## Einstein S Lesson On How To Stand Up For Yourself

Statistical calculations of Maltus are unconvincing not so much because he did not have good-quality statistics, how many because of inability of his theory to sustain collision with empirical data. Keynes somehow praised digital and actual material of Maltus as "the proof output in the way" and even Marshall paid tribute to that he called "the first case of thorough application of an inductive method in social sciences". But Maltus was keep to the point when in the preface to the second edition of "Experience" noticed that, "if any mistakes, besides my will, occurred in this work, they cannot have considerable influence on essence of my reasons".

Maltus's ideas received an immediate response just because were extremely simple and did not demand neither creation of the new analytical concept, nor factual opening. It seemed, everything that he made — it brought together some well-known vital facts and drew from them necessary conclusions. Really, unless the population does not grow always only so far as it can support itself? And unless uncontrolled reproduction of the person would not lead soon to an impossible situation at any growth rate of a subsistence? The well-known opposition of two types of progressions offered by Maltus — geometrical for an increase in population and arithmetic for a food gain — worked with hypnotic persuasiveness of the slogan or advertizing. It was easy to see:" even the superficial acquaintance with figures will show" as Maltus said that if the gain is expressed by difficult percent, that small final number at the lowest speed eventually will become more largest number which growth is expressed by simple percent (compare: 2+4+8+16+. and 1000 + 1003 + 1006 + 1009 +...). The additional population will be reproduced further (from here and difficult percent), and the gain of additional food resources will not be. Therefore, at any initial situation soon "all tickets will be sold". The reader at such moments is not inclined to remember that in real life simply there is no uncontrolled growth of the population biologically limit speed, and therefore all such calculations, let the most terrible, leave the main hypothesis unproven.