the ultimate standard of value-第7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！


oduct　of　labor；　one　is　in　entire　harmony　with　the　conceptions　of　the　Austrian　school。　What　effect　this　has　upon　the　law　of　cost　will　appear　later　on　in　the　discussion。　　　　　　In　another　place（31*）　Professor　Marshall　give　us　quite　a　different　standard　for　determining　the　value　of　labor。　He　holds；　that　in　the　case　of　every　agent　of　production：　〃there　is　a　constant　tendency　toward　a　position　of　normal　equilibrium；　in　which　the　supply　of　each　of　these　agents　shall　stand　in　such　a　relation　to　the　demand　for　its　services；　as　to　give　to　those　who　have　provided　the　supply　a　sufficient　reward　for　their　efforts　and　sacrifices。　If　the　economic　condition　of　the　country　remain　stationary　sufficiently　long　this　tendency　would　realize　itself　in　such　an　adjustment　of　supply　to　demand；　that　both　machines　and　human　beings　would　earn　generally　an　amount　that　corresponds　fairly　with　their　cost　of　production。〃　I　am　not　quite　sure　how　wide　an　application　Professor　Marshall　would　give　to　this　statement。　This　much；　however；　is　clear；　he　would　apply　the　distinction　of　the　classical　school；　between　the　rapidly　fluctuating　〃market　price〃　and　the　〃normal　value〃　which　is　based　upon　cost；　to　the　commodity…labor。　In　the　passage　just　cited　he　manifestly　wishes　to　indicate　the　standard　according　to　which　the　normal　or　long　period　position　of　wages　is　finally　determined。　But　as　it　appears　to　me；　he　is　not　quite　clear　whether　he　would　make　the　efforts　and　sacrifice　of　the　laborer　the　ultimate　standard　（as　his　expression；　〃sufficient。。。　for　their　efforts　and　sacrifices；〃　would　seem　to　indicate）；　or　whether　he　would　take　the　cost　of　rearing　and　maintaining　human　beings　as　the　standard　（as　the　expression　〃amount　that　corresponds　fairly　with　the　cost　of　production　of　human　beings〃）　would　imply。　Doubt　may　also　arise　whether　it　is　his　opinion　that　the　absolute　height　of　wages　tends　to　an　equilibrium　with　the　〃efforts〃　or　〃cost　of　production　of　human　beings〃；　or　that　the　differences　in　wages　to　which　these　give　rise　are　but　variations　from　an　average　level；　the　absolute　height　of　wages　being　determined　by　other　considerations。　　　　　　If　this　last　is　Professor　Marshall's　opinion；　then　I　am　in　entire　agreement　with　him　in　his　conception　of　the　value　of　labor。　That　differences　in　the　pain　of　labor　tend　to　bring　about　corresponding　difference　in　wages；　I　have　already　admitted。（32*）　The　same　influence；　and　for　quite　analogous　reasons；　may　be　exercised　by　differences　in　the　cost　of　producing　human　beings。　　　　　　If；　however；　the　expression　is　to　be　interpreted　in　the　wider　sense；　that　the　absolute　height　of　wages　is　finally　determined　by　the　pain　of　labor；　or　by　the　cost　of　producing　human　beings；　then；　as　it　seems　to　me；　Professor　Marshall　has　taken　a　position　which　cannot　be　maintained。　This；　so　far　as　the　pain　of　labor　is　concerned；　I　have　endeavored　to　show　in　a　previous　chapter。　In　regard　to　the　cost　of　producing　human　beings；　a　twofold　objection　suggests　itself。　First；　this　statement　is　hardly　verified　by　experience；　for　modern　economists　are　quite　generally　agreed　that　the　〃iron　law　of　wages〃　cannot　be　interpreted　as　meaning　that　the　necessary　cost　of　maintenance　is　a　fixed；　definite　amount；　toward　which　the　wages　of　labor　must　in　the　long　run　tend。　On　the　contrary；　they　are　agreed　that　the　wages　of　labor　may　permanently　exceed　that　amount；　which　hitherto　has　been　regarded　as　the　amount　of　the　necessary　cost　of　maintenance。　