COST OF LIVING.

Evening Star, Issue 22891, 24 February 1938, Page 2

COST OF LIVING.

TO THE EDITOR. Sir, —In your report of Mr Neilsou’s meeting at South Dunedin on Tuesday evening he is quoted as saying that the official figures of the increase in the cost of living show a rise of a little over II per cent., but that wages had risen 21 per cent, leaving a balance in favour of the wage-earner representing a rise of 9 per cent. It is incredible that such an absurdly fantastic statement could be made at a public meeting by a member of Parliament, and if this should meet the eye of Mr Neilson I hape he will forward a disclaimer.—l am, etc., February 24. Inchedulous. e.V ■ - TO THE EDITOR. Sir, —The economics of the present Government have, not as yet been tested. High export prices are responsible for our present prosperity in New Zealand. A serious drop in export values will be more disastrous to the Labour Government than the last recession was to the previous Government. No Labour politician has been able to prove otherwise, despite the preposterous claims advanced from time to time. Prosperity is, or until the immediate present, was worldwide, and to state that “ the Labour Government has progressed when other Governments have failed ” is simply not correct. What other Government in the British Empire has failed to regain prosperity? Other States, notably South Africa and Australia, are experiencing a boom far exceeding our present prosperity. Indeed, the statement that “ the Labour Government in New Zealand has retarded rather than assisted prosperity ” is to a large extent correct. Another assertion, identical with the claim advanced by the Hon. W. Nash during the parliamentary discussions on his first Budget, is that “ a man, his wife, and two children, earning the same income (£4OO per annum) fare better in New Zealand than in Great Britain.” This statement is also not correct. In Britain costs are well below New Zealand costs, and consequently purchasing power is higher. Not . merely spending power. New homes are available at £450 to £750; not a minimum of £l,lOO as in New Zealand. Motor cars costing £l9B in London are £320 here. Shoes—London 12s 6d, here £1 3s; same quality socks are 30 per cent, cheaper. Suits are also £2 to £3 below local price. Prices for practically everything are 20 to 30 per cent, cheaper in Britain than in New Zealand, Tnis fact should he evident to the Labour supporters,' because of. the necessity of tariffsi to protect the local workers. The ■ real truth is that £4OO per annum in Britain is equal to at least £6OO per annum iff New Zealand.' v. :: , In conclusion, may I suggest that increased Savings Bank and also commercial bank -deposits are world-wide, and if our Labour Government is responsible for these' world-wide increases then X am afraid that “ magicians ” is a more correct term than. u politxcians.”—l am, etc., February 24. Realist.