OTHER PEOPLE’S IDEAS

Wairarapa Times-Age, 25 July 1939, Page 8

OTHER PEOPLE’S IDEAS

UNEMPLOYMENT

(To the Editor) Sir, —Your anonymous correspondent "E.G.C.'’ seems to be far more concerned with the fact that I blame the Government for not finding a solution for the permanent employment of the unemployed than with the question itself. I admitted nothing grudgingly, but gave the Government credit whore credit was due. Like everyone else my views on politics are not of the slightest value unless they are practical. Personally I agree with some of the ideals of the Labour Party, but I am of the opinion that they have not been able to carry out many of their own ideas in a practical manner, and that is why we are now faced with most serious national problems, when as a matter of fact the country should now be in a more stable position than at any time in its history. I have mentioned the problem of the unemployed because I consider that with wise administration thousands by now could have been self-supporting and no longer a drain on the taxpayers. As far as your correspondent “E.G.C.” is concerned, he has evidently given the matter some consideration, which would not have been necessary on his part or mine if the Government had tackled the problem wisely. I would like to meet him as long as he does not want to discuss politics, a subject which I cordially dislike. Like most other people the only thing I have ever had to do with politics is to vote for the party I thought would do the least harm. I

have no wish to discuss the merits or demerits of either party. I can only say again. Sir, that in my opinion both the previous Government and the present Government, like former Governments, have not tackled- the problem of unemployment in a practical manner. It is no news, as thousands of the unemployed know it is true, as well.as thousands of the public. I don’t care who solves the problem,, but unless it is solved very soon things are going to be very serious for us all.

As an ordinary individual I have, at the risk of ridicule, and abuse, openly stated what I consider is a practical plan for absorbing thousands of unemployed so that they can be selfsupporting and no longer a burden on the taxpayers. I have heard of no practical plans being put forward in the House by either party, and if no one in the House has ideas on the subject, the outlook is indeed very black. Something must be done about the matter and if it is not done both the Government and the Opposition will have let the taxpayers down very gravely. I should like to see the matter thrashed out in the House with neither party abusing the other with cheap jibes, jeers and cheers that lead nowhere, but honestly endeavouring to find a solution. It seems to me that different schemes could be adopted, and the one already suggested for community farming should be tried without further delay.

It must be quite obvious to anyone that the Government will have to increase taxation almost immediately if wages are not to be reduced on public works. If wages are reduced this will mean less circulation of money. This will detrimentally affect the retailers, and many will be compelled to reduce their staffs. This will still further increase unemployment. On the other hand, if taxation is increased the 'spending power of the public will be reduced which will also increase unemployment. Unless there is an unexpected boom in exports, the problem of unemployment may become increasingly more difficult, to handle, and plans should be made immediately and something practical started.

■lt is, of course, going to cost several million pounds to put thousands of unemployed on the land, but in any case it is going to cost almost as much to pay them high wages for a number of years and the country definitely cannot stand it. If further land is brought into production the country will have greater assets and in a few years time less taxation will be necessary instead of more.

I don't believe it is too late even now, but it may be if there is further delay. Why can’t the Government arrange to subsidise' practical farmers, say 5s per week per man, the farmer to pay the same amount and take on unemployed cadets up to 35 years of age for two or three years Pen thousand men would then cost the ofX y n«nnn^ 13 °’ 000 . Per yCar instead of £2,080,000, a saving of nearly two million pounds per year on ten thousand men. The farmers who would only be paying 5s per week would be able to develop their own farms and increase their production. which would assist them to pay the increasing taxation. Men with ambition would see that it would be well worth while to accept low wages if in two or three _ years’ time they were Io have their own farms. There are thousands already on public works wno could lie used to break in land loi their own future use and for those c 7' ldot positions with farmers. .1 he British Government has just made arrangements to break in one million acres of land so as to become seh-supporting. It looks as if f or once we don’t lead the world! In fac it takes the Old Country, beset with tai greater problems than our own to give us a lead. If our politiC ir ,e ‘ !C,ers were less members of a self-admiration society, and more piactjcal, it would bo better for the country.

Il the whole unemployment question is not discussed fully in the House without a lot of political claptrap very soon, it should be obvious o tiie public that our politicians have little practical interest in the unemp oyed. I think, Sir, that every daily paper in the country should urge the Government to take some practical action m the matter as the question is of vital importance to the best of the unemployed themselves as well as every taxpayer in the country. The Government do a lot of talking about the marvellous things they are doing lor the country, but after all it is the axpaj'er who is finding the money. inini: it is about lime the taxpayers had a few cheers, as they at any rate have done something to deserve them. —Yours, etc.. L. B. MAUNSELL. Mastorton, July 24.