Das Kapital — Kap. 7 · semantic zoom

§1

1. Der Exploitationsgrad der Arbeitskraft

After the previous chapter named constant and variable capital, this section sets transferred constant value aside to isolate living labour's new value and measure the surplus against variable capital alone.

Der Mehrwert, den das vorgeschoßne Kapital C im Produktionsprozeß erzeugt hat, oder die Verwertung des vorgeschoßnen Kapitalwerts C stellt sich zunächst dar als Überschuß des Werts des Produkts über die Wertsumme seiner Produktionselemente.

Surplus first appears as excess

The surplus-value produced by the advanced capital C in production -- the growth in value of the advanced capital-value C -- first presents itself as the amount by which the product's value is greater than the value-sum of the elements used to make it.

Das Kapital C zerfällt in zwei Teile, eine Geldsumme c, die für Produktionsmittel, und eine andre Geldsumme v, die für Arbeitskraft verausgabt wird; c stellt den in konstantes, v den in variables Kapital verwandelten Wertteil vor. Ursprünglich ist also C = c + v, z.B. das vorgeschoßne Kapital von 500 Pfd.St. = 410 Pfd.St. + 90 Pfd.St. Am Ende des Produktionsprozesses kommt Ware heraus, deren Wert = c + v + m, wo m der Mehrwert, z.B. 410 Pfd.St. + 90 Pfd.St. + 90 Pfd.St. Das ursprüngliche Kapital C hat sich in C' verwandelt, aus 500 Pfd.St. in 590 Pfd.St. Die Differenz zwischen beiden ist = m, einem Mehrwert von 90. Da der Wert der Produktionselemente gleich dem Wert des vorgeschoßnen Kapitals, so ist es in der Tat eine Tautologie, daß der Überschuß des Produktenwerts über den Wert seiner Produktionselemente gleich der Verwertung des vorgeschoßnen Kapitals oder gleich dem produzierten Mehrwert.

Capital split and surplus named

The capital C divides into two parts: a sum c spent on means of production, and another sum v spent on labour-power. The first is the value-part transformed into constant capital; the second is the value-part transformed into variable capital. At the start, then, C = c + v. For example, an advanced capital of 500 pounds sterling may be 410 + 90.

At the end of production a commodity comes out with a value of c + v + m, where m is surplus-value: in the same example, 410 + 90 + 90. The original capital C has become C', 500 has become 590. The difference is m, a surplus-value of 90.

Because the value of the production elements equals the value of the capital advanced, it is indeed a tautology to say that the excess of product-value over the value of its production elements equals the growth in value of the advanced capital, or the surplus-value produced.

Indes erfordert diese Tautologie eine nähere Bestimmung. Was mit dem Produktenwert verglichen wird, ist der Wert der in seiner Bildung aufgezehrten Produktionselemente. Nun haben wir aber gesehn, daß der aus Arbeitsmitteln bestehende Teil des angewandten konstanten Kapitals nur ein Stück seines Werts an das Produkt abgibt, während ein andres Stück in seiner alten Existenzform fortdauert. Da das letztre keine Rolle in der Wertbildung spielt, ist hier davon zu abstrahieren. Sein Hineinziehen in die Rechnung würde nichts ändern. Nimm an, c = 410 Pfd.St. bestehe aus Rohmaterial zu 312 Pfd.St., Hilfsstoffen zu 44 Pfd.St. und im Prozeß verschleißender Maschinerie von 54 Pfd.St., der Wert der wirklich angewandten Maschinerie betrage aber 1.054 Pfd.St. Als vorgeschossen zur Erzeugung des Produktenwerts berechnen wir nur den Wert von 54 Pfd.St., den die Maschinerie durch ihre Funktion verliert und daher dem Produkt abgibt. Rechneten wir die 1.000 Pfd.St. mit, die in ihrer alten Form fortexistieren als Dampfmaschine usw., so müßten wir sie auf beiden Seiten mitrechnen, auf Seite des vorgeschoßnen Werts und auf Seite des Produktenwerts^26a, und erhielten so resp. 1.500 Pfd.St. und 1.590 Pfd.St. Die Differenz oder der Mehrwert wäre nach wie vor 90 Pfd.St. Unter dem zur Wertproduktion vorgeschoßnen konstanten Kapital verstehn wir daher, wo das Gegenteil nicht aus dem Zusammenhang erhellt, stets nur den Wert der in der Produktion verzehrten Produktionsmittel.

Only consumed value counts

Still, this tautology needs a closer specification. What is being compared with product-value is the value of the production elements consumed in forming it. We have seen that the part of constant capital made up of instruments of labour gives only a piece of its value to the product, while another piece remains in its old form. Since that remaining piece plays no role in forming value here, it has to be left out. Bringing it into the calculation would change nothing.

