And, here, also can be seen the difference between The Labour Theory of Value, as a theory of objective value, and theories of subjective value. On the basis of the first, the use value of the commodity may remain the same, and yet its value change if more or less labour is required for its production. However, for subjective theories of value, changes in value can only be explained if the use value/utility of a commodity changes relative to others.
“In considering bread as a use-value, we are concerned with its properties as an article of food and by no means with the labour of the farmer, miller, baker, etc. Even if the labour required were reduced by 95 per cent as a result of some invention, the usefulness of a loaf of bread would remain quite unaffected. It would lose not a single particle of its use-value even if it dropped ready-made from the sky. Whereas labour positing exchange-value manifests itself in the equality of commodities as universal equivalents, labour as useful productive activity manifests itself in the infinite variety of use-values. Whereas labour positing exchange-value is abstract universal and uniform labour, labour positing use-value is concrete and distinctive labour, comprising infinitely varying kinds of labour as regards its form and the material to which it is applied.” (p 36)
Which of these, even given all the distorting effects on prices of capitalism, seems to fit observable reality? Its true that, on a hot day, demand for ice-cream may rise, and sellers take advantage to increase prices, compared to a cold day, but, averaging out these variations, isn't it the changes in the costs of producing the ice-cream that best explains changes in its price, and those changes in costs, ultimately come down to the changes in the quantity of labour required for its production. That is why, as firms attempt to become more competitive, i.e. to reduce the individual value of their output below the market value, they continually seek to reduce the labour required for production, via the use of labour saving machines, division of labour and so on.
If we take something like an electronic calculator, the use-value of such devices, measured by the functions they perform, and so on, increased considerably after they were first introduced. A theory of subjective value would suggest that the value of such a device should then have risen. But, on the contrary, the value of calculators progressively fell, as increases in productivity meant that less labour was required for their components, and for the assembly of those components into the end product.
A calculator, as a machine, used productively, of course, saves a lot of labour, because those doing the calculating can now do so much more quickly. And that is true of any machine, because no machine would be introduced unless it enabled an increase in labour productivity. This saving in labour, is its use-value, but its not that which determines its value, but the labour required for its own production.
“Thus the exchange-value of a machine, for instance, is determined not by the amount of labour-time which it can replace, but by the amount of labour-time expended in its production and therefore required for the production of a new machine of the same type.” (p 37)
No comments:
Post a Comment