Reconstruction of Henry George -- The Sequel
Teaching Economics as a Science
Harry Pollard
PART ONE: INTRODUCTION
International, 1973
In 1973, at the International Conference of the International Union
for Land Value Taxation and Free Trade on the Isle of Man, I reported
on the Inter-Student High School Program, pointing out that the
courses that we had used for decades for adult instruction showed
weaknesses which made them unsuitable for use with young minds. This
made necessary heavy revision of 'the School course', both in teaching
style and in content. During this reappraisal, we found ourselves in
conflict with some of the arguments of Henry George. In most
instances, the differences were minor and were essentially extensions,
not pursued by him, of George's arguments. Some other disagreements
were not so minor yet they in no way rebutted, or changed, Henry
George's thesis that our advance must always be toward his twin goals
of liberty and justice for all.
Some Georgists did not welcome these points of view. Perhaps most
contentious was the assertion that all taxes come out of Rent. Some
friends thought this was anti-Georgist, yet over the years the storm
has died, and the heresy appears now to be accepted.
We found George read very well in the modern setting. Little that he
had said a century ago needed amendment; His analysis remained as
cogent and contemporary as anything offered by the latest crop of
economic writers. In fact, seldom does one nowadays meet the
profundity one encounters constantly in the works of Henry George.
The new adult course was based on the improved secondary course, but
contains further revisions and extensions. Some of them are presented
in this paper. As we developed our thinking, we did not confine
ourselves to a particular book. All of George's books and his total
philosophy became the raw material from which we built the successful
adult courses we present under the name of 'The Classical Analysis'.
What follows in this paper is a discussion of some of the changes and
extensions to our basic teachings.
PART TWO: THE STUDY
The Subject
Political economy is a behavioral study of social Man. The term
political refers to 'social' and the term economy means
'organization', which makes Political Economy 'the science of social
organization'. It has been called the 'science of the natural social
order' and has been described very specifically as the 'art and
science which deals with the production and distribution of wealth'.
Art and science are not the same. Art is synonymous with 'skill';
science is another name for 'knowledge'. While science is the search
for knowledge, art is the process of using scientific findings
effectively. Scientific analysis may expose a market problem in the
allocation of natural resources, but using a 'land value-tax' to solve
the problem is skillful, or artful -- not necessarily scientific.
Political economy is a science of production, not of consumption.
This science stops when production reaches the consumer -- where, in
fact, production is finished. Also, not part of the study are those
who service the consumer, or his products. Such people may satisfy
desires and maintain existing production, but they don't produce
wealth.
This removal of the service economy from examination is not a
cavalier gesture. It is made necessary by th9 natural boundaries of
the science.
The Path of Inquiry
The objective of scientific inquiry is the confirmation of
consequences and particularly to uncover 'invariable consequences'
(consequences that repeat). 'Consequences' is one of a connected set
of concepts which make facilitate analysis. Henry George discussed the
first three. We can extend his arguments.
- A sequence is a name given to two happenings that occur
one after another.
- consequence is the second of two happenings when it is
the result of the first.
- A Natural Law is the name given to a consequence that
is seen always to repeat -- the 'invariable consequence'. Perhaps
the best description of Natural Law is that it is a recognition of
experience.
- A rule is a homely guide to sensible action based on
Natural Law. 'Slow down when driving around a corner' is a useful
rule even if the Natural Law on which it is based isn't known.
- A law is a formal statement of a rule, with a penalty
added for non-compliance. Individuals within a community accept
contractually laws and their penalties -- because they make sense.
Laws help to reduce the impact of poor choice and temporary
irrationality. A good law will be both sensible and just (apply
equally to everyone). A law which is perceived as silly or
inappropriate is simply avoided or ignored by the populace.
- A privilege is a private law (privi-lege). Its purpose
is to benefit one at the expense of another. It is coercive, but
is usually not identified by those who are disadvantaged. When
privilege is recognised, it is resented (except by the recipient).
