12 HOW TO PAY FOR THE WAR

comprehensive than the plan for deferment of in-come which I proposed in the columns of The Timeslast November. Nevertheless this original proposalis the lynchpin of the whole construction, failingwhich the rest would be impracticable. Withoutthis proposal the cost of family allowances wouldaggravate the problem of consumption by increas-ing it in one direction without diminishing it inanother; and would merely make the progressof inflation more inevitable. The same is true ofan iron ration at a low price. Unless we have firstof all withdrawn the excess of purchasing powerfrom the market, the cost of subsidising con-sumption will lead the Treasury deeper into thefinancial bog. But if a deferment of earnings isagreed, the whole construction stands solid.

A general plan like this, to which all are requiredto conform, is like a rule of the road—everyonegains and no one can lose. To regard such a ruleas an infringement of liberty is somewhat silly.If the rule of the road is imposed, people willtravel as much as before. Under this plan peoplewill consume as much as before. The rule of theroad allows people as much choice, as they wouldhave without it, along which roads to travel.This plan would allow people as much choice asbefore what goods they consume.

A comparison with the rule of the road is avery fair comparison. For the plan is intended toprevent people from getting in one another's wayin spending their money.