Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : Let's Talk About Our Feelings!!! -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: greenspirit who wrote (46048)	7/19/1999 1:53:00 AM
From: Dayuhan	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 108807

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.

To: greenspirit who wrote (46048)	7/19/1999 8:47:00 AM
From: Ilaine	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 108807

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. Regardless of whether a laborer is productive or unproductive, s/he still consumes about the same amount. This produce, how great soever, can never be infinite, but must have certain limits. Even the most productive laborer is limited in the amount s/he produces. (Written before machines were in common use, automation can vastly increase production, of course.) 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. Smith is talking about agricultural workers, and seems to be talking about grain or potatoes, both of which require that a certain percentage of a crop be saved for planting the next year. If you produce more than you consume, there is more to plant the next year, and, given favorable weather conditions, this increases every year exponentially. But if a non-productive worker consumes a greater proportion of what s/he produces then there is less to plant for the next year, and so on, until one is committing the suicidal sin, "eating the seed corn." If the land is equally productive, it is better for it to be in productive hands.