Grey River Argus TUESDAY, May 28» 1935, GOING OUT.

Grey River Argus, 28 May 1935, Page 4

Grey River Argus TUESDAY, May 28» 1935, GOING OUT.

Though perhaps nior'e spectacular than in other instances where th e instability of the system of modern capitalism has sent th e weaker to the wall, there is nothing peculiar about the exit at Christchurch of half of the daily newspapers of that city. The chief sufferers, as usual, will be the workers only. The process of elimination is going on openly in all branches of business activity in New Zealand to-day. in the particular case under notice, there was some time ago an appeal for State intervention so that a cheek might be imposed on competition in the interests of a large number of employees whose livelihood was at stake. But it is futile to expect such an appeal in an isolated case to be of any avail. The cry for stability in the capitalistic system is raised in regard to currency by the most powerful elements in that system, whereas the same elements in other directions speed up the tendency towards monopoly. In the not distant future the elimination of competition may spread far more widely in New Zealand than many supporters reckon the Government is ready to sanction. Exporters of primary produce are destined to b e subjected to an indirect ,but none the less effective. pressure for the regulation of output. There is also a spread of interests which are driving small traders into the ranks of employees or relief workers. Indeed, the prospect is now that unemployment alone has become a stabilised element in the economic and social life of the Dominion. . The other day ten youths wei’e wanted as stokers in the Dominion Naval Division and there tveife no fewer than five hundred and fifty youths seeking those jobs, or fifty for each vacancy. The Government is not facing the situation fairly or squarely. No doubt, the

interests of ownership have been I conserved in a definite and last-' ing manner where the competition has had its inevitable effect among the newspapers of Christchurch. It is far otherwise with the employees who next month must look for some other means of subsistence. What provisions may hav,. been made in their regard cannot go far to alleviate their lot. It is a simple inference, however, that as ownership and control of the means of production and distr'liution pass into fewer hands, the remainder of the community have their purchasing power steadily reduced, and the vicious circle is thus perpetuated. The Labour Move, ment has honestly and consistently endeavoured to bring sta bility in the Dominion’s economy. It would legislate to guarantee the actual producers of wealth against the danger of loss which arises from competition. It has supported the application of that principle to the producers for the Dominion market, and urged its extension to

the producers for the oversea market. Its advocacy of a livingwage for the workers is therefore balanced by its campaign to a= ;ure primary producers of a payable return for their labour also. It may b e said this would interfere with private enterprise and freedom of competition. But in this very case at Christchurch there is a convincing proof of what actual capitalistic competition means in practice. It is the same in several other fields of business throughout the Dominion. It will be the same in the course of tim e amongst the farming community. In the cities ( there is a. reorganisation going mi. The object is to make more permanent Ihe provision of relief for the needy. This has become necessary, because indigence is so widespread and pauperism is growing. There is manifest an urgent need to stop the causes of this growth of poverty, and the first step is a change of control such as will check and reverse the growth of monopoly.