Citizens Say—

Sun (Auckland), Volume II, Issue 609, 11 March 1929, Page 8

Citizens Say —

(To the Editor.)

THE COST OF LIVING Sir, I wonder whether “Trader” is as superficial as his letter indicates? Possibly, in his juvenile days, he heard of “the house that Jack, built.” The farmer does not complain of the price of his bread, his boots, liis clothing, nor of the duty on the timber, cement and other material which he uses, but he does complain about the inflated cost of living, which reacts in making all internal prices high, except those of goods which are partly exported. It is the cost of the wharf labourers’ and shop assistants’ living, not of the farmers’ living, which is the chief burden on farming. The facts that the railway worker has to pay too much for boots and the Union Company sailor finds house rent for his family high, that come back at the producer. Probably “Trader” will not see it, but most farmers are waking up to this. “CHEAPER HIVING” Kawakaw a. OPEN-AIR SCHOOLS Sir.— In view of the overwhelming evidence now available in favour of the open-air school it is amazing to read the Auckland Headmasters’ Association utterances, which appeared in The Sun a few days ago. Of course, we know there are headmasters who, in spite of the findings of the foremost psychologists, educationists and philosophers of our day, still advocate the examination system as having served past generations, and consequently as being quite all right for us. So also are there headmasters still strong advocates and users of corporal punishment, for “were not they brought up on plenty of flogging, and what’s the matter with them?” they ask. Then, again, may be found many headmasters who well remember the day when such highly fantastical and extravagant notions as the Junior High School at Kowhai would not have been tolerated for one moment by saneminded men. Ah, me! Times change, and not all the Canutes or Caesars under the sun ever held the tide back for one small hour when once it had turned. TEACHER. THE RIGHT TO WORK Sir, As one who usually find much food for thought in The Sun’s leading articles, I was much impressed with your recent comments on the burning question of unemployment. The fact that in some quarters this problem is regarded as insoluble is a mere confession of ineptitude. That there are many in authority in New Zealand imbued with this pessimistic outlook is apparent to anyone who reads the daliy papers. Those possessed of such, mystic vision are, in my opinion, incapable of grasping the fundamentals of good government, which involves faith in ideals as the foundation stone of the edifice of the perfect state. Would any man like to follow an officer in an attack who imagined he was in for a licking before the battle commenced? Yet in our war against social evils the rank and file seem to be led, or misled, the greater part of th€> time by these apostles of pessimism and timidity. That every mail

has a right of access to the means of life is indisputable. If civilisation cannot grasp that truth, so much the worse for civilisation, for this problem of finding employment for all is going to get worse as time goes on owing to the increasing productive power of modern machinery for no other reason. As a preliminary to effecting an improvement in our industrial organisation, I would advocate the introduction of a national levy from each according to his means, the money so raised to be spent upon productive works. If this did not awaken national interest in the most pressing problems of our times, and compel the most thoughtless and apathetic to agitate for a permanent solution, I know of nothing that would. J.M.J. MOTOR TAXATION Sir, — This year motorists are to be called upon to pay another 4-1 by way of compulsory insurance as well as the £2 2s 6d registration and 5s driver’s licence. The ugly feature about this is that it is only the thin end of the wedge. The insurance companies will set up a hue and cry that the premium does not cover the claims, and next year still another £1 will be added. New Zealanders will submit to any taxation as long as it is inflicted by degrees. The working man who keeps a cheap car to take out his wife and family at week, ends is going to be hit very hard by this extra tax, and the Ward Government, which is pledged to call a halt in the ruthless taxation of motor-cars and the motor industry, should look into this extra impost before it is passed on to the motorist. Any such compulsory national scheme of insurance should certainly be carried out by the State Insurance Office on a no-profit basis. The small business man with his little delivery van is being hit very hard by the excessive taxation of motors. The motor is no longer the toy of the rich man. Indeed, the crushing taxation that has been piled on to this industry tends to make the car the rich man’s vehicle, and the Liberals are not keeping their election pledge in allowing these extra imposts to be inflicted. E. STEVENSON. HIGH RENTS Sir, Your leading article last Friday, purporting to be a reply to my letter challenging the statements of The Sun regarding the alleged favourable tone of the property market and general conditions, opened by referring to me as voicing the view of the retailer “who finds business conditions a little too competitive and blames the landlord.” This is a very wrong impression, and unjust even to the landlord. Any fair-minded retailer welcomes competition, which is the life of trade. Unfortunately, the people, as I have said before, have greatly reduced spending power. I am consoled to the extent of being grateful that you extend sympathy to the shopkeeper and admit it as unquestionable that he has suffered during the last two years to hold his own. However that is only part of the truth, because (Continued in next column.)

all shopkeepers have had a hard lot, and particularly in the last 12 months —and now it is the limit. You say that many of the weaker retailers have been put out of business. I can prove that many of the strong ones have also crashed. You add. “and have left others in a precarious position.” To be logical the removal of competition should have left the others in a. stronger position, but, owing to conditions getting worse and worse, the reverse is the case. It is n® use glossing the situation by saying the conditions are merely temporarily embarrassing and distressing, or that recovery of trade is sloy but sure. The fact is that business is at a low ebb and shows no indication whatever of improvement; neither does it indicate the slightest prospect of this desirable sign. Retailers are rapidly being strangled by excessive rents, and if the powers that be do not hasten to come to the rescue th® unemployment position will be more severe, with the cost of living unbearable. I am not given to foolish pessimism, but we must do something to save a position that is positively desperate. If the Government can give aid by way of subsidy and guarantee to the farmer to save him from ruination in times of stress, why should not the business people of the city receive some help when it is imperative, even to the extent of seeing that rents are properly adjusted make it possible to carry on? DEMOCRAT.

UNEMPLOYMENT EVILS Sir,— “Old Employer’s” latest contribution to the subject of unemployment is. I am afraid, more amusing than instructive. He must understand that it is not sufficient to reiterate statements without adducing some logical argument to support them. Nor is it fair to attribute to me statements which I did not make. For example, I did not mention “grinding employers,’’ nor did I advocate indiscriminate land settlement for unemployed men. I confined attention to a criticism of the system of distribution, which question “Old Employer” leaves serenely alone. He also says that when in business “he always paid higher wages than he need have done.” and goes on to say that high wages spell hard times and unemployment. One wonders what prompted your correspondent to always pay “higher wages than he need have done.” I would suggest to “Old Employer” that unless he can produce reasonable arguments to bac k up his statement, w© shall not be able to shed much light on the subject of the causes of unemployment. CHAS. BAILEY.