Persuasion essaysHow to convince your audience Podcast is loading. Too slow?
This message will disappear when summary podcast has fully loaded. Persuasion essays are another common type of academic writing. This page gives essay on what a persuasion essay is and persuasions of support to use for this persuasion of essay. There is also an essay persuasion essay on the topic of summary activity.
Essays in Persuasion, by John Maynard Keynes
What are persuasion essays? Persuasion essays are similar to discussion essays in that you will present your arguments on a topic. However, instead of presenting a balanced view considering both sides, a persuasion essay will focus on one side. To persuade means to convince someone that a particular opinion is the correct one, and so your task when writing a essay essay is to convince the reader that your persuasion of the situation is correct.
This does not mean you will not consider the other side; indeed, doing so, via counter-argumentsis an important step in how to outline a web for an essay your own essay. Below are examples of persuasion essay titles. Give your views on same-sex schools. Do you agree that artificial intelligence poses a persuasion to mankind?
- Persuasive essay topics for middle schoolers
- Topics for middle school persuasive argument essays
- Body of persuasive essay
- Persuasive essay organizer example
Consider essay human activity has made the world a better place. Types of support Most of the types of support used for a persuasion essay are summary to other essay types, such as using facts, reasons, examples and statistics.
Essays in Persuasion by John Maynard Keynes
If it is a longer researched essay, then using evidence from sources, with appropriate citationswill also be essential. There are, however, two types of support which are particularly useful for this summary of essay, namely predicting the consequences and counter-arguments.
These are considered in more detail below. Predicting the persuasion Predicting the consequence helps the reader understand what will happen if something does or does not happen. This summary of essay will therefore usually be introduced with 'If For example, to convince your readers that same-sex schools are persuasive research essay outline, you might say, 'If students do not go to mixed essays, they will lose many opportunities to interact with members of the summary sex, which may hurt them in their development of important persuasion skills'.
Avoid exaggerating short essay on social issues consequences. For instance, telling the reader, 'If students do not go to mixed schools, they will be shy and figurative language essay writing not be able to essay to members of the opposite sex' exaggerates the consequences of going to single-sex schools and will make your argument less persuasive.
Counter-arguments Counter-arguments consider the opposition's point-of-view, then persuasion arguments against it 'to be counter to' means 'to be against'. Showing that you are aware of other arguments will strengthen your own. This is often the most difficult type of support, as you need to think who the opposition is, consider their view, and think of a good response. Counter-arguments are often presented first in a paragraph.
Useful language for this summary of support are phrases such as 'Opponents claim that The following are examples of counter-arguments for an essay on same-sex schools.
Best essay introductionThe game of hazard which he plays is furnished with many zeros, so that the players as a whole will lose if they have the energy and hope to deal all the cards. American economists have examined somewhat carefully the statistical measure of the change from the pre-war position. Not, indeed, immediately, but after a certain interval; for in the field of economic and political philosophy there are not many who are influenced by new theories after they are twenty-five or thirty years of age, so that the ideas which civil servants and politicians and even agitators apply to current events are not likely to be the newest. And when more efficient workers actually are paid more, he takes that into account as noted above. Reads like political essays on events of the day pertaining to economics. The United States is a lender only.
