Thomas Robert Malthus
Early life: My name is Thomas Robert Malthus; I prefer the name Robert. I am an expert in the fields of political economy and demography. I was born on 29 December 1766, in Surrey, England. Growing up in a country house in Westcott, as the sixth kid out of seven was not easy. I received home schooling when I was young and then transferred to Warrington Academy from 1782. I worked hard to go to one of the most prestigious college in the world. I graduated as an honor student from Jesus College, Cambridge. I took down prices in English declamation, latin and Greek too.
Later on I went on and became and ordained Anglican Priest and taught political economy at East India Company College. My students always called me ‘Pop’, which is an allusion to my theories about population.
Influences: The two economists that influenced me were David Ricardo, Jean Charles Leonard de Sismondi, Adam Smith, William Godwin, David Hume, Jean-Jacques Rousseau.
My theories are as the follows:
My most important economic theory was the growth of population would outrun the food supply and population growth must be controlled to avoid famines. The reasons are as the follows:
The overproduction of young- Young people are the most expensive investment in life. There is no guarantee for an improvement in standards of living even if the government provided them education. Reasons such as ‘brain drain’. Our dearest kingdom is constantly losing talents to overseas, what a waste of our valuable resources!
The irresponsibility of the lower classes- this continued the argument of having overproduction of young. Lower classes tend to overproduce youths that they couldn’t afford. They are not being responsible for keeping control of their births and expect the government to give them money and rely on it.
The inability of resources to keep up with the rising population-Mathematically, the human population rises geometrically (eg, 1,2,4,8,16…), and the food supply increases arithmetically (eg.1,2,3,4,5,6,7). Unless family size was regulated, man’s misery of famine would become globally epidemic and eventually consume man.
Iron law of wages- I defined subsistence wage as a wage at which the working population does not change. If the wage exceeds the subsistence wage, population would grow rapidly owing to the worker’s lack of moral restraint. This will increase in population tend to reduced wages. On the other hand, if wage falls below subsistence wage, famines would occur. Fall in population would tend to increase wages. Therefore, as a result, wages in the long run would be equal to subsistence wage. However, this does not happen in real life, due to lack of moral restraint, that’s why our population is rising without control.
Major publications:
The present high price of provisions-The ultimate reason for the outcome of poverty and famine were God’s way of preventing mankind from being lazy! They were the natural consequences of over population growth. Glory to be god!
Beside god’s work of art, government should also contribute an effort not to make mankind a lazy bunch of creatures! Recent laws just passed which provided a system of welfare that provided an increased amount of money, which will depend on the numbers of children in a family. This is ridiculous! What is the government trying to do? This only encouraged poor to give birth to more children, as they would have no fear that their increased numbers of offspring would starve to death.
Due to the fact that the poor get more money that encouraged them to have more offspring that they could barely afford, their offspring would just be as poor as them! This would cause an increase numbers of poor workers that would reduce labor costs and ultimately make themselves poorer then they are now. Therefore, if this phenomenon continues, poverty is inevitable and will be a permanent situation as population is rising exponentially for a long period of time.
It is time for the government to realize that giving money to the poor is not going to reduce the gap between rich and poor. Prices would simply rise and the value of money would change. The poor law is not a solution to solve our economic problems. If you are interested in how the high prices sterms from Poor laws, read my publication, ‘ The present high price of provisions’.
Principle of Population -With these problems lying around, why are mankind still able to survive on earth with inability of resources to keep up with rising population?
There are two ultimate reasons that hold population within resource limits, at the moment. Positive checks and preventative checks. Positive checks includes hunger, disease and war, preventive consists of abortion, birth control, prostitution, postponement of marriage, etc. However, my point being to introduce you to these ideas is that if our human society is depended on these human misery to limit population, then sources of misery such as hunger, disease and war would eventually afflict society, as it would ransack economic stability.
Principle of Political economy -To solve our population from suffering in this misery, I propose the solution to the upcoming economic crisis that I foresee In the future. I like to these problems by the name ‘gluts’.
Gluts originated from a decline in profits due to insufficient demand in the market. In reverse, insufficient demand is caused by inequality of distribution of income. The only way to twist this situation around is to increase government spending an redistribute income to the rentier.
Capitalists will be able to produce as much as they want, so that will increase supply, and at the same time, Landlords will consume as much as they want, which will potentially increase demand.
Influence on the field of economics: I was the best known for my theory of population. My assertion that a population cannot grow more than its food supply had a profound impact on economic though and development of other disciplines. My essays were believed to be substantial in my time at least, on subsequent economic thought.
Well, there are some more obvious and immediate influence. My essay on population caused an immediate change to the decision to conduct the first modern British Census in 1801.
I used an entire chapter to bash Britain’s poor laws and it did influenced Britain’s Prime Minister pitt the Younger and the poor Law Amendment Act of 1834. By 1840, the only way for the poor to receive assitence was to enter a Poor House.
My Corn Laws controversy- tarrifs were placed on imported grains and growing population placed pressure to import gain.
In conclusion, I believe that my theories had substantial impact on the developing field of economics. My ideas on population were to be believed to be revolutionary and directly influenced the work of my contemporary David Richard and Alfred Marshall.
Later on I went on and became and ordained Anglican Priest and taught political economy at East India Company College. My students always called me ‘Pop’, which is an allusion to my theories about population.
Influences: The two economists that influenced me were David Ricardo, Jean Charles Leonard de Sismondi, Adam Smith, William Godwin, David Hume, Jean-Jacques Rousseau.
