Fermat's Library | Economic Possibilities For Our Grandchildren annotated/explained version.

21 min read Original article ↗

2

ECONOMIC

POSSIBILITIES

FOR

OUR

GRANDCHILDREN

This essay

was

first presented in

1928

as

a talk to sevetal small societies,

induding the Essay Soeiety ofWinehester College and the Politieal Eeonomy

Qub

at Cambridge.

In

June

1930

Keynes expanded his notes into a leeture

on 'Eeonomie Possibilities for our GrandehiIdren' whieh he gave at Madrid.

It

appeared in literary form in two instalments in the

Nation

and

Athenaeum,

11

and

18

Oetober

1930,

in the midst

of

the slump.

I

We

are suffering just now from a bad attack

of

economic

pessimism.

It

is

common to hear people

say

that the epoch

of

enormous economic progress which characterised the nineteenth

century

is

over; that the rapid improvement in the standard

of

life

is

now going to slow

down-at

any rate in Great Britain;

that a decline

in·

prosperity

is

more likely than an improvement

in the decade which lies ahead

of

uso

I believe that this

is

a wildly mistaken interpretation

of

what

is

happening to

uso

We

are suffering, not from the rheumatics

of

old age, but from the growing-pains

of

over-rapid changes,

from the painfulness

of

readjustment between one economic

period and another.

The

increase

of

technical efficiency has

been taking place faster than

we

can

deal

with the problem

of

labour absorption; the improvement in the standard

of

life

has been a little too quick; the banking and monetary system

of

the world has been preventing the rate

of

interest from falling

as

fast

as

equilibrium requires. And even

so,

the waste and

confusion which ensue relate to not more than

71

per cent

of

the national income;

we

are muddling

away

one and sixpence in

the

["

and have only

18s

6d,

when

we

might,

if

we

were more

sensible, have

[,1; yet, nevertheless, the

18s

6d

mounts up to

as

much

as

the [, I would have been

five

or

six

years

ago.

We forget

that in

1929

the physical output

of

the industry of Great Britain

3

21

THE

FUTURE

was

greater than ever before, and that the net surplus

of

our

foreign balance available for new foreign investment, after paying

for all our imports, was greater last year than that of any other

country, being indeed

50

per cent greater than the corresponding

surplus

of

the United States.

Or

again-if

it

is

to be a matter

of

comparisons-suppose that

we

were to reduce our wages

by a half, repudiate four-fifths

of

the national debt, and hoard

our surplus wealth in barren gold instead

of

lending it at 6 per

cent or more,

we

should resemble the now much-envied France.

But would it

be

an improvement?

The

prevailing world depression, the enormous anomaly

of

unemployment in a world

full

of

wants, the disastrous mistakes

we

have made, blind us to what

is

going on under the

surface-

to the true interpretation

of

the trend

of

things. For I predict

that both

of

the two opposed errors

of

pessimism which now

make

so

much noise in the world

will

be proved wrong in our

own

time-the

pessimism

of

the revolutionaries who think that

things are

so

bad that nothing can

save

us but violent change,

and the pessimism of the reactionaries who consider the balance

of our economic and social life

so

precarious that

we

must risk

no

experiments.

My purpose in this essay, however,

is

not to examine the

present or the near future, but to disembarrass myself

of

short

views and take wings into the future. What can

we

reasonably

expect the level

of

our economic life to

be

a hundred years hence?

What are the economic possibilities

for

our grandchildren?

From the earliest times

of

which

we

have

record-back,

say

to two thousand years before

Christ-down

to the beginning

of

the eighteenth century, there

was

no

very great change in

the standard of life of the average man living in the civilised

centres

of

the earth. Ups and downs certainly. Visitations

of

plague, famine, and

war.

Golden intervals. But

no

progressive,

violent change. Some periods perhaps

50

per cent better than

others-at

the utmost

100

per cent

better-in

the four thousand

years

wh

ich ended

(say)

in A.D.

1700.

3

22

POSSIBILITIES

FOR

OUR

GRANDCHILDREN

This slow rate

of

progress, or lack

of

progress,

was

due to

two

reasons-to

the remarkable absence

of

important technical

improvements and to the failure

of

capital to accumulate.

