THE Wairarapa Age MORNING DAILY TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 25, 1913. THE COST OF LIVING.

Wairarapa Age, Volume XXV, Issue 10713, 25 November 1913, Page 4

THE Wairarapa Age MORNING DAILY TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 25, 1913. THE COST OF LIVING.

A very interesting and instructive article', comparing the cost of living to-day with what it was twenty and thirty years ago, is= published in our columns this morning. The figures have been prepared with scrupulous care, and wo have no reason to doubt their accuracy. It will surprise many to know that in the cost of imported necessaries of life there has been a decrease of 35 per cent, in thirty years.. On the other hand, there has been an increase in the cost of meat and other provisions. Taking the aggregate, the cost of living to-day, allowing for the increases in rent, cannot be said to be much greater than it was in 1882. Wages have increased by 28 per cent, over the whole period, and it would thus seem that the condition of the worker io much better than it was thirty years ago. If the cost of living is greater tliau it should be, this Is no fault of the (manufacturer or the producer. We have to look in other directions

for tho c.tuso. We shall have no difficulty in discovering that the mode of living to-day is quite different to what it was two or three decades back. Men and women dress better; they consume more of what may be termed luxuries; their homes are more elaborately furnished; they spend more time and money in amusement and recreation; and —may we say it?—they are less frugal and industrious than in former years. We cannot object to the improved conditions of the labouring classes. Indeed, it is one of the best guarantees of national progress and development that the people of the country are well clad and fed, and have ample opportunities for recreation. But if people indulge in amusement and recreation to excess, and do not display thrift and industry, how can the individual or the community be made prosperous? Tho figures that we quote to-day show clearly that the working man is in a better position than he was thirty, or oven twenty years ago. . But, strangely enough, he does not appreciate the conveniences and advantages he derives under the better system of living. He is not satisfied. He wants to extract from his employer, in many instances, more than the employer can afford to give, and more than his labour is worth. How many men stop to ask themselves the question, "Is my employer receiving out of hig business all that he is entitled to receive? Am I giving a full equivalent for the wagea I am receiving? Could not the profits of ray employer be increased by greater exertion on my part? And, if these profits are increased, would it not be better for myself and the community at large?" No; the worker, in nine cases out of ten, does not stop to ask these questions. He has been taught to lean upon the Arbitration Act and labour legislation generally, aud to ask, ""How much can my union compel rny employer to pay?" There would not be half the discontent and industrial unreat in this country if the workers were to depend upon individual effort rather than upon collectivism. - For, after all, it is the individual effort that counts. If there were no combinations of labour to create extravagant demands upon capital, there would be no necessity for combinations of emplovers ' to' protect .themselves against exploitation. We shall be told that tho improved condition of the worker to-day, a* shown by our own figures, is largely due to the operations of trade, unionism. That is a statement that is open to serious question. The list we publish-shows that before trade unionism had a hold upon the country, the wages;of general labourers and carpenters increased in the same ratio as they have done under unionise And the fact must not bo overlooked that the retailers have not increased the cost of necessaries of life to that extent which they might have done. It must not be assumed, however, that we are averse to the existence of unions aa such. These may render very useful service to the cause of labour and to.the community at large if their efforts are directed to the right channel. But we dd maintain that the workers of this Dominion are depending too much upon collectivism and too little upon individual effort. There is not an heftiest worker who has not the ambition to better himself and some day become an employer. If this werthy ambition is to be realised, it cannot be through trade unionism or the harrassing of employers. It can only be by personal effort, thrift, and industry. Wo want a happy and contented people in this country. This,wo will never hare until the workers, as well as the employer?!, recognise their individual responsibility as citizens.