Chapter 9 Chapter VIII Wages

The product of labor is the natural reward, or natural wages, of labour. In primitive society, land was not yet private property, and there was no accumulation of capital, so there were no landlords or employers, and all the products of labor belonged to the laborers. If this state of affairs continues, the increase in the productivity of labour, caused by the division of labour, will lead to a consequent increase in the wages of labour.In this way, the amount of labor required to produce goods will become smaller and smaller, so that the price of everything will be lower and lower.At this time, as long as the commodities involve the same amount of labor, they can be exchanged with each other; all kinds of commodities can be purchased with a small amount of labor products.

Virtually everything becomes cheap as society progresses.And on the surface, some items have become more expensive than before.In other words, it is to exchange it for other goods, and the number of items that can be exchanged is more than before.Now suppose that the productivity of labor in most industries has increased tenfold (that is, the industry produces ten times as much labor as before), but that in one industry has only doubled. If the daily labor output of most industries and a certain industry is different, then the former seems to be at a disadvantage.Because, with the same amount of work, the former exchanged ten times the output for only twice the output.So, on the face of it, a pound of the latter seems to be five times more expensive than it used to be.But in fact, the pound of the latter is half as cheap as before, that is to say, it is now twice as easy to produce a pound of goods as before.For, while five times as much other goods are required to produce it, the labor required is at the same time half as much.

In the primitive society, all labor products were exclusively owned by laborers; when land private ownership and capital accumulation appeared (even if labor productivity had not been significantly improved at that time), the phenomenon of laborers exclusive labor products ended .As to the effect of this phenomenon on the remuneration or wages of labour, we need not inquire further. After the land was privately owned, almost all items produced or collected by laborers on the land had to be distributed to the landlord as required.Rent, therefore, is the first item deducted from the produce of labor upon land.

Ordinary cultivators mostly have no means of subsistence.Usually, their living expenses are paid in advance by the farmers who employ them until the crops are harvested.And if the farmers are to advance the living expenses of the cultivators, the farmers must share the crops of the cultivators.Thus the farmers recover their capital, and obtain such a profit that they are willing to employ the cultivators.The second item deducted from the produce of labor upon land, therefore, is profit. In fact, apart from agricultural products, all other products of labor are also subject to deduction of profit.In crafts or manufactures, for example, until the work is completed, the employers advance most of the labourers' raw materials, wages, and subsistence necessary for the maintenance of production.The employer's price is to share the labor product of the laborer (or the value of labor added to the raw material).We call the employer's share the employer's profit.

If a person can work independently, has the capital to purchase raw materials by himself, and can maintain his own life during the operation, then when the operation is completed, he has both the identity of a laborer and an employer, so he can enjoy all The product of labor (that is, the total value added by labor to raw materials), his gains naturally include capital profits and labor wages, two different incomes. However, such instances are uncommon.For example, in all of Europe, if calculated according to the proportion, among the 21 workers, 20 will work under the boss, and only one worker will also be the boss.Moreover, when it comes to labor wages, people generally understand it as labor remuneration paid by employers to workers.In general, the employer and worker here are not the same person.

The ordinary wages of the labourer, wherever they are, are determined by a contract between labor and capital.The relationship between labor and capital is a relationship of interest, so when they conclude a contract, their positions will never be the same.The laborer cooperates with the employer in order to increase wages, so of course he hopes to get more; but the employer wants to reduce wages, so of course he is unwilling to give more. As for who has a favorable position between labor and capital, in other words, who can finally force the other party to accept the conditions proposed by you, it is generally easy to infer.Because the number of employers is relatively small, it is easier to unite, and this unity is not restricted by law.But the union of numerous laborers is prohibited by law.Many associations united to raise the price of labour, have frequently been suppressed by Acts of Parliament; but none of those united to lower the price of labour.Moreover, once a dispute arises, employers can fight a protracted battle, but most workers cannot persist.For the landowner, farmer, manufacturer, or merchant, who has savings of his own, can sustain himself for a year or two without employing a laborer; Persist, let alone persist for a month or a year.Employer and laborer need each other to the same degree in long periods of time.But the employer's need of the laborer is not as urgent as the laborer's need of the employer.

One may often hear of workers' unions, but rarely of employers' unions.In fact, employers may combine anytime and anywhere.Therefore, those who look at the surface and think that employers rarely combine are simply ignorant of the world and of the truth of the matter.The union of employers is a secret union of solidarity, for the purpose of keeping the wages of labor no more than they are actually due.Wherever and whenever an employer dares to violate this unity, he is doing the most unwise thing, and will be ridiculed by his neighbors and colleagues. This union between employers is a natural one, so common that it is not known, so we do not often hear about it.Employers sometimes engage in special combinations in secret, in order to reduce the wages of labor below their real wages, and remain in the utmost silence till their object is achieved.

