THE PLUTISH "PRESS"

NZ Truth, Issue 606, 27 January 1917, Page 4

THE PLUTISH "PRESS"

Airing its Awful Ignorance

London. January 17.

The Board of Trade figures show that retail prices on January Ist last were S7 per cent, over prewar prices, compared with Germany's 111 per cent, Austria's 177 pet cent.., and Norway's 82 per cent. — Cable item. . The above paragraph inspired the Tory, 'Christchurch "Press" last week to perpetrate a lengthy leading article, the pretext of it being a lesson m patriotism for New Zealanders, but ostensibly for- the purpose of deoderisins the stench of the war profits scandal m this country, and protecting th<» most vulnerable portion of Fat's an:atomy — his pocket. "The real lesson of the figTiTes," says the "Press," is that the New Zealand people \rho are clamoring against "the increased cost of living should be ashamed of themselves." Then, after chewing over the fact that the workingman m Britain, earning £3 a week, pays £4 income tax, besides the 87 per cent, advance on food prices, whilst the New Zealand worker, having ho income tax and earning £5, growls about the cost of living rising "20 per cent, or so," the Tory organ proceeds, to' imply that everyone who disagrees with its own sentiments on the subject of war profits is an I.W.W. propagandist. The "Press" also endeavors to make its limited circle of readers believe that "the' war- profits are distributed throughout the com-munity-and com© largely into the pockets of the very people who are attack, ing 'the poor farmer"; that the real shirker is not the Bilver-tailed commercial cormorant, so much aa "the stay-at-home citizen who pays nothing to a treasury towards the cost of the war, and who wishes to have his war, like his bread, and butter, for nothing." •■:•; ■>- •'• '■ ' • ' .' ■♦ ' It would be.interesting to know who told the "Press"' that the cost of living m New Zealand had advanced "20 per .cent, or so" on pre-war rates. It is common knowledge 'amongst all New Zealanders who are required to contrive for their weekly wages to see them fed and housed over seven days, that the cost of living is well beyond the figure set down as accurate by tho Christchurch mascot of Massey, and it is equally well known, that m all instances, the most exorbitant increases have been placed on those commodities which the people cannot do .without. • The £3 average wage of a working man m England also is worth half as much more m that country as the same wage would be m New Zea-, land, and that fact alone should catch the lone eye of the "Press" as an argument against its/ puerile contention that the workihgman m England is at present worse oft than the worker m New Zealand. But, even if that were not so arid the sovereign was of the same value m New Zealand as m England, the English worker's pay would still be less and his sacrifice would be greater than/ that of the New Zealander, not bccjause he wants tilings that way, but because he has not got sufficient kick to resist the dominance of the class whose cause the , Christchurch "Pross" exists to champion, and who. it' suggests, gets the war profits and then patriotically hands the whole lot back to those from whom it originally sucked them. •# • ■ It is a pity that m the face of such a ludicrous explanation, the "Press" has not disseminated any enlightenment as to why the primary producer raised the cost of living even "20 per cent, or so" if his profits from that increase were to go back into the pockets of the public. It is evidently because the puhlic, m the alleged opinion of the "Press,", are m this way receiving the benefit of the profits being made In New Zealand out of tho war, that that wall-eyed enemy of democracy purges itself of the suggestion that the working people of tho Dominion, like those m England, should have an income tax piled on top of the already extortionate bonus which they are paying to profiteering: "patriots." It would bo interesting to know whether the "Press," during one of its periodical talks with Itself, has ever "tumbled" to t'ho fact that the tax on the English workingmen's wages might never havo been necessary had, it not been for the fact that New Zealand's patriotic phmdor.bunds placed such prohibitive prices on necessities for the men m the trenches and tho people m England. The tax was essential, m order that starvation might bo obviated, and that the British Government, despite tho profitpinching patriotism shown, by top-dog Now Zealanders, might continue to do its fair share m the winning of tho j war.