294 MONEY OR GOODS?

economists who would give an exactly—or even
nearly—similar list of them. Mr Kitson glances
*' at a few elementary truths." " Wealth/' he says,
"is the product of two prime factors, man and
Nature, generally termed labour and land. With an
unlimited, or practically unlimited, supply of these
two factors, how is it that wealth is and has been
hitherto so comparatively scarce ? " But is the
supply of " man " unlimited in the sense of man
able, willing, and properly trained to work ? And
is the supply of " Nature " unlimited in the sense
of land, mines, and factories fully equipped with the
right machinery and served and supplied by adequate
means of transport ? Surely the failure in production
on which Mr Kitson so rightly lays stress is due, at
least partly, to lack of good workers, good organisers,
good machinery, and good transport facilities.
Workers who restrict output, employers who despise
science and cling to antiquated methods, the op-
position of both classes to new and efficient equip-
ment, and large tracts, even of our own land, still
without reasonable transport facilities, have some-
thing to do with it. And lack of capital—this
answer to the question Mr Kitson flouts because,
he says, "since capital is wealth/' to say that
" wealth is scarce because capital is scarce is the
same as saying that wealth is scarce because it is
scarce/' But is it not a u fundamental truth of
economic science" that capital is wealth applied
to production ? Wealth and capital are by no
means identical. When a well-known shipbuilding
magnate laid waste several Surrey farms to make