Thursday, 23 March 2023

A Contribution To The Critique of Political Economy, Chapter 2.C Theories of The Medium of Circulation and of Money - Part 4 of 20

This contradiction between use value and exchange-value is the same as discussed earlier, as inherent to the commodity, and so also to commodity production and exchange as a whole. As Marx sets out in Theories of Surplus Value, Chapter 9, the bourgeois economists, like Ricardo and Mill, failed to recognise it, whereas Sismondi did. But, Sismondi sought to avoid the consequences of those contradictions by seeking to hold back capitalist development. It is why his ideas are reactionary, as are those of the petty-bourgeois socialists that followed him, down to today. As Lenin points out, Sismondi was reactionary compared to Ricardo, just as the petty-bourgeois socialists, today, are reactionary even compared to the liberal bourgeoisie.

When Marx says that the arguments of the Mercantilists remain valid, even in modern economies, what he means is the points referred to earlier. In the circuit of industrial capital, exchange-value takes the form of money in its congealed form, if only for a moment. For large-scale investments in fixed capital, not only must stocks of such fixed capital be built up, on the one side, but large hoards of money must be accumulated with which to buy it, on the other. Today, these hoards take the form of money tokens, and bank deposits, rather than gold or silver, but, in times of high inflation, when faith in paper and electronic tokens disappears, there is also a rush to replace them with gold and silver, as natural stores of value.


The mercantilists understood money in its congealed form as money hoards, but bourgeois economy, which starts from the circuit of industrial capital, which can also be reduced to C – M` - C`, understands money only in its fluid form, as means of circulation. This also explains why, today, bourgeois economists of both Right and Left confuse money with currency, money with merely money tokens. When they talk about “money supply”, they really mean currency supply.


“... the specific aspect of money as means of circulation is upheld against its specific aspect as money. If the function of means of circulation in serving as coin is isolated, then, as we have seen, it becomes a value-token.” (p 159)

In so far as these tokens are representatives of money, and redeemable for it, they must conform with the laws previously outlined, whereby it is the value and quantity of commodities to be circulated that determines the amount of money in circulation. However, what appeared to be the case, as described by Hume and others, was that it was the quantity of money in circulation that determined prices. Marx explains the reality as against the appearance.

“If there is a fall or rise in the value of gold and silver, in which the exchange-value of commodities is measured as price, then prices rise or fall because a change has taken place in their standard of value; and an increased or diminished amount of gold and silver is in circulation as coin because the prices have risen or fallen. The observable phenomenon, however, is that with an increasing or diminishing volume of means of circulation, prices change while the exchange-value of commodities remains constant.” (p 160)

In other words, as described previously, if the value of commodities remains constant, their exchange-value, to each other, also remain constant. A metre of linen with a value of 10 hours exchanges for a litre of wine with a value of 10 hours. But, if the value of a gram of gold falls from 10 hours to 5 hours, the price of both linen and wine rises to 2 grams of gold. In order to circulate commodities, twice as much money must be put into circulation. But, what is seen is this increased currency circulation, which is the consequence of the fall in the value of gold, so that it appears that it is this increased currency circulation that is the cause of the higher prices, and not the consequence of it.

“If, on the other hand, the amount of value-tokens in circulation falls below the requisite level, or rises above it, then it is forcibly reduced to that level by a fall or rise of commodity-prices. The effect in both cases appears to be brought about by the same cause, and Hume holds fast to this appearance.” (p 160)

So, again, as seen earlier, if money tokens are redeemable for gold, they must conform to the laws relating to money. If too many are put into circulation, they are devalued, and commodity prices rise, including the price of gold, which rises above its mint price. Owners of tokens exchange them for gold at the mint price, which is lower than the market price, so that the quantity of tokens in circulation is reduced, and vice versa. This, of course, is not possible with non-redeemable tokens and fiat currency.


No comments:

Post a Comment