LECTURES TO BUSINESS MEN

Evening Star, Issue 16998, 21 March 1919, Page 6

LECTURES TO BUSINESS MEN

AN AUSPICIOUS BEGINNING. At Otego University laat night the Ven. Archdeacon Woodthorpe, M.A., delivered the first of a series of 24 weekly lectures which he proposes to give for the benefit of business men. The start was most enoouraging, over 40 men being present, showing how keen is the desire to study the economic problems with which wo are confronted to-day. Requests have been made to have the course repeated in some other towns, or, failing that, to have the lectures printed or typewritten and sent to study circles which it is proposed to form.

Archdeacon Woodthorpe took for hia subject last night ' Wealth and the Productive Process.' In the course of a comprehensive address he said : —No one can exaggerate the importance of the study which we begin to-night. We all realise that we are lace to face with serious problems. We have been engaged in a great war which is testing all tlie theories arid resources of civilised man. We have many questions, theoretical and practical, that are coming up for consideration, and, if possible, for solution. The Empire of which we are part has a mission which is almost unparalleled in its possibilities for usefulness at the present time. If we remember that it covers one-fourth of the world's surface, and is responsible for the destinies of one-fourth of the world's people, we shall grasp at once the nature of tlie opportuiuty that is presented to us to-day. I have had the privilege during the last three years of lecturing to the W.E.A. in this City. To-day, in England, a new association is being formed—'the World Association for Adult Education. It has been founded by a man of great energy, Mr Albert Manabridge, with the assistance of others. It is the intention to extend that influence into every country which is associated with the League of Nations, and even beyond the rang© of its authority. If, therefore, I insist strongly upon the need of careful, painstaking study of facts and tendencies in industrial life, you will recognise that I have in my mind also the end or purpose to which all such study must lead—the efheiencv, well-being, and happiness of mankind. Economics deals with man, and not merely with things. The production of wealth is not an end in itself, but only a means to an end. Things are produced in order that they may be used or consumed. If we regard production merely, we may make man an excellent producing machine, but we defeat the very end for which production is carried on. For many years there was a sharp conflict between the two schools of economic writers, some placing the emphasis on wealth, and others on man. The change of view is worth noticing. Tha early economists regarded the subject purely from the point of view of the State—political economy was one aspect of kingcraft. The second conception was that of the study of wealth and man's relation to it. The third, the study of man in his relation to wealth. _ The whole development of the science is full of encouragement. . . . Economics deals with man as a member of society, for whom production of wealth is carried on. We have to emphasise the fact that it deals with the well-being of man, and not for some men and for some classes of men. Economics, says Marshall, is the study of man's actions in the ordinary business of life; it inquires how 'he gets his Income and how he uses it. Tims it is on the one side a study of wealth, and on the other, a more important side, a part of the study of man. For man's character has been moulded by his everyday work, and by the material resources which he thereby secures, more than by any other influence unless it be that of his religious ideals. We deal in economies with industrial society—that is, with those social phenomena which result from men's associated efforts to gain a livelihood. We must notice furthere that this industrial society is in a state of process of development, equally with all other social life spheres. We thus have a statics and a dynamics of economics. By the statics of economies we mean that branch which deals with economic society as it exists at a given time. By the dynamics of economics we mean that part of economies which has to do with the growth processes of industrial society. We ask what changes have taken place in the nature of industrial society, and how these changes have been effected. The two departments of economics—statics and dynamics—must be developed together: neither can be understood without the other. Continuous change goes on in industrial society. The position to-day is different h7.m that of 50 years ago. Thirty years hence the changes may he even greater. The changes are the result of many and complex factors, such as natural forces and conditions, human effort, social institutions, etc. The economic motive, however, is always dominant; the desire