ABSTRACT
The classical economists took a great interest in development, and the issue of unproductive labour became a widespread concern. Preoccupation with the wastefulness of the aristocracy diminished. In general, The authors accept Smith's division between production of material goods, which is productive, and production of services, which is unproductive. The anonymous An Essay, while not mentioning Smith, closely follows his classification of the unproductive occupations. Read states that Smith's distinction is essential to understand the effects of an undue increase of unproductive workers. The faithful followers of Smith on unproductive labour included not only Malthus, but also James Mill and Ricardo. Of Smith's closest followers, some lay particular stress on condemnation of the aristocracy's wastefulness, and especially on unproductive servants. Schlotzer is favourable only to a reasonable degree of luxury, which encourages industry without damaging society. However faithful to Smith, these authors cannot help opening the issue of unproductive labour, a veritable Pandora's box.
