WORK, ECONOMICS, AND PROFIT VERSUS WEALTH

So,  now we have re-created the tribal unit along traditional lines and by modern methods. It is potentially large  enough to  provide for its own needs, the Tribe  may start to  extricate itself  from  dependency and its members may start  to  feel  the benefits of having control over their own lives. The  disinherited  are  re-inherited.  A life with capital reclaimed, restarts after a  3,000 year break.

So  now the Gen sets to work with its own redistributed capital. It  applies its own labour to  that capital to create wealth and to meet  its own  needs. It sets up a Corporation to develop an area, issuing bonds as described previously. Soon it will be able to create a surplus that it  may trade with others and further increase the quality of its  existence, should it choose to do so. If we want a better standard of living  we  work for it. Or if we’re happy with  our  quality  of life, we don’t do any excess work. Enjoy. Make Art and Music. Even these products of course have economic value if they are sold. We may even make more from a decent tune than a year’s crops.

Beyond this, we have not fought this hard simply to repeat the mistakes of the past and so we should look very carefully in turn at economic relations, education and forms of government amongst other key enquiries. I look first at our economic activity.

There  has  been introduced into the  economic  landscape  a theory of profit by Adam Smith in his famous book “The Wealth  of Nations”. The theory states that profit is inextricably linked to production.  The Capitalist Establishment was very eager to  hold

up  this “argument” as the justification for enriching itself  at the expense of others.

But  it  is no more than a license for greed as has  been  demonstrated by Henry George who wrote “Progress and Poverty” in  1879 in answer to Smith’s book.

George  argues that economic production may be broken  down  into only  three parts – land, capital and labour.  Natural  resources like  trees and oil are part of the land. Capital  is  everything made  by man from these resources. Capital may be further  broken down to be either tools or stock. When someone applies labour  to capital,  they  create  wealth.  But what is  the  price  of  the product? What is it’s real value?

The product’s real and actual value is precisely the sum of three things…

1/  LAND – The use of land required in the  product’s  production and  distribution (i.e. natural resources (raw  materials),  land for the factory, the warehouse, the road and the shop).

2/ CAPITAL – The use of capital expended in the production and distribution of the product,  i.e. how much stock is used to produce the product  and how much depreciation of tools occurred in its production).

3/  LABOUR  –  i.e. wages for the time spent  in  production  and distribution.

The simple mathematical equation therefore follows…

WAGE  per labourer = Total of WEALTH produced minus CAPITAL  used  in  production minus RENT for land, and this sum divided  by  the total number of labourers.

Exactly the same equation sets the value of the product  produced – it’s value. So re-organising the same equation gives us…

Product Price = Rent + capital used + wages,  this sum divided by the number of products produced.

And  since price x no. of products = WEALTH produced,  this  then yields the same equation in another simpler form…

WEALTH = LAND + CAPITAL + LABOUR

Note  that when arrogant land-owners tell people that it is  only their  laziness  that holds them back, it is actually  access  to land and capital that holds them back. Nothing comes from nothing and  the landless cannot make wealth out of thin air. That’s  why they  won’t  give you your share of capital to set  up  your  own business, or allow you to be involved in that land redevelopment. In the absence of land or capital, people have to  sell their labour to someone else, which is what a “job” is. Labour without capital or land. Work without security or future. They convinced us that a job is what we want.

Back  to  the economic equation. Taking an example,  100  workers take  8 hours (@ £20/hour) to produce 1000 things. The wage  bill is  therefore  100 workers x 8 hours each x £20/hour =  £16,000.

The  rent is £500, the capital used costs £2,000, including losses. The sale  price of the item is therefore …

(16,000 +   500 +  2,000)  / 1000     =   £18-50  

i.e. (wages  +  rent + capital) / no. of products  =  price

On  receiving  this precise price for the product,  the  producer pays  first for the land and the raw material that has  been  extracted from it. Secondly, the producers pay to cover the loss of capital  used up in production. The remainder they keep as  their wages.  There is no profit. They are paid for the work that  they have done, no more no less. No work, no pay. Adding anything else to the sale price is theft, i.e. getting the consumer to pay  you more than the product is actually worth. Or put another way,  the consumer  pays  the  producer for not working.  Profit  pays  the Directors  who are generally also the Shareholders, who hold  our share of the planet in their own hands. 

So  we  can  clearly see where profit  fits  into  the  equation.  Profit may also arrive in another way – buying something for less than it’s worth as well as selling it for more than it’s worth…

1/ The Director may buy something for less than its worth…Or  simply  steal it. Mainly practised by  Imperialists  stealing land and therefore not having to pay the first cost of production –  land  and raw materials. The other way to do this  is  to  get slaves to produce capital and then the producer keeps the capital and doesn’t pay for the labour. This removes the second and third costs  of production. All the sale value may then be returned  to the Director as profit. 

2/ The Director may sell something for more than it’s worth… by  just  calculating the actual value and adding on a  bit.  Or selling it for whatever he can convince the buyer to pay. The buyer  therefore  pays more for the product than it  is  actually worth. The buyer acquiesces, allowing the producer to steal the extra value.  In the exchange, the buyer loses by giving up  more  than they receive in return. Buying the goods impoverishes the buyer.

Profit, or more accurately the professed need for it,   is a con. It can be removed from the economic  equation. And  removing  profit still guarantees that people who  work  get paid. The only new aspect of this change is that people who don’t work don’t get to make a living on the backs of other people  any more. Profit, as we can clearly see, is theft.

<<< previous                    next >>>