that the plan does not make any correction until an actual deviation has occurred, and so the remedy always lags behind the disease. This is true. The corrections do follow the deviations and so the correction can seldom be absolutely perfect. The practical point, however, as cannot be too often emphasized, is that it is approximately perfect and far nearer perfect than our present system. When steering an automobile, the chauffeur can only correct the deviation from its intended course after the deviation has occurred; yet, by making these corrections sufficiently frequent, he can keep his course so steady that the aberrations are scarcely perceptible. There is no reason why the monetary automobile cannot be driven very nearly straight.
It is also pointed out that, after the correction is applied, it may happen that prices will take an opposite turn, in which case the remedy actually aggravates, for an instant, the disease. But, taking the extremely fitful course of prices since 1900, and correcting it, according to the plan, every two months[1], we find that this does not often happen and never for long. Even in the few remaining cases the deflections caused were very slight and were soon corrected immediately after the following adjustments.
G. Conclusion on " Alleged Defects." It will be seen that the objections which have been mentioned in this section are all on the ground of inadequacy. They are partly answered directly and all are answered by the argument that, however inadequate the proposal may be, our present standard is even more so. Nothing practical is ever perfect and the imperfection of a plan does not condemn it if it is better than the plan which it replaces and if no plan still better is available.
If those who object to stabilization as proposed, because it is not perfect, are sincere, they should either supply a criterion of the imperfection they emphasize in the form of a better index number, or—if the plan
- ↑ As shown in Appendix I, § 9.
