United States or Pitcairn Islands ? Vote for the TOP Country of the Week !
Happily, these vulgar maxims exhibit economy and luxury in a false light, taking account, as they do, of those immediate consequences which are seen, and not of the remote ones, which are not seen. Let us see if we can rectify this incomplete view of the case. Mondor and his brother Aristus, after dividing the parental inheritance, have each an income of 50,000 francs.
Mondor spends the money himself, and around him, and therefore the effect is seen. Aristus, spending it partly through intermediate parties, and at a distance, the effect is not seen. But, in fact, those who know how to attribute effects to their proper causes, will perceive, that what is not seen is as certain as what is seen.
And when I say profitable, I do not mean only profitable to Aristus, or even to society in general, but more profitable to the workmen themselves to the trade of the time. To prove it, it is only necessary to turn the mind's eye to those hidden consequences of human actions, which the bodily eye does not see. Yes, the prodigality of Mondor has visible effects in every point of view.
He was all his lifetime a great admirer of Antiochus of the city of Ascalon, and took his brother Aristus into his own house for his friend and companion, a man for his learning inferior indeed to many of the philosophers, but for the evenness of his temper and steadiness of his conduct equal to the best.
He forms another medium between Aristus and the workmen. The names only are changed, the expense remains, and also the encouragement to trade. 4th. Saving.
Will any one pretend to say that it gains more by Mondor's purchase of a thoroughbred horse for 10,000 francs than by the purchase of 10,000 francs' worth of stuffs by Aristus or his friend? For if this sum serves to pay a debt, a third person appears, viz., the creditor, who will certainly employ them upon something in his trade, his household, or his farm.
The 10,000 francs devoted to this purpose benefit trade in an equal degree; they reach the butcher, the baker, the tailor, and the carpenter. The only thing is, that the bread, the meat, and the clothing are not used by Aristus, but by those whom he has made his substitutes. Now, this simple substitution of one consumer for another in no way affects trade in general.
If we were to trace it carefully, however, we should see that the whole of it, down to the last farthing, affords work to the labourers, as certainly as the fortune of Mondor. Only there is this difference: the wanton extravagance of Mondor is doomed to be constantly decreasing, and to come to an end without fail; whilst the wise expenditure of Aristus will go on increasing from year to year.
But, at the same time, the man who sells the land or the rent, is determined by the consideration that he does want to spend the 10,000 francs in some way; so that the money is spent in any case, either by Aristus or by others in his stead. With respect to the working class, to the encouragement of labour, there is only one difference between the conduct of Aristus and that of Mondor.
It is all one, whether Aristus spends a crown or desires some unfortunate person to spend it instead. 3rd. Offices of friendship. The friend to whom Aristus lends or gives 10,000 francs does not receive them to bury them; that would be against the hypothesis. He uses them to pay for goods, or to discharge debts. In the first case, trade is encouraged.
Word Of The Day