Unfortunately, people see little distinction between law
and privilege and a proper resentment of privilege
develops into opposition to all legislation. Then laws -- useful
lubricants to smooth the advance of civilization -- become
suspect, unwelcome and ineffective.
Law and Privilege
This set of related concepts deserves comment. Societal 'rules' may
be called 'implicit contracts', or 'understandings'. You do not expect
a person walking toward you on the sidewalk to beat you up. Implicit
contract is the real social contract. It's enforcement exists only in
the minds of those who practise it.
"Laws' are explicit and contractual -- the result of voluntary
agreement. One hopes that their formality might reduce the ambiguity
that may attend social understandings. The intent of law should be to
provide the stability that helps a civilization to endure.
Not so 'privilege' which implies a coercive obligation.
George introduced the concept of obligation and noted that values can
be derived from obligation. He erred not in this, but in his treatment
of obligation.
There are two similar conditions of value creation. One -- value from
obligation -- is created by a credit situation. If I owe you a week's
work, but you don't want it yet, I might well give you a receipt
entitling the possessor to one week of my work. The receipt will be
valuable (I think) and could be sold to another. This is a market
credit transaction. "I'lI pay you later". In similar
fashion, a mortgage imposes an obligation to pay -- which may be
bought and sold. Yet it is a simple market contract.
A 'value from privilege' is NOT a market transaction. It is a
coercive law which transfers wealth at the barrel of a gun. Analogous
to Zen's 'one-handed clap' -- a privilege is a "one-way
exchange'. The ability to take without payment is valuable to the
possessor, but should not be linked to non-coercive 'values from
obligation'. Unfortunately, the overwhelming majority of modern
legisation is privilege.
PART THREE: THE BASICS
Basic Assumptions
This study of Man begins with two assumptions of human behavior. The
first assumption points to Man's direction; the second describes how
he got there.
The first is simply that:
People's desires are unlimited.
The second is:
People seek to satisfy their desires with the least exertion.
This antipathy to exertion confirms the conclusion that the consumer
is not important to our study. A producer will not exert if his
production is not desired. Thus, the fact of production indicates
desire for it. A consumer is a 'given'.
The desires of Mankind take a multitude of forms. We may easily pick
'survival' as the most reasonable primary desire. This thought can be
extended to suggest that Man has a general desire for personal
advantage along with an equivalent aversion to disadvantage.
We should also note the effectiveness of Man's reasoning ability. Man
may choose -- something denied other animals. This ability to deny his
instinctual conditioning leads to the conclusion that his choices must
have been pretty good -- or he would not have survived.
PART FOUR: TURNING CONCEPTS INTO USEFUL TERMS
Concepts
It should be noted that a word is never defined. Rather, the concept
is defined -- which means putting a fence around it. Within the fence
is the concept, outside is everything else. The defined concept is
then given a name.
The strength of George's analysis springs from a brilliantly
conceived set of defined concepts. They were not new with George --
but he swept aside ambiguities and created a superb foundation for
thinking. It seems almost sacrilegious to meddle with them, but that
had to be done. Very simply, we have used everyday words to name the
broad concepts and specific terms to name the essence of the concepts.
To accomplish his desires Man does things. To aid analysis of this
behavior it is necessary to cut the universe into chewable bite-sized
chunks. The classical direction was to place everything into three
natural concept classifications.
We arrive at the three by using our imagination to remove people and
their products from the universe. When we and ours are gone, left will
be something we can call 'Natural Resources'.
Then, we can bring humanity back and call this huge agglomeration of
characteristics and behaviors 'People'.
... Who, brimful with desire, satisfy them by getting to work on
Natural Resources. The material result -- the products of exertion --
but neither natural resources, nor people -- we'll call 'Product'.
So we have:
PEOPLE - the complete 'package' called human beings;
NATURAL RESOURCES - everything except People and their
products;
PRODUCTS - the material result of People acting on Natural
Resources.
These three broad classifications cover everything in the universe --
even God. Further, the classes are mutually exclusive. Something in
one class cannot be in another -- a vital requirement for proper
classification.
