Moreover, unproductive consumption embraces not only every economic loss, every outlay for injurious purposes,[212-1] but also every superfluous outlay for useful purposes.[212-2] Yet, not to err in our classification here, it is necessary to possess the impartiality and many-sidedness of the historian, which enable one to put himself in the place of others and feel after them as they felt. The man, for instance, who, in cities like Regensburg and especially Rome, sees numberless churches often, so to speak, elbowing one another, cannot fail to recognize the difference between the buildings of to-day for business, political, educational and recreative purposes, and the medieval, for the satisfaction of spiritual wants. The latter also may, in their own sphere, and in their own time, have, as a rule, operated productively, as the former operate, often enough, by way of exception unproductively; as in the case of railway and canal speculations which have ended in failure. It would be difficult to decide between the relative value of the two kinds of wants, because the parties to the controversy do not, for the most part, share the want (_Bedürfniss_) of their respective opponents, frequently do not even understand it, and therefore despise it. Thus, there are semi-barbarous nations, who can entertain that respect for the laws which is necessary even from an economic point of view only to the extent that they see the person whose duty it is to cause them to be observed seated on a throne and surrounded by impressive splendor. Hence, such splendor here could not be considered merely unproductive consumption.[212-3] We must, moreover, remark in this place as we did above, § 54, that it is easiest to pass the boundary line between productive and unproductive consumption in personal services. In 1830, the expenses of the state, in Spain, amounted to 897,000,000 of reals per annum; the outlay of municipal corporations, to 410,000,000, and that for external purposes of religion, 1,680,000,000. (_Borrego._) This is certainly no salutary proportion; but it is scarcely evidence of a worse economic condition than the fact that in Prussia it would require a basin one Prussian mile in length, thirty-three and eight-tenths feet broad, and ten feet deep to hold all the brandy drunk in the country (_Dieterici_); or this other, that the British people spend yearly £68,000,000 sterling for taxes and £100,000,000 yearly for spirituous liquors.[212-4] Berkeley rightly says that the course practiced in Ireland, with its famishing proletarian population, of exporting the means of subsistence and exchanging them against delicate wines, etc., is as if a mother should sell her children's bread to buy dainties and finery for herself with the proceeds.[212-5] [212-6] [Footnote 212-1: Thus, for instance, food which spoils unused, and food which is stolen and which puts a thief in a condition to preserve his strength to steal still more.]