Theories of Surplus Value, Part II, Chapter 8 - Part 2

This difference in productivity, therefore, can only be compensated by absolute surplus value, i.e. by increases in the length or intensity of the working-day, within fairly narrow limits. If the labour-time required for the reproduction of labour-power is six hours, then the rate of surplus value, of 100%, with a twelve hour working day, can be increased to 200% with an eighteen hour working day, but its unlikely to be able to extend it beyond that.

If there are one million workers, so that the necessary social working day is six million hours, then, with this eighteen hour day, eighteen million hours of value is produced, giving twelve million hours of surplus value. If the number of workers doubles, the total amount of surplus value also doubles to twenty-four million hours, but the rate of surplus value is not changed. But, this is not the case with relative surplus value. If social productivity rises, then its possible that the needs of this working population of two million may still be met by the expenditure of six million hours of labour, but in an eighteen hour day, these two million workers produce thirty-six million hours of value, so that surplus value is now thirty million hours, giving a rate of surplus value of five hundred percent, with a consequent increase in the rate of profit.

Its possible that instead of a reduction in the value of labour-power arising from rising social productivity, a similar effect may be achieved by reducing wages below the value of labour-power, but, over the longer term, this will reduce the supply of labour-power, for a variety of reasons. Workers may leave the country, have smaller families, or be incapable of working for the same length and intensity. They will not develop the same level of skill, education and so on, so that even if the same quantity of concrete labour is undertaken, it will represent a smaller quantity of abstract labour.

Marx repeats the point made in Capital I, in response to Carey.

“In any case because in a given country the value of labour is falling relatively to its productivity, it must not be imagined that wages in different countries are inversely proportional to the productivity of labour. In fact exactly the opposite is the case. The more productive one country is relative to another in the world market, the higher will be its wages as compared with the other. In England, not only nominal wages but [also] real wages are higher than on the continent. The worker eats more meat; he satisfies more needs.” (p 16-17)

Yet, as was indicated earlier, these higher wages go along also with higher profits, and a higher rate of profit, because although these wages are higher than wages in other countries, they are not higher as a proportion of the total value of production.

“But in proportion to the productivity of the English workers their wages are not higher (than the wages paid in other countries].” (p 17)

Back To Part 1

Forward To Part 3