100 R. Bonus for the first order

Choose work type Thesis Course work Abstract Master's Dissertation Report on Practice Article Report Review Examination Monograph Solution Tasks Business Plan Answers to questions Creative work Essay drawing writings translation presentations text set other increase in unique text candidates dissertation laboratory work assistance on-line

Be find out the price

The theory claiming that the basis of the price is the cost created by labor is the theory of labor value. This theory has been developed by outstanding representatives of the English classical political economy: William Petty (1623-1687), Adam Smith (1723-1790), David Ricardo (1772-1823).

In relation to each product, V. Petty differed a political price under which he understood the market price determined by the ratio of supply and demand, and the natural price (value) hiding behind the fluctuations in market prices. Natte, the natural price of any product is determined by the number metal moneyobtained on average for it. This amount, in turn, depends on the ratio of labor costs for the production of a unit of this product with labor costs for the production of a monetary material unit - silver. In the time of V. Petty, silver was dominant monetary material. For example, the natural price of Bachelor V. Petty considered the number of silver, which was spent the same amount of labor as on the production of bread.

According to A. Smith, the exchange value of goods, i.e., their quantitative ratio in the exchange is determined by the amount of labor spent on the production of exchanged goods. Market prices ranged around the level due to the ratio of labor costs for the production of exchanged goods. Smith with greater clarity than anyone before him identified and delimited the consumer value and the change value of the goods. He showed the pattern of the fact that the cost must certainly be expressed in exchange proportions, in quantitatively, the exchange of goods, and with sufficient development of market relations - in money. Smith understood that the value of the cost is determined not the actual labor costs of the individual producer, but by those costs that are on average necessary for this state of production.

ABOUT further development Smith the theory of value indicated the distinction between the natural and market prices of goods, and the first ("central price") was interpreted as a monetary expression. At any time, the market price may turn out to be both higher and lower than the cost of the goods. The cost is determined by the costs of the production of goods and is the minimum price at which the goods can be sold for a long time. Although the market price sometimes falls below the cost, it cannot last long. Smith marked the beginning of the study of specific factors causing rejection of prices from the cost. This opened up the possibilities for research and suggestions as pricing factors, the role of various monopolies.

However, A. Smith believed that the cost was determined by the work only in the "initial state of society." For the conditions of the developed market economy, he designed another theory, according to which the cost of goods is formed by addition wages, Profit and rent per unit of goods. The natural price, or the cost of raw materials and materials is determined by the cost of labor necessary for their production. Land Rent depends on location land plot; The profit of the same entrepreneurs depends on the amount of funds invested in labor, land rent and the acquisition of materials, or, in other words, from the value of the capital invested in the capital. At the same time, Smith specially stressed that the entrepreneur can receive wages for the management of the enterprise, however, it cannot be mixed with profit from business.

This statement, the name of the "Dogma Smith", contradicts the labor theory of value.

The main merit of D. Ricardo in the development of the theory of cost and prices is that he showed the inconsistency of the last approval of A. Smith. It was convincingly proven that the Earth as a factor of production does not create the value of goods that income-brought by it is a land rent - the fruit of the wage workers and is due to the action of the law of value. From here, I followed a very important conclusion: only work exerted on the manufacture of goods is the only source of value. D. Ricardo considered the work the only and final reason for the price. Metal money, by Ricardo, represented as A. Smith, a regular product. D. Ricardo caught the dependence of the value of the value of the goods from the level of development of labor productivity and identified the problem of socially necessary labor. Ricardo came to the conclusion that differences in labor productivity do not cancel the cost definitions, since the value of the cost is not regulated by the fact that actually went to the manufacture of this product, but by those that are necessary for its production under the worst conditions. But the proposed decision is incomplete and inaccurate. As a regulator of the value of the cost, they displays individual labor costs of the manufacturer who creates the cost of goods under the worst conditions. The process of pricing, which is typical for agriculture and mining industry, was distributed to all sectors of the economy.

D. Ricardo substantiated the structure of the cost (price) of the goods, which he laid out on the cost of guns, tools, buildings and the immediate cost attached to the old. In other words, the cost (price) is decomposed on individual elements.

The difference in the views of A. Smith and D. Ricardo is to understand the cost (prices) in the projection on a real economic life. According to the late interpretation of the cost according to A. Smith, the increase in wages, as well as other income in society, leads to an increase in prices, i.e., inflation (this idea A. Smith was subsequently deployed to the theory of "inflationary spiral of prices and wages "). By Ricardo, the increase in wages will not lead to an increase in the cost (it is asked for labor costs), but will reduce profits and rent.

K. Marx (1818-1883), continuing the line of labor value, brought this theory until completion, conclude that the price is a monetary expression of value, and the cost itself is created by the living labor of employees. Marxist theory of labor value did not put a goal to formulate the basis for the disclosure of specific laws of pricing. Its goal was - justify that the basis of any prices is labor costs, either directly (as in simple commercial production), or in the transformed form, for example, in capitalist production prices (hence the Marxist formula: "Price is the transfused form of value"). The goal was purely ideological: from the theories of labor value to go to the theory of surplus value and thereby justify the exploitative nature of capitalist production.

The value formula, according to the labor theory of value, has the form:

where W- the cost of goods, a set of socially necessary costs labor; C - the cost of extractable labor (the cost of wear of wage, consumed raw materials, materials, fuels, components); V - the wage of employees of employees; T - the surplus value, the profit base ("unpaid" living labor); (C + V) - the costs of the entrepreneur, the costs of the economic entity.

The development of market relations under free competition conditions leads to the cost modification; Changes the change and immediate price base. The price of production appears, which was defined by F. Engels as a coup in pricing. The mechanism of its formation is based on the intersectoral competition of capital, carried out by overflowing them in accordance with the fluctuations of the rate of arrival in different areas (industries) production.

The ideological goal has not changed since the time of K. Marx, so there was no need to seriously revise the theory. In practice, the theory of labor value was used and led to the USSR and countries of socialism to the so-called model of cost pricing, when prices were based on labor costs, without taking into account the variety of pricing factors, which preserved low production efficiency, braked technical progress.

By developing the price of a new product, the entrepreneur is not interested in so much by "how much buyers will give" for him, but first of all their own costs that he will suffer. The lower the costs, the greater the free "field" of the price on which the preliminary one will occur (still perfect) bargaining with the buyer: some of this field should be left to receive a buyer of winning price from acquiring a new product model, and part should be an additional Profit businessman.

The relevance of the content of the content and the basic conceptual provisions of the theory of labor value is determined by the fact that the theory of labor value is the foundation of the classical political economy. This theory has sequentially developed by U. Petty, L. Smith, D. Ricardo and their numerous followers and popularizers. Logically, the slender concept of the theory of labor value was created by K. Marx. In accordance with the theory of labor value, the only source of value of the goods is labor, and since the price is a cash form of value, therefore, the basis of the price is the work spent on the production of goods. The purpose of the study is to identify and analyze the essence of the theory of labor value from the standpoint of various historical and economic concepts.

The object of the study is the theory of labor value as the basic economic concept of political economy.

We formulate research tasks:

- give the concept of labor value as an economic category;

- consider the content, essence and significance of the law of value;

- Analysis of evolutionary approaches to the development of the theory of labor value in economic science;

- consider the goods as labor in the economic concept of K. Marx;

- characterize the surplus value and economic forms of surplus value.

Methodological research base - the use of historiographic analysis and system-analytical methods

The theoretical basis of the work was the work of such authors Kakanikan A.V., Balikoev V.Z., Bartenev S.A., Belousov V.M., Blag M., Mridel Kh.A., Zubko N.M., Kozyrev V. M., Leshe Sh., Rist S., Maltus T.R., Marx K., Engels F., Mil J.S., Nosova S.S., Ricardo D., Samuelson P., Smith A., Say J.B., Shumpeter J., Yadgarov Ya.S.

