OTHER PEOPLE’S IDEAS

Wairarapa Times-Age, 14 September 1943, Page 4

OTHER PEOPLE’S IDEAS

THE ATTACK ON INTEREST (To the Editor) Sir, —The Democratic Labour candidate, Mr Crawford, introduced a proposal the other night which evoked much criticism. This was to provide money at LI per cent to enable ex-ser-vicemen and others tq purchase land, houses, stock, etc. If this policy were to be applied to returned men only, provided thd land were acquired at reasonable prices, the repercussions would be unimportant; but apparently the provision of cheap money for all sorts of enterprises, on a universal scale, is a major plank in Democratic Labour policy. Now this would amount to an attack on interest, and unless full compensation were guaranteed, would adversely affect a large number of people. Interest is paid <a) to the banks (which put up practicaly nothing) and subsidiary concerns; (b) to private mortgagees and to bond and shareholders, many of whom have “put up” years of hard work. ' There are probably more than 100,000 people dependent, or partly so, on mortgages alone in this country. In answer to my question re the above, Mr Crawford replied that all existing contracts would hold good;and later on agreed that in- the case of mortgagees the present rates would be guaranteed for life. Now this seems reasonable enough as far as it goes. But what happens at death? In justice to dependents, either the same rates would continue, or an amount would be repaid into the estate equal to about four times the amount of invested money. Is this guaranteed by the Democratic Labour Party? On reflection it seems to me that the attack on interest is fraught with danger. What is to be the effect on land (and other) values, of cheap money? Land values would soar to four times the present level, at least. The real and essential need is public control of the issue of currency (con-sumer-money), so that the community can buy what it produces. This should be- debt free and free of interest/ But loans advanced by a State bank (pro-ducer-money) which compete unfairly with private investors will cause hardship to many. I might add that in view of the many excellent points macle'by Mr Crawford I moved a vote of confidence which was’seconded and carried on the voices. On reflection, however, I must dissociate myself from this cheap money proposal in its present form. It is unnecessary.—l am, etc., MAURICE M. WHIMP. Greytown, September 13. BROADCASTING FUNDS (To the Editor) Sir, —I notice that Mr Robertson in his statement does not question the figures given by Messrs J. L. Heckler and 1 W. Horne in Saturday's paper. This is just as well because, being interested, I have taken the trouble to check them from the Government accounts referred to and I find that if anything the position is understated, as the great bulk of the huge funds accumulated is not even laid out in buildings, machinery, plant, etc., but is held in cash or equivalent temporary investment. The total sum so invested is £1,180,000 at March 1, 1943. The cash held in addition is not given exactly but it was £58,263 at March 31, 1942, and on the figures it seems that it could not be much less at March 31, 1943. Then there are further thousands held by the Commercial Service. Again with regard to the income, Messrs Heckler and Horne have again understated the position because they omitted the £62,983 profit on the Commercial Service. If this is added to the £374,361 profit on the main service it shows that Messrs Heckler and Horne’s statement that the Government collected more than double what was required ism®** conservative. It was nearly ty-’ ~ xhe're is a note in the 1943 statement that tlje accumulated fund is available for future development and to overtake arrears of construction held up due to the war. This' will be capital expenditure and the reasoning involved is not likely to appeal to farmers and others who have tried in vain to have some allowance on their taxation demands owing to deferred revenue maintenance during the war, let alone capital expenditure. In any case, the question raised at Alfredton was merely whether the fund existed. I The whole figures arc a blatant example of the Government’s incurable passion for transferring money from the people's pockets to its own.—l am, etc., ACCOUNTANT. Mastertbn, September 14.