Although laborers can feel the pain of this secret union, they are often powerless to resist and can only submit silently.Therefore, no one else is aware of the existence of this secret union. But sometimes workers also organize defensively in order to counter this combination.Moreover, even when employers do not combine, workers automatically combine in order to increase the price of labor.They combine sometimes because of a sudden rise in the price of food, sometimes because their labor is too much taken away by their employers.Once they bond, word spreads quickly, whether the bond is defensive or offensive.Because, once they are combined, they are already in a desperate situation. In order to quickly solve their own food and clothing problems, they have no choice but to take risks and resort to shouting and even terrible violence to coerce employers to meet their needs immediately.

At this time, of course, the employer will make a big publicity and turn to the government to ask the government to prohibit the union of workers.Therefore, this combination of violent riots generally cannot bring benefits to the workers, and the result is often that the leader is punished or the whole is completely defeated.Due to the interference of the bureaucracy and the persistence of some employers, most workers had no choice but to submit to make a living. Although the employer is often in an advantageous position in the dispute, he cannot pay his laborers (even the lowest ranks of laborers) the ordinary wages below a certain standard.Moreover, this standard must be maintained over a long period of time.

The wages paid to those who live solely on their labour, should at least be sufficient for their subsistence.Under normal circumstances, this salary must also allow the laborer to support his family.It seems that it is for this reason that Cantillon made the following speculation: the salary of the lowest-ranking laborer who supports a pair of children must be at least a multiple of his own living expenses; part of it, just enough to sustain itself. According to general statistics, half of children die before reaching the age of majority.The poorest laborers, therefore, generally have at least four children in order to be able to have two who will live to adulthood.Cantillon believes: "The necessary cost of raising four children is almost equal to the living expenses of an adult. This should not be a problem for a low-level laborer. Because even the labor value of a strong slave is his The multiple of their own living expenses, let alone a lowest-level laborer. Therefore, I seem to be sure of this point: even for the lowest-level and ordinary laborer couples, their labor income must slightly exceed their living expenses in order to support Dependents. As for the proportion of this excess, I don’t want to be sure.”

In some cases, however, workers are in a more favorable position than employers.The wages they receive will greatly exceed the above-mentioned minimum wages consistent with general humane standards. No matter in any country, if the market demand for workers, day laborers, servants and other wage earners is constantly increasing, that is to say, there are more employment opportunities for laborers every year than the previous year, then there is no need for laborers to combined with wage increases.Because, at this time, employers will naturally compete to hire laborers at high prices.In this way, their natural combination to prevent wage increases will automatically be broken. It is evident that the employer's demand for wage laborers must increase in proportion to the wages of labour, which he advances.This increased capital arises partly from the employer's subsistence in excess of his subsistence, and partly from the means of the employer in excess of his own use. No matter which landowner, pensioner, or rich man he is, as long as he thinks that his income can support his family and have a surplus, he will use all or part of the surplus to hire domestic servants.Moreover, the number of domestic servants they employ will naturally increase with this surplus. Those who spend the surplus in employment, besides the rich, also have such independent laborers as weavers and shoemakers.When he has a surplus of capital which is sufficient to purchase raw material, and maintain him till his goods are sold, he naturally employs this surplus, in order to obtain still greater profits, in employing helpers.The number of helpers he employs naturally increases with this surplus. Therefore, the demand for wage laborers in a country depends on whether the income and capital of the country increase.This demand naturally