“PLOUGHMAN” AND MR SEYMOUR.

Waikato Times, Volume 116, Issue 19364, 18 September 1934, Page 7

“PLOUGHMAN” AND MR SEYMOUR.

(To the Editor.) <ir, —Mr Seymour staffs that he lias answered my questions "when—against Mr McMillan —I have contended that all values arc community created." i had noted that.land values were community created, hut 1 have nut seen that Mr Seymour agrees tiiat

these values (exchange) should belong to the community that makes them. My questions arc clear and distinct, and require the simple answer, yes or no. I assume that Mr Seymour will admit that the community has the moral right to possess all the exchange land values it creates. If I am wrong I shull he obliged if Mr Seymour will explain why. 1 note with pleasure that Mr Seymour agrees that it is desirable to “get down to fundamentals,” and that he is anxious to give assistance for such a purpose; it is owing to this fact that I would rather not deal with much that is in Mr Seymour’s letter. “One step at a time” is enough for me. Slicking to community values, Mr Seymour stales: “I have contended that all values arc community created,” and asks me to give an instance of an individually created value. 1 admit that I also believe all values arc community created, and that my question (a) was merely an effort to obtain a foundation upon which to build; there is still a possible misunderstanding in that “all values.” Does Mr Seymour believe that mental and physical values are community created and should belong to the community? If not, why not? The position appears to be that all exchange (not use) land values are made by the community, and should belong to the community to lie used as an asset to meet the community's liabilities: that owing jo improper legislation the continual 1 y is deprived

1 of its income and resorts to questionable methods to raise funds to meet the obligations that should have been paid from the land value revenue. S'ticking to fundamentals, will Mr Seymour please state what, in his opinion, is the best policy for the country to adopt in relation to: (a) Land tenure; (b) raising sufficient revenue to meet liabilities? For a long time, Sir, I have followed the correspondence that has appeared in your paper, and I have come to the conclusion that there is ntuch truth in all the different economic principles that have been explained; that no one school of thought has a monopoly of the truth. In New Zealand wo had a splendid body of skilled workmen who applied their labour to the raw materials witli which our country is so richly endowed; thus wealth was produced and unemployment was practically unknown; then something happened—something, or somebody (or a group of somebodies) stepped in and commanded: “Stop! Thou shalt not work !” We still have the workmen, eager to work, and the raw materials; but wc are held at the point of a gun (for the whole military power of the country backs up Mr Somebody). Who is this Somebody? Mr Seymour has been trained to sift evidence, collect faels, and cut out all irrelevant matter. Jt is evident Dial lie lias also made a deep study of the science of political economy. I have followed his many statements as given in his letters, and I think ho

is correct when he states that there Is much shallow thinking. Mr Soymour has had a lot of fun out of his correspondence. So far lie has been more of an iconoclast than a builder, but I will ask Mr Seymour to help “the cause that needs assistance, the wrongs that need resistance, and the good that he may do.”—l am, etc., PLOUGHMAN. Hamilton, September 10, 1034.