The absence

of

important technical inventions between the

prehistoric

age

and comparatively modern times

is

truly re-

markable. Almost everything which really matters and which

the world possessed at the commencement

of

the modern

age

was

already known to man at the dawn

of

history. Language,

fire,

the same domestic animals which

we

have today, wheat,

barley, the vine and the

olive,

the plough, the wheel, the oar,

the sail, leather, linen and cloth, bricks and pots, gold and

silver, copper, tin, and

lead-and

iron

was

added to the list

before

1000

B.c.-banking, statecraft, mathematics, astronomy,

and religion. There

is

no

record

of

when

we

first possessed these

things.

At some epoch before the dawn

of

history-perhaps even

in one

of

the comfortable intervals before the last

ice

age-

there must have been an era

of

progress and invention com-

parable to that in which

we

live today. But through the greater

part

of

recorded his tory there

was

no

thing

of

the kind.

The

modern

age

opened, I think, with the accumulation

of

capital which began in the sixteenth century. I believe-for

reasons with which I must not encumber the present argument

-that

this

was

initially due to the rise

of

prices, and the profits

to which that led, which resulted from the treasure

of

gold and

silver which Spain brought from the New World into the Old.

From that time until today the power

of

accumulation

by

compound interest, which seems to have been sleeping

for

many generations,

was

reborn and renewed its strength. And

the power

of

compound interest over two hundred years

is

such

as

to stagger the imagination.

Let

me

give

in illustration of this a sum which I have worked

out. The value of Great Britain's foreign investments today

is

estimated at about

l4,oOO

million. This

yie1ds

us an income

at the rate

of

about

6t

per cent. Half

of

this

we

bring horne

3

2

3

THE

FUTURE

and enjoy; the other half, namely,

3t

per cent,

we

leave to

accumulate abroad at compound interest. Something

of

this

sort has now been going on for about

250

years.

For

I trace the beginnings

of

British foreign investment to

the treasure which Drake stole from Spain in

158o.

In

that year

he returned to England bringing with hirn the prodigious spoils

of

the

Golden

Hind.

Q!Ieen Elizabeth

was

a considerable share-

holder in the syndicate which had financed the expedition.

Out

of

her share she paid off the whole

of

England's foreign debt,

balanced her budget, and found herself with about

1:40,000

in

hand. This she invested in the Levant

Company-which

prospered.

Out

of

the profits

of

the Levant Company, the East

India Company was founded; and the profits

of

this great

enterprise were the foundation

of

England's subsequent foreign

investment. Now it happens that

1:40,000

accumulating at

3t

per cent compound interest approximately corresponds to the

actual volume ofEngland"s foreign investments at various dates,

and would actually amount today to the total

of

1:4,000

million

which I have already quoted

as

being what our foreign invest-

ments now are. Thus, every

1:1

which Drake brought horne in

1580

has now become

1:100,000.

Such

is

the power

of

compound

interest!

From the sixteenth century, with a cumulative crescendo

after the eighteenth, the great age

of

science and technical

inventions began, which since the beginning

of

the nineteenth

century has been in full flood-coal, steam, electricity, petrol,

steel, rubber, cotton, the ehemieal industries, automatie

machinery and the methods

of

mass production, wireless,

printing, Newton, Darwin, and Einstein, and thousands

of

other things and men too famous and familiar to eatalogue.

What

is

the result?

In

spite

of

an enormous growth in the

population

of

the world, which it has been necessary to equip

with houses and machines, the average standard

of

life in

Europe and the United States has been raised, I think, about

fourfold.

The

growth

of

capital has been on

ascale

which

is

far

3

2

4

POSSIBILITIES

FOR

OUR

GRANDCHILDREN

beyond a hundred-fold

of

what any previous

age

had known.

And from now on

we

need not expect

so

great an increase

of

population.

If

capital increases,

say,

2 per cent per annum, the capital

equipment

of

the world

will

have increased

by

a half in twenty

years, and seven and a half times in a hundred years. Think

of

this in terms

of

material things-houses, transport, and the

like.

At the same time technical improvements in manufacture

and transport have been proceeding at a greater rate in the

last ten years than ever before in history.

In

the United States

factory output per head

was

40

per cent greater in

1925

than

in

1919.

In

Europe

we

are held back by temporary obstacles,

but even

so

it

is

safe to say that technical efficiency

is

increasing

by more than

1 per cent per annum compound. There

is

evidence

that the revolutionary technical changes, which have

so

far

chiefly affected industry, may soon be attacking agriculture.

We

may

be on the

eve

of

improvements in the efficiency

of

food

production

as

great

as

those which have already taken place

in mining, manufacture, and transport.

