PUBLIC OPINION

Waikato Times, Volume 125, Issue 20957, 9 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 their proper names as a guarantee of good faith. Unless this rule is complied with, their letters will not appear.

FINANCIAL INCONSISTENCY

(To the Editor) Sir, —The workings of the financial system are beyond comprehension. In England some time since it was suggested that the old age pensions should be increased from 10s to 12s a week—a mere bagatelle for the old people. Mr Chamberlain stated in the House of Commons that the finances of the country would not permit of the increase. At a little later date this same Prime Minister embarked upon military warfare and immediately £500,000,000 was authorised ! The injustice of the whole affair is that old citizens cannot have what they are really entitled to by way of a dividend, yet war can demand and get millions. The same policy is in force in this country. We cannot buy necessary goods but war credits are unlimited. And we accept these things without murmur because we do not realise the money power.—l am, etc., LIBRA. Hamilton, November 8.

FARMER ANSWERS CRITIC

(To the Editor) Sir, —In reply to “ Worker,” I would like to ask him what motive prompted him to write such a lot of piffle. I could tell him in a few words, “ politics and jealousy.” It is a well-known fact that many of the so-called “ workers ” haven’t got flash cars, but then who could earn enough to buy a car when they only work 40 hours of a total of 112 daylight hours in the week? Mr Semple has done quite a good job of putting all the “ old Lizzies ” off the road, but a good many of the “ shining limousines ” that “ Worker ” describes are but modern versions of the “ good old Liz,” and not RollsRoyces and Daimlers as “ Worker ” would have us believe. Why shouldn’t the farmers go and hear Mr Hamilton if they wish to? Many of them had done a day’s work before going out, and I suppose “ Worker ” was still between the sheets when they were doing it. (Or perhaps on such a low wage as £4 16s or more he cannot afford such luxuries.) And, when he was perhaps breasting the bar, with his nose buried in froth, after his “ hard day’s work,” the farmer was still at his work in the cowshed. I would advise “ Worker ” to live and let live, but that doesn’t seem to be the Labour Party’s motto. The farmers are not asking for an increase in their incomes; all they want is a fair deal, and while costs are increasing so rapidly, they will never get it. And “ Worker ” should also know that it takes a good “ hand ” to milk 20 cows. If he were but doing that, he would be doing his “ bit,” too, instead of living in semiidleness.—l am, etc., COCKY’S WIFE. Ohaupo, November 8.

QUESTIONS FOR FARMERS

Sir,—As an ex-farmer and citizen of Hamilton I would like to ask your numerous farmer correspondents a few questions, and I hope they will honour me by replying, for believe me, the questions I will ask have been exercising the minds of many of my fellow citizens for some time. I would first of all beg of them to realise that the average citizen' of this town is not antagonistic to the farmer, for with hardly any exceptions, he has some point of contact either through his business or through farmer friends and realises that his living is vitally concerned with the prosperity of the land. Why is it that the individual farmer admits the blessings of the present price of butter, and yet in company condemns it so roundly as inadequate? Can this statement be denied? If their resolutions are true and they are seeking support from other people, why is it that they have never attempted to prove in simple terms that they are worse off than other callings? By that, of course, is meant detailed balance sheets and figures. Of course, the farmer’s costs have risen, but he cannot claim to be alone in that. The coal-miner and the public servant have less purchasing power than they had.

It is unfortunately true that the backblock farmer and farmers on all marginal land are having a struggle. They always will. But is that any argument that the existing deficit of £1,500,000 should be added to? Again, how do they explain the fact that for the first-class land there is hardly an acre for sale? Do they dispute this fact? With the cash offering at the present time, would not the land agents be deluged with vendors if half the statements made at the mass meetings were true?

How can the farmer explain away the new cars, washing machines, refrigerators and all the other gadgets that have been sold to the farmers and are still being sold? Is he buying these out of his losses? Will he deny the suggestion that there is an element of truth in the statement that he still expects to have a handsome bank balance after these purchases? Can he honestly state that he has less left after paying for the necessities of life than other occupations, if not in cash then in some form *of capital appreciation? That, after all, is the supreme test, my farmer friends. In all sincerity I invite enlightenment on these questions to remove the fishy smeil of politics from our nostrils. We know that some of you do not like the Labour Government. But, my friends, there is a war on and if we are to win it there is no room for petty bickering. Try to formulate some more convincing argument than has been put forward to date.—l am, etc. HAMILTONIAN. Frankton, November 8.

