Karl Marx Economic and Philosophical Manuscripts of 1844 Wages ...

2526eliminating human labor has it become possible to spinfrom a pound of cotton worth 3s. 8d., 350 hanks worth 25guineas and 167 miles in length.” [Schulz, p. 62]“On average, the prices of cotton goods have fallen by11/12ths over the past 45 years, and according toMarshall’s calculations a quantity of manufacture costing16s. in 1814 now cost 1s. 10d. The drop in prices ofindustrial products has meant both a rise in homeconsumption and an increase in the foreign market; as aresult, the number of cotton workers in Great Britain notonly did not fall after the introduction of machinery, butrose from 40,000 to 1.5 million. As for the earnings ofindustrial employers and workers, the growingcompetition among factory owners has inevitably resultedin a drop in profits in proportion to the quantity ofproducts. Between 1820 and 1833, the gross profit made byManchester manufacturers on a piece of calico fell from 4s.1.5d. to 1s. 9d. But, to make up for this loss, the rate ofproduction has been correspondingly increased. Theconsequence is that there have been instances ofoverproduction in some branches of industry; that thereare frequent bankruptcies, which create fluctuations ofproperty within the class of capitalists and masters of labor,and force a number of those who have been ruinedeconomically into the ranks of the proletariat; and thatfrequent and sudden restriction in employment among theclass of wage-earners.” [Schulz, p. 63]“To hire out one’s labor is to begin one’s enslavement; tohire out the materials of labor is to achieve one’sfreedom.... Labor is man, while matter contains nothinghuman.” [Pecqueur, pp. 411-12]“The element of matter, which can do nothing to createwealth without the element of labor, acquires the magicalproperty of being fruitful for them [that is, for the propertyowners], as if they themselves had provided thisindispensable element.” [Pecqueur, p. 412]“If we assume that a worker can earn an average of 400francs a year from his daily labor, and that this sum issufficient for one adult to eke out a living, then anyonewho receives 2,000 francs in interest or rent is indirectlyforcing 5 men to work for him; an income of 100,000 francsrepresents the labor of 250 men; and 1,000,000 francs thelabor of 2,500 (300 million—Louis Philippe—thereforerepresents the labor of 750,000 workers).” [Pecqueur, pp.412-13]“The property owners have received from human law theright to use and abuse the materials of all labor—i.e., to doas they wish with them.... There is no law which obligesthem punctually and at all time to provide work for thosewho do not own property or to pay them a wage which isat all times adequate, etc.” [Pecqueur, p. 413]“Complete freedom as to the nature, the quantity, thequality, and the appropriateness of production, the useand consumption of wealth and the disposal of thematerials of all labor. Everyone is free to exchange hispossessions as he chooses, without any other considerationthan his own interest as an individual.” [Pecqueur, p. 413]“Competition is simply an expression of free exchange,which is itself the immediate and logical consequence ofthe right of any individual to use and abuse allinstruments of production. These three economicmoments, which are in reality only one—the right to useand abuse, freedom of exchange and unrestrictedcompetition—have the following consequences: eachproduces what he wants, how he wants, when he wants,where he wants; he produces well or he produces badly,too much or not enough, too late or too early, too dear ortoo cheap; no one knows whether he will sell, to whom hewill sell, how he will sell, when he will sell, where he willsell; the same goes for buying. The producer is acquaintedwith neither the needs nor the resources, neither thedemand nor the supply. He sells when he wants, then hecan, where he wants, to whom he wants and at the price hewants. The same goes for buying. In all this he is at alltimes the plaything of chance, the slave of the law of the