Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

HIGHER STANDARD OF LIVING

Wd constantly hear 'lff lisjeriLflmade that the cost oi every Hung has gone up, and I believe that many people are satisfied that such is ihe case. I have in my possession store pass hooks which show lire pii„e3 actually charged me and others ifl 1877, 1394, and 1897, ami lh.: Cur-, rent retail price list of a premia fit firm and the prices v, orb out as follows for the articles named, viz-

A careful study of this table wilt show that, compared with forty years ago, prices are now much, lower, while for the later date lh? jad.anlago is still decidedly in favour-of ihe latest price li t. Adding the items together for each period we find that in 1877 a matt buying one of each would pay 34/3,| An 1894 he would pay 17/01, in 1897| 21/I|, and in 1911 20/0?. One wonders how the family man got on in 1877. Wages were not nearly as high, as now, yet the cost of living was 1 tlun 75 per cent, higher that it is now; bread, butter, candles, tea, sugar, and flour being at what we would now almost consider famine prices. i Another writer says It Is appa-, rent that Great Britain’s free trade, nolicy is of little ;use to her v. h n the demand for foodstuffs is greater than the supply. We have overlooked the fact that we have introduced European ideas as regards foodstuffs into the Orient, and-as Great Britain’s producing areas have not increased correspondingly, higher prices prevail in Great Britain. The correspondent’s list of prices pub li filed a few days ago is quite correct, but ho could have made a much stronger case if he had included tbofollowing items, that have been reduced quite 60 per cent. ; —Keroutn', salt, potatoes, onions, fruit, fish (fresh and preserved). Coal and gas are also much lower.

1877 1804 1897' 1911 Sugar (tb.) . 0/6 0/3 0/3 0/2} Raisins (lb.) . 0/8 0/7 0/7 0/5 Jam (lb.) . 0/10 0/5 0/5 0/4 Butter (tb.) . 1/6 0/14 0/11 1/2 Tea (lb.) 3/0 1/8, 1/8 1/6 Currants (tb.) . 0/6 0/5. 0/5 0/3 Cream of Tartar (tb.) .. . 2/8 1/4 1/4 1/0 Carbonate of Soda (tb.) 0/4 0/4 0/4 0/4 Candies (tb.) . 1/3 0/7 0/7 0/6 Beef (tb., average) .. 0/6 0/3} 0/3 h 0/5 Flour (100 tbt) . 22/0/ 10/0 14/0 13/0 Bread (loaf) ... 0/6. Q/3. 0/4 0/3 i

Permanent link to this item

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/PGAMA19130228.2.13

Bibliographic details

Pelorus Guardian and Miners' Advocate., Volume 24, Issue 16, 28 February 1913, Page 2

Word Count
401

HIGHER STANDARD OF LIVING Pelorus Guardian and Miners' Advocate., Volume 24, Issue 16, 28 February 1913, Page 2

HIGHER STANDARD OF LIVING Pelorus Guardian and Miners' Advocate., Volume 24, Issue 16, 28 February 1913, Page 2

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert