The Mouse on Wall Street
1969 • 165 pages

Ratings1

Average rating3

15

Grand Fenwick has already invaded the United States and landed the first man on the Moon; this time it finds itself with a surplus of money and tries to get rid of it on the American stock market, with (as usual) rather fantastic results. The story is mildly entertaining and makes use of the established characters of Grand Fenwick; it's a pleasant read.

The book seems to be trying to teach the reader something about national finance and investment, but I'm not sure whether this a primary aim or just a side-effect. Furthermore, as I'm no expert on these subjects, I can't say whether the teaching is sound; but I have my doubts.

Mountjoy dismisses the idea of using the surplus income to eliminate taxes by claiming that the people would lose interest in government if they didn't have to pay for it. But government would surely continue to rule over and have effects on people; if that doesn't motivate them to take an interest, I doubt that paying taxes would, either. If I were running a country and found myself with a large surplus income, I'd see the elimination of taxes as a most pleasant duty. Think how much effort would be saved nationwide if no-one had to assess, collect, pay, or struggle to avoid paying taxes.

The point is frequently made, particularly by Mountjoy, that a large surplus of money is damaging to Grand Fenwick (or, by extension, to any country), and that the best thing to do is to get rid of the embarrassing surplus somehow.

I'm afraid I remain naïvely keen on the prospect of an embarrassingly large surplus of money. It gives you possibilities, and you can do what you please with them. You can of course spend the money unwisely and end up less happy than you were before; in which case, more fool you.

To throw money away because you're afraid of spending it unwisely strikes me as a very defeatist attitude, unless frugal living is part of your religion or personal philosophy. I'm not sure whether Wibberley intended to advocate this seriously, or whether he argued it with tongue in cheek, for comic effect.

December 28, 2015Report this review