Removing the Less Essential
Broad concepts are interesting, but not too useful.
People come in an assortment of sizes, shapes an colors -- and at
least two sexes. Natural Resources run the gamut -- from the bald
eagle to the electric-magnetic spectrum. And Products are anything
that can be invented by the creative human imagination.
This is too much to grasp, so we must seek ways t reduce our
groupings to manageable proportions. This we can do in several ways
without lessening the integrity of the classifications.
- This is a social science. Anything not a part of the
market process may be omitted. An apple picked and eaten by the
same person is not part of a social science. Food produced for
home consumption by a farm family, paintings by an amateur for his
own wall are not part of the science. Anything not exchanged may
be stricken from our agenda.
- Non-essentials may be removed. These are items that fit
into the concepts, but which aren't significant to our analysis.
Mud pies and sand castles may be the 'material products' of
people, but they are hardly significant. We walk across a meadow
and produce crushed grass, but who cares about that product? To
avoid the less consequential we'll simply dismiss a products
without market exchange-value. If it has no market value, we'll
exclude it from our analysis. We can also remove from the study
work that goes into products worth nothing.
- Production will not take place without consumer. People
will not work without reward. Ergo, if there is production, there
must be a consumer (either another person, or the producer
himself). The consumer is a 'given' and may conveniently be remove
from our study of production. This is not to say he isn't
important, but merely that he isn't needed for our analysis.
Consumer-related services can be removed from the study along with
the consumer.
Not, however, pseudo-services -- the statistical 'services' which are
actually part of the productive process. The supermarket cashier is
part of production -- as is the trucker and the factory nurse. Sony
can put together a VCR, but most of the production -- and value
increase -- takes place between the factory and if consumer. Most of
the income goes to people who carry, sell and deliver the VCR to the
consumer. All of them are producers -- but NOT the man who services
the machine at a later date.
PART FIVE: EXERTION, TIME, AND A PLACE TO STAND
Abstracting the Essence
We can further simplify the defined concepts. We began with People,
Natural Resources and Products -- broad classes with an infinite
variety of members. We can reduce the complexity by seeking and using
a characteristic common to every member of a class.
People
The skills, qualities, abilities, deficiencies, and hidden desires
that make the human package, manifest themselves in external action.
How a person exerts and to what end, is a reflection of his mental and
physical make-up. We need no profound examination of psychological
condition, or mental and physical abilities. Instead, conclusions may
be inferred from what a person does and why he is rewarded.
Immediately, we see that rewards are linked to his exertion in
production.
The characteristic common to all people is exertion and we'll give to
this defined concept,
human exertion, the name LABOR.
Natural Resources
The characteristic common to all natural resources is location.
Indeed, the first thing we add to any practical treatment of natural
resources is an address. To make useful a natural resource, we must
locate it. In fact, the more precisely we locate a natural resource,
the more valuable it is to us.
Natural Resources is a defined concept for everything in the universe
except humans and their product, which is interesting, but not too
useful. More pertinent and practical are the natural resource
addresses, Times Square, the ozone layer, Piccadilly Circus, Yosemite,
1024 Acacia Avenue, Channel 2 -- and even 4pm, Wednesday (think about
4pm, Wednesday).
The Classical Analysts -- the group of 18th and 19th century
philosopher/economists who put together the science of political
economy -- used the term LAND for Natural Resources. We shall use the
term
LAND for location -- the characteristic common to all
natural resources.
Products
When exertion (LABOR) applied at a location (LAND) produces a
material result which is satisfying a consumer desire, it is called
WEALTH. If the product (concept) has market value and is in
the hands of the consumer (definition) it is given the name WEALTH.
Capital
Some products are not in the hands of the consumer They are still in
the process of production. A product not in the hands of the consumer
is not Wealth. Neither is it Land, nor Labor. We need a fourth defined
concept to cover products not yet Wealth.
