[To the Editor of the Srecritroad SIR,—Will you spare me
a little, of your valuable space to point out one very serious flaw in " L L. P.'s communica- tion which appeared in your last .number ? The whole structure of his argument is based upon the statement—which he repeats three times—that the workers are kept on a bare
subsistence level. Because of this bare level, says L. P.," the workers are unable to purchase the surplus goods which they manufacture, and, consequently these goods must he sold abroad. But " I. L. P." has carelessly overlooked our important home trade, and has ignored the great volume of purchases by the workers of such articles as cameras, bicycles, gramophones, wireless sets, &e. Are all these things included' in a bare subsistence level ? Or to throw the question into a more general form, Could anyone spend a week during the season at Douglas; Blackpool or Yarmouth and still believe in this bare subsistence level ? "'I. L. P.'' tells us that Karl Marx built his economic theory upon• this fiction of bare subsistence. If this be so, the theory of Communism will not' stand long.
" I. L. P." 'writes as though the sole reason for selling goods abroad was the inability of the workers through poverty to purchase such goods. Has he forgotten the natural exports of each country—English coal, French wines, Spanish cork; Brazilian coffee ?
Let me assure, " I. L. P." that I write in no hostile or carping spirit—the situation is far too serious for that. Radical reform of our present system is urgently needed, and a better distribution of the surplus (the word " profit " is a tainted one), but over-statements and careless statements will not help matters.—I am, Sir, &c., MANUFACTURER.
Previous page
