PROFIT-SHARING AND THE "COME TOGETHER" POLICY

Dominion, Volume 11, Issue 257, 18 July 1918, Page 6

PROFIT-SHARING AND THE "COME TOGETHER" POLICY

Sir,—ln one of your June issues there appeared a short report of a paper read bv Mr. C. J. Ward on "Economics and War," in the course of which he quoted the editor of the "New Age," defining profit-sharing as sharing the plunder with the man who has been robbed. Mr. Watkins is also reported to have said that there could not be any such thing ( as profit-sharing. As one who believes that by a general application of the principle of profitsharing much might be done to bring about not only increased production, but also more friendly co-operation between Capital and Labour, and a more equal distribution of wealth, without drying up the soiiirces of wealth {upon all of which the future of the Empire so largely depends I *, I should be interested to know how the gentlemen mentioned above define profits, and whether they are not confusing them with profiteerings. . Although one may be (as I am) profoundly convinced of the immorality or the doctrine of getting the highest price possible for an article irrespective of the cost of production (of which the o5 per cent, addition; to pre-war values in the case of woo! is an outstanding example), one may also honestly believe that it is legitimate to earn something over and above the mere cost, of production, distribution, or exchange, otherwise there would be no incentive to enterprise or any kind; and if it w legitimate, it should also be right and possible that that something over and above should be divided fairly between Capital and Labour in proportion to the share that each has taken in the production of tho article, or the sen-ice.- rendered in its distribution and exchange.-! am. etc., K. D, I'liijij. Inly 13. .