SOCIAL CREDIT AND SOCIALISM

Otago Daily Times, Issue 24345, 9 July 1940, Page 8

SOCIAL CREDIT AND SOCIALISM

TO THE EDITOR Sir—ln your report of an address given by Miss King upon effective distribution, she is said to have stated that the Socialist looks with favour upon a system of taxation which takes money from the rich and gives it to the poor. For a number of years I have openly and proudly declared myself to be an uncompromising and revolutionary Socialist, because 1 believed that the objective of Socialism was social ownership and control of the means of production, distribution and exchange. Now Eread that Miss King, who has already been deeply interested in economic problems, gives an interpretation' of what constitutes the belief of a Socialist that is really more than I can allow to pass by unchallenged. Such an interpretation might be acceptable to the milk-and-water type, but to any person who has given serious thought to the fundamental principles of the economic system it will only be considered most ridiculous. Most of the leading thinkers of the world will agree that as yet in no part of the world has an economic system been introduced that will produce an equitable distribution of the national income or give economic security. As rational human beings, no doubt we shall not be satisfied until a more perfect system has been introduced. Where or by whom it will be introduced lies in the lap of the gods. It might be considered rather boastful to venture the belief that the New Zealand Government may be taking a lead in the world’s affairs with its Socialistic experiments Whether the people of New Zealand are sufficiently educated in economic knowledge to stand whole-heartedly and solidly behind the Government time alone will tell. It may be necessary for the Government to introduce some kind of training facilities to prepare the community to be able to carry out the advanced laws the Government desires carried out. and, if the citizens will prove themselves as honest and faithful in their service t,. the community as they have done to private enterprise, then a great transformation in the commumtys economic welfare will be the result. There is already some indication of dissatisfaction amongst the ardent individuals who place too great an estimate upon their own private opinions in a democracy. They have failed to learn that private opinions must become subordinate to the constitutional will of the people in a true democracy. In conclusion, I would like to make just a short comment upon the economic solution propounded by Miss King that a mathematical monetary formula had been produced that would rectify our economic defects. I confess my inability to satisfy myself that any kind of monetary reform will remove the root cause ol the defects in our economic system. It may be stated with some degree of truth that an increase or decrease m the volume of money currency will have some effect upon our economic system, tor money has some effects on our economic life. An increase in th- volume of money makes money more cheap, which again is reflected in an increase in the prices of commodities. So does a decrease .in the volume of money reflect itself in failing prices. How to introduce and maintain an equilibrium of the money factor is the work of experts. Money is a commodity of exchange, ft also measures the social necessary labour power inserted into a commodity mr price fixation; it maintains and controls the volume of consumption. It the community failed to provide such a safeguard, then the community would quickly become bankrupt. Thus it is essential to be careful in the manipulation of the money factor. We must be exceedingly careful in the way we entertain the shibboleths ot the money cranks if we would steer a safe course for a true democracy. I am. etc., R - Harrison. July 8 Other Letters to the Editor appear on page 4.