출처: The Times, Monday, October 17, 1932 (p.13)
자료: Private spending money for productive investment: a comment by economists to the editor of The Times
※ This is a reading note this reader has made with some annotations and personal remarks added, in trying to understand the article of the above source, so please refer to the source marked above to see the original.
※ Some related or quoting articles :
- [HAYEK, Robbins & others'] Letter to the Editor (The Times, 1932)
- Hayek and Keynes: what have we learned?
- Keynes vs. Hayek: The Great Debate Continues (Wall Street Journal, 2010)
Sir,--On October 10 you gave prominence in your columns to a letter inviting the opinion of economists on the problem of private spending. There are a large number of economists in this country, and nobody can claim to speak for all of them. The signatories of this letter have, however, in various capacities, devoted many years to the consideration of economic problems. We do not think that many of our colleagues would disagree with what we are about to say.
- If a person with an income of ￡1,000, the whole of which he would normally spend, decides instead to save ￡500 of it, the labour and capital that he sets free are not passed over to an insatiable war machine. Nor is there any assurance that they will find their way into investment in new capital construction by public or private concerns. In certain cases, of course, they will do this[.]
- A landowner who spends ￡500 less than usual in festivities and devotes the ￡500 to building a barn or a cottage, or a business man who stints himself of luxuries so that he can put new machinery into his mill, is simply transferring productive resources from one use to another.
- In the present conditions their entry into investment is blocked by lack of confidence. Moreover, private economy intensifies the block. For it further discourages all those forms of investmentㅡfactories, machinery, and so onㅡwhose ultimate purpose is to make consumption goods.
- Consequently, in present conditions, private economy does not transfer from consumption to investment part of an unchanged national real income.
- On the contrary, it cuts down the national income by nearly as much as it cuts down consumption. Instead of enabling labour-power, machine-power, and shipping-power to be turned to a different and more important use, it[private economy] throws them into idleness.