Long before capitalism, in the conditions of a slave-ownership society, people sought to understand the essence of commodity relations, the laws that they manage. Scientists ancient Mira They did it along, but achieved serious results. Marx wrote that historically the views of Greek scientists form theoretical initial points of modern science. An outstanding place in this respect belongs to Aristotle, with his understanding of the need for the exchange of labor, although he remained a supporter of the natural economy. Aristotle in his works came to the genius for his time the conclusion: if one product exchanges on the other, then it means that they are equal . But he could not find out what was the basis of the equality of goods.

There are various cost theories. One of them is the labor theory of the cost, which determines the substance and the value of the cost of goods by the work spent on its production.

The theory of labor value is the foundation for classical political economy.The basics of the theory of labor value were laid by English economists of W. Petty, A. Smith and D. Ricardo. This theory has consistently developed by U. Petty, A. Smith, D. Ricardo and their numerous followers and popularizers.Petty had an idea that the cost is determined by the work at all. By Smith, the cost of goods is created in any industry. material productionHowever, it attributed the cost-forming properties to specific work. D. Ricardo determines the cost of goods by labor spent on their production, whatever its concrete form. At the same time, it does not distinguish between concrete and abstract labor. Logically, the slender concept of the theory of labor value was created by K. Marx.Only in the writings of K. Marx for the first time the dual nature of the labor producers was opened for the first time, the understanding of which allowed him to develop a truly scientific labor theory of value.

English classics of political economy (V. Petty, A. Smith, D. Ricardo) for the first time determined the essence of the cost.

D. Ricardo noted that in economic theory, nothing gave rise to so many mistakes and disagreements, as inaccuracy and uncertainty of meaning, which is invested in the word cost. During the XVII - XIX centuries, basic concepts were formed on the issue of goods.

The first to define the cost was given to William Petty, who was a representative of the classic school that arose in the XVII in England. V. Petty, calls the cost of a "natural price". "The natural price" of the goods, or its value, is determined by the amount of labor spent on its production. William Petty in their judgments mixes the cost with exchange costs, reducing it to money, so from the very beginning does not distinguish the cost from the price. He mistakenly believed that the cost was created only by labor spent on the production of goods, and the remaining types of labor create the cost only due to the exchange of their product for money..

Adam Smith made a significant contribution to the development of cost theory. Unlike V. Petty, he recognized the labor of the main substance of the cost - "her valid measure". A. Smith continues to investigate the nature of the goods and indicates two of its properties: the usefulness and "possibility of acquiring other subjects" .

If the growth of wealth is limited to the size of the market, then the richness itself is not just a set of physical items. The product to become wealth must be suitable for the exchange, that is, have a change value. It is the exchange value (value) - the central concept of classical political economy.

For the first time, attempt to distinguish the individual and socially necessary costs did D. Ricardo. However, under the socially necessary cost, he understood the worst production conditions, and not only in agriculture, but also in industry. He also believed that the change in the value of the value was a change in labor productivity.

Indeed, labor productivity has a decisive effect on the value of the cost of goods. Productivity is its effectiveness, fruitfulness. It is measured by the number of consumer values \u200b\u200bproduced per unit of time or time spent per unit of products. The more consumer values \u200b\u200bare made per unit of time, the higher the productivity, and vice versa.

The value of the cost of goods varies depending on the intensity of labor. Under the intensity of labor is understood by the costs of labor per unit time. The growth in the intensity of labor means an increase in labor costs for the same period of time. More intense labor is embodied in greater number of products and creates a large value per unit of time.

Thus, with increasing, both labor productivity and its intensity, the number of customer costs has increased. However, in the first case, the cost of the product unit decreases, the value of the value of the product produced remains unchanged, and in the second, the value of the product of products increases, and the cost of the unit of products remains unchanged. In other words, the value of the value of the goods varies directly in proportion to the number and inversely proportional to the productive force of labor.

The value of the cost of goods has an impact and the degree of labor complexity. The work of the jeweler is harder than the work of the locksmith, and the last harder of Labor Lesoruba. The work of an employee who does not require special training is called simple difficulty. Labor, to fulfill that preliminary training is necessary, is called complex labor. Sophisticated work should be considered as multiplied or erected easy work. The reduction of complex labor to the simpler occurs during the exchange process. When determining the value of the value of the goods, the basis is taken by the public required amount simple labor.

According to his own recognition of Smith, the chapters of his books devoted to the theory of exchange cost and prices, demand from the reader of special patience "To clarify what it may seem to some extent unclear even after the most detailed explanations, which I am able to give". Subsequently, Smith's commentators and in fact found several theories of value in these chapters at once instead of one and noted a lot of logical inconsistencies. But this was the case when contradictions of the theory were productive: they highlighted new, previously not known faces of economic reality.

Smith sought to find a response to a diverse, as it seemed to him, the question: "... What is the real measure of ... exchange value or what is the actual price of all goods".

In the context of labor separation, the wealth or poverty of a person is determined, as Smith considered not by the fact that it could create for his own consumption and use, but by what he can get in exchange for his own work, product or income. That is why wealth is a set of exchange costs. In search of Merila's exchange costs, Smith collided with two different tasks that he failed to clearly distinguish:

measurement task: how to measure exchange costs at different periods of time;

the task of explanation: why exchange proportions are installed so, and not otherwise; What lies with them.

The decision of both tasks Smith tied with difficulty - from here, perhaps the belief in their community. Meanwhile, the work itself in each case was interpreted in different ways.

Menage value commensity. In the conditions of market exchange, the task of compulsion of exchange costs is solved in a sense by the market itself. Already a simple exchange of two products establishes between them a quantitative ratio: the unit of one product is equal to a certain number of other. The combination of such relations between all goods is a system of relative prices, which makes all goods mutually commensurate. In practice, the system of such prices is formed by equating all goods to a single equivalent - money.

At Smith, the idea of \u200b\u200brelative prices is introduced indirectly through the concept of disposable labor (Labour Commanded): "... the cost of every product for a person, which ... means ... exchange [it] to other items, is equal to the number of labor that he can buy on it or Get at your disposal. " Similarly, for the buyer, "the real price of all subject is" the work and efforts necessary for its acquisition. " To this, it should be added that for Smith it is not necessary that this was the work of the buyer himself: that "what is bought for money ... is acquired by labor to the same way as items purchased by our own.

Speaking of valid prices, Smith assumed the correlation of all goods with a unit (serving) of labor:

X Goods a \u003d

Y goods in \u003d \u003d units

………. =

M products n \u003d

But, having received a common measure in labor, all products become commensurate. This means that we are talking about the system of exchange proportions, or relative prices. In such a system, a unit of labor is interchangeable with units of any other product, and consider the labor of the best measure of exchange value than any other product, there is no reason. This implicitly admitted to Smith himself, indicating the equivalence of "real" (labor) and nominal (monetary) prices of all goods.

Measuring of wealth in time. It would seem that Smith's reasoning was brightened to the inevitable tautology: exchange costs are commensy as they compete - through market prices. However, it is at this point of his arguments that Smith is fascinated by a real problem. Valid and nominal prices are equivalent, but with one important reservation: "... at a certain time and in a certain place, money represents the exact measure of the actual exchange value of goods, but only a certain time and in a certain place".

If this condition is not fulfilled, "[in] the type of oscillations of the value of gold and silver is the same nominal price can have very different costs". Thus, Smith approached the understanding that relative prices are "simultaneous" prices. If we consider that over time, not only the cost of money, but also the cost of any product, and therefore the entire system of relative prices can be changed, it is inevitable that the price proportion relating to different periods of time is incommensurable, and the problem of the combination of exchanges Values \u200b\u200bin time - nontrivial.

