Page 2 Advertisements Column 5

Press, Volume LV, Issue 16451, 19 February 1919, Page 2

FIRST DISPLAY OF i New Season's FURS And Millinery At the D'l'C *" % SEE THE CASHEL STREET WINDOW fc, Prgfl. fl PBdi¥gouCT»Ai3BcrsQnuirJ P2577-WSI | .'<• Prohibition Pays ! • That Prohibition will pay New Zealand is proved by I the following, which is a conservative estimate of the I financial gain that will be made by the Dominion. I The Source of our Public Revenue I* D m J m ~a2 am ' I The basU of the National Wealth is j IIOQUCIIOII I Without Production{KSSESSSSr The Estimated Value of the Annual Production of the Dominion is ... £100,000,000 I The Dominion Revenue for year ending 31st (taking net, and I not gross, returns from Railways and Post Office), was ... - ... £15,612,219 I (This means that 15,6% of Production went to the Public Revenue)- I When Prohibition is passed on April 10th, Compen- 1 sation not exceeding £4,500,000 will be paid the fl liquor trade including brewers, hotelkeepers, wholesale I merchants, clubs, wine-makers and employees. I What will be lost: jv Liquor Duty (approximately) ... ... •• < t £1,000,000 I Interest, including Sinking Fund on the £4,500,000 ' 250,000 I £1,250,000 I What will be Gained by Prohibition: I (1) The £5,000,000 now expended in liquor, if not spent on this, must be 1^ expended in some other way. It is safe to assume that its expenditure I. will assist revenue to the same extent as the rest of Production, viz., I 15.6%. This will amount to ... ••• ••• ••• £750,000 I (2) The cessation of the liquor traffic will mean an ultimate saving on I Police, Industrial Schools, Old Age Pensions, Charitable Aid, Hospitals, I etc. The expenditure on these items for year ending 31st March, I 1917, was £1,474,428. Experts agree that 70% to 80% of this I 1; .. expenditure is caused by drink, but for safety call it 55%. I " \ This means a saving of ... £810,935 I Votal £1,590,935 I This will pay the whole loss and leave £340,935 I per annum to the good. I But this is only the beginning of the saving. I The loss through inefficiency caused by drink is generally estimated at I . 10% to 20%. Few put it under 10%, but even calculate it as 5%. I On £100,000,000.Production, 5% increased efficiency is ... £5,000,000 I ~ „ 10% increased efficiency is ... £10,000,000 I £5,000,000 increased production will add 15.6% o to Public Revenue or ••• £780,000 1£10,000,000 £10,000,000 increased production will add 15.6% to Public Revenue or ••• 1,560,000 I Totals Gained by Prohibition: I . On S per cent, basis ( mg * e " m< T of J ReT . ennc ? efiv f d ) £1,120,935 I ■< from mcreaied prodncUon. pln» the ( _ I On lO per cent, basis >> b«i«nce of £340,935, >■ above. 1 j900)930 I This is only the Public Revenue viewpoint. A much more important point of I view is that of the people themselves. To them Prohibition will mean — I Anything from £ 10,000,000 to £ 15,000,000, being the saving of waste on drink I • added to the consequent increased production. This money will be available 1 for raising the standard of living, and will represent anything from £10 to £15 I per head of the population or £50 to £75 per family. I The Revenue problem is solved. Prohibition will, as it I has done elsewhere, I Reduce Taxation I Lessen the Cost of Living | Increase the Standard of Comfort