24 Transaclions.—Miscellaneous. 
It is also commonly supposed that a spendthrift who expends his capital 
in one year, does more direct harm to the working classes than a wealthier 
man who expends as large a sum out of his interest; there is a feeling that 
in the one case capital has been destroyed, and that on capital the well- 
being of the workmen depends, while in the other case the capital which 
produced the interest is still intact. There is, however, no difference, 
except indirectly, in the two cases. Both consume certain wealth, which, 
had they not consumed it, would have gone to the working classes. It 
makes no difference to the latter whether what they want and would have 
had, if it had not been taken by some one else, is taken by A or by B; nor is 
their future stock of wealth at all influenced, for the men who were employed 
in producing the commodities consumed by prudent B were just as much 
taken away from the production of goods to be used by workmen, as were 
those employed in producing for spendthrift A. 
When a spendthrift squanders his wealth he ceases to be a capitalist, 
but the others acquire the share which he has lost. The whole class owns 
between them all the wealth produced. If one of their number falls out of 
the ranks it is so much the better for the rest; on the other hand, a capitalist 
who increases his share by saving and investing a larger proportion of his 
gross share than the average, acquires his right at the expense of the 
others. He benefits the working classes, not only directly by increasing 
their wages, but also indirectly, by compelling other capitalists to be more 
frugal so as to maintain their proportionate share of the future stock ; 
the spendthrift injures the working classes directly by consuming the wealth 
which they have produced, and also indirectly, by making it easier for the 
average man to keep his position as a capitalist, and thus keeping up the 
rate of interest. 
It is the interest of the capitalists to give as little as they can to the 
labourers, and to receive as much from them as possible, consistently with 
their attaining other objects they have in view. As a rule, while they wish 
to live comfortably or luxuriously themselves, they also wish to leave 
to their heirs a right to a share of the common wealth, not less than 
that which they themselves enjoy. If they live too abstemiously, they 
increase the share to which they are entitled, but exercise a self-restraint 
which, under the circumstances, they consider unnecessary ; if they live too 
well, other more abstemious men will push them from their stools, and 
acquire, to their loss, a right to the wealth produced by the community. In 
order to hold their own they must conform their personal expenditure to 
that of the average of their fellow-capitalists. 
Capitalists are not necessarily men of more than common intelligence, 
