[243] Whenever, of course, the man acting for himself, places himself in the relation with the good which permits its power to become effective. Compare the discussion in section ii of this chapter. No apology is offered for the present “discussion of mere words” as it might be termed by the hostile. These discussions contribute to clearness of thought upon questions of theory, and clearness of thought in theory is certain from time to time to be of benefit to discussions of many proximate and practical issues. For instance, we find recently a well known writer explaining that “scientifically” the distribution of money among nations is so governed that money reaches the level of equal “marginal utility” in the different countries. See a paper entitled “The Distribution of Money,” _Journal of Political Economy_, vol. ix, p. 49. This proposition has no meaning, and is authorized by nothing in the Austrian theory, though the writer quotes the Austrians freely. A little “word discussion” by “practical” writers might enable them to see when they are covering up the absence of an explanation by mere conjuring with formulæ whose real meaning has not been ascertained. [244] The term “disutility” is almost universally used as equivalent to “discomfort,” that is, as being purely subjective. This makes it available as an opposite of satisfaction (or of utility according to the usage of those writers who use the latter as a subjective term) but the same usage debars its employment as the opposite of utility in the sense advocated in the present essay. [245] The determination of Crusoe’s supply of a good at this point, which fixes the subjective value of the good, bears a few obvious analogies to the determination of competitive exchange values in the social market at the point of “normal equilibrium of supply and demand,” as described by Professor Marshall. [246] Reasons will appear later, it is believed, to show that when we reach the complex case of real social industry and exchange value the control of cost over value will be much more impaired than that of utility. [247] It has already been shown why it is quite impossible to hold to the opinion that cost is the essence of value. _Cf._ _ante_ pp. 34-5. [248] A man may receive part of his income by gift or inheritance and earn a part. The latter part becomes in this case a sort of marginal portion. Though all of his dollars have not cost him disutility, some of them have, and upon principles already discussed, any dollar has the “effective” disutility cost of the most costly dollars. This is just as true as the fact that the first hours of labor may sometimes be play and yet their product always counts as having a disutility cost because of the disutility of the final hour.