the ultimate standard of value-第5部分

快捷操作: 按键盘上方向键 ← 或 → 可快速上下翻页 按键盘上的 Enter 键可回到本书目录页 按键盘上方向键 ↑ 可回到本页顶部! 如果本书没有阅读完，想下次继续接着阅读，可使用上方 "收藏到我的浏览器" 功能 和 "加入书签" 功能！


agriculture。　In　some　countries　it　is　the　eleven…hour　day；　in　others　the　ten…hour　day；　that　prevails。　If　the　present　labor　agitation　should　be　at　all　successful；　we　may　see　the　eight…hour　day　quite　generally　adopted。　In　any　event；　the　amount　of　the　pain　of　labor　is　more　or　less　fixed。　When　changes　occur　in　the　rate　of　wages　or　in　the　value　of　the　product；　the　laborer　is　not　free　to　make　a　correponding　change　in　the　length　of　his　working　day；　and　thus　restore　the　equilibrium　between　utility　and　disutility。　If　the　ten…hour　day　prevails；　we　cannot　say　that　with　a　wages　of　seven　and　one…half　cents　per　quarter　hour；　a　million　laborers　will　work　forty…two　million　quarter　hours；　and　hence　that　forty…two　million　piece　of　commodity　will　be　produced；　while　with　a　wages　of　five　cents；　they　will　labor　thirty…eight　million　quarter　hours；　and　produce　thirty…eight　million　pieces　of　commodity。　But　whether　the　wages　was　five　or　seven　and　one…half　cents；　they　would；　in　all　probability；　work　forty　million　quarter　hours　and　produce　forty　million　piece　of　commodity。　In　this　way　the　equilibrium；　in　the　case　of　the　individual　laborer；　between　the　wages　and　the　disutility　of　labor　is　disturbed。　With　many　the　disutility　of　the　last　quarter　hour　of　labor　will　be　less　than　the　utility　of　the　wages　received；　while　for　others　it　will　be　in　excess　of　the　same；　i。e。；　the　laborer　in　this　last　instance；　will　find　that　the　disutility　of　the　last　quarter　hour　of　labor　（or　it　may　well　be　of　several　of　the　last　quarter　hours）　is　greater　than　the　utility　of　the　wages　that　he　receive　for　it；　and　this　whether　the　rate　of　pay　is　five　or　seven　and　one…half　cents　per　quarter　hour。　If　he　were　free　to　determine　the　length　of　his　working　day；　he　would；　of　course；　work　that　many　quarter　hours　less。　But；　as　a　matter　of　fact；　he　is　not　free　to　do　this。　He　must　either　work　the　regular　ten　hours　or　not　work　at　all。　He　naturally　chooses　the　former；　because　the　total　utility　of　his　entire　wages　（which　means　for　him　protection　from　hunger；　etc。）；　is　undoubtedly　greater　than　the　total　disutility　of　the　entire　ten　hours　of　labor。　　　　　　In　this　way　the　disutility　of　the　labor　fails　to　operate　as　a　correct　measure；　either　for　the　amount　of　the　labor　supply　or　for　the　quantity　of　the　product。　It　also　fails　in　the　same　way　as　a　correct　measure　for　the　height　of　wages　and　the　value　of　the　product。　In　so　far　as　free　competition　may　prevail　in　the　determination　of　cost；　the　value　of　the　product　will　vary　with　the　wages　paid；　but　it　will　not　vary　with　the　disutility　of　the　labor。　A　careful　examination　of　the　actual　facts　of　life　will　show　that　the　influence　of　this　disutility　or　pain　of　labor　only　appears　in　the　following　special　cases：　　　　　　（a）　In　the　case　of　those　goods　that　are　produced　outside　of　the　time　devoted　to　the　regular　occupation。　An　instance　of　this　may　be　found　in　the　making　or　repairing　of　tools　during　leisure　time；　these　tools　being　intended；　not　for　sale；　but　for　home　use。　Their　cost　is　the　pain　or　disutility　of　the　labor　devoted　to　them；　and　they　will　be　valued　according　to　the　amount　of　this　disutility。　　　　　　（b）　This　is　also　true　in　the　case　of　some　regular　occupations；　in　which　men　produce　on　their　own　account　as　artists　and　authors。　It　is　also　true　in　the　case　of　industries　carried　on　at　home；　where　men　are　free　to　continue　or　to　stop　working　as　they　may　themselves　determine。　