As we have seen, one of the chief purposes of Plato in his limitation of commerce was to eliminate graft from the government. Though his remedy was not acceptable, yet his remarkable appreciation of a very grave problem that still faces us should be recognized. Furthermore, no better solution for it has ever been offered than the separation of politics from big business. This was the underlying principle of his suggestion, and it is in accord with the trend of modern statesmanship. Another impelling motive of Plato in his stringent legislation was to render impossible the development of extremes of wealth or poverty in the state. Again, we should credit him with having clearly appreciated the problem, though we may criticize his attempted solution. The great commercial prosperity of today has made the situation vastly more acute, and still economics has no satisfactory solution to offer. After all, in the light of modern tendencies toward the regulation of industry and commerce, some of Plato’s ideas do not seem so “grandfatherly,” but rather prophetic, and in accord with sound economy. His legislation against the sale of adulterated products,[242] and in favor of publicity in business,[243] and state supervision of prices[244] has a startlingly modern ring. POPULATION The problem of population and food supply, which disturbed Malthus and some of the other English economists, was also a cause of concern to Greek thinkers. This might well be expected, since it is a recognized fact that the source of the grain supply was always a matter of grave concern to Athens and many other Greek cities.[245] Plato states the problem clearly and hints at a solution, when he says that the natural increase of population in his state shall not exceed the economic basis for it.[246] In the _Laws_, he suggests specific means for preserving the proper number by restraining over-productive people, and by encouraging the opposite.[247] If such general provisions should not prove sufficient, he would then resort to colonization.[248] On the other hand, should population be greatly depleted by war or disease, he would even open the doors of citizenship to the undesirable classes.[249] His interest in the problem of population, however, is primarily moral and social rather than economic. Moreover, in antithesis to Malthus, he limits his consideration to a very small, artificially constructed state. With the narrow political vision of a Greek, he thinks that the production of a _multitude_ of “happy-hearted” men in a state is impossible.[250] DISTRIBUTION