HOUSEWIVES' UNION.

Wanganui Herald, Volume XLIX, Issue 14340, 9 July 1914, Page 8

HOUSEWIVES' UNION.

TO THE EDITOR. Sir,—Mr Antonoff’s opinion is that the Housewives’ Union has every moral right to exist and develop, etc. I don t deny him that opinion. I have the same opinion that far, but I don’t see where it will 'nave any power to combat the dark forces that deprive the worker’s of the comforts of life, and I think'my comparison of organised Labour with organised shopkeepers was sound. Certainly Labour is apparently handicapped by Arbitration laws; so is the shop-keeper to a certain extent; but competition plays a greater part. The shop-keepers arc labourers as much as any other section, t’nc only difference is they try to live without having any direct master. Hut they must work "and look after their business to. live: they are subject to just as keen competition to make a living, as any other calling. Tuey are also tied to a locality, and’ under the screw of the land lard they are no more free to do as they like then any other .worker, > But all other classes of workers have the same scope: they can unite and demand better conditions or, refuse to work. The shopkeeper can only do the same, that is, units and demand higher prices, and if the other workers refuse to purchase, he has to keep his commodity the same as the other workers. Shopkeepers arc no bettor organised than’ other workers; there arc always some in every, line who will not unite, who take advantage of the market, ‘ and keep the rest in check. I think Hie law of supply and demand operates in New Zealand the same as everywhere else. True, the supply of some commodities is much in excess of “local demand,” but, through disposing of the’ surplus to compete with other places, the high prices are maintained, and when more than the surplus is exported, prices naturally go higher, because then the local supply is less than the demand. -Tills is done hy " the-capitalist, not the shopkeeper—and if we import from other countries it acts in the same way to raise the prices there and lower them here. At the same time, if wo imported everything from the cheapest market, what would be the position of our own people? Tuc cheapness would be useless, because we would have nothing to purchase with, I think Mr Antohoff has fallen into error in classing Housewives’ Unions with co-operation. Presumably be is thinking only of the usual co-operative system of distribution for profit. In that case they are both the same. But the co-operation that I wish to sec inaugurated is, as I said n my former letter, for, production and distribution (more production,, if any difference), a co-operation that will employ all its members, without any ide,a of profit or dividend, a co-operation that will provideevery necessary and comfort for its members, a system that will do away with the present exploitation, and remove all fear of poverty. And this can be carried out as easily as a Housewives’ Union. Thou Why have the shadow (Housewives’ Union), and neglect the hone (co-operative common wealth)? Mr Antonoff says competition has not failed in other centres, as Palmerston, North, New Plymouth, Wellington, etc., which proves my contention that competition rules prices of commodities (Labour included), and if there was no competition here the Housewives’ Union could not exist. True, it takes the place, or effects more competition, but so sure as it works to reduce prices, so sure will it work to reduce the demand for Labour. I have no time for palliative methods generally, especially when it is as easy to get the whole loaf. Palliatives have been our cursft, they arc cunningly served out to keep the multitude quiet, and as soon as they got quiet enough they are taken away again. The workers have it in their power to do away with all exploitation (shopkeepers also), and to have plenty of every necessity and pleasure there is to bo had. They only need to unite, and co-operatively produce and distribute everything they require. Such a system is being attempted by the Social Democratic Party. All that is necessary is for all workers (and shopkeepers) to unite under that banner, and they can get the whole loaf as easily as getting the crust. Such a co-operative society, instead of bringing the standard of living down to the level of China, would bring the standard of living “for the workers” np to the highest standard that we know of, and bring the cost of commodities down to the standard of equal time value for equal time value—*n other words to a just exchange.—l am, etc., , H. ROGERS.