That　the　degree　of　their　fatigue　will　exert　an　influence　upon　this　determination　may　be　granted。　　　　　　（c）　This　is　likewise　true　in　those　industries　in　which　men　voluntarily　work　overtime　and　receive　special　payment　for　the　same。　But　such　overtime　is　neither　general　nor　fixed。　It　is　a　more　or　less　temporary　and　exceptional　arrangement；　which　only　continue　during　the　period　of　special　pressure。　Therefore　the　influence　of　this　case　upon　the　supply　of　labor　and　the　value　of　the　product　is　neither　deep　nor　lasting。　　　　　　（d）　Differences　in　agreeableness　or　disagreeableness　of　the　various　occupations　will　（unless　offset　by　other　conditions）　tend　to　give　rise　to　differences　in　the　rate　of　wages。　Those　which　involve　less　than　the　average　laboriousness　or　unpleasantness；　or　which　have　associated　with　them　certain　advantage　or　perquisite　will　yield　a　less　than　normal　wages。　Occupations　of　more　than　the　average　laboriousness　or　unpleasantness　will；　on　the　other　hand；　yield　a　more　than　normal　wages。　I　must；　however；　expressly　declare；　that　in　these　cases　the　absolute　amount　of　the　pain　of　labor　does　not　determine　the　absolute　amount　of　the　wages。　Difference　in　the　disutility　or　pain　of　labor　can　only　give　rise　to　variations　from　a　normal　wage；　and　as　we　shall　take　occasion　to　show；　this　normal　wages　is　determined　by　an　entirely　different　set　of　conditions。　　　　　　The　influence　of　the　laboriousness　or　disagreeableness　of　the　labor　is　often　greatly　modified　and　in　some　instances　is　entirely　offset　by　opposite　tendencies。　In　Professor　Marshall's　〃evil　paradox〃（19*）　we　have　one　of　the　earliest　recognized　facts　of　our　economic　experience。　This　is　the　fact　that　unpleasant　occupations；　unless　they　demand　some　rare　quality；　usually　bring　in　a　wages　that　is　not　only　no　higher；　but　is　ofttimes　lower；　than　that　paid　in　more　pleasant　occupations。　　　　　　（e）　Under　normal　wages　I　include　the　wages　in　all　those　occupations　that　do　not　require　any　rare　or　exceptional　qualities。　This；　of　course；　include　the　great　mass　of　all　occupations。　With　this　understood；　it　become　clear　that　the　disutility　of　labor　has　but　an　indirect；　and　in　one　sense　crude　influence　upon　the　absolute　height　of　the　normal　wages。　It　undoubtedly　prevents　the　introduction　of　an　eighteen…hour　labor　day　or　even　of　a　fifteen…hour　day；　but　it　has　not　been　able　to　prevent　the　introduction　of　a　thirteen　or　fourteen…hour　day；　as　is　shown　by　the　history　of　the　condition　of　the　laboring　classes。　No　one　would　claim　that　the　progress　of　humanity　from　a　thirteen　to　an　eight…hour　labor　day　has　corresponded　step　for　step　with　a　similar　progressive　movement　in　the　subjective　feelings　of　the　laborer。　Nor　will　any　one　claim　that　the　laborer　will　find　in　his　wages　an　exact　equivalent　or　recompense　for　the　pain　or　disutility　of　his　labor　when　he　works　thirteen　hours　per　day。　Again；　when　he　works　twelve　hours　per　day；　and　so　on　for　eleven；　ten；　nine　and　finally　for　eight　hours　per　day。　It　is　no　nice　variation　in　the　point　of　equilibrium　between　utility　and　disutility　that　determines　the　length　of　the　working　day。　It　is　the　changing　of　the　relative　strengths　of　the　various　social　factors　that　plays　the　principal　part　in　this　determination。　This；　within　certain　limits；　which　we　cannot　here　stop　to　discuss；　it　will　probably　continue　to　do　in　the　future。　　　　　　（f）　Finally　the　absolute　height　of　the　wages　of　skilled　labor　is　manifestly　still　more　independent　of　the　disutility　or　pain　of　such　labor。　