In every
mode of production, the surplus value is divided into revenues.
Interest is the form of revenue obtained by the owners of loanable
money-capital.
This form of
capital, like merchant capital, pre-dates capitalism itself. It is
not capital in the sense that Marx describes it, as being a social
relation between wage-labour and capital, which expands and produces
surplus value on the basis of that relation, in production. Interest
bearing capital, like merchant capital, does not enter into a social
relation with wage labour, it does not engage in production, and does
not thereby produce surplus value. Like merchant capital,
interest-bearing capital is only able to to expand, because it is
able to obtain a share of the surplus value that has been produced by
others, in the realm of production.
The money
lender is able to obtain interest from the slave owner, because the
slave owner produces a surplus product, and in a money economy, which
arises upon the back of commodity production and exchange, the money
value of this surplus product, assumes the form of a surplus value.
The slave owner is, thereby enabled to pay interest to the money
lender out of this surplus value.
Similarly,
the feudal lord extracts surplus value in the form of rent. To the
extent that this rent takes on money form, the landlord is thereby
enabled to pay interest to the money lender. The petty commodity
producer may also produce a surplus value, being the difference
between the value of their labour-power, i.e. what they must spend to
buy the necessary commodities required for the reproduction of their
labour-power, and the new value created in production, by their
labour. They are thereby enabled to pay interest on borrowed money
out of this surplus value.
As Marx
discusses, in Theories of Surplus Value, it is this which
leads Adam Smith to describe interest as a secondary form of revenue,
because it is always obtained as a result of the primary owners of
surplus value borrowing money from the money lender, and then paying
interest to them, as the price of having done so.
In
pre-capitalist economies, the resort to borrowing money tends to be
something done only in extremis. The direct producer, has no need to
borrow money, so long as they can continue to reproduce their
labour-power out of their own production. It is only when some kind
of natural disaster prevents that, that the direct producer must make
up their shortfall by buying additional products in the market, for
which they will need to spend money, which they may not have.
The
petty-commodity producer will again seek to reproduce the value of
their means of production out of the value of their end product, and
will likewise seek to produce at least enough new value by their
labour, to cover the value of their labour-power, and thereby ensure
its reproduction. It is again only when this becomes impossible that
the petty commodity producer will have to borrow money either to
cover the cost of reproducing their means of production or means of
consumption, so as to continue to produce.
The
non-owner of means of production, i.e. the wage labourer, is never in
possession of the surplus value they produce, and so is never in a
position to pay interest to a money lender, out of such surplus.
What they are paid as revenue themselves, i.e. wages, is only ever
(taking temporary fluctuations into account) enough to enable them to
buy the commodities required for the reproduction of their
labour-power.
Of course,
in reality, the worker also is faced with paying interest. At times,
their actual wages may be less than is required to cover the purchase
of their necessaries, and they may have to borrow money to achieve
that goal. The lender of the money is not concerned with why they
have borrowed that money, whether it is to be used productively to
generate surplus value, out of which the interest can be paid, or
whether it is simply to be used to fund consumption. Either way the
lender demands the payment of interest. But, if the worker then has
to pay this borrowed money back, plus interest, that is revenue which
the worker does not have to buy the required necessaries in the next
period.
Economically,
the interest must then be funded, one way or another, out of the
surplus value produced by the worker but appropriated by the primary
exploiter. If peasant producers are unable to reproduce their
labour-power, because they have had to finance some of their
activities by borrowing, and now have to repay that borrowing with
interest, they will have less to be able to hand over to the
landlord, for example. Workers whose wages are consistently too low
to cover the reproduction of their labour-power, and who borrow, must
either obtain higher wages later on, so that they can cover the cost
of those necessities, plus the interest on their borrowing, or else
they will be able to consume fewer commodities, so that the market price of those commodities will fall in response to the
under-consumption. If not, labour-power will not be reproduced, the
supply of labour-power will fall, and so wages will rise.
This
illustrates a fundamental difference between interest and these other
forms of revenue. The value of labour-power is objectively
determined by the labour-time required for the reproduction of the
producer, and this remains true whether the producer is a member of a
primitive commune, a peasant producer, an artisan petty commodity
producer, a wage worker, or a worker in a communist society. The new
value created by all these producers is equally objectively
determined, by the length and intensity of the normal working-day.
Consequently, Marx shows, the mass of surplus value is also
objectively determined, as the difference between these two values.
It determines the maximum that can be extracted as rent in
pre-capital societies, and profit in capitalist societies.
But,
interest is determined by no such objective laws. In pre-capitalist
societies, where borrowing is used as a last resort, the number of
money lenders is small, and the amounts of money lent is relatively
small in total. Various taboos and restrictions are placed upon
lending money at interest, and consequently, no legal protection is
given to the lenders, if they do not obtain repayment. Consequently,
the fact that those borrowing are desperate, and those lending seek
to cover themselves against default, leads to usurious rates of
interest being charged on borrowed money.
There is
little in the way of competition between such lenders to limit these
interest rates, or to establish an average rate of interest.
Under
capitalism, the objective laws which determine the value of
labour-power, and also determine the new value produced by labour,
and consequently the mass of surplus value, remain. This surplus
value now assumes the form of profit, and the relation between this
profit, and the capital advanced for its production establishes the
general annual rate of profit. But, under capitalism, money-capital
is merely one phase of the circulation of industrial capital, and
like the other circulation phase of capital, commodity-capital, is
subordinated to productive-capital, which generates the surplus
value, which is merely realised in circulation.
