of output, or bad organisation, owing to continued friction between capital and labour, 

 a nation's income falls far below what it might be, then all classes will suffer and the 

 nation as a whole fall behind its competitors. 



On the side of consumption the growing wealth of a nation and its bad distribution 

 tends to great waste. The growth of luxury diverts the nation's productive powers into 

 supplying unproductive articles. All classes become wasteful in food, drink, clothing, 

 and household economy generally. What this means may be gathered from Sir Robert 

 Giffen's estimate, made some years ago, that 34 per cent, of the national expenditure 

 is on food and drink, 13 per cent, on dress, and 16 per cent, in "house" expenditure, 

 including rent, furniture, light, etc. The rich become wasteful in all their pleasures, 

 motoring, dress, servants, etc. They demand that labour shall be uselessly employed 

 in providing for all their unnecessary wants, and the less rich follow suit as best they 

 can. Take one or two instances of wasteful consumption. Our drink bill in 1913 was 

 over £166,000,000. All that money could have been productively employed. As it 

 was, it went to employ labour, capital, and ability on the growth of barley and hops, 

 the working of breweries and distilleries, and on the management of countless public- 

 houses. In the end the product of all this great labour and effort had gone down the 

 throats of the people, generally to their great detriment, and nothing remained. Had 

 it been diverted for the betterment of our productive industries — suppose, for instance, 

 that it had been employed in providing better motive power for our industries or in 

 rebuilding our canals or in better clothing, housing, or education of the poorer classes — 

 our wealth would have been much greater. Again.when a rich man employs much labour 

 and capital in his unproductive pleasures, in keeping, for instance, too large a number 

 of men-servants or gardeners for pleasure gardens, or when his wife employs many 

 dressmakers, they are diverting the nation's labour and capital from productive to 

 unproductive wealth. Nor is it only the rich who err, though in their case the error is 

 the more glaring and the less pardonable. The poorer classes in this country are 

 perhaps less thrifty than their fellows in any great civilized country except the United 

 States. Unfortunately there are too many millions for whom saving is practically 

 an impossibility. But, even where it is possible, it is a comparatively rare virtue, as 

 the profits of public-houses, cinemas, theatres, and racecourse "bookies" show. Many 

 social troubles would be remedied if both rich and poor learnt more of the true art of 

 economical living. 



THE CAPITAL AND INCOME OF THE BRITISH EMPIRE 



The discussion hitherto has been confined to the financial and economic position 

 of the United Kingdom. But it may be asked : — What about the resources of the British 

 Empire as a whole? It is the British Empire, not the United Kingdom only, which is 

 at war. There is no part of the British Empire that is not vitally concerned in the 

 struggle. Are not the whole resources of the Empire available? And are they not 

 much greater than the resources of the United Kingdom only? 

 In 1903 Sir Robert Giffen made the following estimate: — 



Capital Income 



Canada £1,350,000,000 £270,000,000 



Australasia 1,150,000,000 210,000,000 



India 3,000,000,000 600,000,000 



South Africa 600,000,000 100,000,000 



Remainder of Empire 1,200,000,000 200,000,000 



Total £7,300,000,000 £1,380,000,000 



Here indeed is a great addition to the wealth of the United Kingdom alone, and 

 since 1903 the wealth of the rest of the British Empire has been largely increased. Sir 

 Robert Giffen then estimated the income per head of Canada and Australasia at £48, 



8 