to devise bettor methods to enable us to satisfy our economic wants. Tn the past there have been four stages of development in industry : (1) The independent or domestic economy; (2) the town or local economy; (3) the national economy; and <4) the international or world economy. The present stago of economic evolution is marked by specialised production in connection with a highhly-developed system of the exchange of goods. This stage presents four distinct characteristics : (1) The institution of private property ; (2) freedom of competition. Under this head are examined freedom of initiative, freedom of contract, and the principle of self-interest. (3) Co-operation, through exchange of goods. No one produces all he consumes. Our system of co-operation, says Professor Taylor, is both effected and: regulated bv exchange. (4) The money economy (marl; this point): In an economic system based on exchange, the; immediate advantage of a bargain is more likely to appeal tn the minds of men and to determine their »r tions than his concern for the ultimate, good of human society. The distinction between individual and social gain needs often to be carefully distinguished. The interests of the individual and the. society are not necessarily opposed, but they often may be. Wealth is perhaps one 'of the most ambiguous terms in the Enelifh language. In the time, of Henry VTII. the word meant well-being, "In"all time of our wealth," says the Anglican Litany. Then it co.me to be applied to money and other concrete things, command over which caused a person to live in wealth. Quesnay said that agriculture was the source of all wealth, both that of the State avid that of the individual. Adam Smith, however, found the true orisn'n of wealth in the general activity of soeietv. Labor is the true source of'wealth. "This is the oricrin of that celebrated theorv which has given rise to so much misunderstanding, and gave rise to Karl Marx's famous doctrine. But Adam Smith, as a?ain*t the Physiocrats, affirmed that it was human activity and not natural fortes which produces the mass of comm-o-ditics consumed every year. Without th« mind and directing 'activity of ]ja.b«r, natural forces could not bo utilised. To him work was the apparent of we-iitr.—not the_ work of a sin-trie class like the aericrulbut the work of all classes. Hence all work lias a claim to bo considered prodiuctfvo. The nation's enniial income owes something to every worker in the community. It is the result of their collaboration, or as Adam Smith term<s it, their "co-operation." A .nation is just a vast workshop, where the labor of each, however diverse hi character, adds to the wealth of nil . . . The leading idea, to-day is the relation of wenlth to public welfare. To-day we believe that money is made on a laa>ge scale by doing the public a service. If a man's jrcocb'command a high price we assume that he has nn»t an actual need. If this price furnishes him a large margin of profit, we belie-e that ho ha« so organised _ the labor under his control as to diminish not only hie own expenses but the actual labor cost of pmducing the goods. Production is the bringing into existence of economic goods in order to satisfy the wants which Nature does not freely furnish the means to satisfy- These goods may bo material or non-material. Notice that the prodtn-ctive process does not exist apart from the exchange and distributive and consuming processes'. They are all parts of one organic structure. They may, however be isccLated and distinguished for puxpoeets of study and analysis. It used to be said that production took place through tho cooperation of throe factors—land, labor, ; and carnal. The inecprisitesi qi'

hav« boan «tate<i aath&r differently st <slf» 'I forent periodls of ewniomfo efcady. The .j Physiocrats emphasised tlio importance of M land, with a tendency to state economic j laws :m physical Jaws. Adam Smith emphasised tho importance of labor and established political eoonomv aa a "moral" science—i.e., a science dealing with human voluntary conduct. .J. S. Mill emphasised: .g the importance of capital. Professor Alar- " i abol! states the requisites of production .„" are land, labor, capital, and organisation. £j Labor is the an© facti.r which is bound up .-9 with the human personality, having will j and aims of its own. Labor ia the only a force through which, an <he highest and '.-fl fullest sense, activity can be ascribed. » Professor Char-las Gide saya labor is tha 'm only factor which can claim the title of ■ agent of production in the exact meaning »jj of the word. Man alone -bakes the initia- J tivo in every productive operation. Na- M tare plays cmiy an absolutely passive role; 'fl it yields to man's irtdligenc© and skUL " jfl The primary agent in, production it -fl labor; Nature and capital are eubordin-jM ate and secondary. Capital, the produr of labor and Nature, ia really an " ment."