[281] This is probably more extensive in London than in the United States.
[282] Loc. cit., p. 47.
[283] Loc. cit., pp. 130-131. The very title, "growth of business," suggests the fallacy to which we refer in the text, namely, that we have a steady upward movement, with little variation. This is largely true of production and consumption. It is in no sense true of "trade," as distinguished from production.
[284] Kemmerer relied on the investigation of 1896, whereas Fisher used more the figures of 1909. Kemmerer does not, in general, assign an absolute magnitude for "trade," but for 1890 he gives a figure. Loc. cit., p. 136. d.
[285] Loc. cit., p. 136, d.
[286] A recent discussion of these problems is to be found in Shaw, A. W., Some Problems in Market Distribution, Harvard Univ. Press, 1915.
[287] Op. cit., pp. 51-52.
[288] London, Paris, and New York all do a great deal of manufacturing, particularly of finer things, whose value is high, and which require a high proportion of labor, as compared with machinery. Cf. our discussion of the London "Money Market," infra, in Part III.
[289] Ibid., p. 47.
[290] Cf. Jenks, The Trust Problem, Rev. ed., p. 29. The doctrine that these costs are net social loss is challenged by the present writer in an article, "Competition vs. Monopoly," in the New York Independent, of Oct., 1912.