When an apple is picked and eaten, producer and consumer are the same
person. When appleseeds are planted there will be no consumption until
the trees grow and apples are harvested. The growing orchard is
certainly a product -- but it doesn't directly satisfy a desire.
Between the investment of exertion and the satisfying of desire is an
interval of time. Yet, people like to satisfy their desires quickly.
In fact, they will demand compensation if they must await
satisfaction.
Products left in production are infinitely diverse ranging from a
hammer to a racehorse stud, from a farm cow to a word processor, from
a supermarket cart to a 747 jet. The characteristic common to all
products left in production (rather than directly satisfying desires)
is time.
All these products represent a delay of satisfaction -- a time delay.
Between investment of exertion and return of product, there is a
period of time. If we are to postpone receiving the result of
exertion, we will demand compensation for the time we go without.
Products in production are called
CAPITAL and the characteristic common to them all is Time.
In summary, the names and defined concepts we shall use (called the
Factors of Production) are:
LABOR -- human exertion engaged in the
production of Wealth;
LAND -- the location of production;
CAPITAL -- material products during the time they are kept
from the consumer;
and their result:
WEALTH -- material products possessing exchange value which
have reached the consumer.
Returns and Rewards
The market decides the value of production. This value returns to the
Factors of Production as reward for their participation. The part of
production that returns to Labor
for exertion is called WAGES; the part that returns to
Capital for time is called INTEREST; the part that
returns to Land for location is called RENT. These
three rewards make up the final product, WEALTH.
So, the picture is that the three factors produce WEALTH which
returns to the factors as rewards --which is why they are involved
with production.
E.C. Harwood described these three returns as 'form-value',
'time-value', and 'space-value'.
Rent and Land-Value
At this point an important caveat. George did not make clear that the
return to land in modern conditions is not Rent. Wages, Interest and
Rent are market determined returns. Present land return is not Rent,
but (Rent + premium). The action of the present land market does not
parallel those of Labor and Capital.
The process of the market the 'price-mechanism' does not work with
Land. Necessary to the price mechanism's proper action is unrestricted
production and unrestricted mobility. Response to a price rise is a
rush of new goods, or people, to market. Land cannot rush to market.
The market for a location is at the location and there it is unique.
Thus, the value of land is not the result of price-mechanism pressure.
Arranging for Land to obey the pressure of the price-mechanism is a
simple matter. We simply collect Rent -- perhaps the only reason for
doing so! Without Rent collection, land is sheltered from market
pressure, which requires a separate name for its value.
So, in the present economy, the annual return Land is not Rent, but
Land-Value which capitalizes into 'sale-price'.
We must devote much effort to describing this basic language, because
it is the most important part of the study. Once these defined
concepts are named, understood and used, many problems of modern
society swim comfortably into focus and may be addressed.
PART SIX: VALUE -- OBJECTIVE AND SUBJECTIVE
Two Kinds of Value
Value is the same as worth. Something that is worth more to you is
more valuable to you. As you wish to increase your desire
satisfactions, anything which al-lows you to do this is 'valuable'.
You prefer to have something of higher value, rather than something of
lower value. Apreference indicates you value one thing more than
another.
Note, however, that value and price are not the same. Price is value
in terms of a standard (such as money).
We can view the world only subjectively. So any emphasis of the
subjective aspect of value is unnecessary. However, when several of us
see the same value, we may regard this as an 'objective' value. This
objective value is seen in the market and is the market clearing
price. This is the price in the market that 'clears the shelves' --
the highest price that will optimize throughput. This defined concept
seems little taught these days, which is a pity as it so excellently
describes a market process.
George called subjective value 'personal value' and so shall we.
Personal values are difficult, or impossible, to ascertain. We can be
unreliably told a personal value, or we can more reliably find a clue
to personal value through behavior. When an exchange takes place, we
have evidence that both traders preferred (valued) the thing they got
to the thing they gave. Bu we know no more than that.
One of the more famous and continuing debates in political economy
concerned 'use value' and 'market value'. Use value is simply
'usefulness to you', or 'personal value'.
