PllNOIPLE$ FINANCE 968 supposing the eduction not of the most efficient kind-- we should probably ?ud that thirty years later the increase of taxable cap?city which could be imputed (were .it possible to trace it separately) to this expenditure on education would be equal to the whole three years' expenditure. This means a return, after '1on8 delay, of 800 per cent per annum, if we regard expenditure on education as capital outlay. The results suggested by these examples I think, exaggerated if we assume that the different measures are moderately well co-ordinated. Why then, it may be asked,, is not every people of the earth pro?essing in wealth and taxable capacity at a speed which would make us all immeasurably better off within a single generation ? Progress is, indeed, very
rapid in some countries, but in none so great as the f?ures I have given would reason is two-fold--partly enormous possibilities of such wastefulness due to efforts, and partly are not,' unco-ordinated due to the has to be invested and a burden of expense incurred whilst waiting for the return. loans the burden of the cost By means of publi? of any great work is spread over its anticipa?d life, but the annual charge for in?erest and sinking fund is itself a burden which has to be met for many years by means of taxation, though each year the burden becomes smaller, because the balance not realized by direct or indirect revenue decreases. Every scheme for a new public work, or for any reform of an educational or social kind, will mean putting a burden on the tax-payers in advance of the benefit which will lair accrue in ? the form of increased taxable capacity. It is evident, therefore, that the number of such new schemes which can be taken up at any one time is limited by the existin4? ill-conceived that capital suggest is possible. The due tn ignorance of the outlay, together with and fact
