WAR TAXATION.

Lyttelton Times, Volume CXVI, Issue 16808, 18 March 1915, Page 3

WAR TAXATION.

WHO SHOULD PAY? TO THE EDITOB. Sir. —Your correspoiiue.nt John iiailow says " the subjects of •every Stateought to contribute towards tno support, of the Government, as nearly a« possible in proportion to the revenue ivhicli they respectively enjoy, under the protection of the State." To that let us say. Amen. It would lessen the pain of every mother who has lost a son in the war to reflect that_ wealth at least was making somo sacrifice. —I am, etc.,

JOSHUA LITTLE

TO THE EDITOR. Sir.. —Reading your article on opiu ions of some Christchurch business men, it is quite amusing the various ideas expressed by different merchants as to the proposals they have for the raising of a war tax. You will noto how they particularly wish to dodge the burden being put upon their own line of business.

I notice a draper states he does .not want a direct taxation through the Customs, which he appears to think would have a detrimental effect on his business through the public having to curt„j] their purchases on account of the increased cost of living. He is decidedly in favour of a bachelor tax, which in the natural conrse of events, presuming that to avoid this tax bachelors will alt take unto themselves wives, must result eventually in a large increase of business to the drapers. Probably this draper has a few marriageable daughters, or he envies the bachelor's lot.

Before concluding, I should like to venture an opinion. Why not tax those who can afford the luxuries or life, the man who owns a motor-car for pleasure? .There is no doubt he is the ono who should hear the taxation, not the poor fellow who has oo remain a bachelor for the reason that he cannot afford the cost of the prospective per-: ambulator.—l am. etc.. ■ BACHELOR No. 1.

T"> THE EDITOR. Sir, —Since tho war began the cost of living has been steadily on the increase throughout' the Empire.. In this country, with its large export of foodstuffs, the increase uHB been estimated at at least 25 per cent, or, in other words, the powe.r of a sovereign reduced to fifteen shillings; but in tbo Homeland, where they arc almost, entirely dependeut on outside sources for their supplies, tho position must be much more acute. What is the cause of this enormous burden which falls most heavily on those least able to bear it? Has there been a famine in any part of the earth ? Are there incomparably more mouths to feed? Has Labour exacted any more for its portion in- producing? Cer-! tainly a large percentage of the voluntary forces have become non-producers, but this cannot in any way be responsible inasmuch as unemployment exists. Then doe 3 tho regular Tommy eat more whan on active service ? No: he gets less and of poorer quality. To all of these queries, wo can answer emphatically, No. Since Nature, the workman and the soldier aro not responsible, we must look el-ewhere for the cause-