Market Value
Market value arises from the confluence of subjective valuations and
can be considered objective. As Marx saw, market value and exertion
are related. But he missed the point. Exertion is a consequence of
market value, rather than the reverse. If a product can expect a
worthwhile market value, exertion may be invested in its manufacture.
Things that take much skill and ability to produce will not be
manufactured unless their market value is likely to be high. Products
in the market take station, with their positions in the hierarchy
directly related to their difficulty of production.
I Once products have taken station in the market, the price mechanism
acts normally to maintain their position relative to other products in
their stations.
The combination of high prices and production difficulty means such
goods are not plentiful. Thus, a third condition, rarity, becomes the
natural companion of production difficulty and high prices.
We should not use the term 'scarcity' in political economy. (They can
-- and will -- in economics.) There is no such thing as scarcity in a
market economy. Goods adopt prices that make them always available.
There may be a 'scarcity' of Rolls-Royces at $5. There will be no
scarcity at $300,000.
In the market, the Rolls will assume a market-clearing price which
balances supply and demand. In a non-market situation, scarcity is
always a friendly neighbor, for science is abandoned in favor of
coercive whimsicality.
Price Mechanism
When demand increases, prices rise which draws supplies to market,
and prices drop. This is
price mechanism action. Essential to its effectiveness is an
available supply of goods which, in response to rising prices, can get
to market.
Should production be restricted, or goods kept from market, the price
mechanism cannot work. When goods fall to respond to the urgencies of
the price rise, the price mechanism tries harder by sending prices
still higher. This phenomenon of rising market price for difficult to
produce goods has led to a pseudo-market for 'collectibles'.
Collectibles
When a production run is finished, no more can easily be made. This
is true of a properly unique production, such as the Mona Lisa
(although there are 6 authenticated original Mona Lisas), and of a
contrived uniqueness, such as a limited edition, or first cover. It
even applies to a simple product that has little value other than
uniqueness, such as a Rosalie Beer can -- worth more than $10,000.
Such things are not merely difficult to produce, they are impossible.
(To make one Rosalie Beer can would be tremendously expensive, to
produce 10,000 would make production pointless.)
When market demand for one of these items is felt, the price
mechanism increases its price. But, no more are forthcoming, so the
price rises further. The items have become 'collectibles' -- things
which are coveted not because they satisfy desires directly, but
because one may become wealthy merely by holding them.
Anticipated Future Value
As was mentioned, an exchange is made when each trader believes
market value exceeds the personal value of his product.
In contrary fashion, if either trader considers personal value of his
product to be greater than market, he will not trade.
A person with a collectible thinks not of its present market value,
but of its future value, which he expects to be higher. This
'anticipated future value' is his personal value. As this 'anticipated
future value' is a personal value greater than present market value,
it will not be traded.
Collectibles need not be unique. I may possess a rare coin which is
one of several hundred in existence. The relationship of 'present
market' to 'future anticipated' will still hold, even though other
collectors may regularly trade their coins.
If present market value rises to my personal value it is likely that
instead of selling at market, I will adjust my personal value to
another higher anticipated future value -- and not sell.
Last To Sel1
It is clearly Evident to a holder of collectibles that the one who is
last to sell gets the highest price. This is not the action of the
normal market. When the widget maker sees a price rise he rushes his
widgets to market. The race is to the swift, for the result of his
action is to diminish demand. The unfortunate who is late getting to
market will get a lower price. When people extoll the virtues of the
free market, they are applauding this quick reaction to price change.
Collectibles reverse this process. Collectors gain most by acting
last, and their continuing reluctance to trade still further tightens
the market. A market where everyone is trying to be last to sell is a
peculiar aberration in the smooth flow of the exchange process.
Land-Value
Collectibles don't get in anyone's way, to paraphrase Churchill and
it is true that the collectible market is of little interest to
non-collectors. Yet, one collectible does pose a problem. This
collectible is Land, without which nothing is possible.
In every way Land acts like a collectible. Location is always unique.
