If enterprise is afoot, wealth accumulates, whatever may be happening to thrift; and if enterprise is asleep, wealth decays, whatever thrift may be doing.

This line comes from Keynes’s discussion of the drivers of aggregate wealth and employment during downturns, where he challenges the common moral and policy emphasis on “thrift” (saving) as the primary route to prosperity. Writing in the mid-1930s in the shadow of the Great Depression, Keynes argued that what matters for the level of economic activity is not simply households’ willingness to save, but the state of “enterprise”—the propensity of businesses and investors to undertake new ventures and capital investment. In that setting, heightened thrift can coincide with falling output and wealth if it depresses demand and discourages investment, whereas vigorous enterprise can expand income and wealth even if saving behavior is unchanged.

Keynes contrasts “enterprise” (active investment, risk-taking, and the willingness to deploy capital) with “thrift” (saving and frugality). The claim is that aggregate wealth depends less on how much people try to save and more on whether economic actors are confident enough to invest and expand production. If enterprise is vigorous, incomes and profits rise and wealth grows even if households are not especially thrifty; if enterprise collapses, mere saving cannot prevent contraction and capital deterioration. The line encapsulates a core Keynesian theme: in a monetary economy, the level of activity is driven by investment and expectations, and excessive thrift can coincide with stagnation rather than prosperity.