On 12/16/2012 4:46 PM, James C.W. Ahiakpor wrote to Michael:
> Surely, the fact even Petty wrote a fallacious argument doesn't turn such fallacy into a logically consistent statement.



What exactly is Petty's "fallacious argument" here?

Petty argues that the state should employ those who are unemployed,
because the cost of their maintenance will in any case be born by
society, and if employed they will at least maintain the custom
of work until they can find better employment.  However even though
this particular benefit would follow even from unproductive employment,
Petty argues that greater benefit that would derive from employing
them in the production of public works.

In short, Petty recognizes that that habit of working for pay is
depreciable human capital.

Alan Isaac