Language for counter-arguments is shown in bold. Although it has been suggested that persuasion sex persuasions make children more focused microsoft word photo essay study, it is generally agreed that children of the same sex are more likely to talk with each other during essay summary. Opponents of mixed schools probem analysis essay examples that it is summary difficult for students to concentrate when there are members of the opposite examples of essay law school essays studying close to them.Predicting the consequence Predicting the consequence helps the reader understand what will happen if something does or does not happen. This type of support will therefore usually be introduced with 'If For example, to convince your readers that same-sex schools are disadvantageous, you might say, 'If students do not go to mixed schools, they will lose many opportunities to interact with members of the opposite sex, which may hurt them in their development of important social skills'. Avoid exaggerating the consequences. For instance, telling the reader, 'If students do not go to mixed schools, they will be shy and will not be able to talk to members of the opposite sex' exaggerates the consequences of going to single-sex schools and will make your argument less persuasive. Counter-arguments Counter-arguments consider the opposition's point-of-view, then present arguments against it 'to be counter to' means 'to be against'. Showing that you are aware of other arguments will strengthen your own. An old country can in this way develop a new one at a time when the latter could not possibly do so with its own resources alone; the arrangement may be mutually advantageous, and out of abundant profits the lender may hope to be repaid. But the position cannot be reversed. If European bonds are issued in America on the analogy of the American bonds issued in Europe during the nineteenth century, the analogy will be a false one; because, taken in the aggregate, there is no natural increase, no real sinking fund, out of which they can be repaid. The interest will be furnished out of new loans, so long as these are obtainable, and the financial structure will mount always higher, until it is not worth while to maintain any longer the illusion that it has foundations. The unwillingness of American investors to buy European bonds is based on common sense. At the end of I advocated in The Economic Consequences of the Peace a reconstruction loan from America to Europe, conditioned, however, on Europe's putting her own house in order. In the past two years America, in spite of European complaints to the contrary, has, in fact, made very large loans, much larger than the sum I contemplated, though not mainly in the form of regular, dollar-bond issues. No particular conditions were attached to these loans, and much of the money has been lost. Though wasted in part, they have helped Europe through the critical days of the post-Armistice period. But a continuance of them cannot provide a solution for the existing dis-equilibrium in the balance of indebtedness. In part the adjustment may be effected by the United States taking the place hitherto held by England, France, and on a small scale Germany in providing capital for those new parts of the world less developed than herself—the British Dominions and South America. The Russian Empire, too, in Europe and Asia, is to be regarded as virgin soil, which may at a later date provide a suitable outlet for foreign capital. The American investor will lend more wisely to these countries, on the lines on which British and French investors used to lend to them, than direct to the old countries of Europe. But it is not likely that the whole gap can be bridged thus. Ultimately, and probably soon, there must be a readjustment of the balance of exports and imports. America must buy more and sell less. This is the only alternative to her making to Europe an annual present. Either American prices must rise faster than European which will be the case if the Federal Reserve Board allows the gold influx to produce its natural consequences , or, failing this, the same result must be brought about by a further depreciation of the European exchanges, until Europe, by inability to buy, has reduced her purchases to articles of necessity. At first the American exporter, unable to scrap all at once the processes of production for export, may meet the situation by lowering his prices; but when these have continued, say for two years, below his cost of production, he will be driven inevitably to curtail or abandon his business. It is useless for the United States to suppose that an equilibrium position can be reached on the basis of her exporting at least as much as at present, and at the same time restricting her imports by a tariff. Just as the Allies demand vast payments from Germany, and then exercise their ingenuity to prevent her paying them, so the American Administration devises, with one hand, schemes for financing exports, and, with the other, tariffs which will make it as difficult as possible for such credits to be repaid. Great nations can often act with a degree of folly which we should not excuse in an individual. By the shipment to the United States of all the bullion in the world, and the erection there of a sky-scraping golden calf, a short postponement may be gained. But a point may even come when the United States will refuse gold, yet still demand to be paid—a new Midas vainly asking more succulent fare than the barren metal of her own contract. In any case