Malthus, T. R. (Thomas Robert), 1766-1834; Malthusianism
market value above or depresses it below cost price; and he does not see
how seriously his own qualifications[636] impair the truth of his theory
of value even when the value is “natural.”[637] It is true, on the other
hand, that the supply at any given time is a supply that will not be
kept up unless the cost price be paid back. The cost price would
certainly be the minimum below which prices could not permanently pass.
But to Ricardo the cost in labour is the formal as well as the material
cause of a value; to Malthus it is only the material, and only part of
that, a mere _sine quâ non_, while the efficient is the demand, and the
final is the consumption of the article by its last buyer or user.
The third leading tenet of the new school, says Malthus, is that the
rate of profits in a country depends on the fertility of the soil there,
and not, as Adam Smith thought, on the competition of capital with
capital for employment. Against them Malthus maintains that there is no
necessary (though there is a frequent) connection between the
productiveness of industry and the rate of profits, still less between
the latter and the productiveness of any one single industry, such as
agriculture. Profits depend on the proportion of the whole produce which
“goes to replace the advances of the capitalist”; but this proportion
may remain the same when the productiveness of industry is very various.
In the previous eight or nine years, say from 1815 to 1824, there had
certainly been no costliness in production. Corn had been cheap, and
farmers’ losses had led to the discontinuance of high farming, and
especially of the forced cultivation of the dear years. The production,
therefore, was at the cost of much less labour. But profits, instead of
higher, were much lower. Abundance of produce and competition of
producers had caused a fall in the value of produce, so that it was
possible for the labourer to receive a greater share of what he made,
though his labour had not become more productive. Ricardo does not take
sufficient account of the influence of prices, both on wages and on
profits.
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