IF ALL MEN WERE EQUALLY RICH

Taranaki Daily News, Volume LII, Issue 3, 28 January 1909, Page 4

IF ALL MEN WERE EQUALLY RICH

1) L'LTI-JllLLl ON AIH KS U\ WHAT WOUU) HAl'I'lON. HUJIAX INSi'IACf. Tho fallacy of the Stiili* uwnrrsliip of capital, one of the leading Souialist doctrines, is vigorously exposed in articles by the world's greatest millionaires, .Mr John D. lioekfcllcr and Mr Andrew Carnegie, in this Christmas number of the World's Work. There is a striking similarity in the Arguments of both, though Mr Carnegie develops his theme move fully.

"All that the millionaire can get out of life is superior food, raiment, and shelter, - ' says Mr Carnegie. "Only a small, a very small, percentage of all his millions can be absolutely wasted. "When the Socialist, therefore, speaks *f all wealth going back to the Stale proclaims no great change in its mission. The State, sole owner, would use it just as the owners now use all but a. fraction of it ; that is, invest it in some of the multiform ways leading to the reward of labor."

Mr Carnegie supposes that a philanthropist lias decided to act on the Socialist idea, of distributing his wealth equally among the p,,or. ffe gives his money to the crowded thousands, awl lt.unis at night to se the rcsulis, ami shudders at the vision that presents it self. "Are these indeed men ami women, or only degraded wietchc.-. in a human form »" he asks. "Is it not evident to all that the first and inilispensible work of the Socialist is the elevation of humanity io that ntandiird of conduct which would ensure the wise and sober use of benefactions '! £.70 FOR EACH PERSON.

" Imagine," Mr Carnegie says, "every iinan, woman, nail child iu Britain receiving £lO. which is one's proportion of the national wealth if equally divided. What would be the result '! Saturnalia for a time, then rich and poor as before slowly emerging, the last state Iworse than 'the first. "It is self evident that there is at present no foundation on which wealth can be equally distributed." He emphasises the point that only competence is desirable, and wealth non-essential.

I The articic must have been written (before Sir Christopher Fimiess outlined his scheme of co-operation, fur Mr Carnegie presents the idea of profit-sharing as a solution for the pressing problem of the age. " Co-partnership," he says, " tends to bring a realising sense of the truth to both labor and capital that their interests, broadly considered, are mutual." Mr Eock'fcller's views coincide with Mr Carnegie's. " While men of wealth control great sums of money," says the richest mnn in the world, " they do not, and cannot, use them for themselves.

" Up to the present time no scheme has yet presented itself which seems to alVord a better method of handling capital than that of individual ownership. " We might put our money into the Treasury uf the nation and of the various States, but we do not find any (promise in the national or State Legislatures, viewed from the 'experience of the past, but the funds would be expended for the general weal more effectively than under the present methods, nor do we find in any of the schemes of- Socialism a promise that wealth would lie more wisely administered for the general good."