In

quite a

few

years-

in our own lifetimes I

mean-we

may be able to perform all the

operations

of

agriculture, mining, and manufacture with a

quarter

of

the human effort to which

we

have been accustomed.

For the moment the very rapidity

of

these changes

is

hurting

us and bringing difficult problems to

solve.

Those countries

are suffering relatively which are not in the vanguard

of

progress.

We

are being afflicted with a new disease of which some readers

may not yet have heard the name, but

of

which they will hear

a great deal in the years to come-namely,

technological

un-

employment.

This means unemployment due to our discovery

of

means

of

economising the use

of

labour outrunning the pace

at which

we

can find new uses for labour.

But this

is

only a temporary phase

of

maladjustment.

All

this

means in the long run

that

mankind

is

solving

its

economic

problem.

I would predict that the standard

of

life in progressive countries

3

2

5

THE

FUTURE

one hundred years hence

will

be between four and eight times

as

high

as

it

is

today. There would

be

nothing surprising in

this even in the light

of

our present knowledge. It would not

be

foolish to contemplate the possibility

of

a

far

greater progress

still.

11

Let us,

for

the

sake

of

argument, suppose that a hundred years

hence

we

are all

of

us, on the average, eight times better off in

the economic sense than

we

are today. Assuredly there need

be

nothing here to surprise

uso

Now it

is

true that the needs

of

human beings may seem to

be insatiable. But they

fall

into two

dasses-those

needs which

are absolute in the sense that

we

feel

them whatever the situation

of

our

fellow

human beings

may

be, and those which are relative

in the sense that

we

feel

them only

if

their satisfaction lifts us

above, makes us

feel

superior to, our

fellows.

Needs

of

the

second dass, those which satisfy the desire for superiority, may

indeed be insatiable;

for

the higher the general level, the higher

still are they. But this

is

not

so

true

of

the absolute

needs-

a point may soon be reached, much sooner perhaps than

we

all

of

us are aware

of,

when these needs are satisfied in the sense

that

we

prefer to devote our further energies to non-economic

purposes.

Now for my condusion, which you will find, I think, to

become more and more startling to the imagination the longer

you think about it.

I draw the condusion that, assuming no important wars and

no important increase in population, the

economic

problem

may

be solved, or be at least within sight

of

solution, within a hundred

years. This means that the economic problem

is

not-if

we

look into the future-the

permanent

problem

o[

the

human

race.

Why, you may

ask,

is

this

so

startling? It

is

startling because

-if,

instead

of

looking into the future,

we

look

into the

past-

we

find that the economic problem, the struggle

for

subsistence,

3

26

POSSIBILITIES

FOR

OUR

GRANDCHILDREN

always

has been hitherto the primary, most pressing problem

of

the human

race-not

only

of

the human race, but

of

the whole

of

the biological kingdom from the beginnings

of

life in its

most primitive forms.

Thus

we

have been expressly evolved by

nature-with

all

our impulses and deepest instincts-for the purpose

of

solving

the economic problem.

If

the economic problem

is

solved,

mankind will

be

deprived

of

its traditional purpose.

Will this be a benefit?

If

one believes at

all

in the real values

of

life, the prospect at least opens up the possibility

of

benefit.

Yet I think with dread

of

the readfustment

of

the habits and

instincts

of

the ordinary man, bred into hirn for countless gen-

erations, which he may be asked to discard within a

few

decades.

To

use the language

of

today-must

we

not expect a general

'nervous breakdown

'?

We already have a little experience of

what I

mean-a

nervous breakdown

of

the sort which

is

already

common enough in England and the United States amongst the

wives

of

the well-to-do classes, unfortunate women, many

of

them, who have been deprived by their wealth

of

their traditional

tasks and occupations-who cannot find it sufficiently amusing,

when deprived

of

the spur

of

economic necessity, to

cook

and

clean and mend, yet are quite unable to find anything more

amusmg.

To

those who sweat

for

their daily bread leisure

is

a longed

-for

sweet-until

they get it.

There

is

the traditional epitaph written for herself by the

old charwoman:

Don't mourn

for

me, friends, don't weep

for

me never,

For

I'm

going to

do

nothing for ever and ever.

This

was

her heaven. Like others

who

look

forward to leisure,

she conceived how nice it would be to spend her time listening-in

-for

there

was

another couplet which occurred in her poem:

With psalms and sweet music the heavens'll be ringing,

But I shall have nothing to do with the singing.