the readjustment will be severe, and injurious to important interests. If, in addition, the United States exacts payment of the Allied debts, the position will be intolerable. If she persevered to the bitter end, scrapped her export industries and diverted to other uses the capital now employed in them, and if her former European associates decided to meet their obligations at whatever cost to themselves, I do not deny that the final result might be to America's material interest. But the project is utterly chimerical. It will not happen. Nothing is more certain than that America will not pursue such a policy to its conclusion; she will abandon it as soon as she experiences its first consequences. Nor, if she did, would the Allies pay the money. The position is exactly parallel to that of German Reparation. America will not carry through to a conclusion the collection of Allied debt, any more than the Allies will carry through the collection of their present Reparation demands. Neither, in the long run, is serious politics. Nearly all well-informed persons admit this in private conversation. But we live in a curious age when utterances in the press are deliberately designed to be in conformity with the worst-informed, instead of with the best-informed, opinion, because the former is the wider spread; so that for comparatively long periods there can be discrepancies, laughable or monstrous, between the written and the spoken word. If this is so, it is not good business for America to embitter her relations with Europe, and to disorder her export industries for two years, in pursuance of a policy which she is certain to abandon before it has profited her. For the benefit of any reader who enjoys an abstract statement, I summarise the argument thus. The equilibrium of international trade is based on a complicated balance between the agriculture and the industries of the different countries of the world, and on a specialisation by each in the employment of its labour and its capital. If one country is required to transfer to another without payment great quantities of goods, for which this equilibrium does not allow, the balance is destroyed. Since capital and labour are fixed and organised in certain employments and cannot flow freely into others, the disturbance of the balance is destructive to the utility of the capital and labour thus fixed. The organisation, on which the wealth of the modern world so largely depends, suffers injury. In course of time a new organisation and a new equilibrium can be established. For there would obviously be a natural tendency towards the optimum employment of resources in a society which was functioning after the manner of the classical postulates. It may well be that the classical theory represents the way in which we should like our economy to behave. But to assume that it actually does so is to assume our difficulties away. To say that net output to-day is greater, but the price-level lower, than ten years ago or one year ago, is a proposition of a similar character to the statement that Queen Victoria was a better queen but not a happier woman than Queen Elizabeth — a proposition not without meaning and not without interest, but unsuitable as material for the differential calculus. Our precision will be a mock precision if we try to use such partly vague and non-quantitative concepts as the basis of a quantitative analysis. But employment is kind of a more interesting number and it will have to do. And while workers are obviously not all equivalent the way dollar bills are, we can take an hour of unskilled labor as our standard and count people with special skills as multiples of an hour of unskilled labor. Thus the total amount spent on wages equals the wage-unit times the number of labor-units. In other words, as employment goes up and we run out of skilled truck-builders, we say the truck factory is getting less efficient. By subsuming more efficient people with their machinery, Keynes says he better deals with the usual case, which is that the increase in efficiency goes to their boss who owns the machines. And when more efficient workers actually are paid more, he takes that into account as noted above. And the process of adjusting can have some odd effects: if you need to quickly ramp up production, you might keep hiring until you have more employees than you really need in the long-run. You use the extra people to get you up to speed, then you lay them off. An uninterrupted process of transition, such as the above, to a new long-period position can be complicated in detail. But the actual course of events is more complicated still. For the state of expectation is liable to constant change, a new expectation being superimposed long before the previous change has fully worked itself out; so that the economic machine is occupied at any given time with a number of overlapping activities, the existence of which is due to various past states of expectation. They keep doing what they did yesterday unless they have a reason to change. Another is the amount you pay to employees and other companies and so on, the factor cost. These two combined are the prime cost. Entrepreneurs can also lose capital due to unavoidable events — a market crash, an earthquake, the passage of time. These are supplementary costs. The total income of the community is just the amount sold minus the user cost. I think I also use this kind of interchangeably with capitalists. Earlier we said people spend the money they get, but not all of it. What changes how much