OTHER PEOPLE’S IDEAS

Wairarapa Times-Age, 27 July 1939, Page 9

OTHER PEOPLE’S IDEAS

INDUSTRIES & IMMIGRATION (To the Editor) Sir—May I be permitted to join in the argument between E.G.C. and L. B. Maunsell. Like Mr Maunsell I would also like to see some practical solution put forward to solve the unemployment problem. However, Mr Maunsell is. I believe, wrong in looking to the land to solve the problem for the following reasons:—

(1) That we are at present producing more than we can find an assured market for.

(2) The amount of primary produce taken from us by Great Britain will probably be more likely to fall in the immediate future than to rise.

The armament programme in England has at present increased the purchasing power of the British consumer. Britain, realising however that armaments are not a permanent solution to unemployment, is looking to place more men on the land to increase her own primary industries, which will of course, limit our market there.

Secondary industries, however, offer a definite scope for expansion not affected by outside markets. A wider adjustment of Labour laws to allow the employment of men of all ages to learn trades and handle machinery would go a long way to easing the strain of public works. One further point: The employment of men at 10s per week by the farmers would certainly be abused and it would be unfair to expect that men after three years should be placed on their own farms when there are hundreds of skilled men anxious for the opportunity to farm on their own account.

To conclude, I would suggest to Mr Maunsell that the expansion of secondary industries, combined with a long-range immigration plan, would be a better solution to our largest problem.—Yours, etc., J.S.D. Masterton, July 26. UNEMPLOYMENT (To the Editor) Sir, —Your correspondent L. B. Maunsell must excuse my anonymity (I am afraid it is a very thin one to a number of your readers); After all there is no harm in it. If I were being personal, instead of discussing a matter of general interest, anonymity would be wrong; but it is a harmless device under these circumstances. I am sure your correspondent will not accuse me of either abusing or ridiculing him. On the contrary I think he is to be commended for his concern about this very important matter.

He still persists in accusing me of being politically minded. I will not labour this point, but will merely state that this, and other related problems, are world problems and I try to look at them without “blinkers” on. However, when Mr Maunsell makes remarks like, “The Government do a lot of talking about the marvellous things they are doing for the country,” surely he cannot claim to be keeping the hem of his garment free from politics; and surely he invites a defender to take up the cudgels. One thing your correspondent seems to have completely overlooked is that this problem of unemployment is not just a New Zealand problem. Unfortunately many other countries know something of it. A country like Germany has none, for the simple reason that immense numbers are being employed in armament manufactures, and in marching about and up and clown —not a very useful way of employing men when all is said. In rich America, I believe, about one in every five is not employed in regular industry. Let us realise, then, that this is a world problem/ Let us realise, too, that no new markets appear to be available to the nations who are increasingly competing for existing markets and to win them must reduce costs of production, which means that, while some nations are producing more, they are not employing more, and also that, meanwhile, others are losing markets —and employing less.

Now let U 3 examine L. B. Maunsell’s wish for greater exports. Will a big increase in exports mean a better price for exports? Again, will not an increase in exports mean that we shall merely have more “sterling” overseas that will only, enable us to buy more overseas? Would it not be better for us to buy more goods made in New Zealand than similar ones made overseas?

Lord Eustace Percy (no Labourite is this noble lord) says in his book "Democracy on Trial": “Our object is, first of till, to create a society ...

whose purchasing power will grow slowly but surely.” Now, Sir, this is just what the Government saw most clearly, and they immediately took steps to increase the purchasing power of the greater part of the populace. This, of course, soon made it possible for many industrialists, retailers, etc., to increase their staffs. Similarly the decrease in the hours of work in many cases, meant that more employees were required. Now the full effect of these two moves and especially of the former, was, to a large extent, nullified because, instead of the increased purchasing power of the people being expended wholly on New Zealand products, the increased wants of the people were increasingly supplied by imported goods. ■ This had a bad effect on our sterling funds and measures had to be taken to chock these excessive imports. (I must reluctantly refer to the wretched action of those who transferred funds overseas and thus made still further difficulties for the Government. Professor Hill, in a speech, put these transfers at 20 million pounds.)

Another step taken by the Government to increase employment was to provide homes for the workers. This was an excellent move, for everyone knows how much the building trades benefited. It is a well-known fact, 100, that nothing tempts the average man to spend more than his home. He is constantly purchasing something to add to its attractiveness. Indeed this is one of the ways in which we shall eventually overcome our unemployment problem—i.e., by enabling the populace to purchase more and more of the things that make life more comfortable and livable.

It will be increasingly plain to most people that the home market will be of more and more importance in every country. Discussing this very point Lord Eustace Percy, after pointing out that a country cannot increase its consumption rapidly unless the goods are forced upon it at cheaper prices and thus defeating the end in view, says: “It would seem that if any experiment on these lines is to succeed, it

•gfts/l 1 Ilf H U lfl'l1 1 Hi RgaOCMWHPMMMMBM—M—MHMSM must aim at a much slower rate of expansion and consumption and :> much more deliberate balancing of supply and demand. We shall return to the standards which have always governed societies before they acquired great wealth through trade —like Elizabethan England before the emergence of the Indian "nabobs.” I have not discussed L. B. Maunsell’s proposals regarding the putting of men on land. There appear to be two initial weaknesses (a) Where will the land be obtained —remember the Kuku farmers; (b) how will the mon be trained to farm the land? Mr Maunsell has endeavoured to answer (b) but Oh! what an answer. Just imagine men up to thirty-five years of age being paid ten shillings per week! He is right when he says the Government will save! Would he, as a reward, give them their section at the end of their probationary period? I am astounded at the way some people lightly regard the depriving of those least able to afford it, of their scanty supplies of cash, whilst they become very hot and bothered when he word taxation is mentioned. Have we no duty to our fellow men? What does it matter if taxation deprives us of some little luxury if it is going to give a little more happiness to those who. God knows, have little enough? —Yours, etc., E.G.C. Masterton. July 25.