Dors tho man who holds the land on which grows the grain, meat, butter, fruit and wool get more for his wares? Does the 1 ' snipping company make the higher rate of insurance the medium of enormously increasing its freights? Does the merchant again make this the occasion of appeasing his avaricious aopetitc? And lastly, does the retailer have a pretext for contriving to make the normal into thirty shillings? Certainly thsy do! So the tenant farmer who has been stru<»eling for years to pay his lord for the right to be on the face of the cwth spi'zrs It's opportunity to get ahead-of it,.'and the financial prosit©, who inverts his borrowed money in a warehouse or company shares extorts exorbitant nr-fits 'or divid"nris. while the small retailer extracts hh mite and fumes and rave« at the navvy, clerk and soldier's wife or widow who are to my. 'pvA who hive nothing to «»U but. their labour and surplus ch'Mreu. Oh which produces the neces•fbv and «citi r T'?nt reoirrcd to send mil' : ons of human beings to the cannon's mm'+h. wVle tbe*r comrades «nd detw3«nts cr». trented th"«.! I do not donht we are hotter thyi oth"t notions engaged in the ghastly ; conflmt. but what ronm for improvement have we in , o«r Admin'st-Winn wh-'ch allows iracrupuVus individuals and combines to pxoloit'at will, srid raises a crv of horror p.t the worlmiu who n>»ks a fprtMng an hour more for. making it possible. J Some time nrro I wrote supporting , the farmer in h : 3 r?st"t to obtain tho i value of hi* produce. I am still of. the same opinion, but the tvua va'uo »t sneh time" s"* + v e present can nevr b* determined while rambling m I is u'niVerso'ly rampant. A I nation which en fi-d hundreds of mil- | finns for war purposes, secure the means of production and distribution I in when* and battleships cl : ko. It is a mere farce for statepn'm to I reprove the worker in anv_ industry. who endeavours to even the hicrher cosh of livin** hy a demand for increased wages. The absuriitv is on a oar with the ncbiev-ment of the deal Premier, who in hero-'cally grappling with tt,*. wheat problem bought Australian (L-bonr) Government con Seated wheat. ir,-t»»d of connsaa+ing New Zealand wheat at current prices. The same ah-1 ffnrditv is auite at r. discount with Mr Beauchamp's pr-mosal to ra\se a war | tax hy further increasing the common burden by the imposition ot | a surtax on exnorts ana imports. I have been oppossd to the practice of striking, not because I believo any such means harsh or unjust, but be-, cause of the inefficiency of Syndicalism, j and the increased hardships consequent on the failure of that means to obtain | bet'.er conditions, but as there is a-' limit to a man's endurance, so is there to a nation's and the race. History abounds with the power of tortured peop.e, and we have to-day all the material for its repetition. Beware, then, lest in our endeavour to fan the flame in Germany, we sot tho firo at our own door. With the utmost sympathy for the man of .any tonguo whose prospects are ' well-n.gh hopeless, I wish that an internitional conference of workers' representatives existed, with the power to induce tho toldier and the worker • to down their tools of destruction and construction, and demand a system of taxation which will gradually restore to the people the rights that are indisputably theirs, and the institution of ■a Supreme Court where justice is hand- j ed out to nations and diplomats and j intriguers aro not tolerated.

] am not dreaming, one cannot dream in times like these, when nations are striving to concert pitch in human slaughter, and divines in both camps call on God for assistance., (Methinks I know where His sympathies lie.) I am not dreaming, for the twelve-page penny dailv keeps me awake reading between the lines, and the R.P.A. sixpenny'editions indicate the course of

human progress. It is no dream, it wants only more fearless men whose lives are not devoted to mercenary motives, no " prowling appetites ravenous for pudding and for praise." or "things' to stick stars upon." Oh for a few Lincolns, Georges, Lathers, Cromwells, Marxs, Shakespeares, Charlenvgnes. Secldons. to lead us in our blindness to a higher and a clearer altitude, where such extremes will be impossible, and nobler ambitions the coal.— I am. etc.. h F. ACTOX. Sumner, March 15.

TO TTTT: F.ntTOR. I Sir, —It is: to be. hoped that Mr Mas- ! sey, with till-his fauns, will never coiii sent to the scheme proposed by Air iieauehamp. No doubt a war tax in essential, and Mr Beauchamp;s proposal to tax our exports and imports would perhaps be a simple and cheap method of collecting it. But as a war tax is necessary, it is just as necessary to impose it so as to fall on all classes of the people, equally and proportionately. It is about time we tried to get "rid of this system of indirect taxation. It may look all right on paper, but from the practical point of view it is as unjust as it is ancient.' As everyone knows, Mr Beauchamp's proposal would mean a tax on some of our household necessities, such as tea and sugar, etc., and of course the paying part of the business would be pushed on to the consumer. Now, would it be justice, would it be righteous to com-, pel the married man with a large family to contribute more than tho married man who r:ither prefers to have no family? The man with a large family would require more of the taxed articles, therefore he would be paying more than the man who had only his wife and self to keep. Then there is the widow who may have two or three children to provide for. Is it justice that- she should have to pay more in taxes than the bachelor? Surely, when everyone- is desirous of bearing a share of the burden, no one would object to a direct tax on all wages, beginning with a substantial tax on high in-, conies, then graduated down so that all j would pay according'to their earnings. I Of course.a substantial graduated laud tax would also be) necessary—or rather an increase on the land tax. To put a. tax on waees there would-be difficul- j ties to overcome., but. in overcoming these it would bring to I'ght the abilities of the true statesman.' Mr Lloyd GeOrcrc was eonal to a fur mer» stupendous task when he produced h ; s "Insurance Act, and surely the machinery could he set in motion which would nVro the w.or {nx eo"nllv on all classes of the community.—l am, etc.. TAY'LOR. Christchurch, March 13.'