Mr. Henry George:
An Examination of Mr George's position as a
Systematic Economist and a Review of
the Competitive and Socialistic Schools of Economy
Robert Scott Moffat
[Book V / Chapter II / 1885]
CHAPTER II / MR. GEORGE'S RICARDIAN THEORIES
We have now only to take a parting glance in its entirety at the
problem with which Mr. George has endeavoured to deal. It is
impossible, as I have said, to deal satisfactorily with the
distribution or wealth, whether actual or contingent, independently of
the distribution of labour. No one has dealt with this question more
methodically than Ricardo. A believer in the Malthusian theory of
populations, Ricardo, like Mr. George, believed that rent was destined
gradually to absorb nearly the whole proceeds of industry, and it is
from Ricardo that Mr. George has borrowed the grounds of this belief.
So plausible are the grounds on which Ricardo has based this
hypothesis that it has been accepted by nearly all his successors. The
method of Ricardo's reasoning has also obtained a firm hold on the
minds of subsequent economists. I have already explained what that
method is, and what admirable results Mr. George has parodied by the
process of elimination systematized by so that Mr. George after
stating many economical facts of great value has been able to
his aerial conclusions in utter disregard of [unreadable]. Mr. George
has thus performed upon the economical system of Ricardo an operation
similar at which Hume performed on the philosophical work of Berkeley,
when following the method by which Berkeley had eliminated matter, he
likewise eliminated mind.
Before examining the doctrine of Ricardo directly, it may be
desirable to say a few words more of Mr. George's development of it.
In speaking on the laws on the distribution of wealth of "the
improvement of the arts" Mr. George uses a very [unreadable]
term. Of course he means industrial arts, of these there are two kinds
which, in relation affect distribution differently: 1st. Improvements
in agricultural arts, or in the raising of material generally; 2nd.
Improvements in the relating to manufactures, or the processes of
acquiring raw material for use. The primary [unreadable] of the former
class is to lower rent; for [unreadable] the same amount of produce to
be raised on land, it throws a part of the land that would, otherwise
be occupied upon the market, and introduces competition among owners
for the sale or lease of their land. Ultimately the loss will be
lowered; but this arises not from the agricultural improvements
directly, but from another factor, the growth of population that
results from [unreadable], and when rent rises from this cause Mr.
George fails to see that it does not necessarily rise relatively to
aggregate revenue. Improvements in the manufacturing arts liberate
labour for the production of raw material, and have thus a tendency,
apart from the growth of population, to raise rents positively, but by
no means necessarily in the ratio of the actual increase of
production. They have a more distinct tendency to give an apparent
rise of rent in another way. By lowering the cost of production of
manufactures relatively to agricultural produce, on which the value of
rent primarily depends, they enable rent to purchase more of them; but
this is an increase relatively to the former purchasing power of rent,
not relatively to the present aggregate of produce.
When there is an increase in manufacturing facilities, there also
arises a demand for more elaborate products. Suppose at a given stage
of industrial development that for every labourer employed in
producing raw material, three are employed in preparing it for use.
Let a great improvement take place in the economy of labour, whether
manufacturing or agricultural, and it will be found that with it will
arise a demand for more elaborate and better commodities of all kinds.
This will tend to arrest the tendency of manufacturing improvement to
increase population and to increase the consumption of raw material.
That this effect is produced in a high degree by the improvement of
manufactures, will be seen if we consider that the finishing processes
required for the preparation of food from raw material vary
comparatively little, and the demand for food varies only with the
population; but with the demand for mannufactures there arises a
demand for all kinds of commodities which require little labour
compared with food for raw material. If, then, agriculture share
moderately, as it commonly does, in the improvement, the probability
is that the demand for manufacturing labour will exceed the demand for
agricultural, so that in the advanced stage four labourers instead of
three will be required to work on the raw produce provided by one.
This is in accordance with the experience of progressive communities,
and, as already shown, it would necessarily give an increased value to
finished productions relatively to raw material, and thus cause a
relative decline of rent. But to put an end to Mr. George's
speculation it is only necessary to take a more precise view of the
possible extent to which improvements, unaided by growth of population
can possibly advance rent. Let us then take Mr. George's illustration
of a stationary population. Let us assume that the improvements are
exclusively manufacturing, that being, as shown, the only kind tending
to increase rent. Let us for the sake of convenience assume that the
improvement is equal to 10 per cent, on manufacturing industry alone,
not on the entire industry of the country. Then the raw produce
remaining the same, 90 per cent. of the existing manufacturing
industry would suffice to work it up, and there would only be 10 per
cent, left for all new enterprises. Suppose the labour of preparing
raw produce for use to require three men for one required to produce
it,, then the whole additional demand that could go to raise rent
would be one-fourth of the available labour. But, as any rise in rent
implies a rise in the price of raw produce, in so far as rent rose,
part of the surplus of wages and capital available for increased
production would be absorbed by it. Therefore the additional demand
for raw produce could not possibly extend to a full fourth of the
saving, unless the landlords who gained what the capitalists and
labourers would lose, should spend their whole gain on commodities.
But this is not the natural course. The landlords, finding their gains
increase, would add something to their capital, in order to spend it
in improving the source of their gains. Now capital spent in
agricultural improvements, while it tends to increase the gain of the
particular improver, tends to lower rent generally. This illustrates
the futility of Mr. George's attempt to deal with the distribution of
wealth independently of tbe distribution of industry.
|