Smith now and indeed it took Merilo - some time constant in time, independent of transient exchange proportions: "Just as natural measures, like a feet, elbow or handstone, constantly changing in their sizes, can never serve as an exact measure of the number Other items and the goods that are permanently exposed to fluctuations in its value, in no way can be an accurate measure of the cost of other goods. "

Smith again turned to work - however, this time its qualities were in the spotlight. "We can say," he writes, "that at all times and in all places the same amounts of labor have always had the same value for the worker. With the usual state of their health, strength and abilities, with a normal degree of art and agility, he must always sacrifice the same share of his leisure, his freedom and calmness. The price he pays, always remains unchanged, whatever the amount of goods he gets in exchange for his work. "

Labor acts in this case As the cost of human effort and in this capacity, has its own measure, independent of the cost of other goods. Labor is opposed to leisure: the more time a person is forced to divert the work, the less remains in its free disposal. Ten hours of labor have similar meaning.

This gaze of A. Smith found an ironic response from K. Marx: "Let you work in the sweat of your face - that was the curse ... wrapped on Adam. And Adam Smith considers the work as a curse. " Marx did not consider this look universal: work is not always a victim. He believed that free creative work was, unlike forced and subalkal - can bring satisfaction and joy of different eras and circumstances. It is in this regard that smith's work acts "the only universal, as well as the only accurate, measure of value."

Leading representatives of the classical political economy A. Smith and D. Ricardo responded to these questions in different ways. The position of Smith can be reconstructed as follows:

a) exchange costs are created by productive labor, including with the developed state of the Company; revenues of capital owners and land essence of the deduction from the product of labor;

b) the natural price of goods - distribution category; It is formed as the amount of income of the main factors of production: wages, profits and rent; Natural norms of these revenues are addressed on the relevant factor markets, independently of each other;

c) capital costs are not an independent part of the natural price of goods. "It may seem," Smith pointed out, - that another quarter is needed to reimburse capital ... But it should be borne in mind that the price of any economic tool, at least a working horse, in turn consists of the same three parts ... and therefore, although the price Bread should be paid for the price and content of the horse, in general the price is still reduced - directly or ultimately - to three components: to rent, wages and profits ";

d) change natural norms Production factors entails appropriate changes in the natural price of goods (for example, an increase in natural wages should cause rise to prices of goods).

The position of Smith is logical, if we assume that in natural
the price of all goods profits is the same share. Only in this case, prices can be proportional to the cost and labor and capital at the same time. It is worth it, however, take a step to reality, having allowed that in different branches, the retirement of labor and capital and, accordingly, the wages and profits are neodynakovo, and immediately the magnitude of the product measured through the labor costs, on the one hand, and the size of the same product, obtained by summing up the factors distributed from it - on the other, they will become incomparable ..

Smith Formula Prices for Product (Q) as income amounts:

Q \u003d W + P + R, (1)

where w-wages;

P - profits;

R - rent

includes not only incomes of direct participants in the production of this product (W 0; P 0; R 0), but also revenues previously obtained by producers of the means of production, which in this production process found the use of capital (C 0):

Q \u003d W 0 + P 0 + R 0 + [C 0], (2)

W 1 + P 1 + R 1 + [C 1],

……………………….

W n + p n + r n + [with n],

So, if q is a natural price of grain, then following Smith, with 0 can be represented as the cost of the purchase and content of the horse used in the processing of the Earth,

C 1 cost when growing a founder for a horse, etc.

Since the value of costs (C) during the transition from C 0 to C 1 is steadily decreased and - in the limit - tends to zero, the total price of the goods can be represented as:

Q \u003d (W 0 + W 1 + ... + W n) + (p 0 + p 1 + ... + p n) + (R 0 + R 1 + ... + R n). (3)

The desire to deliver the classical political economy from such ambiguity in determining the magnitude of the product led to the formation of two alternative concept concepts: labor theory of value. Ricardo, striving to more consistently implement the first, labor, approach; and the theory of factors of production J.-B. Say, who made a bid entirely on the second, factor, approach.

Position Riccardo comes down to the following primary moments:

a) "The overwhelming majority of all goods that are the subject of desires are delivered by difficulty."

b) "The cost of goods ... depends on the relative amount of labor that is necessary for its production";

c) labor creation includes "not only labor used directly ... but also work, spent on tools, tools of buildings that contribute to this work." In other words, capital costs, or a hypothetical fourth component of the price of a product, which at Smith has reduced to previously obtained income, Ricardo treats as previously spent, or embodied (embodied), work;

d) Natural price covers not only capital costs, but also the average rate of profit, its income. Since the rate of profit is proportional to the magnitude of the capital, and not the cost of labor, so this thesis did not fit into the overall logic of the labor theory of the cost; Recognizing the retreat from its basic principle, Ricardo was justified by the insignificance of the influence of this factor. According to him, the profit vibrations that are not related to the value of labor could change the value of the natural price of goods by no more than 6 -7%. It is in this sense that Ricardo's theory is "93% labor theory of value," as the famous American economist J. Stigler determined;

e) a change in the natural price of the factor of production is nothing but a change in the share of the factor in total income; On the natural price of the goods, with other things being equal, it does not affect.

David Ricardo - an outstanding representative of the English classical political economy central place in his exercises pays the theory of value. D. Ricardo agrees with Smith that the exchange cost of goods is determined by the amount of labor spent on its production. However, he contradicts the next position of Smith that the cost of the goods is determined by the work. Thus, Ricardo came to the conclusion that "labor is the basis of any cost." He found that the cost of goods also includes the cost of production tools that is transferred to the finished product. He emphasized that "not only work applied to goods is influenced by the value of goods, but also the work spent on guns, tools and buildings that contribute to this work." Ricardo, distinguished the "absolute and change value". If the absolute value was the work embodied in the product, then the relative (or exchange) advocated as an expression of the value of one product in another.

Speaking of value and wealth, Ricardo pointed to the difference between them. With the development of production and increased productivity of labor, the cost of goods decreases, and their abundance increases. In its theory of the cost of Ricardo, allocated natural and market prices. The first, he declared the expression of value, and the second tied with a deviation from it under the influence of supply and demand. He wrote that "the price of goods is regulated ultimately by the costs of production," and not in demand and a proposal that can only be temporarily influenced by the market price. "

T. Malthus determined the cost of goods by the costs of production, to which he believed the costs of direct and extractive labor, and profit for all capital. At the same time, the profit he considered as a nominal surcharge to the cost of the goods. Separating profits from Labor, T. Malthus came to the conclusion that it turns out as a result of selling goods above its value.

T. Malthus argues that they cannot pay the goods above the cost, neither workers who receive a "meager" salary, nor capitalists who would lose when buying everything they won during the sale. Therefore, there should be a third category of buyers, which only buys, not selling anything. He attracted government officials, land owners, army.

John Stewart Mill is an English bourgeois economist and a philosopher, the last representative of the school D. Ricardo, the cost category analyzes out of any connection with production. Under the cost or exchange cost, it means "his common purchasing power, the power that the possession of this subject gives over the goods sold at all." Moreover, the cost of goods at Mill was determined by the cost of production costs. At the same time, production costs were reduced to wages and profits, and the cost of fixed capital was excluded from them.

Jean Batist is a French economist, actively promoting the ideas of A. Smith, a number of innovations in the development of the theory of value. J. B. Say called the cost of wealth or "value" of goods. Mixing costs with consumer value, he came to the conclusion that with an increase in labor productivity, not only the mass of consumer values \u200b\u200bincreases, but also mass value. When determining the value of the value of goods and the proportions, in which their exchange occurs, Say, put forward two assumptions: the cost or "value" of each subject until it is installed on the market, completely arbitrary, uncertain; The consumer value of the goods is the first basis for their value.

That is, J. B. Say, did not consider the work of the value basis of goods that make them equal and commensurate in exchange. "Value" (value) of the goods he determined their utility. Considering the production as a natural process, he argued that not only labor, but also means of production and earth participate in the creation of value. Capital (means of production), generates profits and percentage, labor - wages, land - rent. He explained this by the fact that in the process of production these factors provide certain services, and therefore, they produce costs.

Thus, J. B. Say put forward the theory of "three factors of production", according to which the production of utility and the provision of services and is the process of creating value. Having built his logical chain of evidence, Say could not get away from the answer to the question: how is the value of the value of the goods, if such a variety of factors, as labor, land and capital participate in its production? It is responsible as follows: the cost of goods is installed on the market in price, under the influence of supply and demand. The amount of money that is given for this thing, in Say, and determines its "value".

