PUBLIC OPINION

Waikato Times, Volume 125, Issue 20955, 7 November 1939, Page 9

PUBLIC OPINION

As expressed by correspondents, whose letters are welcome, but for whose views we have no responsibility. Correspondents are requested to write in ink. It is essential that anonymous writers enclose tbeir proper names as a guarantee of good faith. Unless ibis rule le complied with, their letters will not appear.

WHO PAYS FOR TIIE WAR? (To the Editor) Sir, —I may be showing great ignorance, but I would like someone c< who professes to know all there is to “] know on such matters, such as Mr F J. A. Lee, M.P., and others nearer to w hand, to say who is really paying the O cost of carrying on the war. It is o; hardly the working classes of Britain ai because they are receiving even o; higher wages than usual. We in d New Zealand talk of what we are a; doing, or going to do. As far as I tl see, all hands, including the farmers, oj want at least as much reward for b effort this year as last year. Trades- ir men do not hesitate to ask for rises in wages. tl It is really all a little hard to si understand. After all, is it to be t< placed on the shoulders of future s] generations to liquidate the debt over h the next 100 years or so? If we tl really wanted to help at our own ex- tl pense we should surely reduce our h own standard of living and by this T amount at any rate pay as we go. a, and so truly be doing our “bit.”—l tl am, etc., It E.C.H. Hamilton, November 4. sj ft d COMPARISON OF TAXATION 0 (To the Editor) Sir, —On reference to a standard s< dictionary I find that taxation is thus d defined: “The raising of revenue by a c . State.” Therefore I include in out taxation the money raised by the State for the purposes of Social Security, most surely falls under the n definition of a tax. Mr W. B. McManus asks me how I know that the combined State and Commonwealth taxation in Australia comes to £lB per Q capita. I saw the statement in the Press news and that should be accep table; if not, a reference to the Commonwealth Year Book would soon enable a check to be made. I estimated our taxation at £32 per a capita from figures in the last Bud- ir get, before the war added two or three millions to this year’s tax bur- h den. Local body taxation is not v included; if it were, the per capita taxation would be about £5 more. I ir think that when the next Budget gives us the figures for the current financial year, Mr McManus will find that my estimate of £32 per capita will show a small margin of error, not more than 10s either way. Considering the determination and energy the Government is showing in forcing its policy of State control of industry on the people of New Zealand, the following figures, taken from a table compiled by the League of Nations, should interest Mr McManus and others. It is a table giving a comparison of “real wages’’ in various countries, Britain’s rate being made a norm set at the index .. figure of 100. The figures for two t j controlled industry States are Germany 73, Italy 39. The New Zealand worker is going to have a rough £ spin.—I am, etc., A. WARBURTON. Ngaruawahia, November 6. si LABOUR’S HERITAGE U (To the Editor) ti Sir, —Mr Warburton states that b Labour detests facts and refers to as a a fact the glorious heritage Labour e succeeded to in 1935. From 1928 ti to 1934 I was in business in Auck- £ land, and during that period I saw a " once thriving business area slowly a deteriorate and decay. The living a: quarters of the empty shops were a occupied by destitute families seeking a shelter, with rentals 7s 6d a week, a n common yard in the rear of the ft shops, each family claiming a portion s: and attempting to supplement the ° necessities of life from the good Cl earth. The breadwinners were granted two days’ work a week, on i r which they were endeavouring to ft support themselves and their fam- 0 ilies. 8 One saw and could realise the <? utter hopelessness of their position, ft Here in quite a new district I saw ft despair turning to squalor and the breeding of a typical London slum. tc The humanitarians nobly attempted " to alleviate their suffering, but these n conditions were too widespread, and ®' required a national effort to cope ** with them. The Government of that s ’ time, lacking a soul, bankrupt of v statesmanship, but true to Tory 81 traditions, bowed its head to ortho- " dox finance and worshipped the golden calf. It added to the people’s " miseries by abolishing the Arbitra- P tion Court and cutting the civil ser- b vants’ wages 10 per cent. The people ei asked for bread and were given a P stone. el Strange as it may seem, during r< this period New Zealand was ex- 81 porting approximately £50,000,000 a P year in surplus produce and accumu- “ lating vast overseas funds. What a “ travesty on our present civilisation. w Analogous is the scorn held through- c< out the ages in both verse and literature for the miser who, living a life ", of penury, hoards his idolatrous gold; “ it needs no emphasis. Yes, you will say, but the world ~ Was suffering from deep-rooted ills which were the cause of the slump; * times are a great deal better now and would be infinitely more prosperous under a Tory Government. If this were so, how can one reconcile the statement of the Dean of Canter- J* 1 bury (published in March, 1939), “ “That in Tory England on that date pi there were enough unemployed with 8 their dependants, should they link hands, to encircle the coastline of * England”? E Remember the biting words of the p Creator to the ruling class of His time: “Ye serpents, ye generation of * s vipers, how can you escape the 8 damnation of hell?”—I am, etc., .. C. J. BARNES. , Hamilton, November 4.

