A Layman's Interest in Economics

Albert Einstein

[Excerpts from two letters written in German by Albert Einstein to E. Paul du Pont,
3 December and 13 December, 1935. The following information is taken from an advertisement
of the letters available for purchase at auction in 2013]

In this letter, Albert Einstein states he has a layman's interest in economics, remarking that he keeps his thinking on such matters private until sufficiently grounded, and expressing admiration for Princeton economics professor Stuart Chase.

3 December

"Your letter clearly expresses your wish to be of service to all people. In a non-technical way, I myself engage economic problems with great interest. My provisionary words were naturally not intended for the newspapers because only when I believe that my assertions have been adequately grounded do I reveal them openly. Among the contemporary writers who engage these problems here, Stuart Chase has made the most impression upon me. . . ."

In a second letter, he states that he has twice read with approval Henry George's Progress and Poverty, acknowledging that they share an appreciation of Princeton economics professor [Franz] Oppenheimer, and describing points of agreement and difference as regards the economic views of himself and Oppenheimer.

13 December

". . . In olden times the soil was the most important, perhaps the only important means of production. Non-accessibility to the soil meant that the ones not owning the land were forced to work for smaller remuneration. Even today, a political system which would permit a better distribution of ownership of land would diminish the great supply of labor and would bring about a betterment of economic conditions.

"I believe, however, that the recognition of this viewpoint alone does not give a clear understanding of the theme. I furthermore believe that the ownership of the industrial means of production in the technically highly-developed economy is an equally important consideration. From a practical perspective--especially in view of trusts--all ownership has a monopolistic character. . . .

". . . Given a free economy under current conditions of production, it seems doubtful that there would be a tendency toward a healthier distribution of the means of production. In this connection, the writings of my friend Professor Oppenheimer do not convince me completely because the unfavorable distribution seems to be due entirely to politico-military causes. The reason that highly developed countries have found it necessary to socialize several parts of the economy, or at least control them, speaks against such a view."