Tue Ecowoseics or Rearstantenr—By_ Paul Binzig. Kegan & Paul, 6/-.
The "Blurb" on the dust-cover of this book asks whether it is wise to spend money on armaments or te economize in this type of budget expenditure. On the other flap it giver The author's conclusion that rearmament is, from an economic point of view, a lesser evil than continued unemployment, and that the remedy economic planning.
Economies is a dangerous subject at the best of time. Theories, unless the theorist is also a seer with know-edge of the future, must always presuppose "other things being equal." fend, to satisfy this, economic laws would have to work in vacuo. Therefore, to reach the admirable and, to the logical mind, obvious conclusion, that the world must use its wits to! save itself, must plan and: provide for the future instead of living from hand to mouth in a welter of wars, depressions and calamities, a great! number of pitfalls for the unwary must. be circumvented by the economist.
This is done most skilfully by Me Binzig.
To start with he admits that the problem of armament or disarmament Jo not now, and in a capitalist system. can never primarily be, an economic tone. Governments, ne says, may cumiplain that they have no money to clear the slums and save human lives. They never seem to have any difficulty, however, in nding money with the help of the conveniently Tesusitated spectre of national danger, for the purchase of destructive weapons of war and to use them to destroy human lives. If economic Pressure ruled governments, this would not be s0,.for, as is well known, unorthodox methods of rats-ing money for defence are accepted by those who have a say in the matter, but orthodoxy must be maintained when it is a question of the health and future of the race.
The author then goes on to show how at a time of depression any form of industrial demand is better than none. Therefore expenditure on Fearmament, whatever the political and ethical aspects of the case, may be valuable. Tt can never be as pro= Stable, however, as constructive expenditure would be, could governments persuade the' tax payers 10 fallow such a thing. So, when, after jthe depression, a boom' comes, it ts Impossible for Goveraments, in the! face of highly armed neighbours, to clit down expenditure on armaments which are ostensibly the means of protecting the profits of the boom. Tt is also logical to spend less protection in a boom than in a pression, and so the tax payers raise complaint. Thus armament penditure becomes a permanent, unconomie, maybe increasing expend!- ture, whereas had the same sums been spent by the Government on slums and hospitals and roads and bridges at the time of the depression, they would have had the same im: mediate beneficial effect on employment; then, when trade improved, the Government could continue discontinue this expenditure at will and without reference to what other countries were spending This argument leaves out of uctual question of security and protec-lon, but as this book expressly avoids it together with the general political problem and deals only with the economic aspects of rearmament we may do the same.
For more detailed examination of this fascinating problem the reader must turn to the book itself and he will find it, he can be assured, 2 well-balanced, well reasoned and concise essay, and the more valu~ able as being from the pen of
Text read from the printed page and cleaned; old type leaves the occasional error.