Citizens Say —

Sun (Auckland), Volume I, Issue 1, 23 March 1927, Page 12

Citizens Say

FOREIGN TRADE TO THE EDITOR Sir.— There are a good many people in this Dominion who have a habit of standing on their heads when they wish to contemplate our balance of trade. They look upon imports as a menace, though in this way, alone, can we get paid for our exports They want us to “keep the money in the country” though the only “money” we ever export is in the shape of wool, meat, butter, hides, gold bullion and other commodities, the export of which they are always trying to boost. They are constantly telling us that we have an “unfavourable” balance of trade. How they know this is a puzzle, because the Government Statistician has told us that there exists no reliable data wherewith to make the calculation. By the way, Mr. Zane Grey’s photographer, who has prepared a film depicting the thrills of deep sea fishing, which is intended for featuring in the United States, says this “should cause tremendous interest, bring about a large influx of overseas visitors and draw attention of overseas capital to the possibilities of New Zealand.” Now the people who think that imports (especially from America) injure us should get busy to counteract this propaganda, for, as sure as the sun rises, the expenses of U.S.A. millionaires in this Dominion will come in the shape of imports, as also will any capital they may invest in the country. Tie balance of trade, calculated by their unique methods, will tend to become more and more “unfavourable,” and the Dominion will, if their inverted opinions are correct, quickly be ruined. C.H.N. WHAT ABOUT THIS PARTY? Sir, — When butter was soaring in London and we poor Aucklanders complained of the high price and bemoaned the fact that those with lar&e families could not afford to buy it for their children, we were told that It was “London parity.” It was a daily term. Strange that since such an unholy mess has been made of things, "parity” seems to have been obliterated from the local trade dictionary. It seems there isn’t any "London parity" when butter comes down to about lid in the Old Country. We go on paying the same old price—or within a few pence of it. Great idea, isn’t it—for the poor “downtrodden” producer? N. O. REBATE.

A BAKER’S COMPLAINT Sir, — There is always complaint as to the price of bread, as though it should be baked free from wheat which is milled free and delivered free to the doors. The poor baker gets it “in the neck" all the time. He is popularly supposed to be a robber. Yet there is nothing in New Zealand of better value than the loaf of bread. A man goes ii}to an hotel and pays sixpence for a pint, an “hotel pint,” of beer, and he doesn’t complain of the enormous profits being made by the brewery merger. I know who he gets the most value out of. How much hard labour will he do on a pint of beer? He can do a lot on a loaf of bread. Now, next time “Father of Five,” or “Mother of Many** wants to write to the papers about the alleged foodrobbers, let them leave the poor baker, who is making a mere pittance for really hard work, alone, and turn their attention to the real exploiters. For instance, flour has come down £. 3 or £ 4 a ton. Have the big manufacturers reduced the price of biscuits? And how far would a shilling’s worth of biscuits go? They would make a fair supper, with some cheese and onions into the bargain, not forgetting the pennyworth of beer for which we pay sixpence. A shilling’s worth of bread, with a piece of meat thrown in, would do us for breakfast, dinner and tea. Let the baker alone —there are plenty of others who get more out of the public for much less. — POOR BAKER. IS IT ALL TALK? Sir, — The constant repetition of the affirmation that New Zealand has “the finest educational system in the world” grows tedious. The first and most essential principle of education Is that the pupil should be taugm. how to read correctly and write understandable English. The subject of English seems tc me to have less attention than any. I have seen numerous written applications for positions by boys and girls who have passed the “qualifying” examination, and in nine csises out of ten the composition has been poor, the spelling erratic, the grammar erroneous, and the punctuation (or lack of it) appalling. This will continue, of course, until we have teachers who can teach good English. We will never have them under the present “best in the world” system of education. PLAIN ENGLISH. YET ANOTHER Sir,— In addition to the consent and deafening clatter of electric drills, as they drive into the newly-laid concrete, preparatory to its being torn up to allow of the planting of pipes that have been forgotten, we have the daily song of the pick as It digs up the paths of our main thoroughfares, the while we stumble over heaps of stone and earth and bruise our shins against barricades. Now we have an even more unpleasant nuisance. I refer to the thick clouds of smoke which emerge from the many tar-boilers which make hic.eous the streets, and which sweep in suffocating streams on the passersby, offending their nostrils, blinding their eyes, and soiling their clothes. These emanations are most offensive; they can only adequately be described as “stinking.” Those who object to the term as “vulgar” should go and stand by one of these tarboilers for ten seconds. They would then amend their opinion and say that the adjective was a comparatively delicate expression. NOSTRIL.