TALKING OF APOLOGIES.

Waikato Times, Volume 118, Issue 19661, 22 August 1935, Page 9

TALKING OF APOLOGIES.

1 (To the Editor.) Sir,—lt will be remembered that “Plato" asserted wages had fallen “an average of 20 per cent,” When I asked where he got his “average” from he quoted llie Year Book, but could produce only 18 per cent. As be had the impertinence to demand an apology I proved from ills own authority (the Year Book) that there was no fall at all, and that, on the contrary, true wages have actually risen. Now in his last letter he turns on his own authority and expatiates at length on what “the Year Book does not mention”! Those who are not acquainted with "Plato’s” methods might wonder how anyone could set up that the same authority which is good for his purpose is bad for mine; and to cap all: “'Perhaps Mr Seymour will leave the Year Book alone after this!" And perhaps Mr Seymour won’t. It is a delightfully useful piece of work for dealing with bogus “averages" and “apologies.” I asked “Plato" to explain why h* had quoted “paper" wages, and not “effective” wages 1 “Plato" was 00 the horns of a dilemma- There were only two explanations possible. Th* first was that he did not understand what he read; the second was ht hoped that everybody concerned would “leave the Year Book alone’’ and rely on his assertions. Both explanations were unpleasant. “Plato” dared not confess to either. Hence the desperate course of attacking the Year Book!

To call me “the eoonomio Houdini" does not confer on “Plato" the- advantage he seems to suppose in using the term- Houdini was a man who was a oomplete master of his subjeot,' who had no difficulty in unravelling the knots that held others helpless and incoherent in -their efforts to escape. I am afraid I must borrow some “all due modesty” from Mr Sykes’ abundance and disclaim the honour.

The economic knots in which “Plato” and his friends have trapped themselves are really very simpleones- It is the “new economics" that has got them into trouble. No ‘‘Houdini” —economic or otherwise—is needed tq solve them, They have been completely dissected, classified, and pigeonholed a dozen times over by scientific economists. They have likewise been for centuries the happy hunting ground of the economic charlatan. No one need object if “'PlalQ" and his friends wish to try eoonornic experiments on themselves. They are free to begin to-morrow morning; but they are not going to try that- What they are trying to do is to wreck the machine in the vain hope of esoapins with some -of the loot. I except from this description some who are so confused that they have completely lost all their bearings.

It is not pleasant to contemplate the antics of the demagogue fishing in the troubled waters of social unrest. It is not pleasant to find an anonymous writer telling the wageearner (who is generally unable to get the true figures) that he Is 20 per cent, worse off, when he is really better off except for the unemployment tax- Whether the cause is plain muddleheadedness or deoeit, the effect is the same.

There Is ample to put right without inventing and persisting in fictitious grievances.—l am, etc-, DOUGLAS SEYMOUR. Hamilton, August 1.7, 1935.