From ‘Thrift and the War Loan’, The Spectator, 3 July 1915:
There can be little doubt that tens of thousands of people who would never think about the War Loan merely as an investment can readily be persuaded to put their money into it on the ground that it is a patriotic duty so to do. But if every- body is to subscribe, everybody must save money, and part of the object of the campaign which Mr. Asquith and Mr. Bonar Law have inaugurated is the advocacy of thrift. This advocacy must of necessity be directed to all classes in the community. To single out any particular class and urge upon it alone the duty of thrift would be nothing less than an insult. The duty is incumbent upon all citizens, and the only pity is that it was not urged upon the nation at an earlier date. Those people—there are probably not many of them—who have faith in the wisdom of Governments must have had that faith sorely tried by the spectacle of the varying policy of the Government of the United Kingdom on this crucial question of thrift since the war began. Any student of economics could have told the Cabinet in August last that, though the outbreak of war might bring a temporary dislocation of the labour market, its main effect would be to increase the demand for labour, and that increased demand would continue as long as the expenses of the war were being borne out of the capital of the country. It was also fairly obvious, even at the beginning of the war, that the time would speedily come when the enlistment of a large number of men in the Army would create a real dearth of efficient labour for carrying on the necessary industries of the country and for supplying our troops in the field with munitions of war. Further, it was obvious that, in order to raise the money to pay for the war, ordinary expenditure must be cut down. Yet the Government of the United Kingdom, instead of acting upon these considerations and making provision at the earliest possible moment for the reduction of expenditure, were so obsessed by the immediate and necessarily temporary dislocation of labour that theyactually appealed to the local authorities to extend their activities, and made no appeal to private persons to reduce expendi- ture. Simultaneously the Press, which is no wiser than the Ministry which it so profusely criticizes, urged the public to carry on business and pleasure as usual. And that is what we have to pay for now.
Comments