Wairarapa Age MORNING DAILY. THURSDAY, OCTOBER 20, 1910. INVESTMENT OF CAPITAL.

Wairarapa Age, Volume XXXII, Issue 10123, 20 October 1910, Page 4

Wairarapa Age MORNING DAILY. THURSDAY, OCTOBER 20, 1910. INVESTMENT OF CAPITAL.

In a vigorous article dealing with this subject, the Sydney Daily Telegraph says it is a sign of the times that in many quarters we hear of the investment of Australian capital outside Australia, where the Commonwealth and its labour troubles, and its land taxation, do not prevail. "Australia is ceasing to be a field for the large capitalist. He may live here, and there is no need for him to be a non-resident. But if he aims at applying his wealth to its legitimate end—the increase in production—he is handicapped in Australia and is • looking elsewhere." Statements of this kind are persistently heard, and with so great a need for the employment of capital in Australia, it will be a detriment to the country if such a feeling should grow. Of course, capital can he lent to the State without fear of the land tax, but that only pays 3? per cent., and a resident can hold lands to the unimproved value of £50,000 with a tax not exceeding 1 per cent, thereon. Above that sum, however, tho landowner becomes seriously handicapped, while if he invests his capital in the Pacific Islands, or the Malay Group, or even in Argentina, as some companies have done, lie is welcome and unfettered. Land is by far the greatest asset Australia possesses, and if hulk capital is shut out from that class of investment it will go where it can find a more suit- (

able location. We arc not decrying I the subdivision of large country estates, though it is a process which must be gradual, as the capital in-1 volved is very great. But that left I the way open to investment in city properties. The Commonwealth landtax, however, tends seriously to block that class of property likewise, and what is the largo investor to do? If he buys bank shares, or gas shares, they will all feel the weight of the land-tax considerably, and there are, very few important enterprises in Australia in which the holding of I land is not an important consideration. The land-tax is, or was originally, designed to eject the large landowners, and the Labour party consider apparently that such would be the interests of labour. But the large landowners are great employers of labour, and the question naturally;

arises—Who is to take their place? There are few measures of class legislation that have ever fulfilled their purpose, and more which have operated in ways the opposite from what were intended. Anyhow, the prospect of driving capital out of Australia would not be the way to stimulate employment or increase the volume of wages. Take the banks as an example, which will probably have to find between them £150,000 a year of the land-tax. Who will bear that tax, and the loss occasioned by the confiscation of the note issues P It will be their customers, and their employees who will in the main bear the burden. The operations of the Wade Government in buying up big estates, and parcelling them out amongst small settlers is legitimate. The State finances each operation, and though a good proportion of the money so found has left Australia, the capital was on each occasion replaced. The Commonwealth Labour Government have no intention of assisting the workers on the land. Their only aim is to depreciate Australia's greatest asset, and to penalise British capital, so as to prevent it from assisting Australian enterprise. Lot us hope that in the interests of employment within the bound-1 aries of the Commonwealth, we shall not this week repeat the blunder of April last. If both the Commonwealth and State Parliaments were surrendered to class legislation it is beyond question that capital would quit Australia more and more J extensively, and that the workers would be the greatest and most immediate suiferers.