PUBLIC OPINION

Waikato Times, Volume 122, Issue 20426, 17 February 1938, Page 11

PUBLIC OPINION

As expressed by correspondents, whose letters are welcome, but for whose views we have no responsibility. Correspondents are requested to write in ink. It is essential that anonymous writers enclose their proper names as a guarantee of good faith. Unless this rule is complied with, their letters will not appear.

COST OF LIVING • To the Editor) Sir.—The politicians and would-be : politicians speak a lot about the cost of living. The Minister of Industries claims that although that cost has frone up wages have advanced much more rapidly. I suppose the argument will go on until the election® —and 1 after—but this is a matter where possibly some individuals know a great i deal* more than the average politician. The one person in every home who knows something about the cost of living is the housewife. She has to Id ac ■ unts, and she ! knows how prices arc moving. Now it would he really interesting, and perhaps helpful, if some capable housewife who keeps her accounts carc--1 fully would lei us have her opinion as 1 to the costs of keeping an average home going. The information would !.o such that the critic would have difficulty in dealing with it. Hard j facts are always the best argument. 1 There are several women's organi- • sat ions, such as the Women's Division 1 of the Farmers’ I'nion and the Women’s Institute, which probably could obtain this information. Nobody could object that it meant introducing politics, for the information would deal solely with the facts and figures, and all sides say that that is what they want. Let them have it. r»n»* good test would he to take a list of household commodities which the r Minister t>f Industries is said to have , given during the last election cam- | paign. He said that these costs could . he reduced. Well. it. would he fair to take his list and compare the prices with those that must be paid to-day. There need be no comment, .iust the two lists and let us see how prices have gone. Mv own opinion is that we are not sufficiently awake to the double- , standard wage. There is the money wage—that is. the actual money we ' are paid. That everyone will admit has gone up in the last two years. But there Is also the “real’’ wage—that is, the purchasing value of the money we get. How has that moved? That Is the important question. If our money wages will not buy more than they used to. then the real wage has been reduced. It is the purchasing power that really counts, not the I actual amount of the money paid lo us each week. And the person best ‘ able to say what the movement of the real wage has been is the good wife. She knows, and it would he interesting if she could be induced to let us 1 have her views.—l am, etc., MERE Hamilton, February 15. THINGS FINANCIAL ! —- 'To the Editor) >fr.—Tt Is significant that “8.C0m.” is silent in regard to the alleged assets of the Reserve Bank. As was shown in my previous letter, the bank has no right to its supposed assets, which are created by the people of the country. Ft is simply grotesque that those who* j do the book-keeping should claim the ! asset. i Now for the questions of your cori respondent: (1) “Would I be in I favour of the abolition of the high exi change and be prepared to take sterl1* tng returns for dairy produce?” This is answered by asking a question of “B.Com.*’ Is he and every other sec- . tton of the community in New Zealand • prepared to accept wages and remuneration on the British level? If they are. the farmers’ troubles would disappear to a large extent. Accord--1 ing to our worthy Prime Minister, our goal is “onward and upward.” There Is some lip-service rendered to a “reduction In costs,” but it is not practical politics, as the forty-hour week and hf*rh wages have arrived for good. The net result is that our currency is being depreciated in relation to sterling. The raising of the exchange was puerile, ns it simply put 25 per cent, on to costs and offender! overseas trade, benefiting nobody but the local manufacturers, to whom It meant increased protection. Had the raising of the exchange been accompanied by a rut of 25 per cent, all round on the tariffs the farmers and community generally would have benefited without offending overseas interests. As the result of Labour legislation our currency is further depreciated, until at the present time the real discrepancy Is approximately Ts 'N.Z.). The | remuneration of other sections of the - ! community is based on the New Zea- ; land cost of living. Export industry, I on the other hand, earns sterling ex- 1 | change, which becomes the property j j of the hanks on payment of a depreci- i I ated X.Z. £ worth 13s In sterling. ! : Hence the writer’s contention that the 1 1 farmers are providing a subsidy of 7s in the £ to other sections of the people, it. must be so when export industry Is 7s short in every £ re- ! celved in New Zealand: the whole j community suffers as a result. | “B.Com.'’ asks if there is such a thing as costless capital. ' There is some confusion of thought apparent here. Money is loosely termed ■'capital." If that capital is provided b\ the Reserve Rank or trading bank*. ■ then it is costless to them. Real ; physical capital not money . such as road®, railways, buildings of all description*. etc., is the product of applied labour, and is certainly not costless. The productive capacity of New Zealand has made the housing p - • ’ le T!:»* money part of ■ - mH • t!i. easiest of the lot. we ■ Hid h. «; yding. lary 1 5.

