Remarks to Members of the Brookings Institution's Public Policy Conference for Business Executives.

Gentlemen:

I want to express my welcome to you, and also to express my appreciation to Brooklags. I think it comes at a very appropriate time that you have come to Washington to study government and that you are going back to the business community. I hope that you will be ambassadors of good will, or at least of understanding between Washington and the business community. I have been concerned that our dialog has not been as successful in recent months as perhaps it should be. But I can think of nothing more important in improving that dialog than for each--government to understand the problems of business and business to understand the problems of government. I put this latter particularly high because my experience has been that those businessmen who have worked in Washington, who have held positions of responsibility, who know something about the public responsibilities of those who hold executive office, are a good deal more understanding and a good deal more successful in their business work later on.

I think that we are dealing with a very important and sensitive matter. I think we have a great habit of carrying on this dialog in stereotypes, which I suppose make thought less necessary but do not give us a real clue to what should be the relationship between government, business, labor, and the other great groups which make up the general public interest. I know that frequently businessmen talk about "We wish the Government would stay out--would mind its own business," even though the Government's business has not been defined. But then on the other hand, they look to Washington for action whenever a crisis takes place. It is Washington that is expected to provide solutions to the gold drain; it is Washington which is expected to take action when an economy turns down; it is Washington, the Government, which is expected to take action to curb inflation, to curb excessive strikes in major industries, and all the rest.

So that what I would like to see is a more satisfactory and basic discussion on what are the rather sophisticated and technical questions of keeping our industrial society moving. I think we have something to learn from the European experience in the last 10 years. They have maintained full employment. I talked to one of the officials of the Dutch Government the other day. Their big problem is to secure adequate manpower for a very booming economy. What is true there is true in really all the countries of Europe, with the exception, perhaps, of some parts of Southern Italy, and Italy has had the greatest increase, and was in some ways the most critical situation that we faced in the late forties, has had the most immediate increase in their balance of payments of any country, in the last 5 years, and in their exports, the highest percentage of increase in their exports.

I think that we have to talk, therefore, rather than in these simple slogans, about what our debt management policy ought to be, our tax policy, how we can maintain a full employment. After all, we have had a recession in '58 and a recession in '60, we have not had the increase in our economy that we might have hoped for in January, even though we still have a very strong recovery. Now, how can we maintain this recovery?

These are the problems that we should be talking about, and they cannot be talked about in simple and rather ancient incantations which do not really bring judgment with them. We face very difficult problems here. How can we maintain a competitive position in the world? How can we prevent the gold flow? What actions should we take that are helpful; what are those that are discouraging? What is the role of Government in a major basic industry in wages and prices? Obviously there is some role, because it involves national security. The Taft-Hartley Act puts the Government in, in case there is a strike. There is a position, but what should it be? These are the matters which I hope you have been discussing, because they are the matters which business and Government should be talking about in the coming months.

As I say, some of the conversations sound like old records played from the 1933, '34,

'35, and '36, when the political struggle was different and when the issues were different, when we had no foreign problem and our major problem was domestic.

So I want to say that I can't think of a more effective program. Brookings has a long tradition of very effective public service. I wish we could expand this.

While I don't expect that you will go back necessarily New Frontiersmen, I do hope that you will go back with some understanding that there is a different perspective here and there is a desire which all people share, to see this country proceed ahead, and we would like to do it in concert, and keep our discussions on the real problems and not on ones which are somewhat imaginary.

You are very welcome here to the White House. I am glad to see you.