WHO PRODUCES THE WEALTH?

Manawatu Herald, Volume XLIV, Issue 2477, 7 September 1922, Page 2

WHO PRODUCES THE WEALTH?

THREE INDISPENSABLE FACTORS. CAPITAL, MANAGEMENT, LABOUR, “Labour produces all wealth, and Labour should therefore enjoy all the -wealth” —that is the catch-crv of*, the extremist who misleads the worker for his own ends. Just examine your own workshop for a moment, and see whether it is true. Brown is stronger than White, and a quicker worker, producing twice as much; he is more skilled, and earns more money. That is quite fair. But then along comes Black, who invents a machine that will do the work of a thousand men. He then produces a thousand times as much as a manual worker. Now, which class of labour has produced all the wealth —that of Brown, White, or Black? To whom does the wealth belong if it is to go to the worker producing it?

Go a little further, and think of the man who provides the money and takes the risk of establishing the industry and the manager. The extremists who declare that labour produces all wealth carefully avoid explaining the necessity of and managementr There is the surd impression among them that the manager is over-paid; he produces nothing, and anyone could do his job. Both are stupid ideas. Any workman could be a manager in name, of course, but any workman couldn’t be a successful manager unless he has the ability and knowledge, which must be gained by exnerience.

Why does one industry flourish and never leave any doubt about you getting your full wages every week, while another may perhaps fail? Both employ exactly the same class and quality of trade union labour. The difference is, of course, either in the management or the service to those industries. If the management is good, and the capital available, the industry flourishes. Manual labour will not save a badly-managed industry—but ample capital, good direction, wise buying and clever selling will cause the industry to succeed. Yet the advocates of sovietism, who live on the workers, claim that all wealth made by an industry is made by the manual workers! They do not offend you, though, by stating that the failure of the industry is also the fault of the manual workers. Yet. if the first statement were true, the second must also he right. The fact is capital, management and labour the three indispensable factors in production.

The wealth of New Zealand is fairly widely distributed, and we •lave seen it stated by a leading made unionist that DO per cent, of mi' people are workers. If they always stood to the ground that labour meant fill per cent, of the population there would be little objection to the other statements that ‘labour produces all wealth.” What I- intended to be conveyed by the Socialists who use the term is that the manual workers, or wage earner-, produce all wealth, and that isa fallacy. It eliminates a whole body of useful people, such as farmers and other producer's, who manage their own farms and works; the great body of traders who run their own business; the inventors, managers and directors of industtries. and argues that only wage earners produce wealth. The doctrine will not hear examination. The wealth of our country is produced not only by one class, but by all classes. For that reason we should recognise the interdependence of all classes in the State. Soi ial co-operation is the policy which will add to our wealth and genera! welfare, whilst the poliejf of class warfare and general antagonism can only prove destructive and injurious to all. (Contributed by the N.Z. Welfare League.)