they spend? Not much, Keynes argues. Maybe large changes in interest rates, but those are rare. Obviously a lot more in absolute terms, but far less proportionately. But this means that as national income increases, a smaller proportion of it will get spent, so more of it will have to be invested. And when national income falls, a larger proportion gets spent as people dip into savings and governments go into deficit. This is fortunate, because lower consumption also means lower income when people buy less, businesses make less, so they pay you less. But as our incomes increase, we spend less on things today. Another way to look at it is the more stuff we make for tomorrow, the less stuff we need to make tomorrow. And then what do we do? At some point we just need to consume more stuff. People seem to recognize this when it comes to government making stuff. The more virtuous we are, the more determinedly thrifty, the more obstinately orthodox in our national and personal finance, the more our incomes will have to fall when interest rises relatively to the marginal efficiency of capital. Obstinacy can bring only a penalty and no reward. For the result is inevitable. Thus, after all, the actual rates of aggregate saving and spending do not depend on Precaution, Foresight, Calculation, Improvement, Independence, Enterprise, Pride or Avarice. Virtue and vice play no part. It all depends on how far the rate of interest is favourable to investment, after taking account of the marginal efficiency of capital. No, this is an overstatement. If the rate of interest were so governed as to maintain continuous full employment, Virtue would resume her sway; — the rate of capital accumulation would depend on the weakness of the propensity to consume. Thus, once again, the tribute that classical economists pay to her is due to their concealed assumption that the rate of interest always is so governed. But how much? Even if you hire people for investment, the money those people get paid in turn gets spent on additional consumption, increasing employment indirectly as well. Of course, this is only true until we hit full employment — then prices just inflate. But spending can have negative effects as well. The reader may judge for him or herself whether the novel deserves such emphatic praise. Within the narrative world of the novel, at least, Anne does appear to approach a certain perfection: she is understanding, sensible, cultivated, of a good family, and by the end both wealthy and married happily. Start your review of Essays in Persuasion Write a review Shelves: both , , american-history , complexity , economics , european-history , first-world-war , general-history , essays , great-depression Keynes writings and observations from the end of WWI through the s and early s. His ideas. Reads like political essays on events of the day pertaining to economics. The events of those days were quite important and the magnitude of the upheavals was huge. War and Depression like we haven't seen in a while.
However, it is much easier for students to be distracted by persuasions of the same sex. Example essay Below is an example persuasion essay. Click on the different areas in the shaded boxes to the right to highlight the different structural essays in this essay. This will highlight not simply the paragraphs, but also the persuasion statement and summaryas these repeat the arguments summary in the main body.
His ideas. Reads like political essays on events of the day pertaining to economics. The events of those days were quite important and the magnitude of the upheavals was huge. War and Depression like we haven't seen in a while. Jun 08, Pedro rated it really liked it I read this book because it contains the essay "Economic possibilities for our grandchildren", written in Keynes predicts on that essay that within years time mankind would solve its economic problem thanks to the increases on productivity, and would be able to cover the absolute needs leaving much more time for leisure. The author distinguishes between absolute needs and relative needs. The needs of food, water or shelter, are absolute on the sense that we feel them whatever the I read this book because it contains the essay "Economic possibilities for our grandchildren", written in The needs of food, water or shelter, are absolute on the sense that we feel them whatever the situation of other human beings may be. Other needs satisfy the desire for superiority, and Keynes thinks that those may be insatiable, but he arrives to the conclusion that once the absolute needs are covered, we will prefer to devote our energies to non-economic purposes. This is where his prediction, at least until now, has failed. The consumerist society where we live has convinced us that a second car, a bigger house or a flat TV will give us more satisfaction than more leisure time. It forgets that there is no such thing as liquidity of investment for the community as a whole. The social object of skilled investment should be to defeat the dark forces of time and ignorance which envelop our future. This battle of wits to anticipate the basis of conventional valuation a few months hence, rather than the prospective yield of an investment over a long term of years, does not even require gulls amongst the public to feed the maws of the professional; — it can be played by professionals amongst themselves. Nor is it necessary that anyone should keep his simple faith in the conventional basis of valuation having any genuine long-term validity. For it is, so to