increases when income and capital increase; and it never increases when income and capital do not increase. Income and capital are national wealth.So, in other words, when national wealth increases, the demand for wage earners will naturally increase; and when national wealth does not increase, the demand for wage earners will never increase. The factor that determines the increase of labor wages is not the size of the existing national wealth, but the continuous increase of national wealth.Therefore, the countries where the highest wages of labor occur are often not the richest countries, but those countries that become rich and prosperous the fastest. The wages of labour, though richer in England now, are not so high as those of North America.In New York, the daily wages of ordinary laborers are three shillings and sixpence dollars (two shillings British dollars); and the daily earnings of shipwrights and carpenters are not only ten shillings and sixpence dollars, but also a pint. Rum and wine worth sixpence (six shillings and sixpence in all); while plasterers and builders and carpenters earn eight shillings a day (four shillings and sixpence); , You can also earn five shillings in U.S. dollars (two shillings and ten pence in British dollars) every day... These labor wages are higher than those of colleagues in the same industry in London. In the North American colonies, labor wages seemed to be as high as in New York, and food prices were so much lower than in England, that there were never famines.Even in a poor harvest year, only a part of the output will be reduced, and the remaining part will be enough to meet your own needs.Therefore, if the money price of North American laborers is higher than that of their home country, then their real price must also be proportionally higher than that of their home country.In other words, in terms of providing laborers with the necessities and conveniences of life, the actual ability of North American labor is higher than that of the home country. North America was more prosperous, though less rich, than England, and its wealth was growing at a much faster rate.The increase in the number of residents is a clear sign of the prosperity of a country.The same doubling of inhabitants took only twenty or twenty-five years in the British colonies of North America, while it took England and most other European countries about five hundred years.The reason for the rapid increase in the number of residents is mainly the rapid reproduction of the local population rather than the immigration of new residents.It is said that some elderly local residents even have hundreds of direct descendants.At this time, although there are many children, the family will become prosperous because of the good labor remuneration. According to calculations, the value of the labor of a child who has not left his parents' home is a hundred pounds.Among the middle and lower classes in Europe, if a young widow has four or five children, it is very difficult for her to find another husband.In North America, however, the greatest incentive to marry is children.If there is also a young widow with four or five children in North America, a man will often propose to her because of the temptation of the children.So, early marriage in North America is not surprising at all.Because of early marriage, the population of North America has greatly increased.However, despite the large population increase in North America, the number of workers is not enough.The laborers seem to increase at a much slower rate than the demand for labor, and the means of maintaining them. No matter how rich a country is, as long as it is stagnant for a long time, its wages will not be very high.For this sum, with which wages are paid, is perhaps a very large sum which it can afford to pay the income and capital of the inhabitants.If this fund remained almost constant for several centuries, the annual required number of laborers would be satisfied, or even left over.In this way, employers will not compete with each other because of labor shortage. And when the number of workers increases beyond effective demand, there will be insufficient employment opportunities.As a result, workers have to compete with each other for jobs.For example, when the laborer's wages are more than enough to feed his family, if there is competition among the laborers again, then the employers will depress the wages out of interest, and soon the wages will be reduced. would be reduced to the lowest level consistent with general humane standards. China has always been the richest country in the world.It has the most fertile land, the best cultivation, and the