POINTS OF VIEW

Te Awamutu Courier, Volume 25, Issue 3759, 22 May 1936, Page 7

POINTS OF VIEW

RAILWAYS FREE TO USERS. Sir,—l have read with considerable interest the contributed article “Railways,” obviously the fruit of long research, and I endorse the policy advocated. The “user pays” mentality belongs to the medieval ages, and the modern expression of it comes in the form of petrol and tyre taxes, which are just camouflaged toll gates, and ought to be entirely swept away, as their more obvious predecessors were. YoUr contributor rightly points out that an elevdtor in a great building is simply a vertical railway; its cost is recovered, not by any tax, but by the purely voluntary payment of higher rentals for the use of the building so served. His reform, however, like many another sound scheme, must be preceded by Land Restoration, whereby the State collects the full annual rentals on the social values of land for public revenue purposes. There would then be no need to levy any “tax,” for the added values, and just as automatically, in a free market, the land rentals would rise of their own accord, and the State would receive the additional value as a matter of course at the next valuation registration. The reform would automatically attract to the railways all the heavy parallel motor traffic now such a costly burden on the rates, and motor traffic for goods would fit into its true economic function—a feeder to, and not a competitor of, the Hallways. Respecting the social Value added to land by economic railways, we may as well have an expert opinion upon that. The following is a copy of a land agent’s advertisement which appeared in the “Standard,” Sydney, on April 4th, 1928: “There is no factor which has greater influence on land values than the construction of railways. Immense profits ’have been made by people who have purchased land in the vicinity of an approved or newly-constructed line Your opportunity is now—the railway just started—land still cheap A rise in values will be swift and sure. Buy before the “mass of the people,” realise what is happening. The “mass of the people,” poor boneheads, have not yet realised what has happened and is happening, but splendid articles like that of your contributor should surely enlighten them. Sir, my compliments to the author for writing that article, and to you for having the sterling good sense, the initiative and the Cotirage to publish so bold and fine an effort on behalf of sound economics and fundamental social justice.—l am, etc., T. E. McMILLAN. Matamata.

DOUGLAS CREDIT. Sir,—As far back as April I wrote asking several pertinent questions on the most important subject of Douglas Credit, but none of the champions Of that cult came to my assistance in enlightening me on the points raised. They were: Why did the New Zealand branch of the movement drop the national dividend proposals ? And, secondly, as to information about Alberta. The two queries were perfectly reasonable ones, and in the absence of replies, one can only assume that silence gives consent to the implied criticism that the whole thing is a chimera, not capable of being implemented into actual practice. Are the. Douglas Social Creditors really satisfied with the monetary policy of their allies, the Labour Government, or, are they, as is rumoured, somewhat disgusted at the failure of the Government to delve further into monetary reform than by taking over the Reserve Bank. The failure of the Government to clarify its monetary policy, however, effects more than social creditors. It undoubtedly was responsible for the failure of the Labour Government’s first loan attempt on the London market. The cynic must have found much to whet his cynicism on in the letter of the Governor of the Reserve Bank to the Minister of Finance. As for Alberta, it still seems as if the electors of that place are .still waiting for Douglas Social Credit, despite that they returned a majority of members pledged to that class of reform. In New Zealand the position is equally unsatisfactory, so far as Douglas Credit is concerned.—l am, etc., WHY?