History and criticism of the labor theory of value in English political economyWhitaker, Albert C. (Albert Conser)
History
History and criticism of the labor theory of value in English political economy
Whitaker, Albert C. (Albert Conser)
Economics -- Great Britain -- History; Labor theory of value -- Great Britain -- History
The homogeneous labor force (which we have assumed temporarily)
will distribute itself among all the various industries in society
in proportions determined by the marginal product in each industry.
Capital will also distribute itself throughout the system of industries,
tending, of course, in the long run, to appear in each industry in such
proportions as will, apart from inequalities of risk, produce everywhere
an equality of its returns. Assuming the distribution of capital to have
reached a condition of equilibrium—it being no part of our present
task to follow out a theory of interest—let us try to show that labor
will distribute itself over the field of industry in such a manner
that exchange values will be proportionate to marginal labor costs. If
labor flows from one industry to another, the total output of the first
industry will decline and that of the second will increase. The change
in the supplies of the respective products of these industries will
alter the exchange values of these articles. Different distributions of
labor among industries will give rise to different relative supplies
of commodities and different exchange values. As the supply of labor
in any industry increases, its marginal product decreases. If all
occupations possessed the same disutility, the supply of labor would be
so distributed that its marginal product would have the same exchange
value in all industries. But if some occupations necessitate higher
disutility costs than ordinary, the supply of labor obtainable for
those industries will decrease until the exchange value of the marginal
product is raised till it compensates for the superior disutility.[263]
If one commodity is produced at a higher disutility cost (to the labor
directly employed upon it) than another, the marginal product of labor in
it will have a higher exchange value. If 6 A in one industry and 1 B in
another make the marginal product of a labor-day, 6 A will exchange for
1 B, provided the disutility of labor is the same in both employments.
But if it costs more disutility to produce 6 A than 1 B, the relative
supplies of A’s and B’s would be so adjusted that 6 A will exchange for
more than 1 B. Thus a superior disutility cost raises the exchange value
of a commodity, in order that this commodity may afford a superior value
product to labor. Labor-power is a peculiar production good. Like other
production goods of manifold productive uses, its expenditure constitutes
potentiality cost; but it is unlike others in that human pain cost is an
ever-present incident to its expenditure. The distribution of labor power
among different productive uses is not governed solely with reference to
its share of value derived from the product, but is governed in part with
reference to the pain-cost involved in the production of the product. A
higher disutility necessitates a higher share of exchange value. Thus
it comes to pass that this most disposable and important of production
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account