Physicrafts, unlike classic, argued that the source of wealth is agriculture, which creates a "pure product" - excess the product of nature in excess costs. Recognizing only agricultural work by the creator of "net income", physiocrats essentially believed that the cost is growing from the ground.

K. Marx as a simple work considered the work of a person who does not possess special training. Now such a completely unqualified workforce can be used only on utility work. All major form of work requires one degree of qualifications. Therefore, we are entitled to allocate the labor of the least qualified major workers who participate in the production of each this type Product.

1. Drointent market exchange products have the same internal content - the cost. Therefore, in the market, they equate to each other in a certain exchange proportion.

2. The cost of goods is created by the social labor of manufacturers. This work is public because the manufacturer of the market product creates it for others. Therefore, the cost is a public labor embodied in the product. And the equality of products at their cost means that the same amount of labor is concluded.

A. Smith clarified: "Not on gold and silver, but only on labor was originally acquired by all the riches of the world; And the cost of them for those who own and who want to exchange them for any new products is exactly equal to the number of labor that he can buy on them or get at its disposal. "

3. Look forms the cost, varies by its complexity or quality can be distinguished by a simple (not requiring any preparation) and complex (qualified) work. The last time spent the time, the effort of a person to acquire the necessary knowledge and labor skills. Therefore, in the market exchange of goods, one hour of complex labor can be equal to several hours of simple labor.

4. The work itself is measured using working time. If work is the same in quality (let's say, simple work), it is quantitatively measured in hours of work.

5. For the manufacture of the same type of product, employees usually spend unequal largest individual working time. For they have different conditions Production (facilities and objects of labor) differ in the level of qualifications, according to the degree of intensity (tensions) of labor efforts. Therefore, the goods of the same type and quality (for example, potatoes), usually have different largest individual value.

But on the market, the goods cannot be sold at the individual value of each of their owner. Indeed, in this case, the person who spent on the same product is the largest working time (but it could be the most insielic and lazy). A public (market) cost is installed on the market for products of one type and quality. Therefore, the labor theory of value revealed economic ties, which can be schematically reflected in the Formula "Commodity Manufacturer - Public Work - Commodity - Public Cost - Market Price." It is noticeable that there is a look at commodity and market relations only on the one hand - from the position of the commodity producer and the seller of the product.

2. Product as workforce in the economic concept of K. Mars

Karl Marx, divided the labor theory of value. According to Marx, the sole source of value is the work of hired workers. By definition, K. Marx "Product is primarily an external subject, a thing that, due to its properties, satisfies any human needs."

K. Marx attached great importance The teaching on the dual character of labor, by putting it in a single series with the opening of the law of surplus value.

In accordance with the theory of labor value, the only source of value of the goods is labor. Since the price is a cash form of value, therefore, the basis of the price is the work spent on the production of goods.

For understanding of cost and prices, the theory of the dual nature of labor is extremely important. K. Marx attached great importance to the doctrine of the dual character of labor, putting it in one series with the opening of the law of surplus value.

Since the goods have a consumer cost and cost, then work, its creating, is also a dual character. On this occasion, K. Marx noticed: "From the attention of all economists, without exception, there was a simple thing that if the goods are something dual, namely: the consumer value and exchange cost, then the work embodied in the product should have a dual character."

Friedrich Engels also notes that: "In order to become a commodity, the product must be transferred to the hands of who it serves as a consumer value by means of exchange." From here we see that the goods, it is nothing more than a product of labor intended for exchange. It follows from this that the goods, as such, possesses two properties: the ability to satisfy any human need, suitability for exchange.

K. Marx noticed: "With the attention of all economists, without exception, there is a simple thing that if the goods are something dual, namely: consumer cost and exchange value, then the work embodied in the product should have a dual character."

According to the theory of the value of K. Marx, the value of the value of the goods is determined by the socially necessary costs of working time on its production. Human labor forms the cost, but the work itself is not a cost. The cost can manifest itself in a public relationship of one product to another, i.e. in their exchanges or in exchange. At a certain stage of the development of commodity proceedings, the goods have a common for all form of value, namely a cash form of value. Thus, the price is a monetary expression of the cost of goods.

The cost "there is only an expression in things, a real expression of relations between people, public relations, is the attitude of people in their mutual production activities."

Thus, the cost is an economic category, expressing the relationship between business entities for the equivalence of abstract labor expended on the production.

Finding the category of the cost of goods in the distinction of abstract work, which is essentially difficult to public, K. Marx overcame the confusion of the individual and social value of goods characteristic of its predecessors and was able to solve the problem of the value of the goods.

But the value of the value of the goods is not determined by individual, but socially necessary labor costs or working hours. K. Marx gives the following definition of this concept: "Socially necessary working time is the working time, which is required for the manufacture of any consumer value in cash social normal conditions Production and on average in this society, the level of cleverness and intensity of labor "

The work at the same time acts in a specific and abstract forms. Concrete labor as an economic category does not represent difficulties for understanding. Its beneficial properties are obvious, they protrude on the surface of the phenomena. Specific difficulty produces a qualitatively defined consumer value.
- bread, costume, boots, bike, etc. The development of a public division of labor leads to the emergence of an increasing number of highly solid labor types. These types of labor differ from each other by various usefulness of products for a person, on the use of means of production, the nature of labor operations. Specific work exists in any socio-economic system as a result of public division of labor and the need to meet the economic needs of each under these conditions.

Specific types of labor consist of many millions. But at the same time, they all have something in common - the cost of human labor in general: energy, muscles, nerves, mind. This is an abstract work, which allows you to measure the results of specific labor in our consumer utility.

The work of the commodity producer, considered as the spending of human labor in general, regardless of its concrete results, is called abstract labor.
Synonym for the word "abstract" is the word "disturbed". On the market, when exchanging, there is a distinguishing from specific forms in which goods are ridicked by each of the many types of specific labor. Goods are compared between themselves as crystals of homogeneous abstract labor.

Abstract work creates the cost of goods. The cost is manifested in the exchange of goods in the form of exchange value. The exchange value of goods, the proportions in which they exchange, their exchange ratio are a form in which the cost of goods is expressed.

With private ownership of the means of production, labor expended on the production of goods, acts as a private, at the same time, the public division of labor determines its social character. Consequently, abstract work forms the cost of the goods, and the cost itself expresses public relations.

The cost "there is only an expression in things, a real expression of relations between people, public relations, is the attitude of people in their mutual production activities."

Thus, the cost is an economic category, expressing the relationship between business entities for the equivalence of abstract labor expended on the production.

Finding the category of the cost of goods in the distinction of abstract work, which is essentially difficult to public, K. Marx overcame the confusion of the individual and social value of goods characteristic of its predecessors and was able to solve the problem of the value of the goods.

Since the cost of goods is created by difficulty, the value of the value of the goods is measured by the number of labor in it.
Natural labor measure is working hours: hour, day, week, etc. For the manufacture of not only different, but also homogeneous goods, manufacturers can spend different amounts of time. It depends on labor instruments, the skill of the employee, his professional skills and other conditions. Time that spends separate employee The production of any product is called individual working time or individual labor costs. But the value of the value of the goods is not determined by individual, but socially necessary labor costs or working hours. K. Marx gives the following definition of this concept: "The socially necessary working time is the working time, which is required for the manufacture of any consumer value in cash of socially normal production conditions and, with an average of this society, the level of cleailness and intensity of labor."

Socially normal (or typical) production conditions are those in which the overwhelming part of goods of this species is created. This is usually medium conditions. Only under these conditions, a manufacturer with medium swelling and operating with an average intensity, for the hour of labor creates a value equal to one socially necessary hour. If production conditions do not comply with socially normal (better or worse) or if the cleaner of the employee and the intensity of its labor is higher or below the established in society middle sizeIn this case, the value of the cost created by him for the hour will be more than or less.

