PRACTICAL ECONOMICS

Maoriland Worker, Volume 13, Issue 30, 25 July 1923, Page 14

PRACTICAL ECONOMICS

Wage Workers' Sfarrj. ■ night ■■■■ Increased Profits Wrong • From Toilers ■ Speaking in the House in reply to the Hon. J. G. Anderson, Mr.- Holland said: — The Minister of Labour endeavours to make it appear that the workers of to-day are receiving in wages the equivalent of what they received m 19114. Now, I venture to say that if you were to authorise the Government Statistician to take the whole of the cost of living into consideration—the prices for the whole of the commodities that comprise the necessaries of life—not three or four groups only—you would find that the average worker of to-day is between 9/- and 10/- per week worse off than he was prior to August, 1914. WORKL KSS TrOEKKKS. Let mc read to the Minister a letter which is characteristic of the many other letters which come to Labour members week by week. The writer is an official of the Auckland Waterside Workers' Union, and he says:—

"To-day scores of men anxious for work have had another of those painful experiences of going home with the story of nothing doing. This is my personal experience. I have been standing in the engagementroom for watersiders Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday, Friday, Saturday, Monday, and again to-day Tuesday, and have not had one penny piece to take home to my family. We stand each day from 7.45 a.m. to 9.45 a.m. and Saturday, 1 p.m. to 3 p.m. Our children ask when we go home: 'Have you had any work to-day, Dad ?'" . #

. That letter conveys a statement of the position that quite a number of workers find themselves in at the present time throughout New Zealand, while the Government are importing more workers to take their places in the bread line along with these. Now, the Minister, if I understand him rightly, denied that profits had increased as revealed by the figures quoted in the mass by the honourable member for Lyttelton. I have been going through these figures recently. When the last statistical paper came do hand at Westport I had just received an invitation from the Workers' Educational Association at Greymouth to speak to them, and it occurred to mc that it would be well to take this particular subject. So I went into the figures from 1891 to 1923. I propose to deal only with a portion of those figures, starting with the year 1911 and carrying through to . 1922. As the Minister knows —and as my colleague, the honourable member for Lyttelton, mentioned —prior to 1919 we received these statistics only every five years. Since then we have received them yearly. PRODUCTION AND WAGES. Now, in 1911 the gross production per worker in New Zealand, in the secondary industries, with which these statistical publications deal, was £564; five years later, in 1916, the gross production per worker was .£786; in 1919, £872/8/-; in 1920, | £95.7; in 1921, £1046; and in 1922, 1 £954/18/-.

In 1911, the added value per worker —that is, the value added to the raw material by the workers engaged in those secondary industrieswas £L 96. In 1.916, five years later\ it was £244/10/-; in IQI9 it was £268/8/; 1920, £342; 1922, £385/7/-.

The wages per worker were, in 1911, £99; in 1916, £Jls; in 1919, £141/12/-; in 1920, £159/11/-; 1921, £159/lg/s 1922, £194/10/-.

Let mc pause here to say that in 1922 it will be found, I think, that numbers of the lower p.aid workers and apprentices were cut out of the report, but that does not affect the position except to make it less favourable for the purpose of my argument. WAGES ANI> A1)I>EI) TA„UE. I want to show, now the difference between tbe value added to the raw fn-aterial &id tbe wages paid to tbe w'of'k'efs. In 1911, that W&S £97 per" worker; that Is, every worKe% in' "Hhp secondary dealt willNS"those statistical Tepdrte; |aye : RkiS' jKb%Bm© waees which, ■ if ■-•*'%■ >> - .- ••■*..

him or her. In 1916 the difference) between added value and wages w r as £129/10/- per "worker; in 1919, £126/16/-; 1920, £152/9/-; 1921, £183/10/-; in 1922; £190/17/-. Last year, 1922, was a record, and! let mc draw the attention of honourable members to the fact that whereas in 1922 ihe gross production per worker J decreased slightly as against 1921, the j difference between added value and j wages paid to the individual worker} increased from £183/10/- to j '£190/17/-, an increase of £7/7/- peri worker. j ' Till-] IK-CKKASKHii SI/RPJ/US. Let. mc finally place before' the House a table which shows the excess of increase in added value overj the increase in wages. In 1916 thej increase in wages over 1911 was £V6\ per worker; the increase in added value over 1911 was £48/10/-; therefore; the excess of increase in added value over increase in wages was £32/10/- per worker. In 1919 the increase in wages over 1911 w r as £ 42/12/- per worker; the increase in -added value over 1911 was £72/8/-;

