REPLY TO "SIMPLE SIMON."

Ellesmere Guardian, Volume LVI, Issue 88, 19 November 1935, Page 4

REPLY TO "SIMPLE SIMON."

Sir, — In replying to "Simple Simon's" letter of November 14, I am pleased to say that I can again discover one point on which we are in entire agreement, namely, "That wealth has to be produced in the first place before there is anything for a monetary system to operate upon, or to represent." With regard to some of his other statements concerning money, however, I am afraid we must remain in conflict. I find it very difficult to follow the reasoning of "Simple Simon" in many of his arguments, but I am content to leave readers of this correspondence to decide whether "Simple Simon" is correct when he says that I am wrong in my "belief that we buy goods really with money. . . . Goods and services are bought with other goods and services; were it otherwise, the possession of money, say on an island where no goods had been produced and transported, would buy goods and services." This is like saying that it is impossible to generate power from petrol, because if you did have a quantity of petrol on an island where there were no motor cars, it would be quite useless; therefore petrol has no value in any circumstances. Then, again, "Simple Simon" says that I am "quite wrong in assuming that he thinks the poor are poor because the rich have too much," but later in his same letter he says: "About a fifth of the population of New Zealand, including workers and dependents, are now in receipt of some form of charity, more or less camouflaged doles. Presumably Mr Eade would allow the recipients of land rentals, at rates running up to £20,000 per acre per annum in New Zealand, to retain their tribute, while poor struggling folks eke out meagre incomes." Concerning the land question, I think I can honestly say that I have carefully studied nearly everything that "Simple Simon" has written in the Guardian on that subject, but have not yet discovered any argument to alter my conviction that the collecting of an economic rent by the State without any compensation to the present owners is both legally and morally wrong. I think that it is really of small benefit to continue this discussion, as we have both already stated our arguments in considerable detail on various occasions. It would seem that we must agree to differ, while at the same time respecting each other's attempt to solve the great economic riddle.—l am, etc., L. G. EADE.

Australia holds the record for the longest piece of straight railway. For 328 miles across the transcontinental line the rails swerve not an inch. Nor, at the rate of a foot of drop to the mile, does the world of railway know a flatter piece of country.