In other words, more productive work for this time always creates a greater value than less productive.

Publicly necessary labor costs act as a kind of public standard, which is manifested in the market and into which commodity producers should fit. Extra cost Individual labor is not recognized by society, they cut off, therefore, do not create costs. Nobody will pay for the actual labor costs exceeding those in which the production of the main amount of goods of this species.

The essence of the law of value is that the exchange of goods is carried out in accordance with the number of socially necessary labor spent on their production. In other words, the law of value means that the goods exchange each other at a cost containing the same number of socially necessary labor.
Purchase and sale of goods for this equivalent acts as a law,

The price of goods in the market is determined by the socially necessary labor costs for its production. In practice, the price under the influence of competition, demand and suggestions may be higher or lower than the cost. The smaller the goods in the market, the more the demand for it exceeds the offer, the price and the price of this product will be higher, and vice versa. Everyone seeks to produce more products than his competitor. But no one knows the actual social needs in a particular product, the offer almost never coincides with the demand for this product.

If the goods produced more consumer demand for them, then the prices of these goods on the market are falling and falling below the cost. Some of the goods produced turns out to be unnecessary, commodity producers are forced to sell them significantly lower than the cost, get damages and reduce production. With an increase in demand, there is a reverse reaction of commodity producers.

The law of value is the law of prices. Through the mechanism of market pricing, through their oscillations around the cost under the influence of competition, supply and demand, natural regulation of commodity production occur, the spontaneous establishment of a certain equilibrium between supply and demand. And although this equilibrium is practically unstable and incomplete, the law of value still contributes to the development of market economy.

The law of value expresses its two entities, two categories: individual and socially necessary labor costs. The constant resolution of the contradiction between these two entities of the law of value is determined by the source of development both the law itself and the entire trade production. Each commodity producers seeks to reduce individual labor costs to the level of socially necessary. Those commodity producers who fit into socially necessary costs seek to reduce them in order to get a big difference between market prices and their individual labor costs.

The law of value performs well-defined and practically important functions in the development of market economy: a spontaneous regulator of the production of goods; Stimulator reduction costs of production and engine development engine. It contributes to social differentiation in a market economy, throwing out of the trade production of non-competitive commodity producers. Formation of the average profit and the price of production is associated with the understanding of the surplus value and the specifics of the "Workforce" product.

The teaching on these categories of K. Marx replied to the assigned, but not solved by D. Ricardo. The question: if the profit is the unpaid work of workers, and everything exchanges in cost, including the work of workers in the form of wages, then how and why profit occurs. K. Marx proved that the entrepreneur does not buy labor in the labor market, and the ability of an employee to work. He introduces the category "Workforce" into the scientific circulation. This is a special product possessing, like other goods, consumer cost and cost. The workforce "Working force" is the category of an exclusively capitalist system of the economy that has created two conditions for its occurrence: personal freedom of employee and deprivation of means of production and means of existence.

The cost of a special product "Workforce" is determined by the sum of the vital goods required both for the existence of the worker and its family and for the training of labor. The cost of labor, expressed in money, is the price of the product "Workforce".
In a market economy, it takes the form of wages.

3. Accessive value and capital in the theory of labor value

The stage in the development of the science and nature of the category "Capital" was the creation of K. Marx the theory of labor value. Its studies are worn, on the one hand, a deep analysis of the fundamental categories of the commodity and capitalist system, on the other hand, is the ideological focus on the destruction of this system. Unfortunately, the scientific achievements of K. Marx are underestimated or deliberately distorted due to its conclusions about the insoluctivity of antagonistic contradictions born by private-capitalist property on the means of production.

At the same time, it should be borne in mind that K. Marx explored the real situation in the development of capitalism of the middle of the XIX century, when all his socially-
economic contradictions reached the limit and the ability to preserve the capitalist system was questionable. So, P. Drager writes that "Most contemporaries of Marx shared his views on capitalism," "Even the opponents of Marxism took his analysis of internal contradictions of capitalism."

Not without the influence of the teachings of K. Marx and its widespread distribution in the world, capitalism was able to find methods and means of more or less successful resolution of these contradictions. However, the objective achievements of K. Marx in the field of economic science are distorted from ideological considerations.

A prominent American specialist in the field of modern economic thoughts B. Seligman believes that "Marx and the definition of capital has great advantages," but it is irretrievably lost in the theories of Fisher and Knight, which leaves the impression of their apologetic nature.

Marx critically analyzed and summarized the entire previous experience both in the development of capitalism and the views of economists for private-capitalist production. In "Capital", released in 1867 in Hamburg, K. Marx gave definitions to all major economic categories, paying great attention to the study of the capital of capital and the definition of this category.

As the capital study is deepened, K. Marx cites several definitions of this category. The shortest and capacious: Capital is a value that brings the surplus value, i.e. Capital is a self-exploring value.

The consumer value of the goods "Workforce" is the ability of employees of employees to create a new cost, greater than the cost of the workforce itself. The difference between the magnitude of the new cost and wages is the surplus value. The surplus value is the result of an unpaid employer of the hired worker.

K. Marx launches the rate of surplus value as the attitude of an unpaid part of the worker's work to his paid part. The rate of surplus value shows how much unpaid labor worker gives capitalist to each unit of paid labor (wages). Therefore, K. Marx calls the rate of surplus value of the norm. "... The rate of surplus value is the expression of the degree of exploitation of labor force capital." Naturally, with such conclusions, neither the Class of capitalists, nor representing his interests, nor the defendants of those and other official economic science could agree.

The teachings on the surplus value of K. Marx allowed the contradiction of the general capital formula: Dr. 1 (d 1 \u003d d + C1, where it is profit) in production as a result of unpaid labor, this increase is only implemented in circulation.

K. Marx divided the entire capital to the permanent (preserving its value during the production process) and variable (changing its value that creates a large value compared to its own value).

All advanced capital from the standpoint of participation in creating the cost of goods K. Marx divided into a permanent and variable. Permanent capital includes production costs. These costs are transferred to the employee to the created product without changing the initial cost. Other business variable capital - the cost of buying labor. In the process of production, this capital changes its cost, creating a greater amount compared to wages employee.

Not in the interests of the capitalist share capital on a permanent and variable. For him and those and other costs - production costs, and it expects to make a profit with the total amount of capital.

The surplus value assigned to all over capital is profit and profit rate. The surplus value assigned to all over capital, K. Marx called the transformed form of profit. In the form of profit, the surplus value loses any visible connection with variable capital and appears as a generation of all capital.

Since the profit is created by living labor, then in those sectors where the share of living labor is higher, higher and rate of profit compared to industries that have a reduced fraction of living labor. However, intersectoral competition comes into force, as a result of which capital is ridiculed into those industries in which the rate of profit is higher. The growth of supply in these sectors will reduce the rate of profit and increases it in industries where the offer, on the contrary, fell.

The process of inter-sectoral overflow of capital will continue until different rates of profit equal in the average rate of profit. This means that the entire surplus value generated in society turns into a common profit fund from which each capitalist receives its share in proportion to investment capital. Profit obtained at the average norm on advanced capital is called average profit.

Alignment of different standards arrived in the average rate of profit means that the goods in the market economy are not sold at the actual value, but at the price of production.

The price of production is the cost of production (costs of permanent and variable capital) plus the average rate of profit.

Products in a market economy, therefore, are not for sale, but at cost prices. This does not mean that the law of value is violated. Competition, the incomprehension of demand with the proposal leads to the fact that some commodity producers sell goods at prices above the cost, others - at prices below the cost, but all capitalists, taken together, receive the full cost of goods, and the mass of all profits is equal to the entire mass of the surplus value.

Consequently, in capitalist commodity production, the law of value operates through production prices.

4. Economic forms of surplus value

The surplus value is considered as part of the value of the goods, taking into account the costs of purchasing means of production and on the hiring of labor. These costs are respectively constituted and variable capital.