THE

FUTURE

Yet it

will

only be

for

those

who

have

to

do with the singing

that life

will

be tolerable-and

how

few

of us can sing!

Thus

for

the first time since his creation man

will

be

faced

with his real, his permanent problem-how

to

use his freedom

from pressing economic cares,

how

to

occupy the leisure, which

science and compound interest

will

have

won

for hirn,

to

live

wisely and agreeably and

well.

The

strenuous purposeful money-makers

may

carry

all

of

us

along with them into the lap of economic abundance. But it

will

be those peoples,

who

can

keep

alive,

and cultivate into

a fuller perfection, the art of life itself and

do

not

seil

themselves

for

the means of life,

who

will

be able to enjoy the abundance

when it

comes.

Yet there

is

no

country and

no

people, I think,

who

can

look

forward to the

age

of

leisure and

of

abundance without a dread.

For

we

have been trained too long to strive and not

to

enjoy.

It

is

a fearful problem for the ordinary person, with

no

special

talents,

to

occupy himself, especially

if

he

no

Ion

ger

has roots

in the soil or in custom or in the beloved conventions of a tradi-

tional society.

To

judge from the behaviour and the achievements

of

the wealthy classes today in any quarter

of

the world, the

outlook

is

very depressing! For these are,

so

to

speak, our

advance

guard-those

who are spying out the promised land

for

the rest of

us

and pitching their camp there. For they have

most

of

them failed disastrously,

so

it seems to

me-those

who

have an independent income but

no

associations or duties or

ties-to

solve

the problem which has been set them.

I

feel

sure that with a little more experience

we

shall use

the new-found bounty

of

nature quite differently from the

way

in which the rich use it today, and

will

map out

for

ourselves

a plan of life quite otherwise than theirs.

For many

ages

to

come the old Adam

will

be

so

strong in

us

that everybody

will

need

to

do

some

work if

he

is

to

be

contented.

We

shall

do

more things

for

ourselves than

is

usual

with the rich today, only too glad

to

have small duties and

3

28

POSSIBILITIES

FOR

OUR

GRANDCHILDREN

tasks and routines. But beyond this,

we

shall endeavour to

spread the bread thin on the

butter-to

make what work there

is

still to be done to

be

as

widely shared

as

possible. Three-hour

shifts or a fifteen-hour

week

may put off the problem

for

a

great while. For three hours a day

is

quite enough to satisfy

the old Adam in most

of

us!

There are changes

in

other spheres

too

which

we

must

expect

to

come. When the aGcumulation

of

wealth is

no

longer

of

high social importance, there

will

be great changes in the

code

of

morals.

We

shall

be

able to rid ourselves

of

many

of

the pseudo-moral principles which have hag-ridden us for

two

hundred years,

by

which

we

have exalted some

of

the most

distasteful

of

human qualities into the position

of

the highest

virtues.

We

shall

be

able to afford to dare to

assess

the money-

motive at its true value. The

love

of

money

as

a possession-as

distinguished from the

love

of

money

as

a means to the enjoy-

ments and realities of life-will be recognised for what it

is,

a

somewhat disgusting morbidity, one

of

those semi-criminal,

semi-pathological propensities which one hands over with a

shudder to the specialists in mental disease.

All

kinds

of

social

customs and economic practices, affecting the distribution

of

wealth and

of

economic rewards and penalties, which

we

now

maintain at

all

costs, however distasteful and unjust they may

be in themselves, because they are tremendously useful in

promoting the accumulation

of

capital,

we

shall then be free,

at last, to discard.

Of

course there will still be many people with intense, un-

satisfied purposiveness

who

will

blindly pursue wealth-unless

they can find some plausible substitute. But the rest

of

us

will

no longer be under any obligation

to

applaud and encourage

them. For

we

shall inquire more curiously than

is

safe today

into the true character

of

this 'purposiveness' with which in

varying degrees Nature has endowed almost

all

of

uso

For

purposiveness means that

we

are more concerned with the

remote future results

of

our actions than with their own quality

3

2

9

THE

FUTURE

or their immediate effects on our own environment.

The

'purposive' man

is

always trying to secure a spurious and

delusive immortality for his acts by pushing his interest in

them forward into time. He does not love his cat,

but

his cat's

kittens; nor, in truth, the kittens, hut only the kittens' kittens,

and

so

on forward for ever to the end

of

catdom. For hirn jam

is

not jam unless it

is

a case

of

jam tomorrow and never jam

today. Thus hy pushing his jam always forward into the future,

he strives to secure for his act

of

hoiling it an immortality.

