Labour policy—false and true : $b A study in economic history and industrial economicsMacassey, Lynden Livingston
History
Labour policy—false and true : $b A study in economic history and industrial economics
Macassey, Lynden Livingston
Industrial policy -- Great Britain; Labor economics -- Great Britain; Labour Party (Great Britain)
“We may stop here to ask, is there any stage in this process
at which it would have been proper to limit the issue of
currency? The main demand for currency is to meet the weekly
wages bill. If wages increase, whether because more workpeople
are employed, or because rates are higher, additional currency
must be brought each week into circulation. If the supply were
cut off, a substitute would have to be found. At the outbreak
of war there was not enough legal tender money to satisfy our
additional requirements and at once postal orders and even
postage stamps were used to make good the deficiency. If men
and women are to be employed and paid, means of paying them
must be found, and an arbitrary limitation of currency would
merely inflict intolerable inconvenience upon the public.”
Relation of Wages to Cost of Living
It is customary to measure the cost of living among the working-classes
according to the basis of the Ministry of Labour. The Ministry works on
an average pre-war working-budget of food, rent, clothing, light and
fuel, and miscellaneous items, and ascertains its cost month by month.
(See _Labour Gazette_, February 1921.) The cost in July 1914, is taken as
100, the greater cost each month since appearing as 100 and something;
this is called the “index-number.” What the Ministry does, therefore, is
to measure the average increase in the cost of maintaining the pre-war
standard of living of the working-classes; it does not, however, take
in account any modification of the standard, which, of course, was
customary; as for instance margarine used when butter was not obtainable.
Lord Sumner’s Committee on the Cost of Living to the Working Classes
(_Parliamentary Paper_, 1918, Cd. 8980), showed by actual investigation
that the index-numbers of the Ministry did not then represent current
conditions, but were too high. On the other hand, the Joint Committee on
the Cost of Living[10] is of the opinion the figures are under-estimates.
All these matters are discussed very fully in the book by Professor
Bowley, who gives his own modified index-numbers. Professor Bowley
sums it up in these words: “There can be no doubt that some sections,
especially the worst paid of the working-classes, were better off in
the summer of 1920 than before the war, and it is probable that other
sections were worse off. It is not possible to decide whether the average
of all wages, measured in purchasing power, had risen or fallen.” If,
however, one takes the wages in certain trades, for example, railways,
mining, and engineering, and compares them with the cost of living since
July 1914, they appear in the following relation:
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account