NATIONALIZATION.
[To TIRE EDITOR OF TUE " SPECTATOR."] Sea,—I was interested in reading your article of June 28th on "Nationalization," but I should like to put this aspect of the case before you as to myself, which, no doubt, is typical of thousands.
Some years before the war I was able to retire on my hardearned savings, giving me an income of £200 per annum, which, as my tastes were simple, was enough for a passable existence. But now you can imagine the difficulty there is in making " ends meet," and my health does not permit of earning. Now, I put the case thus: we have apparently to thank the present capitalists, traders, &c., who are so mercilessly skinning the consumer, for our present state, and although I agree that the working classes are taking (not earning) more than they should, wages account for a comparatively small part of the increase. Under the circumstances, I feel disposed to give the other side a trial, having a feeling that things could not be worse under Nationalization. Believe me, I am not a lover of Government control of anything, quite the reverse, for well I know the " Government stroke," being employed in a Government Department at one time; but this is a point of view that should be taken into consideration, as most likely there are thousands who would vote to give it a trial out of sheer despair
of the present conditions. It seems to me that it is up to the present "profiteers " to give a living proof of the benefits of the system in vogue by ceasing from the atrocious greed now shown by them, and thus defeat Nationalization, which other wise will come about.—I am, Sir, &c., Z. [Our correspondent proposes to jump out of the frying-pan into the fire. The rise in prices is not solely or mainly due to
"profiteering." The rapid increase of wages has had a great deal more to do with it. —ED. Spectator.]
Previous page