It cannot be transported elsewhere -- where land-hunger is extreme.
More locations cannot be created -- each is unique.
Land is not subject to price mechanism discipline. The market doesn't
work with Land.
Land-value rises with the normal growth of activity among an
increasing population. A site next year is likely to be worth more
than this year. Thus, the personal value of Land you hold will always
be brightly painted 'anticipated future value'.
Yet, Land is vital to all production. Unlike the contrived
desirability of the beer can, Land is desirable because it is
essential to life. Demand, fed by the reluctance of collectors to
sell, will continue even to desperation. And the consequential price
increases further strengthen each landholder's decision to stay away
from the market. So, personal anticipated values increase, the land
market noose tightens, prices soar, and paralysis develops.
The annual value that attaches to a site in this situation can hardly
be called Rent. It is Rent plus a premium and deserves a name of its
own - which will be
Land-Value. In current society, this is the value that will be
capitalized into a sale-price.
Rent, like Wages and Interest, is a return determined by the price
mechanism operating in a free market. In this present unfree market,
the cost that attaches to a site is land-value. Assessors and
appraisers do not measure Rent -- they measure land-value.
Needless to say, land-values are turned quickly into Rents by use of
community rent charges, the effect of which is to make the collecting
of land unprofitable. Where 100% of the Rent is collected, the market
value of unused land (zero) becomes greater than its negative personal
value (cost with no return) and the site changes hands. If the holder
can profitably use the site, personal value (use-value) becomes
greater than market and it is developed.
PART SEVEN: MONEY AND PURCHASING MEDIA
Chalk and Cheese
Arguments about money usually erupt out of a discussion of value. And
immediately, it's clear that precise concept definition is mostly
absent. The difficulty is that the term 'Money' tries to stuff within
its meaning two different (and conflicting) concepts. One concept is
'measure of value' -- a standard against which other things are
measured; the other is 'medium of exchange' -- something used as a
convenient buying agent.
That one commodity may, at times, act in both capacities tends to
confound attempts to analyze. One struggles to find things that may be
used for both functions. This inevitably leads to definition by
accounting category, a course that simplifies the work of the
statistician, even as it makes all but impossible the task of the
political economist.
Properly to tackle the subject of 'Money' demands separation by
function of the two entities that are so easily and confusingly
combined. So, any standard entity that measures value we shall call
Money. Anything that serves as a trading convenience we shall call PM,
the short form for Purchasing Medium (PM).
Gold As Money
The history of Money is fascinating in its exposure of man's
inventiveness. Most of man's product been used as the measure of
value. For one reason or another they have all failed to survive the
test market place -- except one. From time to time products have
competed for the position, notably but always the market has returned
to its first love -- gold.
The choice of gold did not spring from the wild of monetary
theorists, nor was it born in the superstitions of ignorant peasants.
It was a market decision proven over thousands of years of experience.
The metal is easily recognized. Its value remains somewhat constant,
and its uniformity and portability made buying convenient. Gold was a
good measure of value and not a had medium for purchasing though its
softness made it subject to wear.
Gold earned its position not just as good Money, but as best Money.
Therefore, we shall use 'Money' and 'gold' as synonymous terms.
Purchasing Media (PM)
Adam Smith described the butcher with an excess of meat who could not
sell it to the brewer or baker for they had nothing he wanted at the
moment. Smith underestimated people. The butcher would not let the
meat rot. Rather would he give the meat to his customers in return for
a promise to pay at a future date.
This promise to pay would certainly be transferable. If the butcher
required some work from the black-smith, he might use the 'promise to
pay' to purchase the work.
In their modern dress of paper, plastic, or metal, these promises (or
PM) have become an indispensable part of commerce. The most obvious
peculiarity of PM is that its value is extrinsic. It merely indicates
that a promise has been made by someone. Unlike gold, which carries
its value with it, the value of PM relies on the validity of the
promise. Any contract that may be written or stamped on the 'Medium'
will be no better than the word of the issuer.