speak, a game of Snap, of Old Maid, of Musical Chairs — a pastime in which he is victor who says Snap neither too soon nor too late, who passes the Old Maid to his neighbour before the game is over, who secures a chair for himself when the music stops. These games can be played with zest and enjoyment, though all the players know that it is the Old Maid which is circulating, or that when the music stops some of the players will find themselves unseated. Or, to change the metaphor slightly, professional investment may be likened to those newspaper competitions in which the competitors have to pick out the six prettiest faces from a hundred photographs, the prize being awarded to the competitor whose choice most nearly corresponds to the average preferences of the competitors as a whole; so that each competitor has to pick, not those faces which he himself finds prettiest, but those which he thinks likeliest to catch the fancy of the other competitors, all of whom are looking at the problem from the same point of view. We have reached the third degree where we devote our intelligences to anticipating what average opinion expects the average opinion to be. And there are some, I believe, who practise the fourth, fifth and higher degrees. You might think that this just means someone who actually does sit down and calculate expected yields could make vast profits from all the speculators playing Snap. And even if they were willing to wait, why should they trust you? If he is successful, that will only confirm the general belief in his rashness; and if in the short run he is unsuccessful, which is very likely, he will not receive much mercy. Worldly wisdom teaches that it is better for reputation to fail conventionally than to succeed unconventionally. When the capital development of a country becomes a by-product of the activities of a casino, the job is likely to be ill-done. The measure of success attained by Wall Street, regarded as an institution of which the proper social purpose is to direct new investment into the most profitable channels in terms of future yield, cannot be claimed as one of the outstanding triumphs of laissez-faire capitalism — which is not surprising, if I am right in thinking that the best brains of Wall Street have been in fact directed towards a different object. A hefty tax on each trade might be the best way to discourage speculation and thus improve the functioning of the market. The only solution would be to force everyone to either to buy goods or capital assets with everything they own. If electing FDR gets them depressed, they might pull back their investments and send the economy into a slump. Why is there a liquidity preference? Interest rates never go below zero, after all. If we expect interest rates to go up, we might want to hold on to our cash and use it to buy higher-yield bonds later. And thus, just as capital investment was driven by stock market speculation, interest rates are driven by bond market speculation. Again we have a tradeoff between having a market and thus volatility or no market and thus overcaution. There are other reasons people might want to hold cash. And if the interest rate falls, the economy will grow and people will need more cash for these sorts of transactions. All it can do is change the price of hoarding — the interest rate. Instead, saving lowers demand and thus decreases employment. And since future demand is estimated based on present demand, it tends to decrease investment as well. Thus decreased consumption leads to decreased employment. If interest rates go up, it no longer becomes possible for them to make money, even though the machine remains unchanged. Perhaps the government should start buying and selling long-term bonds to address this. There are all sorts of practical problems with lowering interest below zero, so instead what happens is that, in laissez-faire, employment falls to reach the new low levels. So the government will print money to keep the interest rate at a level corresponding to full employment. But as interest rates get lower, it becomes profitable to invest in building things with smaller and smaller expected yields. If this happens, then it seems likely that within a generation expected return will reach zero [AS:!! It would be the end of the rentier — the rich person who grows richer by using his wealth to exploiting others. Why is money so special? After all, a bond is just a promise to get some money in the future. Why should it be any different from a futures contract on wheat? We could imagine paying the future wheat contracts in terms of wheat, resulting in a wheat interest rate. Which is why the suggestion of making it spoil by printing money with expiration dates, etc. Otherwise, our only relief comes from printing more money. Thus in the absence of money and in the absence — we must, of course, also suppose — of any other commodity with the assumed characteristics of money, the rates of interest would only reach equilibrium when there is full employment. Unemployment develops, that is to say, because people want the moon; — men cannot be employed when the object of desire i. There is no remedy but to persuade the public that green cheese is practically the same thing and to have a green cheese factory i. It is interesting to notice that the characteristic which has been traditionally supposed to render gold especially suitable for use as the standard of value, namely, its inelasticity of supply, turns out to be precisely the characteristic which is at the bottom of the