Under constant capital, the part of the capital is meant, which is spent on the purchase of means of production and which in the production process does not change the values \u200b\u200bof its value, i.e. It remains unchanged. Under alternating capital, such part of the capital is implied, which is spent on the acquisition of labor (employee commodity) and which in the production process changes its value. In turn, the cost of labor is determined by the value of the vital material and intangible benefits necessary for its reproduction.

Under the reproduction of labor, not only the permanent maintenance of the employee and the provision of its necessary benefits to improve their workforce, but also reproduction of the offspring as an indispensable condition for continuing economic activity in perspective. It means that the cost of labor includes the means necessary for the content of the family.

Given all the above costs, the cost of goods can be represented as a formula:

W \u003d C + V + M, (4)

where W is the cost of goods;

C - cost permanent capital;

V - costs for variable capital;

m - Extension value, or surplus value.

Accordingly, in order to start the production process, the entrepreneur must advance capital for the means of production (C), and the hiring of labor force (V). So, the advanced capital will consist of direct and variable capital (KAV \u003d C + V).

By its essence, the surplus value expresses the relationship of operation. The degree of operation is expressed differently in form of relationships.

Consequently, based on the cost structure of goods, the degree of operation, or the rate of surplus value, can be recorded as a formula:

m \u003d m / v · 100%, (5)

where M is the rate of surplus value;

m - surplus value;

V - variable capital.

Thus, if the working day is 8 o'clock, and the required working time - 6 hours and surcharge working hours is 2 hours, we obtain that the rate of surplus value is equal to

m \u003d 2 hours / 6 hours · 100% \u003d 33%. (6)

The rate of surplus value characterizes the degree of exploitation of the employee, but not an absolute value of operation. So, the rate of surplus value is 100% means that the worker half of the working day works on the capitalist. If the working day is 8 hours, then 4 hours the employee works on the capitalist. However, it does not know what weight of the surplus value will receive the capitalist. If you designate a lot of surplus value m, variable capital, in the form of remuneration of workers V, then at m \u003d m / v, the mass of the surplus value is equal to:

M \u003d m · v \u003d (m / v) · v, (7)

Therefore, it can be said that the increase in the mass of surplus value affects the increase in the degree of operation of workers and an increase in the volume of functioning variable capital (the number of employees). One of the main sources of growth rate of surplus value is to increase labor productivity. It reduces labor costs to produce the necessary workers of life products, i.e., creates the conditions for reducing the cost of labor and the necessary working time.

Any entrepreneur seeks to increase the surplus value of the goods. An increase in the mass of surplus value can be achieved in two ways. Accordingly, and distinguish the absolute surplus value and the relative surplus value.

The absolute surplus value is the surplus value by elongating the working day beyond the necessary working time. Consequently, the first way is to exceed the duration of the working day above the necessary working time. Working day elongation can occur hidden, i.e. In the form of increasing labor intensity. At the same time, the working day remains unchanged, while in terms of labor costs there is an increase in the duration of the working day. For example, if we increase the intensity of labor by 10%, then this means that in a unit of time we put on 1/10 work more than before. Next, we obtain that with the same duration of working time, we create a value of 10% large.

With absolute surplus costs, such concepts as the minimum and maximum working time limits are closely related. The maximum limit of working time is determined by the limit of physical ability to work, as well as the need for time to meet its spiritual, social and other needs. The minimum duration of working time is the time it is necessary to create a cost equal to the cost of labor. When the minimum limit of working time is reached, the creation and assignment of surplus value becomes impossible. Accordingly, the existence of capitalist production is also terminated.

The relative surplus value is the surplus value obtained by increasing the surrounding working time within the framework of the existing working time. This method of increasing the surplus value is the shift of the necessary and surplus working time within the existing working day, i.e. in reducing the necessary working time. This requires a reduction in the cost of labor; For the necessary working time, employees produce the cost of their workforce. So, to reduce the cost of labor, it is necessary to reduce the cost of the consumption of employees, and therefore an increase in productivity in the respective industries. Thus, the basis of the production of surplus value is the growth of labor productivity. This is achieved by changing (improvement) of the technical level of production, in which the employee will be able to make the equivalent of the cost of labor in less necessary work time.

There is a relationship between absolute and relative surplus value. Considering the division of the working day on the necessary and surge working hours, it is impossible to accurately determine which character has a surplus value. Only knowing those factors that cause changes in the ratio between the necessary and surgery working time can be said to be accurate, in which the surplus value is in favor.

It is possible to consider this in the following example, when the working day is 8 hours, and the required working time is 6, the surcharge working time is 2 hours. It is exactly possible to say only that there is a surplus value, expressed in the surplus working time, equal to 2 o'clock. If you suggest that the original working day was 6 hours, then it is obvious that then he went out of these frameworks. Consequently, the surplus value in this case is absolute. If the initial working day was 8 hours, and as a result of the growth of labor productivity, the necessary working hours decreased to 6 hours, the cost created for 2 hours of surplus working time will be considered a relative surplus value.

In addition to the relative and absolute surplus value, there is another variety. This is an excess surplus value.

Excessive surplus cost is surplus value over the usual norm obtained by individual entrepreneurs. That is, excess surplus cost is the difference between public and individual value. Excessive cost arises as a result of the application of new technology, technologies, more advanced production methods in individual enterprises, when individual performance on them exceeds its public level. Improving individual labor productivity and a decrease in the individual value of the goods may occur during the creation of any good. Excessive surplus value is not related to the cost of labor and disappears, as soon as technical or other improvements become the property of most enterprises in this industry. As a result, labor productivity in all society increases. Thus, the pursuit of excess surplus value serves as an engine of technical progress.

The theory of surplus value does not contradict the fact that the value added is divided into two parts - wages of workers and gross profit (surplus value). But this theory does not currently correspond to many conditions of the post-industrial economy. For example, gross profit on joint-stock enterprises do not get any single private owner, but to all shareholders, including employees with shares. With the emergence of the public sector of the economy, a significant proportion of enterprises has become drawn in the form of state taxeswho go to the satisfaction of a variety of joint community needs (free secondary education, development of science, social needs, etc.). Due to the fact that in highly developed industrial countries, a steady tendency towards improving the life level of the majority of the population, there is an elimination of a former acute contradiction between the wealth of the few and poverty of most people.

Summing up the analysis of the theory of surplus value. It can be said that the theory of surplus value analyzed the relationship between employees and entrepreneurs who are associated with the production and distribution of this cost. Also, the theory of surplus value reflected the historically limited space of the action of the trends open to it and regularities. It does not meet the qualitatively new economic conditions characteristic of post-industrial and post-capitalist society.

The market in the process of its functioning is based on economic laws. The mechanism of the functioning of the classic market is determined by two major economic law - the law of value and the law of supply and demand. Specific forms of functioning of market relations are the prices, consumer behavior and seller, competition.

English Classical and Marxist economic science in the face of A. Smith, D. Ricardo and K. Marx The main law of commodity production was considered the law of labor value. The discovery of the classics of economic science of this law was a whole epoch in the development of human civilization. Unfortunately, in modern economic science, especially the Russian, this law does not pay due attention. Meanwhile, the principle of "invisible hand", about which they speak so much in modern Russia, A. Smith linked with the action of the law of value.

In economic theory, nothing gave rise to so many mistakes and disagreements, as preciseness and the uncertainty of the meaning, which is invested in the word cost. During the XVII-XIX centuries, the main concepts of economists on the value of the goods were formed.

Smith reduced the cost of work spent on the production of goods, to the work being purchased (wages), the amount of wages, profits and land rent. Ricardo and Mc Culloch were determined by its production costs, the Say - the utility of things, burly - offer and demand. Marx and Engels, considering their controversy, concluded that the cost is a real form of the cost of public abstract labor and expresses the ratio of production costs for utility. A long argument in economic science is also carried out by the value of the value of the goods, and naturally, at its price. Smith took the cost of the cost sometimes the working time required for the production of goods, and sometimes the cost of labor, Ricardo - working hours on the production of goods in relatively worse production conditions. Sismondi The value of the value of the goods reduced to the relationship between the needs of the whole society and the amount of labor, which is enough to meet this need. In the works of Samuelson, Clark and others are considered to formulate prices, taking into account the influence of limit costs, as additional costs associated with the production of an additional unit of goods.