largest and most industrious population.However, it seems to have stagnated since then.If you look at the reports on China written by modern travelers, you will find that the cultivation, hard work, and dense population of China described in them are almost the same as the similar reports written by Marco Polo 500 years ago.The degree of development of China's wealth may have reached the peak allowed by the country's legal system long before the time of Marco Polo. Comparing the reports of various travellers, they are found to be in many respects contradictory.However, they all consistently record one point, that is, labor wages in China are too low to support family members.In China, although the cultivators work all day long, their wages are at most only enough to buy a small amount of rice; as for the craftsmen, the situation is even worse.Carrying utensils, they are constantly running around in the street market, searching for and even begging for work to survive, completely different from those European artisans who casually wait for customers in their workshops.Compared with the poorest people in Europe, the lower classes of Chinese people are far more impoverished than the latter. It is said that since there is no dwelling on land near Guangzhou, thousands of families are living in small fishing boats.Not only do these people have no shelter, they also lack food, and they often beat each other for the filthy waste discarded by the ship.If they get a cat or a dog carcass, even if it is half rotten and stinking, they will be as happy as other peoples when they get wholesome food.The reason why people get married is not because of the consideration of having children, but because they are free to kill children after marriage.Every night, there will be more abandoned babies in major cities.These abandoned babies were either discarded in the streets or alleys, or thrown into the water like puppies.Infanticide, a dreadful work, is said to be openly regarded by some as a means of earning a living. While China may be stagnating, it doesn't appear to be retreating either.There, you can't see abandoned cities, and there is no barren arable land. The labor employed every year is almost unchanged, and the funds for maintaining labor are almost unchanged.The lowest class of labourers, therefore, can eke out a subsistence, even with very meager means of subsistence.Therefore, the number of its classes will naturally remain unchanged. It is quite another case in countries where the means of maintaining labor are greatly diminished.If, in such countries, the number of hirelings and labourers, which are required for every kind of employment, is yearly reduced, many will be unable to find work.For example, if the people of the upper class cannot find a high-level job, they will think of finding a low-level job. If this continues, the workers who do the lowest-level jobs are not only the lowest-level workers who exceed their needs, but also include Many people from other classes.In this way, the number of laborers will exceed the demand, so that there will be fierce competition for occupations, and the wages of labor will be reduced to the extreme.And, even if people are willing to endure this miserable, impoverished standard of living, many cannot find work.If these unemployed people don't want to starve to death, they have to become beggars, or do some heinous deeds.The scourges of want, hunger, and death are assailed next to the lowest classes of laborers, and then to the entire upper class.When the remaining income and capital, after removing tyranny or disaster, are sufficient to maintain the existing population, the number of inhabitants can no longer be reduced.This situation is common in Bengal and some other British colonies in East India today. If in a fertile country, after a great reduction of the population, three or four hundred thousands are yearly dying of starvation, the means with which labor is maintained must be rapidly diminishing.Britain's attitude towards North American political institutions was to protect and rule; while towards East India commercial companies, it adopted methods of oppression and suppression.The nature of these two measures in the UK is quite different.To illustrate this point, the situation in these two places is the most suitable example. Therefore, good labor remuneration is a symptom of increasing national wealth.If the national wealth of a country increases, the labor of its citizens must be well paid; if the country is stagnant, the poor working people cannot maintain their livelihood; and when the society is rapidly declining, the working people are starving. The wages