|
Main
- books.jibble.org
My Books
- IRC Hacks
Misc. Articles
- Meaning of Jibble
- M4 Su Doku
- Computer Scrapbooking
- Setting up Java
- Bootable Java
- Cookies in Java
- Dynamic Graphs
- Social Shakespeare
External Links
- Paul Mutton
- Jibble Photo Gallery
- Jibble Forums
- Google Landmarks
- Jibble Shop
- Free Books
- Intershot Ltd
|
books.jibble.org
Previous Page
| Next Page
Page 44
B. No unpleasant fiction.
F. Suppose, again, that you were perfectly convinced of this,--that
wealth consists solely and exclusively in cash; to what conclusion would
you come?
B. I should conclude that there was no other means for me to enrich my
people, or for them to enrich themselves, but to draw away the cash from
other nations.
F. That is to say, to impoverish them. The first conclusion, then, to
which you would arrive would be this,--a nation can only gain when
another loses.
B. This axiom has the authority of Bacon and Montaigne.
F. It is not the less sorrowful for that, for it implies--that
progress is impossible. Two nations, no more than two men, cannot
prosper side by side.
B. It would seem that such is the result of this principle.
F. And as all men are ambitious to enrich themselves, it follows that
all are desirous, according to a law of Providence, of ruining their
fellow-creatures.
B. This is not Christianity, but it is political economy.
F. Such a doctrine is detestable. But, to continue, I have made you an
absolute king. You must not be satisfied with reasoning, you must act.
There is no limit to your power. How would you treat this
doctrine,--wealth is money?
B. It would be my endeavour to increase, incessantly, among my people
the quantity of cash.
F. But there are no mines in your kingdom. How would you set about it?
What would you do?
B. I should do nothing: I should merely forbid, on pain of death, that
a single crown should leave the country.
F. And if your people should happen to be hungry as well as rich?
B. Never mind. In the system we are discussing, to allow them to
export crowns would be to allow them to impoverish themselves.
F. So that, by your own confession, you would force them to act upon a
principle equally opposite to that upon which you would yourself act
under similar circumstances. Why so?
B. Just because my own hunger touches me, and the hunger of a nation
does not touch legislators.
F. Well, I can tell you that your plan would fail, and that no
superintendence would be sufficiently vigilant, when the people were
hungry, to prevent the crowns from going out and the corn from coming
in.
B. If so, this plan, whether erroneous or not, would effect nothing;
it would do neither good nor harm, and therefore requires no further
consideration.
F. You forget that you are a legislator. A legislator must not be
disheartened at trifles, when he is making experiments on others. The
first measure not having succeeded, you ought to take some other means
of attaining your end.
B. What end?
F. You must have a bad memory. Why, that of increasing, in the midst
of your people, the quantity of cash, which is presumed to be true
wealth.
B. Ah! to be sure; I beg your pardon. But then you see, as they say of
music, a little is enough; and this may be said, I think, with still
more reason, of political economy. I must consider. But really I don't
know how to contrive--
F. Ponder it well. First, I would have you observe that your first
plan solved the problem only negatively. To prevent the crowns from
going out of the country is the way to prevent the wealth from
diminishing, but it is not the way to increase it.
Previous Page
| Next Page
|
|