And　when　this　excess　of　the　wages　of　labor　above　the　cost　of　maintenance　does　disappear；　it　is　really　due　to　the　fact；　that　the　better　conditioned　laboring　population　have　so　accustomed　themselves　to　the　higher　standard　of　life；　that　much　that　before　was　a　luxury　is　now　a　necessity。　In　an　agreement　between　cost　of　maintenance　and　wages　of　labor　obtained　in　this　way　it　can　hardly　be　said　that　the　cost　of　maintenance　is　the　determining；　and　the　wages　of　labor　the　determined　element。　　　　　　Second；　this　last　explanation　is　not　satisfactory　because　it　simply　leads　us　around　in　a　circle。　According　to　this　law　of　cost；　the　price　of　the　means　of　maintaining　the　laborer　（as　bread；　meat；　shoe；　coats；　etc。）；　is　to　be　explained　by　the　value　and　price　of　the　labor　expended　in　the　production　of　these　commodities。　If　we　start　with　this　proposition；　we　can　hardly　continue；　and　say　that　the　price　of　the　labor　is　to　be　resolved　into　the　cost　or　price　of　the　means　of　maintaining　the　laborer。　I　have　elsewhere　dwelt　upon　the　unsatisfactory　nature　of　this　explanation；　（33*）　and　so　need　not　elaborate　upon　it　at　this　point。　Nor　have　I　any　ground　for　thinking　that　Professor　Marshall　and　the　other　moderate　representatives　of　the　modern　English　school　would　accept　the　〃iron　law　of　wage〃　in　any　literal　sense；　with　all　the　theoretic　and　practical　consequences　which　this　would　involve。　　　　　　Under　these　circumstances　I　do　not　believe　it　is　possible　to　give　a　scientific　explanation　of　the　absolute　height　of　wages；　without　some　reference　to　that　standard　upon　which；　in　the　first　of　the　above　quoted　statements；　Professor　Marshall　seems　inclined　to　base　the　market　or　demand　price　of　labor。　This　is　the　marginal　utility　of　the　labor；　or；　otherwise　stated；　the　value　of　the　product　of　the　last　or　marginal　laborer。　This　explanation　must；　however；　be　supplemented　in　many　and　in　part　important　details；　by　reference　to　the　influence　of　the　painfulness　of　labor　and　the　cost　of　maintenance；　though　these　can　never　entirely　replace　the　above　explanation。　Even　though　for　scientific　purse　we　were　permitted　to　neglect　the　periods　of　short　and　moderate　length；　we　could　not　explain　those　long　periods　to　which　we　had　limited　ourselves　without　reference　to　other　elements；　beside　the　painfulness　of　labor　and　the　cost　of　maintenance。　　　　　　But　we　are　not　permitted；　even　for　scientific　purse；　to　neglect　these　short　and　moderate　length　periods。　On　the　contrary；　any　serviceable　explanation　of　the　value　of　wares；　which　could　be　included　under　the　law　of　cost；　must　be　based；　clearly　and　distinctly；　upon　the　actual　rate　of　wages　during　the　periods　under　consideration；　periods　which　are　really　long；　though　they　may　seem　relatively　short。　The　important　point　is　that　wages　during　these　periods　still　come　under　the　influence　of　that　determinant；　to　which　Professor　Marshall　refers　as　the　〃demand　price　for　labor。〃　　　　　This　point　is　just　as　important　as　it　is　simple。　In　order　to　convince　ourselves　of　its　truth；　we　need　only　keep　clearly　in　mind　what　it　is；　that　the　law　of　cost　really　accomplishes；　in　relation　to　the　price　of　goods；　and　how　this　result　is　brought　about。　The　typical　effect　of　the　law　of　cost　is　to　change　the　chance　and　uncertain　fluctuations　which　the　price　of　goods　undergoes；　into　a　regular　oscillating　motion　like　that　of　a　pendulum。　In　this　motion　the　price　always　tends　to　return　to　the　cost　as　to　an　ideal　resting…place。　