International Marxist Group Archive

Magazines, bulletins and booklets of the IMG and its forerunners, 1961–1984

One Form of Incomes Policy

· The Week Vol. 2, No. 21, 10 December 1964 · p. 6 of the scan · 223 words

The scan: The Week v2 no21.pdf (PDF, Marxists Internet Archive, opens at this page)

Uncorrected machine reading. This text was read by machine (Tesseract OCR) from a scan of a stencilled typescript and has not been corrected. Expect misread words; titles in particular are often garbled where the issue printed no contents list. Quote from the scan, not from this page.
How this article was cut and titled: capitals heading; heuristic; title from the OCR of the heading.

from a Birmingham reader

The Birmingham Trades Council Journal for December carried the following satirical item by James Valentine:

".eeisn't it dastardly that the British South Africa Company 5 is being kicked out of Zambia by the wogs. In 1890, Cecil Rhodes offered one of the chiefs £2,000 per year for a monopoly of the mineral rights in Northern Rhodesia. .So far, the comp-ny has only made a bere £161,000,000 on the deal and apart from taxes, it now turns 20% of its local royalties over to the local government. The government of Zambi- denies the legality of the company's claim to the royalties. But the company says that in 1950 the Northern Rhodesian government guaranteed the company's claim to the mineral rights. And mind you, that was a proper all-white government, The niggers didn't have a vote, let alone rule the damned country.

"The ending of the company's royalties will lose it the £250 million that it would have gathered in by 1986, when the agreement was originally due to terminate. No wonder chairman, ex-Conservative M.P. Emrys Evans, calls it "bare-faced appropriation." Profits last year a bare £8 million, Earnings, after all expenses and taxes, a measly 99.2% of the ordinary capital. The 13 directors slaving away for a mere £70,000 between them. I'11 bet the Zambian Government gets nearly that much...."

← Incomes Policy Discussion the WeekIncomes Policy Discussion Incomes Policy →

Something wrong on this page?