According to Marx, the cost of the cost is only one production factor - the work of workers. Other positions adhere to modern economists. They in one degree or another shave the concept according to which the cost is based not alone, but several production factors - work, capital (means of production), natural factor (land), entrepreneurial abilities. Accordingly, it is recognized that the cost, firstly, is formed by all factors, secondly, disintegrates.

The problem of cost can and should be solved not on opposition, but by coordination, combinations of approaches. When determining the value of the goods, it is important to consider both costs (work, working hours) and results (quantity and quality of utility), their interaction.

As the global market is being generated, the action of the law is applied to world economic relations. Here, national costs act as the individual, of which international ones are formed. The country with high labor productivity has low individual labor costs and when selling goods at international cost receives additional profits, and with high individual cost - loses. However, this does not mean that the country with low labor productivity, foreign trade relations are unfavorable. They are appropriate if she gets goods cheaper than it could produce themselves. There is not so much the value of the value of goods, how much is the ratio of the national and international costs of exported and imported goods.

The impact of the law of value in the market system is manifested, ultimately that this law acts as a kind of "invisible hand", which directs the manufacturer to their goal - to obtain personal benefits, satisfying their own interest. In this regard, A. Smith wrote: "Each separate person is constantly trying to find the most profitable application of the capital, which he can dispose ... But every person uses capital to support industry only for the sake of profit, so it will always try to use it to support that part of industry, The product of which will have the highest value and share the largest amount of money or other goods. "

Bibliography

Anikin A. V. Life and ideas of thinkers - economists before Marx. - M.: Polizdat, 1985. Principles and concepts of Einstein general theory of relativity (theory of gravity) Competition in economic theory Subject and method of economic theory

Labor theory of value

Labor theory of value

Labour Theory of Value) The presentation that the goods have costs thanks to work or labor spent on their production. This question was clearly represented by Locke (Locke) in Ch. 5 "The second treatise on state Board"(" Second Treatise Of Government ", OK. 1681). In it, Locke argues that, although God left the land to people for common useNevertheless, each person has the right, firstly, on his own body and personality and, secondly, as a result, everything that he removes from the total reserves to its own difficulty: "All that anyone removes from the state , created by nature, and in it remaining, he connects with his work, bringing something from himself and thereby making it with his property. " The theory of Locke, as the theory of equitable law (right), revived Robert Nosik in the book "Anarchy, State and Utopia" ("Anarchy, State and Utopia", 1974). At the same time, the labor theory of property rights itself is not a labor theory of value, although it gives the ideological substantiation of the Marxist interpretation of this latter. In full, labor theory of value was developed by classic economists (Classical Economists), especially David Ricardo and Marx (MARX). Ricardo believed that ideal conditions The price (strictly speaking, the exchange cost) of the goods is determined by the amount of labor spent on its production (including the production of means of production with which it was produced). Marx argued that this magnitude is the reward that the worker earned (in this way, an invisible connection was established with what Locke spoke to Marx, and - as it is neither paradoxical - with what the nosik argued after it). However, in reality, the worker, as a rule, receives a salary, which only enough for it to work and produce offspring. The difference between these two values \u200b\u200band forms the working surplus value produced (Surplus Value). With capitalism, appropriately assigned to capitalists, in socialism, it should belong to workers, according to the classically Marxist formulation of paragraph IV: 4 of the Charter of the Labor Party (1918-95), by definition of which the goal of the party is "to ensure that the workers have fully received a remuneration For your work. " Nowadays, most authors believe that the labor theory of cost is hopelessly discredited by the accusation that it does not take into account the role of demand in the establishment of prices. Two employees may spend an equal amount of calories, mining the same amount of ore, which they began to develop together. But if one is obtained as a result of iron, and the other is silver, then the revenues will be different.

Politics. Dictionary. - M.: Infra-M, Publisher "All World". D. Andertill, S. Barrett, P. Bernell, P. Berne, and others. General editors: Doctor of Economics Sidiamy I.M.. 2001 .

Political science. Vocabulary. - RSU.. V.N. Konovalov. 2010.

Watch what is "labor theory of value" in other dictionaries:

- (Labour Theory of Value) Theory, in accordance with which the cost of the product depends on the amount of labor necessary for its manufacture. For the first time developed by Adam Smith (1723-1790), this theory became the fundamental principle of classical ... ... Business Terms Dictionary

- (Labour Theory of Value) Theory, according to which the cost (value) of goods or services is determined by the number of direct and indirect labor costs needed for their manufacture. This theory ignores the role in the production of scarce natural ... ... Economic Dictionary

Labor theory of value - (Labour Theory of Value) Doctrine in classical political economy (and especially in the political economy of Marx), according to which only labor is a source of surplus value, and the cost and price of goods depend directly from working time, ... ... Large Sociological Dictionary

Content ... Wikipedia

Labor theory of value - Labour Theory of Value Doctrine, developed by economists of classics (see Classical Economics). Scientists have believed that the cost of goods is determined by the cost of labor on its production, i.e. The ratio of equilibrium prices of two products is directly ... ... Dictionary-Directory for Economics

Labor theory of value - - the theory developed by A. Smith, D. Ricardo, K. Marx (see Section 1.1). The theory comes from the fact that the value of the good is determined by the number of socially necessary labor for the production of this good ... Economy from A to Z: thematic directory

Labor theory of value - Theory, according to which the cost of any product is determined by the amount of labor spent on its production ... Dictionary of Economic Terms and Foreign Words

Labor theory of value - (in the economy) (Labour Theory of Value), theory, in accordance with the roo, the cost of goods and services depends on the labor invested in them. The first to express this idea Smith, developed and detailed Ricardo and Marx. Marx claimed that the whole cost ... ... Peoples and culture

Labor theory of value - (Labour Theory of Value) on Marx, the purpose of any economy is to create consumer values, that is useful items. However, in many economies, especially in capitalist, people produce things not for their own ... ... Sociological Dictionary

Friedrich von Viers, who proposed the term "theory of imputation" of imputing the theory (eng. IMPUTIATION) The theory that claims that quantitatively certain parts of the products and its value are obliged to their origin, labor, land and capital ... ... Wikipedia

The theory claiming that the basis of the price is the cost created by labor is the theory of labor value. This theory has been developed by the outstanding pre-orders of the English classical political economy: William Petty (1623-1687), Adam Smith (1723-1790), David Ricardo (1772-1823).

In relation to each product, V. Petty distinguished the political price under which he understood market pricedetermined by the ratio of supply and demand, and natural price(Cost) hiding behind the fluctuations in market prices. Natte, the natural price of any product is determined by the amount of metal money obtained on average for it. This amount, in turn, depends on the ratio of labor costs for the production of a unit of this product with labor costs for the production of a monetary material unit - silver. In the time of V. Petty, silver was dominant monetary material. For example, the natural price of the bread of V. Petty considered the number of silver, which was spent the same amount of labor as on the production of bread.

According to A. Smith, the exchange value of goods, i.e., their quantitative ratio in the exchange is determined by the amount of labor spent on the production of exchanged goods. Market prices ranged around the level due to the ratio of labor costs for the production of exchanged goods. Smith with greater clarity than anyone before him identified and delimited the consumer value and the change value of the goods. He showed the pattern of the fact that the cost must certainly be expressed in exchange proportions, in quantitatively, the exchange of goods, and with sufficient development of market relations - in money. Smith understood that the value of the cost is determined not the actual labor costs of the individual producer, but by those costs that are on average necessary for this state of production.

For further development by Smith the theory of value indicated the distinction between the natural and market prices of goods, and the first ("Central price") interpretedas a cash expression. At any time, the market price may turn out to be both higher and lower than the cost of the goods. The cost is determined by the costs of the production of goods and is the minimum price at which the goods can be sold for a long time. Although the market price sometimes falls below the cost, it cannot last long. Smith marked the beginning of the study of specific factors causing rejection of prices from the cost. This opened up the possibilities for research and suggestions as pricing factors, the role of various monopolies.

