[To THE EDITOR OF TIIR "SPIRIT/CORM have been deeply interested
in reading the letters which have appeared in the Times and other Protectionist organs on the subject of Mr. Chamberlain's scheme. They make me regret that it was my fate to learn economics at Oxford instead of at Birmingham. Had it been my good fortune to be educated at the latter seat of learning, doubtless I should have found out long ago how disastrous it is that the imports of a nation should exceed its exports. However, it is better to acquire wisdom late than never to acquire it at all. Now I know that if £700 worth of Birmingham goods can be exchanged for £1,000 worth of French goods the result is a dead loss to Birmingham. I quite realise that the only way to become rich is to sell your goods at a loss. If only you could dispose of £1,000 worth of Birmingham goods in France and get nothing at all in return, then Birmingham would be rich beyond the dreams of avarice. There is, how- ever, one flaw in Mr. Chamberlain's scheme, and that is that under it the British workman will be able to exchange the same amount of labour for more wages (representing more commodities). If we follow up the Protectionist theory, this must be fatal to his interests, for then his " imports " will exceed his " exports." What he must aim at is to get less wages, or, better still, to be allowed to pay for the privilege of working. Then he would be on the high road to prosperity, for he could " export " his work and his money, and import nothing. In other words, he could " dump " both work and money on his employer, to the destruction of the latter and to his own lasting benefit.—I am, Sir, &c.,
Poi,. EcoN.
Previous page
