A "NEW SCHOOL" VIEW

Evening Post, Volume CXI, Issue 70, 24 March 1931, Page 8

A "NEW SCHOOL" VIEW

(To the Editor.)

Sir,—l regard with admiring awe the complacency with which your self-assured journal scolds those perverse souls who object to having their wages reduced. The utter depravity of the Labour Party was never more clearly manifested than at the present time, when tliey steadfastly refuse to bury the hatchet and assist the Prime Minister to initiate a general attack on -wages; despite the fact that almost daily and with a patience that is most praiseworthy, you draw attention to the error of their ways. Although more than once you have pointed out to tiie' representatives of Labour that this is no' time for party politics, -and urged them not to hinder the Government in its legislating activities, these people will not take the hint. Can it be that they disagree with the wisdom of Mr. Forbes's proposals? Such presumption! -I really believe these members arc pleased to consider that our Prime Ministei-'is making a mistake in his method of doing the country a bit of good. They have the audacity to suggest that a reduction of wages will aggravate rather than cure our great depression. They say that, as wages is a class of money that it kept in circulation, its shrinkage is immediately felt by almost every class of business— except pawnbroking and moneylending. They further suggest that even a general reduction in wages will not in any way make up tor the loss of revenue through the fall in prices of our primary products overseas— except in a f'robbing Peter to pay Paul sort of way. If that is the idea, they apparently object to being Peter. It isijust like their cheek to suggest that excessive rates of interest, inflated land values, with resultant exaggerated rents and excessive marketing costs, should bo attacked under the heading of production costs" before we come to wages. Ihe working man to-day, Sir, does not know when he is well off. When I was a young man I worked for 25s a week—that was what induced me to abandon hard work to exploit those who did not know enough to do the same—a step I shall never regret. The workers have been living m a tool s paradise, Sir!—going to pictures, timepayment gramophones, trying to be decently dressed—disgusting, I think! Well, now, they will have to make their equal sacrifice for all sections of the community. The Prime Minister, although, as you very properly remarked at the time, he made many blunders and faux pas while abroad— undoubtedly had his mind broadened and improved by travel. This first became evident when he announced his -waKC-ciitting campaign. rhen_ he iollowed that piece of statesmanship with the inspired slogan which : undoubtedly will become immortal—"No work, no pay!" If.- any of those 35,000 men who are registered as unemployed Bhould ask: "How can we work1 when there s no work to do?" Do you know what tho Prime Minister should reply, Sir? He should fust up and say: "Balance your Budgets, 'tt they can find an' answer' to that 111 be surprised. '. , As for you and your valuable and nigu-ly-esteemed journal, Sir, you belong to an old school! Yonr4deas, two decades ago, would have been almost modern.—l am, "PRO BONO PUBLICO." ["Pro Bono Publico" has evidently not read our statements with sufficient care for his own good—let alone the good of the public. We have consistently affirmed that an adjustment of prices and costs— hitherto contributed to chiefly by primary producers—must be general, i£ it is to be efficacious. Government economy and revision of wages will not alone place us in a better position to meet competition-in our overseas markets. The savings thus effected must be passed on to the consuming public 'by reduction of all other charges.—Ed.]