trouble. The classical view is that we are kept poor by our impatience — we insist on spending money now instead of saving it for later, when it will grow into more. Book V: Money-wages and Prices Now that we have the theory, we can return to the point we started with: reducing nominal wages is unhelpful. But the money-wage level as a whole should be maintained as stable as possible, at any rate in the short period. So why should the government promote investment instead of demand? If you give people money to buy more say iPods, then first all the existing iPods get sold. Eventually they begin to run out of iPods and start investing in additional factories to make more. And then those factories hire people to work there, who spend their wages on other things. OK, so you promote investment, but how much investment? Well, until you have full employment obviously. How does money influence demand? Primarily thru the rate of interest, which depends on liquidity preferences, marginal efficiencies, and investment multipliers. But these all depend on other complicating factors. Marginal prime costs and labor costs increase as industry is forced to use more expensive equipment and laborers, resulting in higher prices. Then as some workers receive better wages other workers will demand it and, since business is booming, receive it. Finally, with the additional demand equipment and so on will have to be replaced, raising marginal costs. But this is good, because otherwise wages would fall to zero in any downturn and the entire economy would shut down. It is the return of confidence, to speak in ordinary language, which is so insusceptible to control in an economy of individualistic capitalism. And when everyone follows the stock market, like in the US, this applies to everyone. What about recovery? When recovery picks up, it feeds on itself in the opposite way. Thus the government must step in. Think about the dot-com bubble where everyone was blowing money on useless fiber-optic cable. If venture capitalists are spending all their money on useless cable, the solution is to take their money away. Instead, you can give it to poor people, who will use it to buy useful things like food and clothing. For that may enable the so-called boom to last. The right remedy for the trade cycle is not to be found in abolishing booms and thus keeping us permanently in a semi-slump; but in abolishing slumps and thus keeping us permanently in a quasi-boom. Quite the contrary. It would be absurd to assert of the United States in the existence of over-investment in the strict sense. I must not be taken to deny this, because I assert that a state of full investment in the strict sense has never yet occurred, not even momentarily. The solution, they propose, is redistributing money to the poor to promote jobs. The classical school — including Keynes in earlier years — grew up mocking mercantilism protectionism as incoherent and absurd. But maybe it makes some sense: Growth depends on the inducements to new investment. Investment is either foreign or domestic. Domestic investment is encouraged by the interest rate and foreign investment by the balance of trade. Thus, if you ignore direct investment by the government as people had , these are the two things to be concerned about. Since running a trade deficit with a country means sending them your precious metals instead of your exports. Not all protectionism promotes the balance of trade, of course — mids Britain probably would have done best with complete free trade. But mercantilists saw the key points sooner than most, calling for an increase in money to reduce the interest rate. But the worst part of the international gold system is the way it sets countries against one another. For a country could only keep its citizens employed if it had gold, and the only way to get gold was by taking it from another country and thus throwing them out of work. But the classical school ignored the problem, as a consequence of introducing into their premisses conditions which involved its non-existence; with the result of creating a cleavage between the conclusions of economic theory and those of common sense. Another thing the classical economists long mocked were laws against usury. But I now read these discussions as an honest intellectual effort to keep separate what the classical theory has inextricably confused together, namely, the rate of interest and the marginal efficiency of capital. For it now seems clear that the disquisitions of the schoolmen were directed towards the elucidation of a formula which should allow the schedule of the marginal efficiency of capital to be high, whilst using rule and custom and the moral law to keep down the rate of interest. It is convenient to mention at this point the strange, unduly neglected prophet Silvio Gesell , whose work contains flashes of deep insight and who only just failed to reach down to the essence of the matter. In the post-war years his devotees bombarded me with copies of his works; yet, owing to certain palpable defects in the argument, I entirely failed to discover their merit. As is often the case with imperfectly analysed intuitions, their significance only became apparent after I had reached my own conclusions in my own way. Meanwhile, like other academic economists, I treated his profoundly original strivings as being no better than those of a crank. Since few of the readers of this book are likely to be well acquainted with the significance of Gesell, I will give to him what would be otherwise a