BABIES AND THE STATE

Press, Volume LXXIII, Issue 22194, 10 September 1937, Page 7

BABIES AND THE STATE

Correspondents who do not comply with our rules set out in the last column of ou f, .Leader Page will excuse us from noticing their letters. “West Coast.”—A woman 60 years of age and a resident of New Zealand fdr 25 years, is entitled to an old age pension, but if her husband earns £lB2 gross, which is more than the amount allowed, she cannot receive the pension. .

ro THB EDITOB or tbi PBB3B. Sir.—ln the instructive article, “Babies and the State,” in “The Press” of Tuesday, an interesting point has been missed. I cannot do better than quote from an article on “Family Endowment,” by R. F. Harrod (Oxford University, Lecturer in Economics) in the July number of "Overseas”; “The main problem is not the parents who have no children, in whose case there is usually some insurmountable obstacle. The trouble is with those who think one, or more often, two, enough. After two, the parental instinct tends to be satisfied. The great adventure has been tried, the emotions released, the joy of parenthood is known and charted, and, more important, its trials and burdens . . . An alternate plan would then be to confine the endoivment to children in excess of two. This would apply the stimulus where it is really needed. The contributions could then be greatly reduced. . . . For instance, on the supposition of a bonus per child equal to ons-fifth of income, a wage-earner at 50s would contribute 3s 4d and receive as benefit 10s per child in excess of two. . . . 1 venture to suggest that for the replacement figure to be achieved, normal parents should normally aim at not less than four children.” —Yours, gtc ELDEST OF SEVEN. September 7. 1937.