3- capital and talent because we are convinced it is necessary for political and economic security. Fourth, that we recognize that government and private enterprise each has a role to play in getting the job done. How goes the struggle? In my opinion, badly. It goes badly because we have failed to define the problem accurately, to set forth our objectives and our goals clearly, and to prescribe solutions that have a realistic chance for success. We insist on attempting to deal with the problem against the background of policies and principles that are accepted as truisms in our thinking and which in my humble view cannot stand the test of objective analysis. The Alliance for Progress aimed for 2-l/2% increase in the annual rate of growth for the first year but only 1.6% was attained. In the first 9 months of 1962 Latin America experienced a net withdrawal of some $37 million of U. S. capital. First, we have in some measure committed ourselves to develop all the undeveloped world, and this presupposes two things. First, that we have the capacity to get the job done, which I seriously doubt; and second, that all the world is worth saving, and this is even more dubious. I suggest to you that such an overwhelming commitment scatters our efforts so widely that we are in grave danger that they will be ineffective everywhere. In some nations the demands are so great and the risk so severe that it is not worth making the effort. Paraphrasing the remark made about the Japs and Dutch Harbor, if the communists inherit this burden "it will serve them damn well right". The second assumption that I challenge is the general feeling that private enterprise has done a good job thus far. Frankly, we cannot "run on our record" in the underdeveloped nations, even though we can point with great pride to the