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
[237] The curious reader would find it of interest to compare Professor
Smart’s statement that the value of a good is almost always in the end
measured by a “foreign utility.” “The value of a horse may be measured
by the foreign utility of a summer vacation.” See _Introduction to the
Theory of Value_, pp. 37-8. Much dialectical exercise of interest could
be had by comparing fully the precise formulæ of “marginal” utility
developed by the Austrian economists and Prof. Clark’s formula. Clark’s
theory is at bottom in harmony with the Austrian, but goes further.
[238] See _op. cit._, p. 380.
[239] _Ibid._ p. 389.
[240] _Cf._ _ante_ p. 145.
[241] A brief comparison of the Austrian concept of “marginal utility”
with Clark’s concept of “effective utility” may be of interest. Many
kinds of goods are divisible into parts without changing their economic
nature. Grain is a good example. A piano is an example of the other kind
of good, the unit good. When a given good is divisible into increments,
the Austrians point out that the value of any or every increment depends
purely upon the satisfaction afforded by the last used or least useful
increment. Putting it in another way, they say the marginal utility of
the good is the actual utility of the last increment, and value depends
on marginal utility. The very essence of this principle is that the value
of a thing, as for instance first increment, does not depend on its own
exact utility. Professor Clark, developing his thought in his own way,
and using a different terminology, goes further than the Austrians, but
along the same line. The “effective” utility of a good is not its own
utility, but is that other least utility produced by the same amount of
labor. The Austrians state that the value of any bushel of wheat depends
on the utility of the “last” bushel, because if any bushel is removed the
result will be that the last bushel is really given up, or any bushel
is in effect the last. Clark points out that among goods which are all
freely reproducible, the value of the product of any unit of labor time
depends on the utility of the least useful product produced by a unit
of labor time, though this other least useful product be an entirely
different kind of good and not an increment of the same kind of good.
Many minute questions in this connection we may pass for lack of space.
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