Notes on Ricardo’s Principles (8) – 価値 7

中湖 康太

Section III

資本も労働が化体されたもの

直接的な労働だけでなく、備品、道具、建物等に投入された労働も考慮すべきこと

Not only the labor applied immediately to commodities affect their value, but the labor also which is bestowed on the implements, tools, and buildings, with which such labor is assisted.

リカードは、以下、商品の生産に関与した直接的な労働だけでなく、その生産に関与した備品、道具等の資本についても、労働が化体されたものとして捉え、それによって獲得、生産された商品の価値は、そこに投入された労働量をもって測ることができる旨の議論を展開する。

つまり、一般に、経済学では、労働、資本を生産要素(投入量)として生産関数を考えるが、古典派経済学では、資本についても労働が化体されたものとして捉え、労働のみを生産要素(投入量)として生産関数を考え、それをもって価値説を展開するといってよいだろう。 

Even in that early state to which Adam Smith refers, some capital, though possibly made and accumulated by the hunter himself, would be necessary to enable him to kill his game. Without some weapon, neither the beaver nor the deer could be destroyed, and therefore the value of these animals would be regulated, not solely by the time and labor necessary to their destruction, but also by the time and labor necessary for providing the hunter’s capital, the weapon, by the aid of which their destruction was effected.

渉猟経済

「ビーバーと鹿の渉猟に関する労働と武器の例。渉猟の難易、必要な時間、武器生産に要する労働と武器の耐久性によって価値が決まる。」 全て労働に換算する、ということ。

Suppose the weapon necessary to kill the beaver was constructed with much more labor than that necessary to kill the deer, on account of the greater difficulty of approaching near to the former animal, and the consequent necessity of its being more true to tis mark; one beaver would naturally be of more value than two deer, and precisely for this reason, that more labor would, on the whole, be necessary to its destruction, Or suppose that the same quantity of labor was necessary to make both weapons, but that they were of very unequal durability; of the durable implement only a small portion of its value would be transferred to the commodity, a much greater portion of the value of the less durable implement would be realized in the commodity which it contributed to produce.

賃金や資本収益率は無関係

「賃金や資本収益率についても、その水準がどうであれ、(労働と資本の雇用に等しく作用するので)相対的価値には影響しない。」 労働市場が競争的であることが、暗黙(implicit)の前提となっているといってよいだろう。 

All the implements necessary to kill the beaver and deer might belong to one class of men, and the labor employed in their destruction might be furnished by another class; still, their comparative prices would be in proportion to the actual labor bestowed, both on the formation of the capital and on the destruction of the animals. Under different circumstances of plenty or scarcity of capital, as compared with labor, under different circumstances of plenty or scarcity of food and necessaries essential to the support of men, those who furnished an equal value of capital for either one employment or for the other might have a half, a fourth, or an eight of the produce obtained, the remainder being paid as wages to those who furnished the labor; yet this division could not affect the relative value of these commodities, since whether the profits of capital were greater or less, whether they were 50, 20, or 10 percent, or whether the wages of labor were high or low, they would operate equally on both employments.

(2015.8)

Copyright© 2020 株式会社ジー・シー・エス(GCS) 中湖康太 経済投資コラム All Rights Reserved.