POSITION OF THE FARMER

(To the Editor) Sir, —Your sub-leader of a few days ago, wherin you rightly assert that farm labour today requires to be highly skilled, could have gone a little further and pointed out that this skill was as worthy of remuneration as any other branch of mdusMr Hamilton had much to say about farm labour, but when he was in charge of affairs more skilled farm hands were forced out of employment than at any other period in New Zealand’s history. Mr Hamilton says we should have resisted the “commandeer. ’ I can assure him that thousands of farmers resisted the handing over of their produce to the Dairy Board, but their protests were in vain and they had to accept the ruinous prices brought about by the policy of one man; thousands were forced off the land and not one of Mr Hamilton’s supporters reached out a hand to save them. The pioneers of this country did all the rough work, including cost of material, when butterfat was under ls per lb and the return from each ewe was under 15s, and they did not require a Court of Review to protect them. Mr Parlane’s suggestion that a gift of six millions to the farmer would be in order is rather fantastic when cne considers that they are already receiving about £2,500,000 for no

thing, besides the 25 per cent bounty by way of exchange, which incidentally forces the man in the street to pay dearly for any imported article and about 4d per lb more than the London parity for butter. Farmers all over the country are proclaiming to the world that they are failures. At every meeting they say “they cannot pay wages,” “it is impossible to carry on.” If this is so, then the huge subsidy by way of exchange and last year’s deficit have been wasted, and no better argument for the nationalisation of farm lands could be advanced. But the farmer is rather inconsistent. While he protests that he cannot succeed at Is 3d per lb, he firmly maintains that the sharemilker is only entitled to 5d for doing the lot. Allowing the sharemilker the modest sum of Id as profit, this means that all the work on the farm can be done for 4d, leaving the farmer lid, plus pigs, etc. I know many farmers in the Waikato, good fellows too, who have not done much work in the last 20 years, and their incomes are well over the £IOOO mark. Would Mr Hamilton be prepared to tax the rest of the community to add to their income? Mr Hamilton is also concernedabcut the soldiers, but, during his term of office thousands of the potential defenders of this country were walking the roads, not knowing where their next meal was coming from. I belong to a very old Conservative family, but I would

much rather the Labourites stayed in power than that the weapons of deceit and hypocrisy were used to dethrone them.—l am, etc.,

OLD REFORM. Hamilton, November 6.

WHITHER NEW ZEALAND?

(To the Editor) Sir, —There is still some little distance between Mr Nash and Messrs Hitler and Stalin, but it is very rapidly diminishing. We shall have to fight both the latter, because they are really as one in the bureaucratic way they administer their countries. The men on the top live at the very highest possible standard, while those at the other end are persecuted, tortured and starved. While there is a spark of Christian brotherhood remaining to us, we shall have to use it to assist those poor downtrodden people. There has never, even from the time of the Captivity, been such wanton cruelty practised between human beings. It is worse than “Chaka” in Africa or Armenia, because it is so long maintained. We in New Zealand do not want to get down to this, but when one class uses its position for its own benefit, then the thin end of the wedge is well inserted. The men at present at the helm may or may not be inclined to go too

far along a dangerous track, but they do not last for ever and their places must be taken by others who may, step by step, bring us to the goal of the “isms” which all finally arrive where we see Germany and Russia at the moment. My paddocks could do with a much-needed topdressing, and though :■ expensive it will pay, I thihk, in the j long run to use the new milk for the j purpose, say for a couple of months » This would kill two birds with one ; stone, because it seems that little less is going to bring home to those witn little knowledge that the most serious thing that can happen to this ; country i reduction in revenue as : the resu' a falling-off in price or j product > primary products. | It 6c at the farmers of all ' sorts ’ \i to stand up to the 1 first si. at although taking the first step .vill be far easier to bear than the time that is surely drawing ' near through which the wages man and small business man will be called | on to suffer the torments of another ■ depression.—l am. etc.. TUNA. Hamilton, November 7