Let

me remind you

of

the Professor in Sylvie

and

Bruno:

'Only the tailor, sir, with your little bill,' said a meek voice outside the door.

'Ah,

weIl,

1 can soon settle

his

business,' the Professor said to the children,

'ifyou'Il just wait aminute. How much

is

it, this year,

my

man?'

The

tailor

had come in while he

was

speaking.

'WeIl, it's been a-doubling

so

many years, you see,' the tailor replied,

a little gruffiy,

'and

1 think

I'd

like the money now. It's two thousand

pound, it

is!'

'Oh,

that's nothing

!'

the Professor carelessly remarked, feeling in his

pocket,

as

if

he always carried at least that amount about with hirn.

'But

wouldn't you like to wait

JUS!

another year and make it

Jour

thousand?

Just think how rich you'd bel Why, you might be a

king,

ifyou

liked!'

'I

don't know

as

I'd

care about being a king,' the man said thoughtfuIly.

'But

it

dew

sound a powerful sight

0'

money! WeIl, 1 think

1'11

wait-'

'Of

course you will!' said the Professor.

'There's

good sense in you,

1 see. Good-day to you,

my

man!'

'Will youever have to pay hirn that four thousand pounds?' Sylvie asked

as

the door closed on the departing creditor.

'Never,

my

child!' the Professor replied emphaticaIly.

'He'll

go

on

doubling it till he dies. You see, it's

a/ways

worth while waiting another

year to get twice

as

much money!'

Perhaps it is not an accident that the race which did most

to bring the promise

of

immortality into the heart and essence

of

our religions has also done most for the principle

of

compound

interest and particularly loves this most purposive

of

human

institutions.

I see us free, therefore, to return to some

of

the most sure

and certain principles

of

religion and traditional

virtue-that

33°

POSSIBILITIES

FOR

OUR

GRANDCHILDREN

avarice

is

a vice, that the exaction

of

usury

is

a misdemeanour,

and the

love

of

money

is

detestable, that those walk most truly

in the paths

of

virtue and sane wisdom

who

take least thought

for the morrow.

We

shall once more value ends above means

and prefer the good to the useful. We shall honour those

who

can teach us how to pluck the hour and the day virtuously and

weIl,

the delightful people who are capable

of

taking direct

enjoyment in things, the lilies

of

the

field

who toil not, neither

do

they spin.

But beware!

The

time

for

all

this

is

not yet. For at least

another hundred years

we

must pretend to ourselves and to

everyone that fair

is

foul and

foul

is

fair;

for

foul

is

useful and

fair

is

not. Avarice and usury and precaution must be our gods

for a little longer still. For only they can lead us out

of

the

tunnel

of

economic necessity into daylight.

I look forward, therefore, in

days

not

so

very remote, to the

greatest change which has ever occurred in the material environ-

ment

of

life for human beings in the aggregate. But,

of

course,

it

will

all

happen gradually, not as a catastrophe. Indeed, it has

already begun. The course

of

affairs

will

simply be that there

will

be ever larger and larger classes and groups

of

people

from whom problems

of

economic necessity have been practically

removed. The critical difference

will

be

realised when this

condition has become

so

general that the nature

of

one's duty

to one's neighbour

is

changed. For it

will

remain reasonable to

be economically purposive

for

others after it has ceased to be

reasonable for oneself.

The

pace

at which

we

can reach our destination

of

economic

bliss

will

be governed by four

things-our

power to control

population, our determination to avoid wars and civil dissensions,

our willingness to entrust to science the direction

of

those

matters which are properly the concern

of

science, and the rate

of

accumulation

as

fixed

by the margin between our production

and our consumption;

of

which the last

will

easily look after

itself, given the first three.

33

1

THE

FUTURE

Meanwhile, there will be no harm in making mild preparations

for our destiny, in encouraging, and experimenting in, the arts

of

life

as

weIl

as

the activities

of

purpose.

But, chiefly,

do

not let us overestimate the importance

of

the economic problem, or sacrifice

to

its supposed necessities

other matters

of

greater and more permanent significance.

It

should be a matter for specialists-like dentistry.

If

economists

could manage to get themselves thought

of

as

humble, competent

people, on a level with dentists, that would be splendid!

33

2