The need for eliminating every unnecessary expense involved in getting goods into the hands of the consumer is real; and no proposal that offers to meet this need should be neglected, even though its adoption might work hardships on particular groups of individuals. Society is entitled to every saving possible in this respect. No individual or group of individuals can rightfully impose its smaller interest as an obstacle to the progress of social welfare. Consequently, the contention that some change in marketing methods is undesirable simply on the ground that it destroys the business of some class of merchants, is baseless. In fact, it is worse than baseless; it is harmful, for it assumes that society should continue to reward the economic activities of a man after his services to society have ceased. Apart from such contentions and the arguments that go with them, we can conclude that any change in marketing methods carried on under conditions of competition is likely to be beneficial, since it could occur only as the result of a natural demand.