ECONOMIC OUTLOOK.

Auckland Star, Volume LXI, Issue 219, 16 September 1930, Page 6

ECONOMIC OUTLOOK.

OVER-EXPENDITURE ON HFIUMKi 1 ' ~~ .(To the Editor.),, ' Sipijf As a rule I pay no attention to anonynwni ' letters, tout your correspondent "Onlooker" * raises one or two points and makes on® or two statements that need correction. I ' not, however, answer him further unless h/ '' writes over his name. In the first place it P would take not a letter but a pamphlet to point out how Government costs could- he eub- ' stantially reduced. 'With a email ]>opulation such as -that of New Zealand the public expenditure is cruel and the cost of liyinjr m far in excess of what it should be. It is n« e . ■ less to put one class of workers against another. We are all paying too nmch for the bare necessities of life,'and it is largely ' the outcome of inordinate expenditure on the. unnecessary things and luxuries. Economies "'M could easily be effected in most Government Departments even without reducing wage# or <i\i the inordinate number of Civil servants.' Bj\v£ the way, I. did not say one word in my letter about reducing wages. I do not belief reducing wages. At the same time I would >. point out to "Onlooker" that mere general increase of wages does not enrich anyone. . - Take a simple case : I am old enough to rem em- '. J ber when the minimum wage came began with one branch of tradesmen penters, I think). At that time I a ' friend in that trade, "You think you wfilU>e" v ' better off with a higher wage, but you won't.'* He placed me in the category of fools and told me I knew nothing about it. I then " - pointed out to him that as long as his trade ' alone received the minimum wage he and hie mates would be better off, but I eaid the boot-' maker, the tailor, the baker, etc., would naturally demand the minimum wage, too. Then he would have to pay more for his hoots, clothes, bread, etc., and his higher wages would have resulted in merely cheapening the value of money. The tradesman/with eight;-■ shillings a day in those days lived and often 'brought up large and healthy families -who were and are a credit to the country. But V they did not. spend their money on' picture theatres, motor cars, school nurses, etc. ill of which are good in their place when you • can afford them." But moet of us cannot afford them, and it seems to me to be dishonest awl hurtful to ourselves and to the best interest* Of the country to buy what we cannot afford. J Finally; ! never preach on the subject "Why Don't Men Go to Church?" Why?, Becauee I know why many men do not go. But' Ido know of one tribunal before which not M but "all" men must go. t 'r, J. FARQUHARSON-JONES/ " : ■"■ " '