i NEUROSIS AND ECONOMIC PRESsure To the Editor; 1 Sir. - Mne w-mb rs ev.-Cy how j many ; pb* in the Dominion an* : suffering from neurosis or kindred complaint* ..f disordered nerves. A 1 conservative estimate, in my opinion. : would he that approximately GO per cent, of the adult population arc victims. more or less, of this insidious ■ modern disease. It is a regrettable fact that the -British Medical Association and similar organisations of the Empire appear to regard these diseases - tion of to-day—whatever members may think individually—and naturally : Governments are inclined to leave these matters Jo the experts concerned, with the result that, as a natioh. we are slowly hut surely falling from an At race to a C 3 race. What we need is some plain talking t and some common sense. ]t is generally understood that the origin of ; these diseases is to be found in mental j worries, often induced by physical ; worries such as overwork, bad living | conditions. and, broadly speaking, 1 economic stress, which in turn is the j constant companion of people who j receive limited incomes to provide, themselves with an inadequate standard jof living. Neurosis is evidently rc- : garded more as an individual responsibility than a national one. That, in j my opinion, is a mistake, and if we are, ! ever to be a fit nation we have to | place the full responsibility on the j State to remove the causes that pre- ' vent the nation becoming a healthy, j fit race of people. ' I The question that may be asked i here is: Can it be done, and what is .' it going to cost ? The answer to i these queries is that I it could have i ; been done at any time during the past ; quarter of a century; and 2 , lo . quote John. Ruskin, consumption is the cost of production. Tf such a value- ’ less, intangible Ihing as money is lo be • allowed to dictate as to whether or not we shall have a happy, healthy . and contented nation, then I suggest • that there is something wrong with i ! the grey matter that our politicians are credited with possessing. Further, ’ that those of the people who realise t that there is more than sufficient- for ! everyone, without taking a penny’s ■ j worth of value from those who have i to give to those who have not. signally > fail in their duty if they allow their t I parliamentary representatives to act ‘ | contrary to their express commands • , for social, economic and financial re- ■ j form. » For a Minister of the Crown to inj form a representative body of citizens j such as assembled at Hamilton roj cently to hear a debate, that Hie Goj vernment did not take ils orders from j the people, but acted as it thought j best in the interests of the >••• ph . is decidedly contrary to our dem..rr;dic constitution and savours of Fascism nr some similar form of dictatorship. —I am, efc., G. N. HOLTBAR. Glen Eden, February 15. SOCIAL DEBIT | i To the Editor) | slr,—Mr Hunter’s latest letter—- ■ i February 9 —makes it necessary to 1 run over the correspondence preceding ‘ ! lt(1) On December 18 last I asked J i Mr Hunter to define the term “ortho- : dox" in relation to finance as habitually ' used by him. I further asked him to • tell me where he thought this “ortho- ■ dox” system was In force to-day. As 1 Mr Young uses these terms with equal I prodigality, and Mr Hunter has so far failed to answer, I must now ask whether he will come to Mr Hunter's assistance. 2. 1 On December 23 Mr Hunter promised to answer these questions, but wanted me first “to answer the problem I have set him.” ■ (3) Tn this letter he also propounded some novel views on the relation of standard of living to debt. I took him up on January 3. .and asked , him to explain what he meant. . i (, n January 7Mr Hunter evolved the formula that if debt increased, “the , productivity and standard of living of Ihe inhabitants” ought lo (hut. did not) ! show “a precisely similar increase.” ; (5) Once more, on January 20, I had • to ask Mr Hunter to explain what he was talking about. As he had not adduced either logic or fact in support of his thesis T had to ask whe- | ther lie had anything at all in the , i shape of fact to back his assertions, i In particular I had to ask him what : "Ihe precisely similar increase” in our j standard of living should be if the : ■ Government- borrowed and spent ! £10.000.000. ; 6 1 On January 20 Mr Hunter ; complained of a perfect fusil- ' lade of questions." A« T had asked for evidence he promised to “see what T ran do in the way of figures.” I do not wish to hurry him. but I j think I am rntifled to some precision j in the matter of figures from onp who i talks of a precisely similar increase.” ! He surely need not. make an elaborate ; Investigation to find out what he meant 1 wh.pn he used the?e words. 7 Tn his letter of February 9 Mr Hunter returns to what he call? “the j social debit problem.” Outside of ' Douglasite circles it is. of course, no • problem at all. But it is a sad wnrrv ! to the Douglasite?. Hi? -question” i runs to over so words, so T will not } quote it here. Rut Mr Hunter lias been goon enough to a-k me to indicate wli.it terms 1 do not underhand and I fullv appreciate his offer. Perhaps fie will explain the following; ,1 ip* . . ■ t til' l b:inl Mr Hunter fell me who handed out tli woods and s>■!'vices on pay day? Dd only "stout fellow*"? Mr Hunto -I> I hav* m-I.'i' lie ird of ;,n> simi institutions in tlii- eoiintr\. '| j„. . : lie\e Mii‘rl 1 ar! Pi. .1 them in Albert I. ' 1 iLAS S YMnrU. j Hamilton, i'. le u .1 \ 15. i