1
results found in
44 ms
Page 1
of 1
30 Aug. 1801
Polit. Economy
A1
Method
I. Sponte Acta
5
20
The habit /practice/ of exchange being established, each modification of the
matter of wealth to which soever of the three abovementioned divisions it
belongs, is in virtue of that practice, convertible with more or less facility
and certainty into every other.
The richer a community, the better secured it is thereby against hostility and
famine.}
A stock of instruments of mere enjoyment presupposes on the part of each
individual a pre-assured stock of the articles of subsistence. The stock of
articles of subsistence capable of existing /being produced and kept up/ in a
country in any other wise than that of exchange has its limits: it can never
extend much beyond the stock necessary for the subsistence of the inhabitants
the stock of instruments of mere enjoyment is without limit.
It is only in respect and in virtue of the quantity of the stock of instruments
of mere enjoyment that one country can exceed another in wealth. The quantity of
wealth in any /every/ country is as the quantity of its instruments of
enjoyment.
[Marginal rubric:] A pine apple contains for one particle of subsistence a
hundred of mere enjoyment x potatoe
+ Note
To '.1[?]. Objects Note concluded
It is in consequence of {the} interconvertibility abovementioned that wealth in
any one shape is wealth in every other: that every instrument of mere enjoyment
{is} a pledge of security: and that national power, so far as depends upon
wealth, is in proportion not to absolute, but only to relative opulence: not to
the absolute quantity of the matter of wealth in a nation, but to its ratio to
the mass of population. For, of the aggregate value of the aggregate mass of the
matter of wealth in a nation, the part dedicated to enjoyment is the only
disposable part: the only part applicable to the purpose of defence. What is
necessary to subsistence must be applied to subsistence, or the man must starve.
Hence, the reason why France, so much superior to Britain not only in population
but in absolute wealth, is yet inferior in power, except with relation to
countries, so near adjacent, that the expence of invading them, may be more or
less defrayed by the contributions made in them.
Similar Items
-
Title: [14 March 1804 Institute Ch]Description: 14 March 1804 Institute Ch.1. Method 3 copied p 1: { Note (d) to p.2. (d) It is in consequence of the interconvertibility above mentioned, that wealth in any one shape is wealth in any other: that every instrument of mere enjoyment is a pledge of security: and that national power, so far as depends upon wealth, is in proportion, not to absolute, but only to relative, opulence: not to the absolute quantity of the matter of wealth in a nation, but to its ratio to the mass of population. For, of the aggregate value of the aggregate mass of the matter of wealth in a nation, the part dedicated to enjoyment is the only disposeable part: the only part applicable to the purpose of defence. What is necessary to subsistence. What is necessary to subsistence must be applied to subsistence, or the man must starve. Hence the reason why France, so much superior to Britain, not only in population, but in absolute wealth, is yet inferior in power, except with relation to countries so near adjacent, that the expence of invading them may be more or less defrayed, by the contributions raised in them.}
-
Title: [25 Aug 1801 0 A Polit. Economy]Description: 25 Aug 1801 0 A Polit. Economy Note Method Method 2 * (a) {By Adam Smith, it is considered, directly and constantly no otherwise than as a science: indirectly only, and occasionally as an art. - Yet of what use is the science, but with reference to the art? Of population, nothing said by him. Yet of what use is wealth but with reference to population: and how can either be considered in any comprehensive point of view without the other: for quantity of wealth being given, degree of relative opulence is inversely as population.} (a) Novelty, whence encrease of variety in regard to instruments of mere enjoyment - or articles of subsistence considered as instruments of enjoyment add nothing to quantity of wealth, but leave it as it was, so far as the old are superseded and kept out of existence by the new. Example new fruits and flowers new stuffs new colours - new fashions for cloathing and furniture useful and ornamental, new productions of the imitative arts. But in as far as novelty and variety are sources of enjoyment, as these encrease, wealth encreases /so does wealth/ if not in quantity, yet (what is good) in value.
-
Title: [25 Aug 1801 A Polit. Economy]Description: 25 Aug 1801 A Polit. Economy Method Method 1 { Method and Leading Features of an Institute of Political Economy (including Finance) considered as an Art.(a) ( - Adam Smith considered it only as a Science). Objects or Ends in view - Maximum of National Wealth - Maximum of Population. Uses of the matter of Wealth - 1. Provision for subsistence - present subsistence and Security in respect of future. 2. Provision for Security in respect of Defence - against external adversaries - internal adversaries - and calamities to which without human design the community is exposed. 3. Enjoyment - viz: mere enjoyment, as far as distinguishable from that share which is the natural {and} more or less inseparable accompaniment of subsistence and security. The modifications of the matter of wealth are correspondent to the above uses. 1. Articles of subsistence. 2. Instruments of security in respect of defence 3. Instruments of enjoyment. But enjoyment being inseparable from the application of the articles of subsistence to their respective uses, an article of subsistence is also an article of enjoyment. Encrease of population is desirable - as being an encrease of 1. the beings susceptible of enjoyment: 2. the beings capable of being employ'd as instruments of defence. It results of course from encrease of the means of subsistence and can not be carried beyond them.
1
results found.
Page 1
of 1