of labor in Great Britain at the present day not only support the laborer's family, but are evidently surplus.We do not need to prove this by tedious calculations of the minimum wages a laborer needs to support a family.Because, there are many signs that clearly show that it is indeed higher than the minimum wage in line with humane standards. First, In Great Britain, there are summer and winter wages for both the highest and lowest kinds of labour. Wages in winter are lower than those in summer, and there is a temporary payment of salary expenses in winter, so family living expenses in winter are the highest in a year; living expenses are lowest in summer, and wages are the highest at this time.It can be seen from this that the factors governing labor wages are not the minimum living needs of laborers, but the quantity and value of work.It may be said that the annual wages of the laborer do not exceed what he needs to maintain his family for a year, but that he only reserves a part of his summer wages for winter use.However, slaves or people who were completely dependent on others were not treated in this way, and they were only given the means of subsistence commensurate with their daily needs. Secondly, In Great Britain the wages of labour, are not affected by changes in the price of provisions. In Great Britain the price of provisions varies from year to month, even from month to month; but the price of labour, in many places, remains the same even after half a century.Therefore, if the poor laborer in the local area can support his family in the year when food is most expensive, he can also live comfortably when the price of food is average and the supply is plentiful, and live comfortably when the price of food is relatively low. living a prosperous life.While food prices have been quite expensive in many places over the past decade, this has had no appreciable effect on the money price of labour.Though the price of labor has risen in some places, it is due to the increased demand for it. Thirdly, The price of food varies from year to year more than the wages of labour; and the wages of labour, in different places, vary more than the price of food in these places. Bread and butcher's meat generally cost the same in nearly all parts of Great Britain.Most of the other retail goods that the working poor can buy are just as cheap in the big cities and in some remote places, and even cheaper in the big cities.The reasons for this phenomenon will be explained later. But the wages of labour, in and near metropolises, tend to be higher than those miles away.The higher range ranged from one-fifth to one-quarter, that is, it was 20% to 25% higher.Eighteenpence a day is the wages of the common labourer, in and about London; and this common wage is reduced to fourteen or fifteenpence a few miles away.In Edinburgh and its vicinity, the wages of the common laborer are tenpence a day; a few miles away, the wages of the same labor are reduced to eightpence.The price of common labour, in the greater part of the Lowlands of Scotland, is eightpence, and varies much less than in England. A person does not necessarily move from one parish to another because of a difference in the price of labour, but goods do.Many large volumes of goods will be moved from one parish to another, or moved in various places in the country, or even transported to various parts of the world because of price differences.With such frequent traffic, the supply of goods in various places will soon be balanced within a certain range.Although human nature is determined to be different, but past experience shows that human beings actually settle down and resettle.In Great Britain, if a poor working man can support his family at the lowest wages of labor, he must be able to live comfortably where the wages are the highest. Fourth, changes in the price of labor tend to move inversely to changes in the price of food, both in terms of time and place. The common corn is more expensive in Scotland than in England.Scotland, therefore, is almost yearly imported a great deal of corn from England.These corns imported from England must sell more in Scotland than in England.But, however high this high price may be, it cannot be higher than what is sold in Scotland for corn of equal quality natively. The amount of flour that can be ground from the grain determines whether its quality is good.The corn of England is ground to a much greater quantity than the corn of Scotland.Corn, therefore, appears to be more expensive in England than in Scotland; but in quality or weight, it is generally much cheaper in England than in Scotland.The price of labour, however, is