I　take　it　that　no　economist　would　urge　that　this　is　the　element　which　finally　determine　the　salary　of　the　higher　officials；　great　actors　or　singers；　specially　skilled　workmen；　managers　of　factories；　lawyers；　doctors；　etc。　　　　　　These　various　points　taken　together　certainly　justify　the　assertion　made　above；　viz。；　that　the　actual　conditions　which　make　possible　an　equilibrium　of　wages　and　pain；　or　of　value　and　pain　（so　far　as　the　value　of　the　product　is　dependent　upon　the　height　of　the　wage）；　do　not　obtain　in　our　industrial　life。　On　the　contrary；　these　conditions　are　only　found　in　a　relatively　limited　number　of　unimportant　and　exceptional　cases。　　　　　This　alone　would　be　sufficient　to　show　that　in　tracing　the　influence　of　disutility　upon　the　value　of　goods；　we　have　quite　a　different　and　indeed　much　narrower　trail　to　follow；　than　that　which　leads　to　the　great　empirical　law　of　cost。　This　may　be　shown　in　the　clearest　and　most　convincing　way　from　several　different　standpoints；　and　with　this　we　are　brought　to　the　second　proposition　advanced　at　the　end　of　the　preceding　section。　First；　it　may　be　shown　that　in　many　instance　the　correspondence　of　the　value　of　goods　with　their　cost；　in　the　sense　of　the　great　empirical　law　of　cost；　not　only　does　not　imply　that　the　value　of　the　goods　corresponds　to　the　disutility　or　pain　of　labor；　but　actually　exclude　this　assumption。　Exclude　it　not　merely　by　chance　or　temporarily；　but　of　necessity　and　permanently。　　　　　　In　order　to　avoid　needless　repetition；　we　will　take　an　example　that　is　sufficiently　comprehensive　to　include　nearly　all　possible　cases。　In　the　production　of　nearly　all　ware　there　come　into　play；　beside　the　commoner　sorts　of　labor；　some　better　paid　skilled　labor。　In　the　making　of　a　common　cloth　coat；　we　will　have　the　labor　of　some　skilled　cutter；　or　of　a　manager　with　a　higher　standard　of　life。　Again；　in　the　weaving　of　the　cloth；　we　find　the　better　paid　labor　of　factory　bookkeeper；　manager；　etc。　If　we　go　back　to　still　earlier　stage…the　manufacture　of　the　machine　or　looms；　the　mining　or　preparation　of　the　steel；　etc。　　it　is　clear　that　the　better　paid　labor　of　the　engineer；　foreman　and　manager　will　enter　into　the　cost。　　　　　　Let　us　now　assume　that　the　production　of　a　cloth　coat；　including　all　stage；　costs　three　days　of　common　labor　at　eighty　cents　and　one　day　of　skilled　labor　at　one　dollar　and　sixty　cents。　Let　us　also　assume；　for　the　sake　of　the　argument；　that　the　wages　of　eighty　cents　is　an　exact　equivalent　or　recompense　for　the　pain　of　a　day's　labor。　If　the　amount　of　this　pain　of　labor　is　to　figure　as　the　regulator　of　price；　then　under　the　above　assumptions；　the　price　of　the　coat　should　not　exceed　three　dollars　and　twenty　cents；　for　the　skilled　labor　of　the　engineer　or　bookkeeper　is　not　more　painful　than　that　of　the　common　miner　or　tailor。　Hence；　if　we　take　the　pain　as　the　standard；　we　cannot　reckon　the　former　as　greater　than　the　latter。　And　yet　we　all　know　that　under　the　above　assumptions；　a　cloth　coat　could　not；　for　any　long　time；　be　put　upon　the　market　for　less　than　four　dollars　（not　including　interest）。　This　is　manifestly　out　of　proportion　with　the　disutility　of　the　labor。　And　yet；　according　to　the　law　of　cost；　the　price　of　the　coat　in　the　long　run；　and　under　conditions　of　free　competition；　should　tend　or　gravitate　toward　this　disutility。（20*）　　　　　The　lack　of　agreement　of　the　cost；　in　the　sense　of　the　classical　law　of　cost；　with　the　disutility　of　labor；　may　be　shown　by　approac