Advanced Purchasing Media
One would expect that as civilization progresses, means of purchase
would simplify, become more effective and cost less. We might expect
that the simplest Purchasing Medium would be:
(a) a printed contract form -- 'I promise to pay..';
(b) written in terms of a standard payment unit, so that
calculation of a transaction would be easy;
(c) in such a form that quick and easy recognition and
certification of authenticity is possible;
(d) portable, stable during the period it is held, easily accepted
by traders, and protected against loss;
(e) inexpensive to produce and service.
The implication of the above is that a Purchasing Medium is a
material thing that passes from hand to hand in exchange for other
material things. A piece of paper in more or less standard form, duly
authenticated, would appear to be best Purchasing Medium. This kind of
PM is so easy to issue, it is likely that its life will tend to be
short, and new PM will be issued as needed.
The issuer of a generally acceptable 'promise to pay' would probably
like to keep track of them. Counterfeit promises might be a problem.
To keep insurance premiums low, loss protection ought to be as
effective as possible.
These conditions have mostly been realized by travellers' checks.
These provide an insured medium at very low cost. In fact, many U.S.
banks offer them to their customers as a free service.
Inflation
Inflation isn't an economic term at all, rather is it a physical term
meaning an increase in volume. The volume of purchasing media (PM) may
change in response to the amount of trade with no effect on the
economy except to improve it. Banks increase PM as the market needs
it. This is how they 'create money', which is highly desirable for it
facilitates exchange.
The methods of providing the PM (cash, coins, certified check, money
order, charge card slip, or deposit into an account book) do not
matter at all -- although these are matters pawed endlessly by
monetary theorists. All that's important is traders have been provided
with pledges, which conveniently facilitate the market process.
Inflation of PM merely shows that trade is brisk. In advanced
societies, where PM accounts for virtually all transactions, total PM
changes hourly.
PM As a Measure of Value
Inflation of Money is a different matter entirely.
The stability of a 'measure of value' rests on its quantity
relationship with other goods. This is why gold is such an attractive
candidate. Much exertion and time must enter into every ounce that
reaches the market. Its quantity suffers natural restriction. The
problem with gold is that it imposes tight discipline which is
unwelcome to governmental money managers. They prefer a more malleable
money.
Governments issue PM as a convenience to their peoples. Usually, they
are rather ornately printed standard documents. Familiarity and
apparent authority leads to their acceptance as Wealth. Thus, normal
desire for Wealth is transferred to the common representations of
Wealth. In the words of the semanticists, the map has become the
territory.
PM is at first wedded to real wealth, but all too soon this marriage
of convenience ends in divorce. The PM which is regarded as wealth --
the measure of value-soon becomes a 'money' resting on the bubble
integrity of whimsical national policy.
PM is poor money. Printed paper is easy to produce and governments
find irresistible the pressure to produce instant 'Wealth' at little
cost. Little physical restraint limits the production of official PM.
Its volume is likely to increase considerably in relation to other
goods. Plentiful official PM drops its market value and more is
required to buy the same Wealth.
This general price increase receives a popular name -- inflation.
Thus, the term which describes an increase in volume of the 'measure
of value' is transferred to an effect of the increase.
PART EIGHT: POSTSCRIPT
Quantity Theory and Velocity
Quantity theory is nowadays referred to as
crude, and is mentioned often in somewhat disparaging terms.
with the above defined concepts it would seem that Quantity Theory
assumes the aspect of a Law.
However, if money is assumed to be a strange mixture including
volatile PM, then Quantity Theory has a hard time finding the
quantity.
Velocity of Circulation seems also a contrivance of poor defined
concepts. A measure of value is something referred to, rather than
actively used. If sales increase at Christmas, more PM is created as
needed. Extra money isn't needed or created any more than inches are
created when construction increases during the summer.
Yet, apparently learned people point out that gold cannot be used as
money because there is not enough to support enormous and increasing
world trade.
I've not traced any statement from them to the effect that we must
stop building roads because we've run out of miles.
|