论平均主义体系
- 语言:
- 英语
- 状态:
- 完整作品
- 作者归属:
- 作者本人所著
- 文本状况:
- 未检测到扫描噪点 (对全文的自动评估,未经人工核对)
- 篇幅:
- 约 7,160 词 · 34 个段落
引用本作品
- APA杰里米·边沁. (n.d.). Of the Levelling System [论平均主义体系]. Digital reproduction: SigPhi. https://sigphiai.com/zh/works/jeremy-bentham/of-the-levelling-system
- MLA杰里米·边沁. Of the Levelling System [论平均主义体系]. Digital reproduction, SigPhi, https://sigphiai.com/zh/works/jeremy-bentham/of-the-levelling-system.
- Chicago杰里米·边沁. Of the Levelling System [论平均主义体系]. Digital reproduction, SigPhi. https://sigphiai.com/zh/works/jeremy-bentham/of-the-levelling-system.
本条目引用所收录的版本。SigPhi 是数字复制平台。已知的年份、出版者和译者均列出;“n.d.”表示年份未知。
内容简介
《论均平制度》:论财产的拉平。
背景与流传
边沁追问重新分配财富是否会增加总的幸福。答案有两半,而人们通常只引一半:会,因为同样一笔钱对拥有得较少的人价值更大;但如果这会摧毁财产的安全感就不会,而他把财产的安全视为其余一切的前提。
这是编辑性背景,不是可引用的来源:与作品本身的段落不同,这些说明无法在语料库中核对。
many thousands of pounds to lend, so many thousands more than they have need to employ otherwise. Upon the equalisation scheme, all these monied men would be no more: nobody would have any thing he could spare for any length of time, much less for ever; no man would have any thing but from hand to mouth. As to the gainers — (I speak always of the immediate and momentary gainers, for ultimately, as we shall see, there would scarcely be a real gainer left in the nation) — as to the real gainers, if they were to be looked for any where, it would be in the class of the present day-labourers in husbandry. Their employment need not be changed; they would continue labourers in husbandry, with this comfortable difference, as it would be thought, of labouring upon, and for the benefit of their own property, instead of other people's. But even these would for the most part gain nothing but ruin by the change. Their fragments of farms having no buildings on them, would be useless to them till buildings could be erected. A man might farm profitably, and live comfortably a year or two hence, if he were then alive: but in the meantime he would not be able to farm or live at all. The immense multitude of new created farms, all of them without buildings, would require an immense and instant multiplication of the number of workmen concerned in building. But this number, instead of being multiplied, or so much as increased, would be as immediately and permanently reduced: for they too would have their portions, as well as the labourers in husbandry: if they laboured any longer, it would be upon their own property, not upon other people’s. If they laboured at all, what inducement would they have to labour upon other peoples property, or indeed for other people? What would they get by it? an