higher in England than in Scotland.Therefore, in the same United Kingdom, if a poor working man can support a family in Scotland, he must be able to live well in England. Now, the most common good food eaten by the common people in Scotland is oatmeal.And in England, the food most commonly eaten by the same class of people is much better than oatmeal.It is the difference in wages that leads to this difference in lifestyle.However, many people think that the difference in wages is caused by the difference in lifestyle, which is really incredible.For example, the reason why A rides a horse and B walks is that A is rich enough to prepare a horse and B is poor enough to walk, not that A has a horse and B does not. From the calculations of each year, it cannot be doubted that the price of corn in England and Scotland was higher in the last century than in the present.If this fact must be proved, it may be more accurate to use Scotland as an example.Because the price of grain in Scotland is publicly determined every year, it can be used as a proof material.Every year, Scotland will assess the prices of various grains in various places according to the actual situation of the market.Something similar happened in France, and even in most of Europe, where there is clear evidence.Therefore, the fact that the price of corn in England and Scotland in the last century was higher than in this century does not require indirect evidence as circumstantial evidence.Similarly, it is beyond doubt that the labor prices in the two places in the last century were far lower than in this century. So if the working poor of the last century could support a family, the working poor of this century must be more comfortable.In Scotland in the last century, the daily wages of ordinary laborers were sixpence in summer and fivepence in winter; while in the Scottish Highlands and the western islands, the wages of most laborers were about three shillings per week.In England in this century, the wages of ordinary labor in the Lowlands were eightpence a day; The daily wages even amounted to tenpence or a shilling.The improvement of agriculture, industry and commerce in England was much earlier than in Scotland, and consequently the demand and price of labor increased accordingly.Therefore, the wages of labor in England in the last century and in this century are higher than those in Scotland.The wages of labor in England have since begun to increase greatly.However, the rate of wage increase in England is more difficult to determine because there are more types of wages in England than in Scotland. In 1614 infantry pay was eightpence a day, the same as it is now.At first, since most of the infantrymen were from the ordinary classes, their rates of payment must also be regulated by the wages of ordinary laborers.In the era of Charles II, a president of the High Court named Hales made the following calculations: a family of six consisting of parents, two children with a little ability to work, and two children with no ability to work, Ten shillings for a week, and twenty-six pounds for a year.If they want to earn so much money to live, they have to work, otherwise they have to beg or steal.Hales seems to have done some research on this question. Mr. Gregory King, who was appreciated by Dr. Thevenin for his political arithmetic ability, also calculated in 1688 the ordinary income of ordinary laborers and non-resident servants.According to Gregory King, based on the average family consisting of three and a half people, it costs fifteen pounds a year for living expenses.The calculations of Gregory King and Hales seem to be different on the surface, but they are basically the same.For, according to their calculations, each person in such a family lived on about twentypence a week. The money incomes and expenses of such a family in Great Britain have increased, more or less, since that time.However, the amount of this increase is not as high as some current reports say.The price of labour, however, is not quite exactly determined, and this is the same everywhere.For, even though the district and kind of labor are the same, the ingenuity of the labourer, and the generosity of the employer, affect the wages of labour.If there is no legal regulation on wages in a certain place, then we can also determine the ordinary wages in that place.And, as a rule of thumb, though the law has frequently attempted to make definite regulations on wages, these regulations have always been inadequate. The real remuneration of labour, that is, the real quantity of the necessaries and conveniences of life produced by the labourer, has probably increased in this century by a