SPEECH AT SALEVARDS (To the Editor) Sir, —I would like to write concerning the farce staged by the "poor” farmers at the saleyards at Frankton Junction on Tuesday last, when they gathered to meet the Opposition leader. By the number of first-class cars (no old Lizzies among them) parked in the vicinity of the Frankton yards (and some didn’t park too close), it did not seem as if the farmers were as hard-up as they try to make out. In fact it only went to prove that they are better off than they have ever been in their lives. Just about the time appointed for the speech there was a great procession of these shining cars down Norton Road, as though, as usual, the speaker had his own crowd with him. Many of the passengers in these cars had evidently not been to the Frankton sales before, as they had to be directed the way to go. The same procession left the vicinity again when the speech was over; thus it seemed to be a case of “follow the leader.” I noticed in the report on the speech that they were told the poor farmers were receiving only 11s a day for their hard work. Well, some of the self-same farmers in the party were heard to say not so many years ago, and at the same saleyards, that 10s a day was enough for any man, so whv_ the difference? We are drawing'more than 11s a day, yet we cannot afford one of the luxurious cars the majority of farmers have these days. There was no mention of the farmers present at the yards who are quite satisfied with the guaranteed price. Oh, no; they happen to be the farmers who, if employing labour, are considerate to their employees, whether they be sharemilkers or farm hands. I was much amused to read of one farmer who had to reduce his herd by 20 cows because of labour shortage. Poor fellow; what would milking 20 cows, even by hand, be to him if he were sincere In his wish to help his country? I think if the advice given by “Ex-Factory Manager” was taken, production would soon increase.—l am, etc.,, WORKER. Frankton, November 6. FARMERS AND GOVERNMENT (To the Editor) Sir, —I would like to say a few words in answer to your correspondent, Audrey Pegler, in Saturday’s Times. I must congratulate her upon the great effort she is making to keep the farm going, and her 70 hours a week of work. It show* what the women on the farms are capable of. But do you think it is worth it? Your correspondent seems to be perfectly happy and enjoying the work, and that is more than I can say for most young men I know who have worked on farms. She seems to think that on a conservative estimate, with another man, she could turn out another 6000 pounds of butterfat and 100 carcases of bacon annually. I think perhaps she is exaggerating a little, but, however, take Is 4d per lb butterfat and say £1 for each carcase of bacon and you will find it works out at about £lO a week. Go to the Placement Office and tell them that you want a man and will pay £5 a week and board, and I think you will soon be accommodated. You will still have a profit of about £4 a week, and as you say you want to produce for the country’s sake and not for profit, you could even pay a higher wage. Here we have all the farmers saying the Government wage is too high. You, Audrey Pegler, are against the Government and don’t intend to give up your farm without a fight. I don’t blame you. The Government doesn’t want your farm. You are happy and contented on it, and that is what the Government wants you to be. With the Socialists in power worse may come, you say, but you must know that the Opposition let everybody know that it was socialism that the present Government stood for. A majority of the people voted the Government back to office, and as we are a democratic country we must abide by the majority. I think that if the Old Country wants us to increase production the price of butterfat must be increased, but I also think it is the British Government that is fixing the price at present, not the New Zealand Government. The dairy account is already a million and a-half behind, and if the Government increased the price it would be still worse. The Opposition is already roaring about the Government spending too much, what would it say if the dairy «c----count was ten millions behind? The Government is between two fires. If the farmers don’t want the guaranteed price let them take a vote on it, and the Government will drop it if they decide not to have it. What can you have fairer than that? I think the Government would be better off without the guarantee, and might get a few farmers’ votes, perhaps. Before condemning this Government the farmers should think back to when the Opposition was in power and butterfat was mnepence a pound, and ask themselves what the Government did for them then. The Labour Government does not profess to be perfect, although some people would blame it for a lot of things, certainly many things that it is not responsible for. Here we have a meeting in Hamilton stating that the Government was going to take the patriotic funds, and on the same page the Minister was denying it absolutely. Another tries to show that the Labour Government is like the German Government but omit* to state that the New Zealand Government is elected, which makes all the difference. Another states that the Union Jack is flying half-mast at Wellington, when Mr Savage has stated, “Where Britain is, we are; when Britain goes to war we are at war.” Why not tell the truth?—l am, etc., THOS. A. FLEETWOOD. Hamilton, November C