Progress and Poverty
[01] In identifying
rent as the receiver of the increased production which material progress
gives, but which labor fails to obtain; in seeing that the antagonism
of interests is not between labor and capital, as is popularly believed,
but is in reality between labor and capital on the one side and landownership
on the other, we have reached a conclusion that has most important
practical bearings. But it is not worth while to dwell on them now,
for we have not yet fully solved the problem which was at the outset
proposed. To say that wages remain low because rent advances is like
saying that a steamboat moves because its wheels turn around. The
further question is, what causes rent to advance? What is the force
or necessity that, as productive power increases, distributes a greater
and greater proportion of the produce as rent?
[02] The only cause
pointed out by Ricardo as advancing rent is the increase of population,
which by requiring larger supplies of food necessitates the extension
of cultivation to inferior lands, or to points of inferior production
on the same lands, and in current works of other authors attention
is so exclusively directed to the extension of production from superior
to inferior lands as the cause of advancing rents that Mr. Carey (followed
by Professor Perry and others) has imagined that he has overthrown
the Ricardian theory of rent by denying that the progress of agriculture
is from better to worse lands.1
[03] Now, while it is
unquestionably true that the increasing pressure of population which
compels a resort to inferior points of production will raise rents,
and does raise rents, I do not think that all the deductions commonly
made from this principle are valid, nor yet that it fully accounts
for the increase of rent as material progress goes on. There are evidently
other causes which conspire to raise rent, but which seem to have
been wholly or partially bidden by the erroneous views as to the functions
of capital and genesis of wages which have been current. To see what
these are, and how they operate, let us trace the effect of material
progress upon the distribution of wealth.
[04] The changes which
constitute or contribute to material progress are three: (1) increase
in population; (2) improvements in the arts of production and exchange;
and (3) improvements in knowledge, education, government, police,
manners, and morals, so far as they increase the power of producing
wealth. Material progress, as commonly understood, consists of these
three elements or directions of progression, in all of which the progressive
nations have for some time past been advancing, though in different
degrees. As, considered in the light of material forces or economies,
the increase of knowledge, the betterment of government, etc., have
the same effect as improvements in the arts, it will not be necessary
in this view to consider them separately. What bearing intellectual
or moral progress, merely as such, has upon our problem we may hereafter
consider. We are at present dealing with material progress, to which
these things contribute only as they increase wealth-producing power,
and shall see their effects when we see the effect of improvements
in the arts.
[05] To ascertain the
effects of material progress upon the distribution of wealth, let
us, therefore, consider the effects of increase of population apart
from improvement in the arts, and then the effect of improvement in
the arts apart from increase of population.
1 As to this,
it may be worth while to say: (1) That the general fact, as shown
by the progress of agriculture in the newer states of the Union
and by the character of the land left out of cultivation in the
older, is that the course of cultivation is from the better to the
worse qualities of land. (2) That, whether the course of production
be from the absolutely better to the absolutely worse lands or the
reverse (and there is much to indicate that better or worse in this
connection merely relates to our knowledge, and that future advances
may discover compensating qualities in portions of the earth now
esteemed most sterile), it is always, and from the nature of the
human mind, must always tend to be, from land under existing conditions
deemed better, to land under existing conditions deemed worse. (3)
That Ricardo's law of rent does not depend upon the direction of
the extension of cultivation, but upon the proposition that if land
of a certain quality will yield something, land of a better quality
will yield more.
|