the excess of increase in added value over increase in wages was £23/8/-. In 1920 the increase in wages over 1911 was £60/11/- per worker; the increase in added value over 1911 was £116; the excess of Increase in added value "over increase in wages was £55/9/-. In 1921 the increase in wages over 1911 was £60/10/-; the j increase in added value over 1911 was £146; the excess of increase in added value over increase in. wages was £85/10/-. In 1922 the increase in wages over 1911 was £95/10/-; the increase in added value over 1911 was £187/7/-; the excess of increase in added value over increase in wages was £93/17/-. That is the answer to the Minister's denial of the increase in profit to the employer as a result of the efforts of the employees. capital comes out oe SURPLUS. | ! An Hon. Member.—But what about wages of superintendence? Mr. Holland.—ln these return "wages"' inclu.ies all salaries. An Hon. Member. —Not taxes? Mr. Holland.--This is the aided value the workers give to the raw material. With the distribution of ! the surplus value I am not dealing at the present time. Some of it goes l-to the mortgagee and the various profiteers. That does not alter ihe fact that the worker creates the value. As every honourable member i of the House knows, or ought to know, all taxes are paid out of.sur-j [plus produced by the worker. An Hon. Member.—Not always. | \. Mr. Holland. —Taxes can only be j [ paid out. of surplus. They cannot be ! paid out of anything else. If there is no surplus, there is nothing to pay the taxes with. An Hon. Member. —But what about capital? Mr. Holland. —If the honourable member would take the trouble to ex- j amine his economics, he would find j that capital itself comes out of surplus. Let the honourable member look to his definitions and see what -the term "capital" means. However. I have no time to enter into an economic discussion with the honourable member to-night. I agree with what the honourable member for Christchurch East, said —it would be stupid not to 'recognise it —that to-day the worker is better off than he was 109 years ago. That goes without saying. Humanity is always progressing. Mr. JLysnar.—Better off than he was ten years ago. ; THE WORKERS' POSITION. Mr. Holland. —The worker to-day is worse off than he was ten years ago. The worker's position is worse in comparison with that of the exploiter than it was ten years ago, or even 20 or 100 years ago. Now, Sir. this country is rich enough to pay a living wage to the men who do its work, a wage which will enable them to keep their wives and families in comfort. \ have letters here in this Chamber tonight—numerous letters —'from workers in the Public Service who declare that they cannot pay their way on the wages which they are receiving at the present time. We all know that is true. Some of these' men have families of from four to six children, some have families up to ten and twelve children, and no man can keep a family of from eight to ten on £3/16/- per week; no man can keep a family of five on £3/16/-; nor yet can a family of three be kept on £3/16/-, That surely is. something which ought to concert menihers of this House. 1 have been told over and over again that the' Labour members' have no monopoly of sympathy with the workingmen, tbut what sympathy meatf? Tbe meastire.pf our sympathy ,will be tested by the manner in which ■we vote when the division is taken. WHAT ABOUT THE FAIRiTEK? gentleman Has jast<jti: '« small Meirr

has not sufficient to live upon is in exactly the same position as the underpaid public servants and wageworkers. The honourable member for Wairarapa, who would have this House believe that he is much concerned about the small farmer, can give evidence of that concern before this session closes. The Labour Party may have the opportunity to submit an amendment that will declare in favour of the small farmer getting the full value of the product of his labour. The honourable member for Wairarapa, Sir. was not in his place when I made reference to this most extraordinary statement with respect to .the small fanners who would not be able to see it through unless income-taxation were reduced. I want to put it to him now. Sir. through you, whether a small farmer whose income is not sufficient to buy boots" for his children —and I know .that statement. is unfortunately true —can be affected by an income-tax that has a foundation exemption ,of £300. and which gives an exemption of £50 for every child under 18 years of age. t Mr. McLeod.—Taxation comes from the soil. PKO'DI'CKJtS OF JfOTHTIfG. ' Mr. Holland. —Nobody is stupid enough to say that taxation comes from the soil. Taxation is made possible by the fact that men bring living lab-ouring-power into application with the natural so produce commodities, wealth, and social values. The taker of surplus values produces mothhrg: Whether men be working farmers, wage-workers on the waterfront and elsewhere, or clerical workers, so long as they are performing social service they ar"« contributing to the production of social values. The goods produced on any farm would have little, social value if there were no railway workers to .convey the commodities to the markets; if there were no waterfront workers, no seamen, no miners digging coal. for the trains and the ships that go throbbing and thrashing across the oceans carrying the products of the farms to the markets of the world.

Mr. McLeod.—And why not put it the other way round?

Mr. Holland. —Yes, and without the labour of on the land there could be no social values created. No one section of workers alone creates social value. There is an interdependence of working-class interests between the land-workers and those who labour on the railways, the ships on the sea, the waterfronts, and in the secondary industries. The trouble is that too many farmers refuse to recognise that they belong to the working class movement. Industrially and politically, the working farmer belongs to the Labour movement, but he does not always know it. When he does recognise the fact it will be infinitely better for him and for all the rest of New Zealand.