|
From Chapter
2: The Scarcity of Labor and Its Ineradicability (pp. 59-61)
This excerpt is taken from George Reisman, Capitalism: A Treatise
on Economics. Ottawa, Illinois: Jameson Books, 1996. Copyright © 1996 by George
Reisman. All rights reserved. May not be reproduced in any form without written permission
of the author. The following limited exception is granted: Namely, provided they are
reproduced in full and include this copyright notice and are made for noncommercial
use, i.e., for use other than for sale, including use as part of any publication that is
sold, copies of this excerpt may be downloaded into personal computers and distributed
electronically or on paper printouts from a personal computer; reproduction on the
internet is permitted provided the copy of the excerpt is accompanied by the following
link to the Jefferson School's home page (which may, and hopefully will, be displayed
elsewhere and more prominently): The Jefferson School
of Philosophy, Economics, and Psychology. This limited right of reproduction expires
on December 31, 1999.
This page has been visited times since August 7, 1999.
Wealth not only is the product of human labor, but also could be produced in larger
quantity if more labor were devoted to its production. Indeed, the application of more
labor is the only fundamental requirement for increasing the supply of wealth. This is
because more labor is the source of additional equipment and materials, including
additional agricultural commodities and mineral supplies extracted from the ground. Thus,
the scarcity of wealth implies a more fundamental scarcity of labor.
As has already been shown, and will be fully confirmed in the next chapter, the fact
that the wealth-character of natural resources is the result of labor indicates that in a
capitalist society, the supply of natural resources can be indefinitely expanded and
therefore does not constitute a long-run limitation on the ability to produce that is
independent of the supply of labor. Indeed, as the next chapter will show, even within
very short periods of time--weeks or months--the supply of raw materials can almost always
be increased through the application of more labor.37
The fundamental scarcity of labor is manifest in the fact that virtually everyone would
like to enjoy an income many times greater than the income he is presently capable of
earning. For example, today an average worker may earn on the order of $20,000 per year
for working forty hours a week. If such a worker had it in his power to earn $100,000 per
year, he would have no difficulty in finding ways to live up to such an income.
Unfortunately, to earn such an income at his present rate of pay, he would have to work
more hours than there are in the week. His maximum actual ability to work is obviously
vastly less than corresponds to the income he would like to have.
But this is only another way of saying that the utmost goods and services he is capable
of producing are far less than the goods and services he would like to consume.
Taken collectively, our desire to be able to spend five or ten times more than we now can
afford to spend is an indication that we would like five or ten times more work performed
than is now performed. In the present state of technology and productivity of labor
(output per unit of labor), this is how much additional labor would need to be performed
to produce the larger volume of output we would like to be able to buy.
Consider. It would be very easy for the government of the United States to arrange
things so that the average worker could earn and spend $100,000 a year instead of $20,000
a year. Indeed, the governments of many countries have long ago made it possible for all
of their citizens to be millionaires! To accomplish such results, all the government would
have to do is print enough new and additional paper money. But there is nothing to be
gained from such a procedure. It is accompanied by rising prices, which prevent the higher
incomes from having any greater buying power than the smaller incomes did before. The only
way that earning and spending $100,000 a year instead of $20,000 a year can represent the
ability to buy five times more goods is if five times more goods are produced. Only then
would prices not rise in the face of five times more spending to buy goods. But in a given
state of technology and productivity of labor, this would be possible only if five times
as much labor could be performed, which, of course, is itself impossible. People can work
themselves to the point of utter exhaustion, and still they cannot produce more than a
small fraction of all that it would be useful and desirable for them to produce. Thus, the
supply of labor that people can provide falls radically short of the supply whose products
they would like to have. Labor is scarce.
(It should be obvious that the scarcity of labor implies there is never any metaphysical
reason for the existence of unemployment--that is to say, there is never any reason for it
by virtue of the necessary, inescapable nature of things. Unemployment belongs strictly in
the category of the man-made. Either it is voluntary and chosen by the individuals
concerned, because they prefer to wait to find better terms of employment or because they
simply prefer leisure; or, where it is involuntary and unchosen by the individuals
concerned, it is forcibly imposed on them. Unemployment is forcibly imposed through
the imposition of too high a level of money wage rates by the government or by coercive
labor unions operating with the sanction of the government. These policies, of course,
could be done away with. The causes of unemployment will be fully clear once we understand
the principles governing money and spending, and the fact that under the freedom of
competition, purchasing power sufficient to buy all the goods and services that can be
produced in the economic system at the point of full employment is automatically generated
by the process of production itself. The discussion of these important matters is reserved
for later chapters.38)
The scarcity of labor, of course, is also the result of a scarcity of personal
services. Virtually everyone, if he could afford it, would like to be able to be served by
maids, cooks, gardeners, personal secretaries, and so on. Each individual could probably
find worthwhile uses for the labor of half a dozen or more full-time servants, without
even giving the matter more than a moment's thought.