Money-capital
expands massively in absolute terms, but shrinks, relatively, in
terms of the total value of output. On the one hand, large amounts
of the money-capital required by the productive or merchant
capitalist is simply realised for them in the value of the
commodities they sell. Take the merchant capitalist. They have
commodities to sell with a value of £12,000, and of this £2,000
constitutes surplus value. In other words, the merchant bought
commodities from the producer with a value of £12,000, for £10,000.
They sell these commodities at their value of £12,000, and thereby
realise the £2,000 of surplus value contained in them.
They now use
the £2,000 of surplus value to meet their own consumption
requirements, whilst reproducing their commodity-capital, by using
the remaining £10,000 to once more buy commodities. Although,
£12,000 was thrown into circulation here, none of it necessitated
borrowing from a money lending capitalist. The merchant already had
£12,000 of commodity-capital, which was realised as £12,000 in
money. Of this £10,000 of money-capital was metamorphosed into
commodity-capital, whilst £2,000 was spent as revenue by the
merchant.
Even had the
merchant initially borrowed £10,000 to cover their purchase of
£12,000 of commodities, that comprised their commodity-capital, this
would not change things. Once they sold these commodities at
£12,000, one of two things could happen. If they had borrowed the
initial money-capital for five years, then they would simply use
£10,000 of the realised £12,000 to reproduce their
commodity-capital, thereby necessitating no additional money-capital,
and paying interest on the money-capital they originally borrowed,
out of the £2,000 of profit, made on the sale, and then using the
remainder of that £2,000 to cover their own consumption.
Alternatively,
had they borrowed the initial £10,000 for just one year, they would
repay this capital sum, from the proceeds of the sale of the
commodities. They would again, pay the interest on that capital sum
out of the £2,000 of profit realised in the sale, and cover their
consumption out of the remaining portion of that profit. They would
then be in the position of borrowing £10,000 to cover their purchase
once more of the commodities to comprise their commodity-capital.
But, this is not an additional requirement for money-capital. It is
simply the initial requirement, once more rolled over.
The same is
true in relation to a productive-capitalist. They start with a
quantity of productive-capital. As a consequence of production, a
surplus value is created. The productive-capital has now been
metamorphosed into a quantity of commodity-capital, which embodies
this surplus value. They then realise this value by selling these
commodities, either directly to consumers or to merchants, the
capital value is thereby metamorphosed into a quantity of
money-capital, which they use to reproduce the previously consumed
mass of productive-capital, and from the surplus value realised they
fund their own personal consumption.
As Marx
says, such simple reproduction remains at the heart of all capitalist
production. The money-capital required to reproduce the consumed
productive-capital, is simply realised out of the sale of the
commodities that comprise the commodity-capital, without the need for
any additional money-capital to be thrown into circulation. To the
extent that the vast majority of production is accounted for by this
simple reproduction process, it is clear that no additional
requirement for money-capital is generated by it. Indeed, the very
process of capitalist development, which increases the rate of turnover of capital, which also creates a release of capital, via
increased productivity, which reduces the value of the consumed
capital, and the process of creating greater efficiency in the
circulation process, reduce the amount of money-capital required.
In fact, an
examination of this process illustrates that no additional
money-capital need be injected from outside this process, to meet the
needs of an expanded reproduction either. If the profit obtained by
the productive or merchant capitalist is large enough, and this tends
naturally to be the case, as productivity rises, and a process of
concentration and centralisation of capital occurs, then each
individual capitalist will require a smaller proportion of their mass
of profit to cover their personal consumption. Indeed, as Marx
describes the same process by which the rise in productivity, causes
the value of constant capital to decline, and annual rate of profit
to rise, also leads to a fall in the value of the commodities which
comprise the personal consumption of the capitalist. That itself
also reduces the proportion of their profit required for that
purpose, and so increases the proportion available for accumulation.
Out of the
realised value of production, not only thereby is the money capital
produced which reproduces the consumed capital, and provides the
revenue required by capitalists to cover their purchase of personal
consumption goods, but it also realises the money-capital required
for the accumulation of additional productive-capital.
However, as
Marx sets out in Capital II, whilst this is true at a global
level, it is not true at an individual level. One capital may
realise a large amount of money-capital, but only a part of it may be
required to replace its fixed capital, in the next year. It may not
be able, for a variety of reasons to accumulate additional capital.
For example, the technical requirements of production determine that
additional productive-capital can only be employed in certain
proportions, and minimum levels.
Consequently,
each individual capital accumulates reserve funds of this
money-capital which can only be used, when they have reached a
particular size, or when fixed capital needs to be replaced, and so
on. But, no capital wants to have capital, including money-capital,
sitting around doing nothing. Consequently, these reserve funds get
thrown into the money market, where they become available for other
capitals to borrow.
At any one
time, therefore, these reserve funds are getting thrown into the
money market, creating additional supply, whilst other capitals that
seek to expand, but lack the money-capital to do so immediately, are
borrowing from the money market, creating demand. In addition, a
stock of loanable money-capital always exists, because some
capitalists withdraw from the realm of production and distribution,
and hold their wealth purely in the form of loanable money-capital.
The interaction between this demand and supply of money-capital,
thereby determines the rate of interest.
The average
rate of interest is the market price for the use value of capital,
its ability to produce profit. Interest itself is the revenue
obtained by the owners of this interest-bearing capital, just as
wages are the revenue obtained by wage labourers, and rent is the
revenue obtained by landowners, and profit of enterprise is the
revenue obtained by the owners of capital.
No comments:
Post a Comment