greater proportion than the increase in the money price of labour.Not only is corn a little lower in price than it was formerly, but many other things suitable to the laboring poor are much lower in price.Take the potato, for example. In most parts of Great Britain today the price of potatoes is half what it was thirty or forty years ago.In addition to potatoes, kohlrabi, carrots, cabbages, etc. are also cheap.These vegetables, which used to be grown with shovels, are now generally cultivated with plows.In short, the prices of all fruits and vegetables have been reduced. In the last century, most of the apples and onions consumed in the UK were imported from Flanders.The great improvement in the manufacture of linen and woolen cloth has given the laborer better and cheaper clothing; and the improvement in the manufacture of base metals has given the laborer not only better tools of trade, but also convenient furniture. .Of course, the prices of soap, salt, candles, hides, fermented wine, etc., were raised by the tax.However, these expensive things are rarely consumed by the working poor.Thus, for the working poor, the prices of most goods are lowered.Nowadays, it is often heard that the working poor have also begun to be extravagant, and they are dissatisfied with the previous clothing, food, and housing.From this we are assured that both the money price and the real price of labor have increased. Is it good or bad for society that the living conditions of the lower classes have improved?The answer to this question is obvious.No matter how large a country may be, the majority of its inhabitants are servants, laborers, and workmen of all kinds.If the situation of most of the members is improved, absolutely no harm will be done to the country.A country cannot prosper if the majority of its inhabitants are poor and miserable.In addition, for a person who provides clothing, food, and housing for the entire society, he can only live a decent life if he shares a part of the products of labor, and this is considered fair. Because of poverty, people undoubtedly do not want to marry, but it is not necessarily the case that they do not want to marry.Poverty seems to be good for fertility.In the Highlands of Scotland, women who live in half-starvation often bear more than twenty children; women in the upper classes generally have two or three, and some are barren.In high society, women often suffer from infertility; in low society, very few women suffer from infertility.Women who live extravagantly can enjoy themselves, but their fertility is often weakened or even completely lost. Poverty, while good for fertility, is extremely bad for raising children.Just as in cold and harsh surroundings a young plant is soon frozen to death, so in the Highlands of Scotland it often happens that a woman has twenty children and only one survives.I have learned from several experienced officers that it would not be enough to have all the children of soldiers in the regiment go to be trumpeters, let alone to replenish the vacancies of the regiment.But in other places near the barracks, there are many lovely children.However, these lovely children usually die before they are thirteen or fourteen years old.In some places, half the children die before the age of four; in many places, half the children die before the age of seven.As a general rule, half of all children die before the age of nine or ten.Such a great death rate is generally to be seen among the lower classes everywhere.In general, though the inferiors are more fertile than the superiors, they do not bring up their children as carefully as the superiors, and their children seldom reach maturity.The mortality rate of children adopted by foundling houses and parish charities is greater than that of inferior children. All kinds of animals need certain means of subsistence in order to reproduce.In a civilized society, only the low class, who have insufficient means of subsistence, can limit the reproduction of human beings by killing most of their offspring.If the laborer has a good labor remuneration, then he has the ability to improve the provision of children, so as to raise more children, instead of expanding the limit of killing children helplessly. Children must be killed in proportion as far as possible to the demands of the labour.When labor demand increases, labor compensation will also increase, which will inevitably encourage laborers to marry and have children, so the population will naturally continue to increase to meet the increased labor demand.When the wages of labor are not sufficient to breed offspring, the wages of labor will soon be raised by the scarcity of labor; and when the wages of labor are high enough to breed too many offspring, the wages of labor will soon be reduced to their natural level by the excess of labor. .