The labor that we implicitly desire to have at our disposal, whether to produce goods
for us or to provide us with personal services, is, as I have said, limited only by our
imaginations. And yet while nature has provided each of us with an imagination capable of
forming desires on a grand scale, it has simultaneously equipped each of us with only two
arms to provide for the satisfaction of those desires. Each of us is easily capable of
forming desires whose fulfillment requires the labor of multitudes, and yet by the laws of
arithmetic, the average member of any society can never obtain more than the labor, or
products of the labor, of just one person. This is so because for each person who
exists to consume, there can be no more than one person present to produce. Indeed, when
the very young and the sick and infirm are allowed for, who can only be supported by the
labor of others, it turns out that for each person who consumes there is, on average,
substantially less than the labor of one person available to produce.
The preceding discussion demonstrates the existence of a fundamental scarcity of labor.
The scarcity of labor is not only fundamental, however. It is also ineradicable.
I have already shown earlier in this chapter how increases in the ability to produce
are accompanied by new and additional desires for wealth, which grow out of the very same
technological advances that make possible the increases in the ability to produce. The
effect of this is that the scarcity of labor is not reduced by increases in the
productivity of labor. The scarcity of labor is also not reduced by any increase in the
size of the population and thus the number of people able and willing to work, because the
additional members of that population bring with them their own needs and desires for
goods and services that are in excess of their ability to add to the supply of goods and
services. Furthermore, as the productivity of labor rises and increases the workers'
standard of living, the workers tend to acquire a growing desire for leisure. As a result,
not only does the desire for wealth grow as the ability to produce it increases, but also
the amount of labor the individual is willing to perform decreases. This represents an
additional cause of the continuing scarcity of labor.
Thus, the fundamental and essential nature of economic life is this: the need and
desire for additional wealth are there and the nature-given means of producing it are
there; all that is lacking is the ability of human labor to transform the nature-given
means of production into additional wealth.
On this foundation, the fundamental economic need of rational beings emerges as the
overcoming of the limitations on production imposed by the scarcity of labor. Always, what
stands between man and his need for greater wealth is his limited ability to produce
wealth--his limited ability and also willingness to perform labor. There is only one
solution to this problem. And that is continuously to raise the productivity of labor--that
is, continuously to increase the quantity and quality of the goods that can be produced
per unit of labor, including the variety of goods. An ineradicable scarcity of labor
resulting from a need and desire for labor that are always vastly greater than the supply
of labor requires that the productivity of labor be rendered greater and greater. The rise
in the productivity of labor is the only conceivable way in which man can obtain the
progressively greater amounts of wealth that his rational and progressive nature requires.
The problem of precisely how continuously to raise the productivity of labor, to
make possible an ever increasing production and enjoyment of goods per capita, is what I
call the economic problem.
(Associated with the economic problem is an important but subsidiary problem, which is
often mistakenly presented as the central economic problem, namely, how to allocate an
existing limited ability to produce in accordance with the choices of individuals to
satisfy their more important wants ahead of their less important wants. The necessity of
this choice is implied by the existence of needs and wants that have no limit, in the face
of a productivity of labor that at any given time is always strictly limited. Regrettably,
it is this subsidiary problem that most economists have in mind when they describe
economics as focusing on "the allocation of scarce means among competing ends."
Closely associated with this mistaken view of the economic problem is the formulation of
the fundamental problem of economic life in terms of a scarcity of goods. The
actual fundamental problem, of course, is a scarcity of labor and thus how to raise
the productivity of labor.)
The next chapter provides a conclusive demonstration of the limitless potential of
natural resources and contains a necessary critique of the objections of the ecology
movement to economic progress. Following it, Chapter 4 will explain why the focal point of
the ongoing solution to the economic problem is the division of labor. The division
of labor will be shown to constitute the indispensable social-organizational framework for
the progressive increase in the productivity of labor required by man's nature as a
rational being. It will be shown to represent in its inner nature the form of society
required for the efficient and progressively improving use of man's mind, body, and
nature-given environment in production.
As previously indicated, subsequent chapters will then show the dependence of the
division of labor on the leading institutions of a capitalist society, above all, private
ownership of the means of production and the price system. They will also show the
reciprocating and thoroughly benevolent influence of the division of labor on private
ownership of the means of production and other essential institutions of capitalism,
namely, economic inequality and economic competition. Still later chapters will show how,
within the framework of the division of labor and capitalism, the productivity of labor is
continuously increased on the basis of capital accumulation--which entails the
employment of ever increasing amounts of wealth as means of further production--and the
absolute dependency of this process too on the institutions of capitalism.
In effect, the remainder of this book can be summarized as demonstrating a single
proposition: in every possible way, with no valid objection, the solution for the
economic problem is capitalism.
Notes
37. See below, pp. 6371.
38. See below, Chapters 1219.
|
|