My theories are as the follows:
My most important economic theory was the growth of population would outrun the food supply and population growth must be controlled to avoid famines. The reasons are as the follows:
The overproduction of young- Young people are the most expensive investment in life. There is no guarantee for an improvement in standards of living even if the government provided them education. Reasons such as ‘brain drain’. Our dearest kingdom is constantly losing talents to overseas, what a waste of our valuable resources!
The irresponsibility of the lower classes- this continued the argument of having overproduction of young. Lower classes tend to overproduce youths that they couldn’t afford. They are not being responsible for keeping control of their births and expect the government to give them money and rely on it.
The inability of resources to keep up with the rising population-Mathematically, the human population rises geometrically (eg, 1,2,4,8,16…), and the food supply increases arithmetically (eg.1,2,3,4,5,6,7). Unless family size was regulated, man’s misery of famine would become globally epidemic and eventually consume man.
Iron law of wages- I defined subsistence wage as a wage at which the working population does not change. If the wage exceeds the subsistence wage, population would grow rapidly owing to the worker’s lack of moral restraint. This will increase in population tend to reduced wages. On the other hand, if wage falls below subsistence wage, famines would occur. Fall in population would tend to increase wages. Therefore, as a result, wages in the long run would be equal to subsistence wage. However, this does not happen in real life, due to lack of moral restraint, that’s why our population is rising without control.
Major publications:
The present high price of provisions-The ultimate reason for the outcome of poverty and famine were God’s way of preventing mankind from being lazy! They were the natural consequences of over population growth. Glory to be god!
Beside god’s work of art, government should also contribute an effort not to make mankind a lazy bunch of creatures! Recent laws just passed which provided a system of welfare that provided an increased amount of money, which will depend on the numbers of children in a family. This is ridiculous! What is the government trying to do? This only encouraged poor to give birth to more children, as they would have no fear that their increased numbers of offspring would starve to death.
Due to the fact that the poor get more money that encouraged them to have more offspring that they could barely afford, their offspring would just be as poor as them! This would cause an increase numbers of poor workers that would reduce labor costs and ultimately make themselves poorer then they are now. Therefore, if this phenomenon continues, poverty is inevitable and will be a permanent situation as population is rising exponentially for a long period of time.
It is time for the government to realize that giving money to the poor is not going to reduce the gap between rich and poor. Prices would simply rise and the value of money would change. The poor law is not a solution to solve our economic problems. If you are interested in how the high prices sterms from Poor laws, read my publication, ‘ The present high price of provisions’.
Principle of Population -With these problems lying around, why are mankind still able to survive on earth with inability of resources to keep up with rising population?
There are two ultimate reasons that hold population within resource limits, at the moment. Positive checks and preventative checks. Positive checks includes hunger, disease and war, preventive consists of abortion, birth control, prostitution, postponement of marriage, etc. However, my point being to introduce you to these ideas is that if our human society is depended on these human misery to limit population, then sources of misery such as hunger, disease and war would eventually afflict society, as it would ransack economic stability.
Principle of Political economy -To solve our population from suffering in this misery, I propose the solution to the upcoming economic crisis that I foresee In the future. I like to these problems by the name ‘gluts’.
Gluts originated from a decline in profits due to insufficient demand in the market. In reverse, insufficient demand is caused by inequality of distribution of income. The only way to twist this situation around is to increase government spending an redistribute income to the rentier.
Capitalists will be able to produce as much as they want, so that will increase supply, and at the same time, Landlords will consume as much as they want, which will potentially increase demand.
Influence on the field of economics: I was the best known for my theory of population. My assertion that a population cannot grow more than its food supply had a profound impact on economic though and development of other disciplines. My essays were believed to be substantial in my time at least, on subsequent economic thought.
Well, there are some more obvious and immediate influence. My essay on population caused an immediate change to the decision to conduct the first modern British Census in 1801.
I used an entire chapter to bash Britain’s poor laws and it did influenced Britain’s Prime Minister pitt the Younger and the poor Law Amendment Act of 1834. By 1840, the only way for the poor to receive assitence was to enter a Poor House.
My Corn Laws controversy- tarrifs were placed on imported grains and growing population placed pressure to import gain.
In conclusion, I believe that my theories had substantial impact on the developing field of economics. My ideas on population were to be believed to be revolutionary and directly influenced the work of my contemporary David Richard and Alfred Marshall.
Dear Mr. Malthus,
Has not your idea of population out pacing food production been proved wrong? Why, even in my lifetime the planet's population has expanded from just over 2 to more than 7 billion people and growing! I think history would indicate that you need some revision.
-Paul Collier
Dear Mr. Collier,
Although my theory of population have been proven wrong for the last two centuries, my mathematical interpretation of the theory is correct..although my theory of population is flawed and proven wrong. It did make sense at the time being when we are still alive and it caused a revolutionary thinking in demographics. Also, part of my theory of population came true where I predict the more population increase, the more diseases and famine and the food supply did decrease and that is why millions of people ARE starving. This proves gradual insubstantial of food supply to the growing population in the modern world. I am very sure your theories are flawed too, you just didn't realized it until you are dead.
-Thomas Malthus
Has not your idea of population out pacing food production been proved wrong? Why, even in my lifetime the planet's population has expanded from just over 2 to more than 7 billion people and growing! I think history would indicate that you need some revision.
-Paul Collier
Dear Mr. Collier,
Although my theory of population have been proven wrong for the last two centuries, my mathematical interpretation of the theory is correct..although my theory of population is flawed and proven wrong. It did make sense at the time being when we are still alive and it caused a revolutionary thinking in demographics. Also, part of my theory of population came true where I predict the more population increase, the more diseases and famine and the food supply did decrease and that is why millions of people ARE starving. This proves gradual insubstantial of food supply to the growing population in the modern world. I am very sure your theories are flawed too, you just didn't realized it until you are dead.
-Thomas Malthus