RE: if money grew on trees, or in the ground

["Canova, Timothy" <CANOVA@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

>From the General Theory:

"'To dig holes in the ground,' paid for out of savings, will increase, not
only employment, but the real national dividend of useful goods and
services.  It is not reasonable, however, that a sensible community should
be content to remain dependent on such fortuitous and often wasteful
mitigations when once we understand the influences upon which effective
demand depends."  (page 220)

"If the Treasury were to fill old bottles with banknotes, bury them at
suitable depths in disused coal-mines which are then filled up to the
surface with town rubbish, and leave it to private enterprise on well-tried
principles of laissez-faire to dig the notes up again (the right to do so
being obtained, of course, by tendering for leases of the note-bearing
territory), there need be no more unemployment and, with the help of the
repercussions, the real income of the community, and its capital wealth
also, would probably become a good deal greater than it actually is.  It
would, indeed, be more sensible to build houses and the like; but if there
are political and practical difficulties in the way of this, the above would
be better than nothing."  (page 129)



-----Original Message-----
From: Paul Davidson [mailto:pdavidson@xxxxxxx]
Sent: Wednesday, March 07, 2001 2:37 PM
To: Lissette Wendy Moreno Villanueva
Cc: pkt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re:


At 10:58 PM 3/6/01 +0000, you wrote:
>Money does not grow on trees, but it does as if...
>when someone decides to save some money at banks for example, can get x%
>of financial interest without moving a hand.

NO -- you misunderstand  -- if money did grow on trees then there would be
a need to hire labor to harvest the money trees (just as farm  workers pick
oranges in California ) and any increase in the  demand for money to hold
as a store of value would create a demand for more farm workers to plant
and harvest more money trees.

Paul