Marx quotes Ricardo's statement,
““The consequence of a rise of food will be a rise of wages, and every rise of wages will have a tendency to determine the saved capital in a greater proportion than before to the employment of machinery. Machinery and labour are in constant competition, and the former can frequently not be employed until labour rises” (l.c., p. 479).” (p 574)
And adds,
“The machine is thus a means to prevent a rise of labour.” (p 574)
It's not the displaced workers who are found employment by the accumulation of capital that the rise in surplus value, and release of capital, brings about, Marx says, but their children, the next generation of workers who come into the workforce. They would previously have replaced the displaced workers, but now find employment in a range of new industries that spring up as a result of this newly accumulated capital. As I've set out before, this can be seen in every long wave cycle. For example, in the 1930's, a new generation of workers found employment in the Midlands and South-East in the new motor vehicle, and consumer electronics industries that arose at that time, even as older generations in mining, steel, and shipbuilding areas remained unemployed.
Ricardo says,
““In America and many other countries, where the food of man is easily provided, there is not nearly such great temptation to employ machinery” [nowhere is it used on such a massive scale and also, so to speak, for domestic needs as in America] “as in England, where food is high, and costs much labour for its production” [l.c., p. 479].” (p 574)
But, this is wrong, as Marx describes, because, in America, far more machinery was used than in Britain. In part, this was because workers were able to save wages and buy plots of land, to turn themselves back into peasant farmers. That meant labour-power was in relative short supply, so wages were high, providing an incentive to introduce labour-saving technology. In support of this, Marx gives an extensive quote from The Standard, of September 19, 1862. It sets out that Americans seek to do nothing by hand that cannot be done by machine,
“From rocking a cradle to making a coffin, from milking a cow to clearing a forest, from sewing on a button to voting for President, almost, he had a machine for everything. He has invented a machine for saving the trouble of masticating food… The exceeding scarcity of labour and its consequent high value” [despite the low value of food], “as well as a certain innate ‘cuteness’ have stimulated this inventive spirit.” (p 575)
The article, which is about the World Exhibition, describes a number of new US technologies of the time that were on display.
Ricardo says,
““The same cause that raises labour, does not raise the value of machines, and, therefore, with every augmentation of capital, a greater proportion of it is employed on machinery. The demand for labour will continue to increase with an increase of capital, but not in proportion to its increase; the ratio will necessarily be a diminishing ratio” ([David Ricardo, On the Principles of Political Economy, and Taxation, third edition, London, 1821,] p. 479).” (p 576)
Although this is one-sided, Marx says this expresses the correct law of capital accumulation. Ricardo is following John Barton, to whom Marx turns next. But, finally, Marx cites Ricardo's comment,
““In both cases the net revenue would he the same, and so would be the gross revenue, but the former would be realised in different commodities” (l.c., p. 476).” (p 576)
But, Marx points out the gross produce may be the same in value and yet consist of different commodities. It may consist of more value in machines and materials (constant capital) and less in wage goods (variable capital).
No comments:
Post a Comment