Citizens Say—

Sun (Auckland), Volume II, Issue 348, 8 May 1928, Page 8

Citizens Say —

(To the Editor.)

ST. HELIERS BUSES

Sir, — A lot has been heard during the past week about overcrowding of buses, but how long is the City Council traffic department going to allow the passengerpacking that exists on the St. Heliers and Kohimarama buses? Passengers are actually allowed to stand on the steps. The driver's view of traffic approaching on his off-side is obscured. Is this fair to the driver? Should an accident occur he would have to stand the brunt of it. Surely the traffic department with its staff of inspectors can put a stop to the practice, and not let it be a case of “shutting the stable door after the horse has bolted.” DAILY PASSENGER. BOYS ON THE LAND Sir,— I fully agree with “Unbiassed” regarding immigration. There is a predominance of both skilled and unskilled labour available locally, so where is the necessity for this steady flow of English labour? It is haying a detrimental influence on j-ural employment, and has created a decided lowering of the standard rate of pay. Farmers find it more economical to employ these boys at 15s a week than to engage a skilled colonial at £2, consequ mtly New Zealanders are being gradually dispensed with and cheaper labour engaged. This must eventually lead o a swelling of the unemployed ranks by men whose rightful place is on the land, not loitering around street corners, when the country is hungry for men of their agricultural ability. The problem is certainly a difficult one, but a more equitable system of immigration is essential. To immigrants entry into a country burdened with its own question of unemployment shows a lack of knowledge of the real principles of successful immigration on the Government’s part. If necessary the admission of immigrants should be prohibited for 12 months, when a more adaptable system of land settlement might be formulated and unemployment successfully overcome. GEORGE MADDOCKS. A ROCKY ROAD Sir, — As one who has been brought up to revere the divine right of city councillors and to respect the mature judgment of our civic administrators, may I ask if it is to the glorious advancement of our civic prosperity that I, in company with other dwellers in the Parnell Park district, should be jolted, bounced, bumped and flung bodily about in the Parnell Park bus as that unpleasant vehicle carries us to and from the city? Is it to the better and fuller administration of our municipal affairs that the few chains of roadway between the concrete of the Strand and the metal of the Cleveland Road is left in the abominable state that it is in? Does it materially forward the

economic security of Auckland that “Les Miserables” who perforce must travel in the Parnell Park bus every day should be tossed about like ninepins and half deafened by the earsplitting clatter of the infernal machine they ride in, as it bucks its juggernaut way over the mass of pot-holes that form that portion of the route? If it is not, may I respectfully suggest to the City Council that the piece of road needs repair before the Parnell Park and Point Resolution buses entirely fall to pieces, and the unhappy residents of the district are forced to walk through the sea of mud that at present they are flung over. SHUTTLECOCK. RATING ON UNIMPROVED VALUES Sir, — I notice that a small bunch of singletax cranks are starting a movement to foist rating on unimproved values on the City of Auckland. Whether they are successful or not doesn’t interest me very much, because my property interests are not extensive, and a few pounds a year one way or the-other are not going to disturb my sleep. I have no illusions, however, about the spirit behind the movement, or the inequity of the scheme. The promoters of rating on unimproved values advocate it in pursuance of an ideal, which is that the entire cost of government, local or general, should be a first charge on landed property. Time and again the injustice, nay, the stupidity, of the scheme has been exposed; it can only be entertained by shallow and superficial thinkers whose bias and prejudice on the subject of land ownership make them incapable of rational thought, but like the ideal of communism, nothing will kill it. Cranks who espouse freak ideas spring up like weeds in every community, and if they had their way would soon wreck a well ordered State. The only safeguard against their activities, after all, is the common sense of the majority of the citizens and their ability to distinguish right from wrong. When it gets down to voting for a rating system, the average citizen, who after all is only human, doesn’t always concern himself with the economics of the question and he is tempted to play fp-st and loose with ethical considerations. I have studied quite a number of polls on rating on unimproved values, a nd I am satisfied that the ordinary suburban ratepayer cares not a jot about single tax and the unearned increment (unless he can get a bit for himself). He merely asks himself one question: “Will I pay less or more under rating on the unimproved value?’* If he will pay less, he votes for it, and the decision is hailed as another triumph for single tax! Now for the equity. A municipality is a state within a state. In the case of a government the Minister of i inance budgets for an expenditure of, , say. 12 millions a year and imposes a variety of taxes such as income tax, customs duties, death duties, etc., to S provide the necessary revenue. The | actual levy of the taxation is supposed

to be in proportion to the ability ?| the taxpayer to pay. In mum v government, where the city treasury may have to budget for an expe of,say, half a million, it is not P cable to impose income an< * ■ ist er taxes to those devised by the M ~ _ of Finance. Consequently an ment is made of the value within the municipality and the o f are taxed accordingly. The sys € obviously defective because t# numbers of wealthy people are a > . enjoy to the full the benefits or m cipal administration without uting sixpence in direct toward the cost. Still, the raUn ® > _teL tern is the best that has been inv To divest buildings from liatnm- ; rating is merely a which narrows the scope of u*® tion, ignoring the considerate “ability to pay,** and transferrins bility from one person to anothe • half million required by the city urer has to be found just the In practice it works out like n A and B buy sections in a suD subdivision for £SOO each. Ais __ off than B. He builds his house ing, say, £1,500 and lives in it- ** * a few years to pay off the price nijnsection. Under rating on the proved value both pay the same although A as a bigger P l '\rLr,d owner is better able to pay mor® tetL . does so under the present s 0 „ When he is asked to vote for the unimproved value he sees am by which he can transfer a his rates to B, and he prompter re _ so, salving his conscience with tn _ v _ flection that Bis a land specalat® way and shouldn’t try to grow n the unearned increment! x Q CARTER- ACRt*