Workmen's advocate. (New Haven, Conn.) 1883-1891, 1889-03-09

sary means of subsistence. But if |
this be the reward of labor, what |
becomes of the excess Of prices paid |
for the articles produced over the
cost Of subsistence of the workers
whilst the articles are being made?
This excess is divided between the
employer and other capitalists, pure
and simple, such as the holder of
land, bankers, etc.
We said that there is not a single
drop of the sweat Of the workers
that is not paid back to capital in
the price of the product, and that
every pound in the hands of the
employers produces another pound.
With this increase the power of cap
ital increases, so that every effort of
the workers enables the capitalist to
compel the workers to further toll.
And when it is impossible to reduce
the prices of the products and thus
cheaper the means of subsistence,
then the increase of the workers
does not increase with the increased
produce Of labor, but the power of
capital does.
Take all those who have worked
together in the production of some
article-those who have worked
with their brains as well as those
who have worked with their hands;
add together what they have re-
ceiyed for their work and they will
not be able to recover the product
Of their labor. And when machin-
cry is employed, thus causing
greater production with the same
amount of labor, then it becomes
more and more impossible for the
workers to buy back with their
wages the product of their work,
and they become poorer and poorer.
But the capitalists say that the
profits of capital is really the recon-
pense of the brain work of the capt.
talist, the reward for his manage
ment. In reality, however, only a
very small portion of the income of
the capitalist can come under this
head; and the English economists
have ways treated the profits of
the employers as the premium of
capital, and have left unnoticed the
reward for brain work on account of
its smallness. If YOU want to know
how small it is, look at the salaries
paid to stewards of estates, to man
ayers OF factories, etc, etc, who do
the brain work, while the principals
travel for pleasure or attend to
other matters. Only the amount so
paid for management can be regard
ed as the recOmpense for such work
when the employer or capitalist does
this work himself. This feature is
still more strongly marked in the
case Of railways, jolnt-stock banks
and industrial companies. Here,
those who possess the capital are
many and they live on their divi-
| dcnds, whilst the "brain work" Of
the business is being done by salar-
| led officials. OF course, some of
these salaries are absurdly high;
but take them altogether and con-,
pare the total with the amount paid
away in dividends, and then YOU
will have some idea of the smallness
of the amount paid for brain work
and management.
Say that the total amount of the
produce of labor during one year is
$500, 900, and that the cost of the
subsistence of the workers-in
other words, their wages. is 500, 900.
Now, whether the employees are
sharp or stupid, idle or Industrious,
the remaining 100000 will fall to
the share Of the employers. as a
class, and how much each individual
employer will receive will depend
upon his personal qualities.
Economics can only deal with the
question of how much of the prod
uce of labor the employers as class
can obtain for themselves, how
much the workers as a class can
obtain for themselves, and what
quantity of the products of labor
the individual worker can obtain.
The question us to how one ndivid-
ual employer can get more for him
self than other individual employ
ers is really part Of practical bust
ness and in no way comes under
economics. All this shows that
capital is not eyer-preSent, that it is