New Gem | No More Learning

What matters it whether a
landlord employing ten labourers in his farm, gives them annually as
much money as will buy them the necessaries of life, or gives them
those necessaries at short hand.

Word:

necessaries

Question:

What are the potential advantages and disadvantages of a landlord providing the necessaries of life directly to his laborers versus providing them with a monetary income?

Answer (optional):

The potential advantages of a landlord providing the necessaries of life directly to his laborers could be that his laborers are guaranteed to meet their basic needs, potentially reducing any anxiety or stress related to affording these necessities. It might also allow the landlord to maintain more direct control over his laborers' living conditions and thus their ability to work effectively. 

The disadvantages could be that this arrangement may limit the laborers’ freedom, as they cannot decide how to spend their own income. Laborers might not be able to buy something they want (as opposed to need) if they're not given any money. Furthermore, the landlord would have to take time and resources to obtain and distribute these necessities, which could be more cost or labor-intensive than simply giving the laborers money to buy what they need themselves. 

The passage also highlights that, in terms of contributing to a state's wealth or ability to pay taxes, there is no real difference between laborers who are given money to buy their own necessities and those who are provided these necessities directly, so there's no clear economic advantage or disadvantage to either approach in this regard.