Montana news. [volume] (Lewistown, Mont.) 1904-191?, 1905-10-04


wages to labor. As an instance, a
cashier of bank may get ten dol
lars per day for six hours work
while the man in the ditch gets two
dollars for ten hours work. So the
ditch digger under this system ex-
changes over 8 days of ten hours
work, for the bank cashier, 6 hour
day. Now does the ditch digger
quit work because he knows he is
putting in ten times more work than
the cashier2 Not on your life.
That freedom of individual demand
must be satisfied. Now if he will
work under the above unequal con-
ditions, do you think he will quit
work because there is a trifling dis
parity between his own and some
other mans work. And now | am
going to straighten out this question
of ratios which you seem to be
worse mixed up in, than anything
else and it will also explain to you
my former assertion that labor is the
only true measure of value. We
will first take the variable ratio of
gold and silver. This has always
been caused by the variable labor
cost of mining and reducing the re-
spective metals to bullion. If it
cost less labor time to produce an
ounce of silver, that metal fell and
if it cost more to produce an ounce
of gold without an equal rise in
producing an ounce of silver the
ratio became more separated. The
same rule will apply to your potato
and glove contest. If it would take
on hours time, under this present
system to produce one bushell of
potatoes, and one hour to produce
one pair of gloves as long as they
were on parity with each other,
say one dollar for each there would
not likely be any noticeable change
from one occupation to the other by
the workers of the respective call
ings, but if there was a fall in the
price of potatoes fifty cents per
bushell and a corresponding rise in
the the price gloves, the potato
raiser would not be long subject to
this unequal exchange but would go
to making gloves which would again
restore the parity between the two
articles and in time make as much
disparity the other way. And this
is the sole cause of the fluctuations
in prices of commodities where all
other things are equal. That is
where the trust has no monopoly on
the commodity.
This illustration also proves that
labor is the only true measure of
value. Now under Socialism, where
there was an under supply for the
demand for a certain commodity
say for gloves, and an over produc-
ton of potatoes, the number of
hours in labor day for the glove
makers would be lowered which
would be equivalent to a rise in
wages under this system. And the
number of hours in the labor day
for the potato raiser, would be
equivalent to a fall in wages for
potato raisers under this system.
That would take enough men out of
the potato business and put them in
the glove factory to supply the de-
mand for both articles. When
once this parity was fully established
there would be very little fluctua-
tions in the supply, as their parity
woald prove that the workers were
satisfied with this arraignment of
labor. This argument is merely
Illustrative as both potato raising
and glove making is mostly done by
machinery which is also collective
labor.
This same illustration disproves
your assertions in regard to being
compelled to regulate supply and
demand by bureaus. but on the other
hand, supply and demand would
control the action of our bureaus
and this also answers your ques-