Suppose c = 410 pounds sterling: 312 in raw material, 44 in auxiliary materials, and 54 in machinery worn out during the process. But suppose the machinery actually used is worth 1,054. For producing the product-value, we count only the 54 that the machinery loses through its function and therefore gives to the product.

If we also counted the 1,000 that keeps existing in its old form as steam-engine and so on, we would have to count it on both sides: as advanced value and as product-value. We would get 1,500 and 1,590, and the difference, the surplus-value, would still be 90. So by constant capital advanced for value-production, unless the context says otherwise, we always mean only the value of the means of production consumed in production.

Dies vorausgesetzt, kehren wir zurück zur Formel C = c + v, die sich in C' = c + v + m und eben dadurch C in C' verwandelt. Man weiß, daß der Wert des konstanten Kapitals im Produkt nur wieder erscheint. Das im Prozeß wirklich neu erzeugte Wertprodukt ist also verschieden von dem aus dem Prozeß erhaltnen Produktenwert, daher nicht, wie es auf den ersten Blick scheint, c + v + m oder 410 Pfd.St. + 90 Pfd.St. + 90, sondern v + m oder 90 Pfd.St. + 90 Pfd.St., nicht 590 Pfd.St., sondern 180 Pfd.St. Wäre c, das konstante Kapital, = 0, in andren Worten, gäbe es Industriezweige, worin der Kapitalist keine produzierten Produktionsmittel, weder Rohmaterial noch Hilfsstoffe, noch Arbeitsinstrumente, sondern nur von Natur vorhandne Stoffe und Arbeitskraft anzuwenden hätte, so wäre kein konstanter Wertteil auf das Produkt zu übertragen. Dies Element des Produktenwerts, in unsrem Beispiel 410 Pfd.St., fiele fort, aber das Wertprodukt von 180 Pfd.St., welches 90 Pfd.St. Mehrwert enthält, bliebe ganz ebenso groß, als ob c die größte Wertsumme darstellte. Wir hätten C = 0 + v = v, und C', das verwertete Kapital, = v + m, C' - C nach wie vor = m. Wäre umgekehrt m = 0, in andren Worten, hätte die Arbeitskraft, deren Wert im variablen Kapital vorgeschossen wird, nur ein Äquivalent produziert, so C = c + v, und C' (der Produktenwert) = c + v + 0, daher C = C'. Das vorgeschoßne Kapital hätte sich nicht verwertet.

Value-product, not product-value

With that settled, return to C = c + v, which becomes C' = c + v + m and thereby turns C into C'. We know that the value of constant capital only reappears in the product. So the value-product really newly created in the process is different from the product-value that comes out of the process. It is not, as it seems at first sight, c + v + m, or 410 + 90 + 90; it is v + m, or 90 + 90. It is not 590 pounds sterling, but 180.

If c, constant capital, were 0 -- in other words, if there were branches of industry where the capitalist had no produced means of production to use, no raw materials, auxiliary materials, or instruments of labour, but only materials supplied by nature and labour-power -- then there would be no constant value-part to transfer to the product. This element of product-value, 410 in our example, would fall away. But the value-product of 180, which contains 90 of surplus-value, would remain just as large as if c represented the greatest value-sum imaginable. We would have C = 0 + v = v, and C', the capital grown in value, = v + m; C' - C would still = m.

Conversely, if m = 0 -- if the labour-power whose value is advanced in variable capital produced only an equivalent -- then C = c + v, and C', the product-value, = c + v + 0; so C = C'. The advanced capital would not have grown in value.

Wir wissen in der Tat bereits, daß der Mehrwert bloß Folge der Wertveränderung ist, die mit v, dem in Arbeitskraft umgesetzten Kapitalteil vorgeht, daß also v + m = v + Δv (v plus Inkrement von v) ist. Aber die wirkliche Wertveränderung und das Verhältnis, worin sich der Wert ändert, werden dadurch verdunkelt, daß infolge des Wachstums seines variierenden Bestandteils auch das vorgeschoßne Gesamtkapital wächst. Es war 500, und es wird 590. Die reine Analyse des Prozesses erheischt also von dem Teil des Produktenwerts, worin nur konstanter Kapitalwert wieder erscheint, ganz zu abstrahieren, also das konstante Kapital c = 0 zu setzen, und damit ein Gesetz der Mathematik anzuwenden, wo sie mit variablen und konstanten Größen operiert und die konstante Größe nur durch Addition oder Subtraktion mit der variablen verbunden ist.