However, A. Smith believed that the cost was determined by the work only in the "initial state of society." For the conditions of the developed market economy, he constructed another theory, according to which the cost of the goods is formed by the addition of wages, profits and rent per unit of goods. The natural price, or the cost of raw materials and materials is determined by the cost of labor necessary for their production. Land rent depends on the location of the land plot; The profit of the same entrepreneurs depends on the amount of funds invested in labor, land rent and the acquisition of materials, or, in other words, from the value of the capital invested in the capital. At the same time, Smith specifically stressed that the entrepreneur can receive wages for managing the enterprise, but it cannot be mixed with profit from business.

This statement, the name of the "Dogma Smith", contradicts the labor theory of value.

The main merit of D. Ricardo in the development of the theory of cost and prices is that he showed the inconsistency of the last approval of A. Smith. It was convincingly proven that the Earth as a factor of production does not create the value of goods that income-brought by it is a land rent - the fruit of the wage workers and is due to the action of the law of value. From here, I followed a very important conclusion: only work exerted on the manufacture of goods is the only source of value. D. Ricardo considered the work the only and final reason for the price. Metal money, by Ricardo, represented as A. Smith, a regular product. D. Ricardo caught the dependence of the value of the value of the goods from the level of development of labor productivity and identified the problem of socially necessary labor.

Ricardo came to the conclusion that differences in labor productivity do not cancel the cost definitions, since the value of the cost is not regulated by the fact that actually went to the manufacture of this product, but by those that are necessary for its production under the worst conditions. But the proposed decision is incomplete and inaccurate. As regulatorthe value of the cost is displayed by the individual labor costs of the manufacturer who creates the cost of goods under the worst conditions. The process of pricing, which is typical for agriculture and mining industry, was distributed to all sectors of the economy.

D. Ricardo substantiated structurethe cost (prices) of the goods, which he laid out on the cost of guns, tools, buildings and the immediate cost attached to the old one. In other words, the cost (price) is decomposed on individual elements.

The difference in the views of A. Smith and D. Ricardo is to understand the cost (prices) in the projection on a real economic life. According to the late interpretation of the cost according to A. Smith, the increase in wages, as well as other income in society, leads to an increase in prices, i.e., inflation (this idea A. Smith was subsequently deployed to the theory of "inflationary spiral of prices and wages "). By Ricardo, the increase in wages will not lead to an increase in the cost (it is asked for labor costs), but will reduce profits and rent.

K. Marx (1818-1883), continuing the line of labor value, brought this theory until completion, conclude that the price is a monetary expression of value, and the cost itself is created by the living labor of employees. Marxist theory of labor value did not put a goal to formulate the basis for the disclosure of specific laws of pricing. Its goal was - justify that the basis of any prices is labor costs, either directly (as in simple commercial production), or in the transformed form, for example, in capitalist production prices (hence the Marxist formula: "Price is the transfused form of value"). The goal was purely ideological: from the theories of labor value to go to the theory of surplus value and thereby justify the exploitative nature of capitalist production.

The value formula, according to the labor theory of value, has the form:

W \u003d c + v.+ t,

where W -the cost of goods, a set of socially necessary labor costs; from -the cost of extradited labor (the cost of wear of wage, consumed raw materials, materials, fuels, components); v -payment of wage workers; t -prostitive value, profit base ("unpaid" living work); (C +. v)- The costs of the entrepreneur, the costs of the economic entity.

The development of market relations under free competition conditions leads to the cost modification; Changes the change and immediate price base. The price of production appears, which was defined by F. Engels as a coup in pricing. The mechanism of its formation is based on the intersectoral competition of capital, carried out by overflowing them in accordance with the oscillations of the rate of profit in various fields (industries) of production.

The ideological goal has not changed since the time of K. Marx, so there was no need to seriously revise the theory. In practice, the theory of labor value was used and led to the USSR and countries of socialism to the so-called model of cost pricing, when prices were based on labor costs, without taking into account the variety of pricing factors, which preserved low production efficiency, braked technical progress.

Western entrepreneurs, not recognizable not by loving K. Marx for his doctrine of labor and capital, especially for the revolutionary conclusions from this teaching, in fact are consistent adherents of the theory of K. Marx about the price and cost. The need to reduce production costs is aware of them for a long time and forever. To take a certain niche on the market, to find and keep your segment of demand, the entrepreneur must have a supply margin in case of a decrease in demand and the need to move to more low prices implementation. This stock is created only by systematic scrupulous work on reduction in costs. Otherwise, the entrepreneur will lose their profit.

By developing the price of a new product, the entrepreneur is not interested in so much by "how much buyers will give" for him, but first of all their own costs that he will suffer. The lower the costs, the greater the free "field" of the price on which the preliminary one will occur (still perfect) bargaining with the buyer: some of this field should be left to receive a buyer of winning price from acquiring a new product model, and part should be an additional Profit businessman.

Labor theory of value (TTS) is an economic theory, in accordance with which the goods exchange among themselves in such quantities in order to ensure equality of labor costs, that is, the amount of working time required for their production (or reproduction) in these socio-economic conditions. These exchange proportions determine the cost of goods that manifests itself in the price through a comparison with goods equivalent. The logical consequence of the labor theory of value is the recognition of labor by the only source of wealth.

Various options for the labor theory of the cost have advanced founders of classical political economy: William Petty, Adam Smith, David Ricardo. This theory has received a complete form in the writings of Karl Marx and therefore it is usually associated with Marxism.

The views on what labor is based on the cost (prices) originated in Ancient Greece. Already Aristotle pointed out that "fair equality was established so that the agriculture belongs to the Shchever, like the work of the shrinkler to the work of the Agriculture." These ideas developed many other thinkers, including John Locke, William Petty. However, the exchange of goods they were inextricably connected with its usefulness for the consumer.

Adam Smith made a significant step forward in the explanation of the nature of the cost. He separated the "Consumer Cost" (value for the consumer, utility) from the "exchange value" (the cost that regulates relationships when exchanging). Adam Smith showed what a huge role for the economy and national wealth plays an increase in labor productivity, in particular due to the division of labor and by the use of machines. Thanks to this, the skills of workers will be improved and the working time saving concluded in a unit of goods is achieved. Adam Smith Cost determined not labor costs concrete person, and the average duration of productive work necessary for this level of development of society. The labor theory of the value of Adam Smith contradicted observations from practice. For example, often prices are not only deviated from theoretical value (the amount of salary was taken for it, the amount of invested capital and rent per unit of goods were taken), but also grouped around some meaning.

David Ricardo first showed why perfect competition The theory of labor costs cannot fully explain the ratio of prices for goods, nevertheless, he adhered to the labor theory of value because it, being a gross approach to reality, was convenient for presenting his model, the main task for him was not an explanation of relative prices, but the establishment Laws controlling the distribution of products between the main classes. Ricardo more strongly divided the exchange cost and value for the consumer (consumer cost). He drew attention to the miscalculation of A. Smita, who considered the newly created value as the amount of personal income, and showed that part of the value created does not take the form of income, but should go for the reimbursement of fixed capital.

Further development of the theory of value received from Karl Marx. Engels in the preface to the second of this "Capital" noted that he knew what Adam Smith knew where the surplus value of the capitalist was taken from. However, the surplus value in the form of a special category Smith did not separate from those special forms that it takes in land rental and profits.

In his main work "Capital. Criticism of political economy, "exploring labor as a specific product, Marx allocated in a special category and analyzed the surplus value that forms profits, but is not it, as in previous theories. He found that "the cost at all is nothing more than work embodied in the product."

The webinar holds on March 13, 2019 at 20:00 (Moscow time) Irina Dedyukhova.

Register to participate in the webinar by filling out the following form and paying participation. Mandatory to fill only the name fields and e-mail.