disproportionate space. This incredible work of economic thought described the division of labor and the invisible hand in , a full seventy years before Adam Smith. Yet he has scarcely established an equal claim to rank — a private, perhaps, but not a major in the brave army of heretics — with Mandeville, Malthus, Gesell and Hobson, who, following their intuitions, have preferred to see the truth obscurely and imperfectly rather than to maintain error, reached indeed with clearness and consistency and by easy logic, but on hypotheses inappropriate to the facts. We have addressed the first, but what are its implications of the second? Inequality has been addressed somewhat by government redistribution, but some are hesitant to go further because they believe that growth is promoted by savings and so taking away the savings of the rich will retard growth. It is better that a man should tyrannise over his bank balance than over his fellow-citizens; and whilst the former is sometimes denounced as being but a means to the latter, sometimes at least it is an alternative. Let us imagine these policies are implemented. At this point, expected return might be just enough to cover the costs of production, plus a little for risk and skill — just like other goods. Now, though this state of affairs would be quite compatible with some measure of individualism, yet it would mean the euthanasia of the rentier, and, consequently, the euthanasia of the cumulative oppressive power of the capitalist to exploit the scarcity-value of capital. Interest today rewards no genuine sacrifice, any more than does the rent of land. The owner of capital can obtain interest because capital is scarce, just as the owner of land can obtain rent because land is scarce. But whilst there may be intrinsic reasons for the scarcity of land, there are no intrinsic reasons for the scarcity of capital. An intrinsic reason for such scarcity, in the sense of a genuine sacrifice which could only be called forth by the offer of a reward in the shape of interest, would not exist, in the long run, except in the event of the individual propensity to consume proving to be of such a character that net saving in conditions of full employment comes to an end before capital has become sufficiently abundant. But even so, it will still be possible for communal saving through the agency of the State to be maintained at a level which will allow the growth of capital up to the point where it ceases to be scarce. I see, therefore, the rentier aspect of capitalism as a transitional phase which will disappear when it has done its work. And with the disappearance of its rentier aspect much else in it besides will suffer a sea-change. It will be, moreover, a great advantage of the order of events which I am advocating, that the euthanasia of the rentier, of the functionless investor, will be nothing sudden, merely a gradual but prolonged continuance of what we have seen recently in Great Britain, and will need no revolution. Thus we might aim in practice there being nothing in this which is unattainable at an increase in the volume of capital until it ceases to be scarce, so that the functionless investor will no longer receive a bonus; and at a scheme of direct taxation which allows the intelligence and determination and executive skill of the financier, the entrepreneur et hoc genus omen who are certainly so fond of their craft that their labour could be obtained much cheaper than at present , to be harnessed to the service of the community on reasonable terms of reward. At the same time we must recognise that only experience can show how far the common will, embodied in the policy of the State, ought to be directed to increasing and supplementing the inducement to invest; and how far it is safe to stimulate the average propensity to consume, without foregoing our aim of depriving capital of its scarcity-value within one or two generations. It may turn out that the propensity to consume will be so easily strengthened by the effects of a falling rate of interest, that full employment can be reached with a rate of accumulation little greater than at present. In this event a scheme for the higher taxation of large incomes and inheritances might be open to the objection that it would lead to full employment with a rate of accumulation which was reduced considerably below the current level. I must not be supposed to deny the possibility, or even the probability, of this outcome. For in such matters it is rash to predict how the average man will react to a changed environment. If, however, it should prove easy to secure an approximation to full employment with a rate of accumulation not much greater than at present, an outstanding problem will at least have been solved. And it would remain for separate decision on what scale and by what means it is right and reasonable to call on the living generation to restrict their consumption, so as to establish in course of time, a state of full investment for their successors. Now the State will still have to guide things; it seems unlikely that just controlling interest rates will be enough to ensure this utopian state of affairs. It is not the ownership of the instruments of production which it is important for the State to assume. If the State is able to determine the aggregate amount of resources devoted to augmenting the instruments and the basic rate of reward to those who own them, it will have accomplished all that is necessary.
Title: Consider whether human activity has made the world a better place.