Why set c to zero

We already know that surplus-value is simply the result of the value-change that happens with v, the capital-part turned into labour-power. So v + m is v + Δv (v plus an increment of v). But the real value-change, and the relation in which the value changes, are obscured because the total advanced capital also grows when its varying component grows. It was 500, and it becomes 590.

To see the process clearly, we leave out the part of the product's value where constant capital only shows up again. In the formula, that means setting constant capital c to 0. This is the usual math move: when a constant is only added to or subtracted from the changing part, set it aside while you study the change.

Eine andre Schwierigkeit entspringt aus der ursprünglichen Form des variablen Kapitals. So im obigen Beispiel ist C' = 410 Pfd.St. konstantes Kapital + 90 Pfd.St. variables Kapital + 90 Pfd.St. Mehrwert. Neunzig Pfd.St. sind aber eine gegebne, also konstante Größe, und es scheint daher ungereimt, sie als variable Größe zu behandeln. Aber 90 Pfd.St. oder 90 Pfd.St. variables Kapital ist hier in der Tat nur Symbol für den Prozeß, den dieser Wert durchläuft. Der im Ankauf der Arbeitskraft vorgeschoßne Kapitalteil ist ein bestimmtes Quantum vergegenständlichter Arbeit, also konstante Wertgröße, wie der Wert der gekauften Arbeitskraft. Im Produktionsprozeß selbst aber tritt an die Stelle der vorgeschoßnen 90 Pfd.St. die sich betätigende Arbeitskraft, an die Stelle toter, lebendige Arbeit, an die Stelle einer ruhenden eine fließende Größe, an die Stelle einer konstanten eine variable. Das Resultat ist die Reproduktion von v plus Inkrement von v. Vom Standpunkt der kapitalistischen Produktion ist dieser ganze Verlauf Selbstbewegung des in Arbeitskraft umgesetzten, ursprünglich konstanten Werts. Ihm wird der Prozeß und sein Resultat zugut geschrieben. Erscheint die Formel 90 Pfd.St. variables Kapital oder sich verwertender Wert daher widerspruchsvoll, so drückt sie nur einen der kapitalistischen Produktion immanenten Widerspruch aus.

Variable capital as process

A further difficulty comes from variable capital's original form. In the example above, C' = 410 pounds sterling constant capital + 90 pounds sterling variable capital + 90 pounds sterling surplus-value. But 90 pounds sterling is a given amount, and therefore a constant amount, so it seems absurd to treat it as variable.

In fact, "90 pounds sterling variable capital" is shorthand for what happens to that value. The 90 pounds is fixed when it is paid out. But once it buys labour-power and production begins, that fixed value is replaced by living work. Money that was still becomes labour in motion. A fixed amount becomes something that can grow.

From the capitalist's point of view, the original fixed value now seems to move and grow by itself. So if the phrase "90 pounds sterling variable capital," or "self-expanding value," sounds contradictory, that is because capitalist production itself makes a fixed value appear as value that expands.

Die Gleichsetzung des konstanten Kapitals mit 0 befremdet auf den ersten Blick. Indes vollzieht man sie beständig im Alltagsleben. Will jemand z.B. Englands Gewinn an der Baumwollindustrie berechnen, so zieht er vor allem den an die Vereinigten Staaten, Indien, Ägypten usw. gezahlten Baumwollpreis ab; d.h., er setzt im Produktenwert nur wiedererscheinenden Kapitalwert = 0.

Everyday use of c=0

Equating constant capital with 0 seems strange at first sight. But people do it constantly in everyday life. If someone wants to calculate England's gain from the cotton industry, for example, he first subtracts the cotton price paid to the United States, India, Egypt, and so on. In other words, the capital-value that merely reappears in the product-value is set equal to 0.

Allerdings hat das Verhältnis des Mehrwerts nicht nur zum Kapitalteil, woraus er unmittelbar entspringt und dessen Wertverändrung er darstellt, sondern auch zum vorgeschoßnen Gesamtkapital seine große ökonomische Bedeutung. Wir behandeln dies Verhältnis daher ausführlich im dritten Buch. Um einen Teil des Kapitals durch seinen Umsatz in Arbeitskraft zu verwerten, muß ein andrer Teil des Kapitals in Produktionsmittel verwandelt werden. Damit das variable Kapital funktioniere, muß konstantes Kapital in entsprechenden Proportionen, je nach dem bestimmten technischen Charakter des Arbeitsprozesses, vorgeschossen werden. Der Umstand jedoch, daß man zu einem chemischen Prozeß Retorten und andre Gefäße braucht, verhindert nicht, bei der Analyse von der Retorte selbst zu abstrahieren. Sofern Wertschöpfung und Wertverändrung für sich selbst, d.h. rein betrachtet werden, liefern die Produktionsmittel, diese stofflichen Gestalten des konstanten Kapitals, nur den Stoff, worin sich die flüssige, wertbildende Kraft fixieren soll. Die Natur dieses Stoffes ist daher auch gleichgültig, ob Baumwolle oder Eisen. Auch der Wert dieses Stoffes ist gleichgültig. Er muß nur in hinreichender Masse vorhanden sein, um das während des Produktionsprozesses zu verausgabende Arbeitsquantum einsaugen zu können. Diese Masse gegeben, mag ihr Wert steigen oder fallen, oder sie mag wertlos sein, wie Erde und Meer, der Prozeß der Wertschöpfung und Wertverändrung wird nicht davon berührt.²⁷