在市场上，不管是劳动供给不足，还是劳动供给过剩，都会迫使劳动价格在短时间回复到社会所需的适当水平。 商品生产受制于商品需求，类似地，人口生产也必然受制于人口需求。如果人口生产过度迟缓，就需要促进其生产进度；如果人口生产过度迅速，则需要抑制其增长速度。正是这一需求，支配和决定了世界各地人口的繁殖程度，它促使了北美人口的迅速增加，也使得欧洲人口逐渐而缓慢地增长，还让中国的人口不增不减。 有一种说法是，奴隶的损耗会给雇主带来损失，而自由佣工的损耗则是其自身的损失。其实，无论是前者还是后者，其损耗都需要雇主来支付。雇主为了让各种职工和自由佣工都能够按照社会需求而增加、减少或保持人数不变，必须给付他们足够的工资。虽然自由佣工的损耗也会给雇主带来损失，但这一损失要比奴隶的损耗所带来的损失小得多。一般情况下，管理用于修补奴隶损耗资金的人，都是大意的雇主或疏忽的监工；而管理用于修补自由佣工损耗资金的人，则是自由佣工自己。如果让没有秩序的富人来管理钱财，那么钱财也会被管理得没有秩序；要是让锱铢必较的穷人自己来管理钱财，钱财自然能处处节省。 虽然富人和穷人都怀着相同的目的来管理钱财，但由于管理方法不同，其管理费用也大不相同。因此，根据所有时代的一切国民经验，我相信自由人的管理费用归根到底要低于奴隶的管理费用。即使是在普通劳动工资很高的波士顿、纽约和费城，也同样是这种情况。 所以，当国民财富增加时，劳动者就能够得到充足的劳动报酬，从而使得人口增加。要是有人对此发出怨言，那就表示他对国民繁荣的必然结果与原因不满。 值得指出的一点是，当社会处于进步并日益富裕，但还没有达到绝顶富裕的状态时，也许大多数贫穷劳动者都会觉得幸福、安乐。当社会处于静止的呆滞状态时，人民生活是艰难的；当社会处于退步的悲惨状态时，人民生活是困苦的；而当社会处于进步状态时，社会各阶级都很旺盛，人民会生活得越来越快乐。 当劳动报酬充足时，普通人民就会受此鼓励而繁殖后代，并更加勤勉，就像人类的其他品质会因为受奖励而加强一样。丰富的生活资料，能增进劳动者的体力；而生活改善和晚景优裕的美好希望，则会让他们工作得更加卖力。所以，如果一个地方的劳动工资高，那么其劳动者也比低工资地区的劳动者更加活泼、勤勉、敏捷。比方说，英格兰的劳动者和苏格兰的相比，前者更强；而大都市附近的劳动者跟偏远农村的相比，也是前者更强。 这时，如果有些劳动者能花四天就挣足一星期的生活资料，那么他在其余的三天，就可以无所事事。但是，这种情况很少见。大多数劳动者在做着按件计算工资的工作时，往往都会在几年之内把身体累垮。据说，无论是伦敦还是其他一些地区的木匠，都不能将其精壮气力保持到八年以上。在其他许多按件计算工资的行业，也经常会发生这种现象。除了制造业按件计算工资之外，农村一些劳动也是按件计酬的。无论哪种行业都有一些特殊岗位，而工作在这些特殊岗位上的技工，往往会因为操劳过度而生病，而且生的是特殊疾病。关于这类特殊疾病，意大利著名医生拉马齐尼曾专门著书论述过。 在我们看来，士兵与勤劳人民不同。但是，他们在从事一些特殊工作时，也是按件领工资的，而且其报酬率不会超过一定的数额。士兵的这一报酬，经常是军官与领工者商定之后决定的，以避免士兵因操劳过度而损害健康。在这一工资数额确定之前，士兵们常常因为希望得到较大报酬而相互竞争，以致操劳过度，只用四天就完成了一星期的工作量。这么一来，他们就有了三天的闲散时间。 可是，世人却因为这三天的闲散而大发牢骚，甚至大声叫嚣。他们不知道，在连续数天都进行着紧张的脑力或体力劳动之后，大多数人都会有强烈的休息欲望。这种欲望，只有暴力或某种强烈的需要才能抑制住。在紧张劳动之后纵情放松是人的天性，不管是悠闲自在一会儿，还是去闲游浪荡或消遣娱乐，都可以避免产生危险甚至致命的后果。如果这一天性要求得不到满足，劳动者迟早都会产生特殊的职业病。 如果雇主有理性和人道，就不应该鼓励劳动者勤勉，而应该让他们适度地休息。我相信，无论在哪个行业，如果劳动者既能适度休息又能不断工作，那么他不仅能够长期保持健康，还能做出比其他人多的年工作量。 有人说，劳动者在物价低廉时比平常懒惰，而在物价高昂时又比平常勤勉。因此，他们得出了这一结论：劳动者会在生活资料丰富时迟缓地工作，而在生活资料不足时紧张地工作。诚然，当生活资料略微较平常丰富时，有一部分劳动者确实会偷闲。可是，这并不代表大多数劳动者都会因此而怠工。这么说，就好比是说人在吃得不好、意志消沉以及疾病时，会比吃得好、兴致勃勃以及健康时，更卖力地工作，这种说法似乎不太可靠。对普通民众来说，饥馑往往意味着疾病和死亡，他们的劳动产物势必会因此而减少。 当物资丰厚时，佣工往往不需要给人帮工就能够靠劳动过活。由于食品价格低廉，雇主也会增加维持佣工的资金，并雇用更多的佣工。农业家尤其如此。因为，这一时期的谷物价格相对低廉，农业家与其将谷物低价卖出，还不如用它来维持较多佣工的生活，从而得到较大的利润。于是，对佣工的需求就增加了，而能够满足这一需求的佣工却同时减少了。所以，当物价低廉时，劳动价格往往会上升。 当物资缺乏时，佣工的生活会困难而不安定，这就促使佣工迫切希望恢复以前的佣工工作。但是，由于食品的价格高昂，雇主往往不会增加雇工人数，而是减少维持劳动的资金。此外，贫穷的独立劳动者为了支付高昂的物价，往往会全部消费掉原本打算购置材料的小额资本，这样也就只能变成雇工了。当就业机会少于求职人数时，许多人为了得到一个职位，就只好接受低于平常的条件。所以，当物价昂贵时，佣工和帮工的工资往往很低廉。 因此，物价高昂的年头更有利于雇主。在物价高昂的年头，雇主在和劳动者订结契约时，往往会觉得劳动者比物价低廉时更恭顺、更愿意依靠他们。所以，雇主们自然认为物价高昂有利于他们的事业。地主和农业家们喜欢物价高昂的另外一个原因，就是他们的地租和利润大部分都取决于粮食价格。 一个人在为别人工作时，不可能会比为自己工作更卖力。所以，独享自身劳动生产物的贫穷劳动者，一般都比按件计酬且与雇主分享劳动成果的帮工勤勉。一些大制造厂里的雇工，往往会因为恶友的诱惑而失去道德；而独立劳动者却不会受到此类影响。如果雇工的工资是以年或月计算的，那么无论其工作量有多少，得到的工资和津贴都是一样的；而独立劳动者却由于独享劳动生产物，因而工作效率也比雇工大得多。当物价高昂时，独立劳动者对各种帮工和佣工的比例会有增加的倾向；而当物价低廉时，这一比例则会减少。 法国一位博学多才的作家麦桑斯，曾在圣·埃蒂安选举中担任税收官。他曾经把埃尔伯夫的粗毛织品、卢昂的麻织品和丝织品这三种制造品，在物价低廉以及高昂时期的产量及价值作了比较，证明了贫民在物价低廉时所做的工作更多。从他由官署登记簿上抄下的报告来看，在物价低廉时，这三种制造品的产量及价值一般都大于物价高昂时；当物价最低时，产量与价值往往是最大的；而当物价最高时，产量及价值往往最小。总的说来，这三种制造品似乎都处于停滞状态。如果逐年计算的话，其产量也略有出入，但总体上却是不增不减。 苏格兰的麻织品、约克郡西区的粗毛织品，它们的产量与价值虽然时有变动，但是大体上却正在增加。不过，从这些制造品的年产额公布记录来看，年产额的变动与物价的高低之间，似乎没有明显的关系。这两种制造品的产量，在物资非常不足的1740年的确是大幅度下降了。但在1756年，虽然物资仍然相当不足，但是苏格兰麻织品的产量却比正常年份还多，而约克郡西区粗毛织品的产量却下降了。直到1766年，也就是在美洲印花税法废止以后，约克郡西区粗毛织品的产量才恢复到1755年的数额，而且在随后的两年内增加到了前所未有的程度，从此就不断增加。 对于一切目的在于外销的大制造业来说，决定其产品销量的因素有很多，比如消费国影响商品需求的情况、时局是和平还是战争、竞争者的盛衰、主要顾客的购买欲望等。跟这些因素相比，产地的旺季价格高低就算是次要因素了。此外，也不排除另外一种可能，那就是物价低廉时的大部分额外制造品，都没有登记在制造业公开记录上。当物价低廉时，男佣工可能会成为独立劳动者，妇女则在家中给全家人织布制衣。这时，独立劳动者的制造品可能就不会向大众出售自己的家庭制造品，而只是被邻居请去制造家庭用品。因此，这一制造品也就没有算在售给大众的商品之内，所以也就没有登记在制造业的公开记录上。而我们的商人和制造业者，往往就根据这些不免夸张的记录来妄断最大帝国的盛衰。 劳动价格的变动与食物价格的变动，往往不一定一致，甚至还经常完全相反。但是，我们不能就此断定食品价格不影响劳动价格。支配劳动价格的因素有两种，一是劳动需求，二是生活必需品和便利品的价格。当人口增加、减少或不变时，劳动需求随之而变，并由此决定必须供应给劳动者的生活必需品和便利品的数量；而劳动价格则由购买这些数量所需的金额决定。所以，当食物价格低廉时，劳动价格有可能会非常高。当食物价格昂贵时，如果劳动需求保持不变，那么劳动价格就会更高。 如果突然遇上大丰年，劳动价格可能会上升；要是突然遇上大荒年，劳动价格则可能会下落。因为，劳动需求在大丰年时可能会增加，在大荒年时则可能减少。 在突然的大丰年里，很多雇主都有足够的资金来维持和雇用更多劳动者。这么一来，劳动者可能就会供不应求，于是，雇主们只好靠相互竞争来雇用更多的劳动者，从而抬高了一部分劳动的货币价格及真实价格。 在突然的大荒年里，情形则刚好相反。这时，雇主用来雇用劳动者的资金会比前一年还少，从而使得许多人都失业了。失业者为了获得职业，只好相互竞争。这样，有时难免会压低劳动的货币价格与真实价格。譬如在大饥荒的1740年，许多人都愿意做仅能糊口的工作；而在此后的几个丰年里，雇主要想雇用劳动者和雇工，就比较困难了。 当食品涨价时，劳动价格会随之提高，劳动需求也会因为物价昂贵而减少，从而使得劳动价格重新降低。相反的，当食品跌价时，劳动价格则会减小，劳动需求也会因为物价低廉而增加，于是劳动价格又会重新升高。而当食品价格的变动幅度不大时，这两种对立因素的作用似乎会相互抵消。所以，劳动工资一般都比食物价格要稳定、持久得多。 一旦劳动工资增加了，许多商品的价格必然也会按照工资中增加部分的比例而抬高，国内外这些商品的消费也会随之减少。但是，当资本增加时，劳动生产力也会增加。这样的话，即使劳动量减少了，也可能会生产出更多的产品。如果一个资本家雇用了很多劳动者，那么他就会出于自身利益而妥当地给他们分配业务，并力图把他和工人们所能想到的最好机械供给他们，使他们能够尽可能地生产出更多产品。 发生于劳动者之间的事情，既可能发生在某一特殊工厂内，也会因为同一理由而发生在大社会的劳动者之间。随着劳动者人数的增加，劳动者之间的分工也会更加精密。当越来越多的人都去从事最适用机械的发明时，这种机械就容易被发明出来。这些改良机械出现之后，只需要用比以前少得多的劳动，就可以生产出更多物品。这么一来，减少的劳动量除了能抵偿劳动价格的增长之外，还会有一部分剩余。