The Dominion. SATURDAY, MARCH 8, 1913. SOME "LABOUR" FALLACIES.

Dominion, Volume 6, Issue 1693, 8 March 1913, Page 4

The Dominion. SATURDAY, MARCH 8, 1913. SOME "LABOUR" FALLACIES.

One of the speakers at last Sunday's "rally" of the Federation of Labour said that "Labour was entitled to all it produced," and that "nothing short of that would satisfy tho workers of New Zealand." That Labour is entitled to its full share of the wealth of the world is a proposition' which cannot be' disputed, but that is not what the Labour-Socialists affirm: they contend that all wealth is duo to Labour and to nothing else, meaning bjf "Labour" those people who work with their hands for wages. That there is any other factor in the production of wealth they will not see, preferring to tell themselves that mere human energy, unaided, can maintain the production of tho consumable wealth required-by the community. To those who have thought long and anxiously by upon the subject, and yet retain their faith in the doctrine that nobody but the wage-earner creates anything, it is useless to appeal; but there are a good many people who have never troubled to think, but have taken for granted the Socialistic doctrine, and these people are often quite amenable to reason. Some attention has lately been given to a paper read at the recent Science Congress by Me. 11. M. Johnston, the official statistician of Tasmania. By a close study of his own State, Mr. Johnston has found that more than 92 per cent, of the - energy necessary to the production of the consumable wealth of Tasmania is supplied by the various auxiliary mechanical aids to industry, the balance of between 7 and 8 per cent, being "Labour's" contribution. Taking these figures as being approximately correct, it is fair to assume that they apply, roughly, to Australia as a whole, and are not very different from the corresponding figures for New Zealand. If, therefore, "Labour" were to receive all that it actually produced unaided it .would receive something like 7 per cent, of the consumable wealth of the State. In point of fact, 60 per cent, of the wealth produced annually in Tasmania is consumed by "Labour." The 53 per cent, which "Labour" thus, receives over and above its actual production is. as has been pointed out, "unearned increment from the inventive faculties, the organising ability, the enterprise, the thrift and savings of other people (or, in other words, their capital), out of which all the advance of the past and the present efficiency have come."

It is 11 significant fact that the demagogues who demand that "Labour" shall receive 100 per ccnt. of the wealth produced, ;md who talk so vaguely about "the Socialisation" of wealth and industry, never advocate increased productiveness and greater efficiency on the part of the wagc-eahiers. On the contrary, "the limitation of output" has been freely advocated by "Labour's" leaders: the less work each man does, these short-sighted people say, the more jobs there will be to go round. Yet it is only by increased efficiency and greater productiveness that the lot of "Labour" can be most truly improved, becausc it is obvious that the more wealth there is for distribution the greater will be the amount to go round. It has not been through an increase in the skill and industry of the average worker (there arc even reasons for believing that the skill and industry .of workmen were greater in the past Llian at pres.ent), but through the great development of the auxiliary aids furnished by scienec and know-

ledge, that tho world has been able to sustain the yearly vaster population on its suri'acc. If a Socialistic State were ever established, it could not escapc starvation and barbarism unless it maintained those elements of modern industry which the La-bour-Socialists of this country declare to be parasitical, Men would remain as unequal as they are now, and the social machine would require them to fit into their proper places. Inventive faculty, organising ability, and all the special capacities necessary to the working of tho world would still be needed, and would be unobtainable if there were not special incentives to the development of them. There is, of course, a kind of half-way house between the modern industrial system and Socialism. This is co-operation, and many people who arc fully aware of the pitiful fallacies of Socialism are hopeful that co-ojieration may some day be the essential principle of industry. But as a liadical Australian journal points out, co-operation will be of no value to the mass of the people if it is obtained at any sacrifice of efficiency. The same journal quotes some signal examples of the practical operation of the principle that a, man shall get all ho produces. The most notable case is that of Robinson Crusoe, and there are also the old-time Australian aborigines and the Australian settlers who went to Paraguay.- All of these "got all they produced," and yet they were poor and useless. j : It is part of the Labour-Socialist's doctrine that the curtailment of output, the restriction of industry, and the extinction of individuality are necessary to the enjoyment by "Labour"—which according to the official statistician of Tasmania provides 7 per cent, of the productive energy and enjoys 60 per cent, of the produced wealth—of 100 per cent, of the world's wealth. Their doctrine involves, logically, the suppression of machinery and improved l methods of work. Only now; and then do we see this doctrine courageously put in practice. A reoent case is recorded in -the New York Post. The great sardine trade of Brittany gave employmc.nt until recently to 50,000 or more persons, but not long ago a series of strikes by the soldercrs of the sardine tins began. These people had been persuaded by the Labour bosses that the introduction of machinery in the preparation of the boxes for sale was a capitalistic attack upon the worker, and they succeeded by strike methods, in' forcing the big firms to continue to employ hand labour. The manufacturers sought to mitigate this foolish handicap upon the industry by urging the fishermen to use new and improved methods of ensuring larger catches and a more permanent and abundant supply. But the fishermen, at the bidding of the "Labour" bosses, saw what they fancied was' another "capitalistic dodge," and they restricted their catches. Only one result could follow: the owners of the Breton factories have closed their works indefinitely, and between 60,000 and 60,000 persons in Brittany arc thrown out of work, with no prospect of finding any new means of livelihood. These Breton workers are merely the victims of the blind aiid foolish policy of the Socialists, which consists in denying economic facts, and social facts which 'are as clearly established as the fact that the Earth is not a flat plain around which the sun revolves.