MONETARY DEVALUATION

Otago Daily Times, Issue 25964, 3 October 1945, Page 3

MONETARY DEVALUATION

Sir, —In his letter of September 26 A. G. M. makes two main inferences that are open to serious question—(l) That because of their centralised control the great industrial monopolies are less adaptable to the needs of the moment and would lose out in competition with smaller localised concerns, given sufficient purchasing power to enable the consumer to choose freely, and (2) that no genuine co-operation is possible with a State bureaucracy, because of its compulsive methods and regulations. It is surely obvious in these days, when science and invention are continually revealing fresh secrets of the universe, that only large-scale organisations, commanding vast resources, can successfully adapt the new knowledge to the needs of the consuming public. Thi3 is in line with the modern development of industry, which spreads its branches throughout the country and absorbs or eliminates formidable competitors. Well-filled purses would not weaken, but rather strengthen this movement, since the customer who is able to choose will usually pick the most modern lines available to him in the shops. These great monpolies, nevertheless, tend to become more and more anti-social in proportion to their growth. They develop a secret and invisible bureaucracy that is more deadening and coercive than any State officialdom that is open to the daylight and subject to the will of the electors. Centralisation, zoning, spheres of influence, gentlemen's agreements, mass propaganda, Tammanyism, graft are all visible evidence of the coercive influences that are at work beneath the surface. State bureaucracy can be irritatingly show and cumbrous, but Bumbledom and the Circumlocution Office flourished long before Socialism became a force in the hand; and one needs only to glance at the great social enterprises connected with the public utilities of transport, communication, power, light, afforestation, irrigation, etc., to acknowledge that the co-operation of the public with these State activities is not only possible, but willingly given. Mr John Stephens's diverting letter in this morning’s Daily Times calls for no serious notice, except to suggest that a modern dictionary is indicated to supply him with a correct modern interpretation of the words “ postulate ” and “ posturise." —I am, etc., Credo. October 1.