Necessary means, bracketed value

Of course, the relation of surplus-value not only to the capital-part from which it directly arises, and whose value-change it represents, but also to the total advanced capital, has great economic importance. We therefore treat that relation in detail in Book III.

To make one part of capital grow in value by turning it into labour-power, another part of capital has to be turned into means of production. For variable capital to function, constant capital must be advanced in the right proportions, depending on the specific technical character of the labour-process. But the fact that a chemical process needs retorts and other vessels does not prevent the analysis from abstracting from the retort itself.

When value-creation and value-change are considered by themselves, purely, the means of production -- these material shapes of constant capital -- provide only the stuff in which the fluid value-forming force is to fix itself. The nature of this stuff is indifferent: cotton or iron. Its value is indifferent too. It only has to be present in enough mass to absorb the quantity of labour spent during production. Given that mass, its value may rise or fall, or it may be valueless like land and sea; the process of value-creation and value-change is not touched.

Wir setzen also zunächst den konstanten Kapitalteil gleich Null. Das vorgeschoßne Kapital reduziert sich daher von c + v auf v, und der Produktenwert c + v + m auf das Wertprodukt v + m. Gegeben das Wertprodukt = 180 Pfd.St., worin sich die während der ganzen Dauer des Produktionsprozesses fließende Arbeit darstellt, so haben wir den Wert des variablen Kapitals = 90 Pfd.St. abzuziehn, um den Mehrwert = 90 Pfd.St. zu erhalten. Die Zahl 90 Pfd.St. = m drückt hier die absolute Größe des produzierten Mehrwerts aus. Seine proportionelle Größe aber, also das Verhältnis, worin das variable Kapital sich verwertet hat, ist offenbar bestimmt durch das Verhältnis des Mehrwerts zum variablen Kapital oder ist ausgedrückt in m/v . Im obigen Beispiel also in 90/90 = 100 %. Diese verhältnismäßige Verwertung des variablen Kapitals oder die Verhältnismäßige Größe des Mehrwerts nenne ich Rate des Mehrwerts.²⁸

The rate named

We first set the constant capital part equal to zero. Advanced capital therefore reduces from c + v to v, and product-value c + v + m reduces to the value-product v + m. Given the value-product = 180 pounds sterling, in which the labour flowing during the whole production process is represented, we subtract the value of variable capital = 90 pounds sterling and get surplus-value = 90 pounds sterling.

The number 90 pounds sterling = m expresses here the absolute size of the surplus-value produced. Its proportional size, however -- the relation in which variable capital has grown in value -- is plainly determined by the ratio of surplus-value to variable capital, or expressed as m/v. In the example, that is 90/90 = 100%. This relative growth in value of variable capital, or the relative size of surplus-value, I call the rate of surplus-value.

