So, now, if capital could reduce nominal wages accordingly, which history shows is not easy to do, as money wages are sticky in a downward direction, this fall in money wages would go along with a constant level of real wages. In reality, money wages would not fall accordingly, if at all, and so real wages would rise. As I have set out elsewhere, this is why central banks have devalued the currency/standard of prices, over the last century, so that, whilst money wages remain constant, or rise modestly, and real wages rise, measured against a constant value of the standard of prices, money wages fall, and relative wages fall even more. Real wages rise only because the value of wage goods falls, relative to a constant value of the standard of prices, more than does wages. In other words, inflation hides the real relation.
“Although the labourer's absolute standard of life would have remained the same, his relative wages, and therewith his relative social position, as compared with that of the capitalist, would have been lowered. If the working man should resist that reduction of relative wages, he would only try to get some share in the increased productive powers of his own labour, and to maintain his former relative position in the social scale. Thus, after the abolition of the Corn Laws, and in flagrant violation of the most solemn pledges given during the anti-corn law agitation, the English factory lords generally reduced wages ten per cent. The resistance of the workmen was at first baffled, but, consequent upon circumstances I cannot now enter upon, the ten per cent lost were afterwards regained.” (p 76-7)
The circumstance, here, was that, after the repeal of the Corn Laws, in 1848, which itself occurred near the start of the long wave uptrend (1843-1865) the resultant fall in the value of raw materials led to a rise in the rate of profit, which facilitated a faster accumulation of capital. The fall in the value of materials, and of labour-power, also created a release of both constant and variable-capital that was, then, also available for capital accumulation. This rapid accumulation of capital, particularly in railway and other infrastructure construction, created a surge in the demand for labour, facilitating the rising money wages. A similar thing occurred, but spread over a longer period, as the 1970's/80's technological revolution massively reduced the value of constant capital, leading to a massive rise in the rate of profit, and release of capital, but, much of which went into financial and property speculation, with the start of the new long wave uptrend only commencing after 1999.
“The values of necessaries, and consequently the value of labour, might remain the same, but a change might occur in their money prices, consequent upon a previous change in the value of money.” (p 77)
In Marx's time, this was primarily viewed in terms of a change in the value of gold as the money commodity, because of the convertibility of currency into gold coins – a gold exchange standard, as opposed to a gold standard in which currency is exchangeable for a stated weight of gold itself. The difference is significant, because a gold coin, obtained in exchange for, say, a paper note, only has the same buying power, as the paper note itself. If the market price of gold rises above the mint price of gold, gold coins buy less gold. But, to, then obtain, gold without buying it, requires melting down the gold coins, which itself has a cost, and only becomes viable in large quantities, and if the difference between the market price, and mint-price of gold diverges significantly.
So, as stated, if the value of commodities remains constant, but the value of gold/standard of prices halves, money prices would double. In that case, money wages would also have to double to stay the same in inflation adjusted terms. If money prices doubled, as a result of this inflation, but money wages only rose by 80%, then they would have fallen in real terms, and real wages would also have fallen. If, as a result of rising productivity, the value of commodities falls by 20%, wages should fall by 20%. However, if there is inflation of 50%, both nominal prices and wages would rise. Both nominal and real wages might, then, rise, whilst relative wages fall, because, although the rise in productivity increases the portion of output going to wages, the portion going to profits rises even more.
No comments:
Post a Comment