THE UNEMPLOYED AND “THE DOLE”

Nelson Evening Mail, Volume LXIV, 19 June 1931, Page 10

THE UNEMPLOYED AND “THE DOLE”

(To the Editor) Sir,-—The teller appearing in your columns signed “Les. Sport,” deserves careful study. Whilst in 1 1 is contribution ho sav.s little that is new, he says a great deal that is true. Tho present deplorable plight of this country most certainly is due to extravagance, public and private, and until we can eliminate the spirit of the spendthrift and of reckless and unnecessary extravagance we shall not get any improved state of affairs. Those of us who are now perforce on short commons would he just as had as ever we were if we only had the chance. New Zealand needs real and genuine ‘self denial” for the next two years at all events. If tho dole were instantly increased fivefold and people paid their levies live years in advance, that would bring no real relief. It would be one of the worst things that could happen at this juncture. The principle of the dole tax is inherently vicious and immoral, and in its effects degrading and disastrous. The best thing that could happen would he the instant, i evocation of this silly law. We know wlmt the dole has done and is doing for Great Britain. The destructive force (hat may vet shatter tho Empire comes from no foreign foe. If comes from within, and what is had for Great Britain cannot he good for us here, where everybody should be well off, and would he well off, had we not wasted—and continue to waste—our substance in riotous living. We seem to have reached that stage when we have no clear perception of flic difference between mine and thine. 'lhe recent records ol ’lie criminal courts support this view. Theft is now prevalent in every walk of Jife; it has even and to a marked degree invaded the actions of those placed in high trust. Infidelity to trust is common. These people argue, and argue quite logically, that they “are no worse than their betters”—“their betters” in this case being our lawgivers in Rarliament assembled. 'They are quite right, too. They are no worse. And the same applies to the postal or bank clerk who purloins the funds of his employers in comparatively small amounts. Because I am unemployed and hard up should provide no excuse or right for me to dip my hand into my neighbour’s pocket and forcibly extract 7s Gd, or any sum. Most of your readers will support my contention that this would he an unlawful act, and one deserving of punishment. It is dear enough in the case of the individual, but not nearly so clear when the powers that be get going with their “dole tax” scheme. The Government have no more right (ban I have to dip their hands into anybody’s pocket to ostensibly provide me or anybody elso with a job, no" matter how badly that job may he needed.

Some’ I see. are now anxious that (he dole tax should he extended (o women workers—a plain proof of how our vision lias become distorted and obscured. The women have suffered, and still suffer, quite enough. Think of file mothers avid the. sisters who have “come to light” and paid the “dole tax" in order that their sons and their 'brothers might he placed in the running and have a chance to get something. In numberless cases that chance has never come, and it never will come. What then ‘f Has this act of self denial been quite thrown away? Not quite. In all probability it has enabled someone else and perhaps less deserving to “get a job.” —1 am, etc., OBSERVER. Nelson, 19th June.