[57] Though I have aimed at excluding from this volume all controversial matter, I may here hazard the opinion that the Socialistic principle is most properly applied to providing the labourers, not with things that they would buy if they were able to do so, but things that naturally they would not buy. Things procurable by money may be divided into three classes—things that are necessary, things that are superfluous, and things that are beneficial. Clothing is an example of the first class, finery of the second, and education of the third. If a man receives food from the State, otherwise than as a reward for a given amount of labour, his motive to labour will be lessened. If a factory girl, irrespective of her industry, was supplied by the State with fashionable hats and jackets, her motive to labour would be lessened also; for clothing and finery are amongst the special objects to procure which labour is undertaken. But desire to be able to pay for education does not constitute, for most men and women, a strong motive to labour; and therefore education may be supplied by the State, without the efficacy of their labour being interfered with. [58] In our imaginary community we have at first eight labourers, who produce _fifty pounds_ a year a-piece = _four hundred pounds_. Then we have eight labourers + one able man, who produce _four hundred pounds_ a year for each labourer = _three thousand two hundred pounds_. Of this the able man takes _two thousand eight hundred pounds_. Now, suppose the labourers strike for double wages, and succeed in getting them, their total wages are _eight hundred pounds_ a year instead of _four hundred pounds_; and the employer’s income is _two thousand four hundred pounds_ instead of _two thousand eight hundred pounds_. The labourers gain a hundred per cent; the employer loses little more than fourteen per cent. The labourers therefore have a stronger motive in demanding than the employer has in resisting. But let us suppose that, the total income of the community remaining unchanged, the labourers have succeeded in obtaining _one thousand eight hundred pounds_, thus leaving the employer _one thousand four hundred pounds_. The situation will now be changed. The labourers could not possibly now gain an increase of a hundred per cent, for the entire income available would not supply this; but let us suppose they strike for an increase of _two hundred pounds_. If they gained that, their income would be _two thousand pounds_, and that of the employer _one thousand two hundred pounds_; but the former situation would be reversed. The employer now would lose more than the labourer would gain. The labourers would gain, in round numbers, only eleven per cent; and the employer would lose fourteen per cent. Therefore the employer would have a stronger motive in resisting than the labourers in demanding.