The paragraph:
Both productive and unproductive labourers, and those who do not labour at all, are all equally maintained by the annual produce of the land and labour of the country. This produce, how great soever, can never be infinite, but must have certain limits. Accordingly, therefore, as a smaller or greater proportion of it is in any one year employed in maintainng unproductive hands, the more in the one case and the less in the other will remain for the productive, and the next year's produce will be greater or smaller accordingly; the whole annual produce, if we except the spontaneous productions of the earth, being the effect of productive labour."
My translation:
Everyone, productive or not, is sustained by the total production of "the land and labor of the country". This production is finite. Whatever resources are devoted to sustaining unproductive individuals must be removed from those available for the sustenance of productive ones. Since all production, except "the spontaneous productions of the earth", is generated by productive labor, an increase in the resources devoted to the support of the unproductive, and the attendant decrease in the resources available for production, will force a reduction in overall production.
This assumes an inelastic relationship between production and resources available for the sustenance of productive individuals, which I assume Smith demonstrates conclusively somewhere along the line. Given the apparently innate tendency of economists to assume the indemonstrable, the assumption may not be justified, but I will give him the benefit of the doubt anyway. To do otherwise would force me to go back and read the book again to defend my contention, which I'm not about to do.
Have you read anything by the British economic journalist who wrote under the pen name "Adam Smith"? (I have his real name somewhere, and will find it if needed.) Perhaps the last of the literate economists. He wrote some very interesting and informative material, all of it easily accessible to the intelligent lay person. I recommend him highly. |
