Malthus, T. R. (Thomas Robert), 1766-1834; Malthusianism
The new school has, according to Malthus, three main principles. The
first is, that what determines value is the quantity of labour that a
thing costs to make,—the second, that supply and demand do not as a rule
affect values,—and the third, that fertility of soil and not competition
regulates the rate of profits. The new school thinks that profits enter
so little into the price of an article that they may be neglected
altogether in the computation of the causes of value. But (says Malthus)
the value of a stone wall would be due, nearly all of it, to labour, and
the value of a cask of old wine kept for twenty or thirty years would be
largely due to profits. £50 worth of stone wall would have much more
labour “worked up in it” than £50 worth of old wine. It is not
sufficient to answer that profits are simply accumulated wages. As well
say that five is another name for four. Ricardo himself introduced many
qualifications into his own statement that value is due to labour. The
principle (he confessed) was modified by the use of machinery and by the
unequal durability of capital.[634]
Malthus admits the truth of Ricardo’s dogma that profits and wages can
only increase at each other’s expense, and he even applies this
principle of Ricardo’s in a new way to the facts of the commercial
depression that had prevailed since the peace.[635] It was universally
allowed there had been a less demand for labour and a great fall in
wages, but, it was also allowed, a much greater fall in profits; so that
wages while lower in gross amount bore a higher proportion to profits
than before. The reason was that, while the competition of labourers was
great, the competition of capitalists with capitalists was still
greater. The result was a universal fall of prices; the wages, though
relatively greater, were absolutely less in amount, and the demand for
labour would have been greater if prices had risen and the capitalist
had got greater returns to his capital. Malthus would not go farther
than this, and the Ricardian doctrine needs to be otherwise applied to
yield the doctrine of a wages fund. It was applied in some such way as
follows:—Competition drives prices down to the cost of production; this
means that at any given time the sum total of profits and wages cannot
be more than they actually are, and both are kept down by competition to
their minimum; the masters could not give higher wages without cutting
down their profits, the men could not get less wages without either
starving or being driven to seek other employments. Malthus does not so
apply his doctrines. To him, what fixes the sum total of wages and
profits is not the cost of production, but the demand for the thing
produced; not the labour spent on a thing, but the labour that others
are willing to give for it; and the cause of value is not cost, but
demand acting with supply. Ricardo, who prefers to confine his theories
to natural value, allows that the state of the demand and supply raises
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