Gustav Gross’s theoretical essay treats time as a neglected dimension of political economy. It begins by contrasting the established study of spatial relations with the less systematic treatment of temporal ones:
In allen Lehrbüchern und Systemen der Volkswirthschaftslehre haben die Beziehungen der Volkswirthschaft zum Raume eine mehr oder weniger eingehende Behandlung erfahren.
English translation: In all textbooks and systems of political economy, the relations of the national economy to space have received a more or less thorough treatment.
Gross moves from time’s nature and measurement to two economic operations: transferring the realization of benefits between different moments and improving the utilization of a given duration. His concluding account of planning connects these operations.
Time is not itself a productive or destructive agent, but the condition within which forces operate:
Wenn auch die Zeit selber keine Kraft ist, so ist doch das Wirken aller Kräfte an die Zeit gebunden und ausserhalb der Zeit keine Kraft, also auch kein Fortschritt oder Rückschritt in irgend einer Beziehung möglich.
English translation: Even though time itself is not a force, the operation of all forces is nevertheless bound to time, and outside of time no force, and therefore no progress or regress in any respect whatever, is possible.
The economic value attributed to time therefore derives from the activities and resources associated with it. Gross distinguishes unequal productive opportunities from differences in time itself:
Die Zeit ist für alle vollkommen gleich, für den Südseeinsulaner nicht länger oder kürzer als für den Gelehrten oder für den, über Millionen gebietenden Banquier.
English translation: Time is perfectly the same for all; for the South Sea islander it is no longer and no shorter than for the scholar, or for the banker who commands millions.
Measurement nevertheless makes time economically actionable. Gross links calendars and clocks to technical development, social coordination, and institutional authority, including priestly control over calendars. Although people cannot change time’s passage, they can compare its contents and reorganize activities within it.
The first operation, transfer through time, responds to fluctuations in needs and in goods’ usefulness. Possession need not coincide with the moment of greatest benefit. Storage bridges this interval, but perishability and forgone alternative uses limit its effectiveness. Money preserves value without retaining the original goods; hoarding, however, still immobilizes resources. Credit carries value forward while allowing its material equivalent to remain economically active, and enables borrowers to anticipate future acquisitions.
Lending thus involves complementary movements: the creditor postpones full utilization while the debtor advances it. Gross regards this arrangement as mutually advantageous when economically prudent, excluding destructive borrowing from his positive model. Personal and secured credit, banking, and insurance receive a common interpretation through their temporal functions. Insurance introduces uncertainty about whether and when payment will occur. This framework also exposes less visible credit relations: workers paid after completing their labor effectively lend to employers. Communities of indefinite duration can sustain transfers beyond individual lifetimes.
The second operation increases useful activity within a period by shortening processes and reducing interruptions. Agriculture remains constrained by seasonal natural forces, although machinery and crop rotation improve temporal utilization. Industry, division of labor, and transport offer greater possibilities for acceleration. Intensive production concentrates labor and capital to economize on time. Gross extends this contrast into a social interpretation, associating agricultural rhythms with patience and conservatism, and commercial activity with impatience and political progressiveness.
Temporal efficiency, however, is not an unlimited social good. Employers seek continuous use of invested capital, whereas workers need time for recovery, family life, education, and enjoyment. Higher productivity may support higher wages, but unequal bargaining power prevents workers from securing the full value of their labor. The pursuit of income may also encourage excessive hours and factory employment for workers’ families.
Gross consequently supports a standard working day, restrictions on women’s and especially children’s labor, Sunday rest, and extended compulsory schooling. His justification is paternalistic: inadequate knowledge and bargaining power warrant state protection. Education both restricts child labor and equips workers to understand and defend their interests. Economic progress should enlarge leisure rather than concentrate wealth and cultivation among a privileged minority.
The conclusion applies temporal organization to consumption and budgeting. Stocks must sustain recurring needs over an appropriate period; coordinating their allocation with transfers through time produces an economic plan. Planning horizons vary with income rhythms and institutional scale, from daily wages to annual agricultural and public budgets. Gross defends annual parliamentary budget authorization while allowing longer plans for forestry and debt amortization. The essay connects storage, finance, productive acceleration, labor protection, and budgeting as interdependent responses to the temporal conditions of economic life.
This work was divided into 8 sections when it entered the library's research corpus—an apparatus for search and citation, not necessarily the author's own table of contents. Each title opens its summary.
Put a question to this work; the Librarian answers from its 8 sections and cites the passage.
Ask the Librarian