Though　the　price　seldom　remains　for　any　long　time　at　this　point；　yet　in　a　general　way　this　might　be　called　the　normal　position　about　which　the　price　oscillate。　　　　　　The　wonderfully　simple　mechanism　by　which　the　law　of　cost　brings　about　this　result　is　as　familiar　as　the　law　itself。　It　rests　upon　the　very　simple　motive　of　self…interest。　If　in　any　branch　of　production　the　price　sinks　below　the　cost；　or　in　other　words；　if　the　market　price　of　the　product　is　lower　than　the　value　of　the　means　of　production；　men　will　withdraw　from　that　branch　and　engage　in　some　better　paying　branch　of　production。　Conversely；　if　in　one　branch　of　production；　the　market　price　of　the　finished　good　is　considerably　higher　than　the　value　of　the　sacrificed　or　expended　means　of　production；　then　will　men　be　drawn　from　less　profitable　industries。　They　will　press　into　the　better　paying　branch　of　production；　until　through　the　increased　supply；　the　price　is　again　forced　down　to　cost。　　　　　　The　law　of　cost　operates；　therefore；　by　changing　the　occupation　　of　the　productive　power。（34*）　So　long　as　the　price　tends　to　cause　a　change　in　the　occupation　of　the　productive　power；　it　is　itself　not　in　a　state　of　equilibrium。　On　the　other　hand；　a　condition　of　at　least　relatively　stable　equilibrium　will　be　attained　when　in　the　different　branches　of　production　the　price　has　so　adjusted　itself　that　the　productive　power　does　not　tend　to　change　its　occupation。　This　would　be　the　case；　when；　in　all　kinds　of　employment；　equal　labor　received　equal　pay　and　unequal　labor　received　proportionately　unequal　pay。　Then　the　differences　in　pay　could　be　regarded　as　a　just　equivalent　for　the　special　laboriousness　or　disagreeableness；　or　for　the　special　skill　or　fidelity；　etc。；　incident　to　certain　occupations。　Equal　capital　would　everywhere　receive　the　same　rate　of　interest。　Any　excess　above　this　could　be　regarded　as　a　just　equivalent　for　the　greater　risk；　etc。；　incurred　in　that　particular　investment。　We　may；　for　example；　assume　that　this　point　of　equilibrium　is　reached；　when　in　all　branches　of　production　the　wages　of　an　unskilled　laborer　are　eighty　cents；　and　the　rate　of　interest　on　capital　is　five　per　cent。　　　　　　Under　this　supposition　the　normal　price；　toward　which　according　to　the　law　of　cost　the　market　price　gravitate；　should　be　such　as　would　correspond　with　an　average　wages　of　eighty　cents；　and　a　rate　of　interest　of　five　per　cent。　The　price　of　a　commodity　that　costs　three　days　of　common　labor　would；　according　to　the　law　of　cost；　gravitate　toward　two　dollars　and　forty　cents　（interest　being　ignored）。　This　would　be　true；　whether　or　not　this　equalized　rate　of　pay　of　eighty　cents　corresponded　to　the　minimum　of　existence。　It　may　be　that　when　the　minimum　of　existence　is　only　forty　cents；　the　rate　of　wages　will　not　remain　at　eighty　cents。　A　generation。　later　it　may　sink　to　sixty　cents；　or　even　to　fifty　cents。　While　this　would　show　that　there　is　no　fixed　and　absolute　normal　price；（35）*　it　does　not　alter　the　fact　that　at　the　present　time　the　price　of　the　commodity；　according　to　the　law　of　cost；　gravitates　toward　that　price；　which　would　give　the　laborer　a　wages　of　eighty　cents。　When　we　examine　this　gravitating　motion　more　closely；　it　is　manifest　that　we　cannot　say　that　〃the　price　gravitates　toward　the　rate　of　eighty　cents〃；　because　the　laborer's　cost　of　maintenance　is　forty　cents。　Instead　we　must　say；　that　the　price　gravitate　toward　the　rate　of　eighty　cents；　because　the　rate　of　wages　w