcast on behalf of Laun Jean, the world's most honored watch, and Wittner, distinguished companion to the world-honored Laun Jean. This is Frank Knight reminding you that Laun Jean and Wittner watches are sold and serviced from coast to coast by more than 4,000 leading jewelers who proudly display this emblem. Agency for Laun Jean Wittner Watch. It's timely. Pick the winner on the CBS television network.