Page images

the landowner can realize as much rent for his land as if he used it for a sheep run. Unless their efficiency is thus impaired, they will then produce as much wheat as if they were protected. The effect of freedom from restriction may mean, in this special type of case, lower wages and higher rent, but not decreased national wealth. If, however, the nineteen men have a preferable alternative, they will not raise wheat but will occupy themselves otherwise at higher wages than wheat raising under free trade would yield them, while the landowner will at the same time realize the higher rent assumed to result from using his land as a sheep run. Free trade would then raise rent more than it would lower wages.

[ocr errors]

There is, however, another aspect of the case, which the writer cannot but believe Professor Carver had in mind, tho it seems not to be clearly stated. This is that protection may be one way not, however, the best or most economical way - of increasing the sum total of utilities. Thus, the wool may be a more profitable product for the landowner only because the class which buys wool is richer than the class which would buy the wheat, and not because it ministers to so important a human want but even in spite of the fact that it satisfies a less intense want. If this is the case, then to divert industry from wool production to wheat production will tend to increase utilities whether it decreases values or not.1 No one should know better than Professor Carver, however, that the best way to remedy the evils flowing from unequal distribution of riches, is not to attempt to discriminate against certain goods as such in the hope of making those goods relatively scarce and hard to get for both rich and poor, while encouraging the production of goods which, in the legislator's view, are most needed by the poor. This is a curiously roundabout and a relatively ineffective and uneconomical method of securing results which can be far more satisfactorily secured by directly taxing those whose incomes are large. It is particularly desirable to do this where these large incomes represent no service

1 Protection has effects on the distribution of gold and on relative price levels which it is not necessary to consider in the present discussion.

given by the recipients to those from whom they are drawn, as is the case with most of site rent. It is the more surprising that Professor Carver did not call attention to this point since he so clearly favors increased taxes on unearned incomes, and since he advocates increased taxes on land as such (not merely, it appears, on future increases in its value), and on inheritances, as part of his "liberalist's program." Indeed, if a few more economists of Professor Carver's reputation should so frankly advocate land-value taxation, it might almost be possible for younger economists to class themselves as, fundamentally, single-tax sympathizers without thereby losing caste within the profession.




In case the nineteen laborers decided to accept lower wages and continue growing wheat, there need not be, as Professor Brown points out, any diminution in the total product. The result would simply be lower wages, higher rent, and the same total product as before. This is in agreement with my argument as previously published.

In case, however, the nineteen laborers decide to enter some other calling it must, of course, be a somewhat more remunerative one than wheat growing under the new conditions. It could not, however, be so remunerative as wheat growing had been under the earlier conditions before the assumed rise in the price of wool, otherwise they would not have been growing wheat in preference to following this new occupation. In short, their wages are somewhat reduced by the enforced change as compared with what they were formerly getting, but not so much reduced as they would be if they had no alternative employment but were compelled to con

1 Pp. 583-584.

tinue growing wheat at such wages as would leave the land owner as high rent as he might get by turning his land into sheep pasture. When this alternative occupation is open, the changes assumed would raise rent and reduce wages somewhat, but not so much as in the other case.

Will these changes, as Professor Brown says, raise rent more than they will lower wages? Yes, if we are thinking of world economy; not necessarily if we are thinking of national economy. In order to find a satisfactory alternative employment, the nineteen laborers may emigrate. In case they do, the national product will obviously be reduced, and will support a smaller population, tho the landowner's rent would be slightly increased. From the standpoint of world economy, the increase of the total productivity of industry is probably not among the theoretical possibilities of protectionism. From the standpoint of national economy, it is. The protectionist is, rightly or wrongly, commonly a nationalist; and from his point of view he finds here at least a theoretical possibility.




IN In my criticism of Professor Carver's book, I assumed the alternative industries into which labor would go in case wheat production were abandoned, to be alternative industries in the same country. But if, in the supposed case (admittedly, of course, seldom realized) of landowners profiting at the expense of laborers because of free trade, the laborers emigrate, then it is entirely correct to say, as Professor Carver does say, that free trade would diminish total national wealth. It deserves to be pointed out, however (and I presume Professor Carver will agree with me in this) that free trade would even then increase the per capita wealth of the country in question. It would fail to do this, in a mathematical sense, in one contin

gency. The average incomes of landowners might be so low and wages so high, that for the wage-earning class to emigrate would leave the average incomes of the landowners and the few remaining laborers lower than the average of the landowners and the more highly paid wage earners had been under protection (altho higher than the average of these same persons's incomes had been). But in any case, the nationalist has the alternative of keeping the home population large and the home production the highest by taxing land rent directly and maintaining free trade, as contrasted with attacking land rent indirectly, uneconomically, and very partially through protection. I trust that these conclusions are consistent with those of Professor Carver as he now states them.


Andrews, Irene O. and Hobbs, Margarett A. Economic Effects of the War upon Women and Children in Great Britain. New York: Oxford University Press. 1919. pp. 190. $1.00. (Publication of Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.)

Barron, C. W. War Finance. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Co. 1919. pp. 368. $1.50.

Beard, Margaret K. The Relation between Dependency and Retardation: A Study of 1351 Public School Children Known to the Minneapolis Associated Charities. Minneapolis: University of Minneapolis. 1919. pp. 17. 25 cents. (Research Publications of the University of Minnesota, Vol. VIII, No. 1.)

British Minister of Labor. Report of an Inquiry as to Works Committees. London: Ministry of Labour. 1919. pp. 131. (Re

printed by Industrial Relations Division, United States Shipping Board, Emergency Fleet Corporation.)

Butterfield, K. L. The Farmer and the New Day. New York: Macmillan. 1919. pp. 311. $2.00.

Carver, T. N. War Thrift. New York: Oxford University Press. 1919. pp. 68. (Publication of Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.)

Cerf, Barry. Alsace-Lorraine since 1870. 1919. pp. 190. $1.50.

Cleveland, F. A. and Schafer, J. (Editors). tion. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Co. Commons, J. R. Industrial Goodwill.

New York: Macmillan.

Democracy in Reconstruc1919. pp. 491. $1.50. New York: McGraw-Hill


Book Co. 1919. pp. 213. $2.00. Dickinson, G. L. (Introduction by). Problems of the International Settlement. New York: Macmillan. 1919. pp. 205. (Papers reprinted and translated from the Recueil de Rapports published by the " Central Organization for a Durable Peace.") Douglass, H. P. The Little Town, especially in its Rural Relationships. New York: Macmillan. 1919. pp. 258. $1.50.

Fairlie, J. A. British War Administration. New York: Oxford University Press. 1919. pp. 302. (Publication of Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.)

Flint, G. E. The Whole Truth about Alcohol. New York: The Macmillan Co. 1919. pp. 294. $1.50.

Gephart, W. F. Effects of the War upon Insurance, with Special Reference to the Substitution of Insurance for Pensions. New York: Oxford University Press. 1919. pp. 302. $1.00. (Publication of Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.)

Hobson, J. A. Richard Cobden: The International Man. New York: Henry Holt & Co. 1919. pp. 416. $5.00.

Hollander, J. H. War Borrowing: A Study of Treasury Certificates of Indebtedness of the United States. New York: Macmillan. 1919. pp. 215. $1.50.

Kinley, David (Editor). Early Economic Effects of the European War upon Canada; Early Effects of the European War upon the Finance,

« PreviousContinue »