In this and the preceding passage you implicitly rest upon the fact,that a produce saved is withdrawn from every kind of consumption,whilst in all the discussions in all the works you attack,in those of Adam Smith,Mr.Ricardo,mine,and even your own,(19)it is established that a produce saved is a value withdrawn from an unproductive consumption to add it to the capital,that is,to that value which we consume,or cause to be consumed reproductively.What would become of the commodities,if every kind,of consumption,bread and water excepted,were suspended for six months ?why,Sir,they would sell for the stone amount,for at length what would thereby be added to the amount of the capitals would buy meat,beer,clothes,shirts,shoes and furniture for that class of producers which the sums saved would set to work.But if we lived on bread and water and did not employ our savings?That is,you suppose we should impose upon ourselves generally an extravagant fast for pleasure and without an object.
What answer,Sir,would you give to him who amongst the number of strange events which may happen in society,should include the ease of the moon's falling upon the earth.A ease not physically impossible.Her rencontre with a suspended comet,or the-mere stoppage of this star in its orbit would be sufficient.Nevertheless I suspect you will think this question rather impertinent,and I confess to you that you will not be altogether wrong.
I admit that this is a method which philosophy does not disown,to push principles to the greatest possible extremity for the purpose of exaggerating them and discovering their errors,but this exaggeration itself is an error when the nature of things alone presents obstacles continually increasing to the excess we imagine,thereby rendering the supposition inadmissible.
You oppose to all those who think with Adam Smith that saving is a good,the inconvenience of an excessive saving;but here the excess carries its remedy along with it.Where the capitals become too abundant,the interest which the capitalists derive from them become too low to balance the privations they impose upon themselves by their savings.Safe employment for capital will be difficult to be found;capitals are employed abroad.The common course of nature puts a stop to many accumulations.A great part of those which take place in families in easy circumstances,cease the moment it becomes necessary to provide for the settlement of the children.The income of the fathers,being reduced by this circumstance,they lose the means of accumulation,at the same time that they lose a part of the motives they had for accumulating.Many savings are stopped by death.A property is divided between heirs,and legatees,whose situation in no way resembles that of the deceased,and who frequently dissipate a part of the property instead of increasing it;that part which goes to government is most undoubtedly dissipated,for the state does not employ it reproductively.
The prodigality and ignorance of many persons who lose a part of their capital in ill-conceived enterprizes must necessarily be set against the savings of many others.Every thing serves to convince us that in what relates to accumulations as well as all the rest there is much less danger in letting things take their natural course than to endeavour to give them a forced direction.
You say (page 495)that in certain cases it is contrary to the principles of a sound Political Economy,to recommend savlng.Ah Sir!A good Political Economy recommends little,it shews what a capital judiciously employed adds to the power of industry,the same as a good agriculture teaches what irrigation well directed adds to the power of the soil;for the rest it gives to mankind the truths it unfolds,it is for them to make use of them according to their intelligence and capacity.
All that is required,Sir,of so enlightened a man as yourself,is not to propagate the popular error,that prodigality any more than saving is beneficial to producers.(20)We are too much inclined to sacrifice the future for the present.The principle of every amendment is on the contrary the sacrifice of the temptations of the moment for the future good.This is the ground-work of all virtue,and of all wealth.The man who loses his reputation by violating a deposit,he who ruins his health because he will not resist his inclinations,and he who spends to-day his means of getting to-morrow,all equally fail in economy,and this is what has given rise to the saying that vice is after all nothing more than a bad calculation.
How is it Mr.Malthus does not see that marriage produces children and consequently fresh wants,whilst capitals have no wants,but on the contrary carry with them the means of satisfying them?
