It's Saturday afternoon....

Lakelady_2

WFT? wrote: »

As subsistence is, in the nature of things, prior to conveniency and luxury, so the industry which procures the former must necessarily be prior to that which ministers to the latter. The cultivation and improvement of the country, therefore, which affords subsistence, must, necessarily, be prior to the increase of the town, which furnishes only the means of conveniency and luxury. It is the surplus produce of the country only, or what is over and above the maintenance of the cultivators, that constitutes the subsistence of the town, which can therefore increase only with the increase of this surplus produce. The town, indeed, may not always derive its whole subsistence from the country in its neighbourhood, or even from the territory to which it belongs, but from very distant countries; and this, though it forms no exception from the general rule, has occasioned considerable variations in the progress of opulence in different ages and nations.

If I could understand what you`re saying - I`d probably agree.

I went to a jumble sale and spent £1.70 - that included two drinks - two biccies and two cakes. Did I do my bit?

Livingthedream

WFT? wrote: »

The trades, it is to be observed, which are carried on by means of bounties, are the only ones which can be carried on between two nations for any considerable time together, in such a manner as that one of them shall always and regularly lose, or sell its goods for less than it really costs to send them to market. But if the bounty did not repay to the merchant what he would otherwise lose upon the price of his goods, his own interest would soon oblige him to employ his stock in another way, or to find out a trade in which the price of the goods would replace to him, with the ordinary profit, the capital employment in sending them to market. The effect of bounties, like that of all the other expedients of the mercantile system, can only be to force the trade of a country into a channel much less advantageous than that in which it would naturally run of its own accord.
The ingenious and well-informed author of the tracts upon the corn trade has shown very clearly that, since the bounty upon the exportation of corn was first established, the price of the corn exported, valued moderately enough, has exceeded that of the corn imported, valued very high, by a much greater sum than the amount of the whole bounties which have been paid during that period. This, he imagines, upon the true principles of the mercantile system, is a clear proof that this forced corn trade is beneficial to the nation; the value of the exportation exceeding that of the importation by a much greater sum than the whole extraordinary expense which the public has been at in order to get it exported. He does not consider that this extraordinary expense, or the bounty, is the smallest part of the expense which the exportation of corn really costs the society. The capital which the farmer employed in raising it must likewise be taken into the account. Unless the price of the corn when sold in the foreign markets replaces, not only the bounty, but this capital, together with the ordinary profits of stock, the society is a loser by the difference, or the national stock is so much diminished. But the very reason for which it has been thought necessary to grant a bounty is the supposed insufficiency of the price to do this.
The average price of corn, it has been said, has fallen considerably since the establishment of the bounty. That the average price of corn began to fall somewhat towards the end of the last century, and has continued to do so during the course of the sixty-four first years of the present, I have already endeavoured to show. But this event, supposing it to be as real as I believe it to be, must have happened in spite of the bounty, and cannot possibly have happened in consequence of it. It has happened in France,

Sorry Pal but you lost me?

mewbie_2

Livingthedream wrote: »

Sorry Pal but you lost me?

WFT? is a thread spoiler. Nothing to offer but a bit of cut and paste from whereever. Thinks it's a clever idea no doubt and is feeling pleased with him/her self. What sort of person can't even troll properly I wonder?

sammyjammy

mewbie wrote: »

WFT? is a thread spoiler. Nothing to offer but a bit of cut and paste from whereever. Thinks it's a clever idea no doubt and is feeling pleased with him/her self. What sort of person can't even troll properly I wonder?

I wouldn't mind but its pointless, I didn't even read his/her thread, life is too short

mewbie_2

WFT? wrote: »

you are following me around the forum...

I am actually trying to avoid you, but you've 'been' everywhere!

Oblivion

gallygirl wrote: »

HAPPY BIRTHDAY DAVE :beer:

Cheers and wishes for a happy life ... raising my glass to you :beer:

Dave.

PasturesNew

FungusFighter wrote: »

...and its your patriotic duty to get out there and shop to prop up the economy :rotfl:

Get off this forum and get shopping, their doing it in America:D

pfft... I've been working... 10 hours today, looks like I've earnt the sum of £10.
Go me.

I'll give those foreigners a run for their "cheap labour"!



Gonna spend it all now though. Takeaway... £4.65

jackomdj

We bought a new TV last week as ours went kaput....also been & bought rabbit bedding from pet shop & hats to decorate from craft shop.... oh & we bought a lottery ticket this morning.

HTH - the whold economy!
Nicky

Oblivion

Pobby wrote: »

Cograts, just over 3 weeks younger than me!

Story of my life ... always someone ahead of me :rotfl:

Thanks very much Pobby and a belated Happy Birthday to you too. I hope we grow old disgracefully

Dave.

Oblivion

WFT? wrote: »

this is ABUSE!!!!! ABUSE!! ABUSE!!!!!!

This is your lucky week. Due to the downturn in the economy we can exclusively offer you ABUSE at a discount. Please apply now to take advantage of our unrepeatable offers ... slight abuse - 10% off ... medium abuse 15% off ... and lifetime abuse 25% off. Born W*nkers need not apply.