Wir haben gesehn, daß der Arbeiter während eines Abschnitts des Arbeitsprozesses nur den Wert seiner Arbeitskraft produziert, d.h. den Wert seiner notwendigen Lebensmittel. Da er in einem auf gesellschaftlicher Teilung der Arbeit beruhenden Zustand produziert, produziert er seine Lebensmittel nicht direkt, sondern in Form einer besondren Ware, des Garns z.B., einen Wert gleich dem Wert seiner Lebensmittel oder dem Geld, womit er sie kauft. Der Teil seines Arbeitstags, den er hierzu verbraucht, ist größer oder kleiner, je nach dem Wert seiner durchschnittlichen täglichen Lebensmittel, also je nach der zu ihrer Produktion erheischten durchschnittlichen täglichen Arbeitszeit. Wenn der Wert seiner täglichen Lebensmittel im Durchschnitt 6 vergegenständlichte Arbeitsstunden darstellt, so muß der Arbeiter im Durchschnitt täglich 6 Stunden arbeiten, um ihn zu produzieren. Arbeitete er nicht für den Kapitalisten, sondern für sich selbst, unabhängig, so müßte er, unter sonst gleichbleibenden Umständen, nach wie vor im Durchschnitt denselben aliquoten Teil des Tags arbeiten, um den Wert seiner Arbeitskraft zu produzieren, und dadurch die zu seiner eignen Erhaltung oder beständigen Reproduktion nötigen Lebensmittel zu gewinnen. Da er aber in dem Teil des Arbeitstags, worin er den Tageswert der Arbeitskraft, sage 3 sh., produziert, nur ein Äquivalent für ihren vom Kapitalisten bereits gezahlten^28a Wert produziert, also durch den neu geschaffnen Wert nur den vorgeschoßnen variablen Kapitalwert ersetzt, erscheint diese Produktion von Wert als bloße Reproduktion. Den Teil des Arbeitstags also, worin diese Reproduktion vorgeht, nenne ich notwendige Arbeitszeit, die während derselben verausgabte Arbeit notwendige Arbeit.²⁹ Notwendig für den Arbeiter, weil unabhängig von der gesellschaftlichen Form seiner Arbeit. Notwendig für das Kapital und seine Welt, weil das beständige Dasein des Arbeiters ihre Basis.

Necessary labour-time

We have seen that, during one part of the labour-process, the worker produces only the value of his labour-power, that is, the value of his necessary means of subsistence. Since he produces in a condition based on the social division of labour, he does not produce his means of subsistence directly. He produces them in the form of a particular commodity, yarn for example: a value equal to the value of his means of subsistence, or to the money with which he buys them.

The part of his working day used for this is longer or shorter according to the value of his average daily means of subsistence, and therefore according to the average daily labour-time required to produce them. If the value of his daily means of subsistence represents, on average, 6 objectified labour-hours, then the worker must work 6 hours a day on average to produce that value. If he worked not for the capitalist but for himself, independently, then with other conditions unchanged he would still have to work the same average fraction of the day to produce the value of his labour-power and thereby win the means of subsistence needed for his own maintenance, or constant reproduction.

But in the part of the working day in which he produces the daily value of labour-power, say 3 shillings, he produces only an equivalent for its value already paid by the capitalist. The newly created value only replaces the advanced variable capital-value, so this production of value appears as mere reproduction. The part of the working day in which this reproduction takes place I call necessary labour-time, and the labour spent during it necessary labour. Necessary for the worker, because it is independent of the social form of his labour. Necessary for capital and its world, because the worker's constant existence is their basis.

Die zweite Periode des Arbeitsprozesses, die der Arbeiter über die Grenzen der notwendigen Arbeit hinaus schanzt, kostet ihm zwar Arbeit, Verausgabung von Arbeitskraft, bildet aber keinen Wert für ihn. Sie bildet Mehrwert, der den Kapitalisten mit allem Reiz einer Schöpfung aus Nichts anlacht. Diesen Teil des Arbeitstags nenne ich Surplusarbeitszeit, und die in ihr verausgabte Arbeit: Mehrarbeit (surplus labour). So entscheidend es für die Erkenntnis des Werts überhaupt, ihn als bloße Gerinnung von Arbeitszeit, als bloß vergegenständlichte Arbeit, so entscheidend ist es für die Erkenntnis des Mehrwerts, ihn als bloße Gerinnung von Surplusarbeitszeit, als bloß vergegenständlichte Mehrarbeit zu begreifen. Nur die Form, worin diese Mehrarbeit dem unmittelbaren Produzenten, dem Arbeiter, abgepreßt wird, unterscheidet die ökonomischen Gesellschaftsformationen, z.B. die Gesellschaft der Sklaverei von der der Lohnarbeit.³⁰

Surplus labour and surplus-value

The second period of the labour-process, the one the worker pushes beyond the limits of necessary labour, costs him labour, the expenditure of labour-power, but forms no value for him. It forms surplus-value, which smiles at the capitalist with all the charm of creation out of nothing. I call this part of the working day surplus labour-time, and the labour spent in it surplus labour.

For understanding value in general, it is decisive to grasp it as a mere congealing of labour-time, as merely objectified labour. In just the same way, for understanding surplus-value, it is decisive to grasp it as a mere congealing of surplus labour-time, as merely objectified surplus labour. Only the form in which this surplus labour is pressed out of the direct producer, the worker, distinguishes economic social formations, such as the society of slavery from the society of wage-labour.

Da der Wert des variablen Kapitals = Wert der von ihm gekauften Arbeitskraft, da der Wert dieser Arbeitskraft den notwendigen Teil des Arbeitstags bestimmt, der Mehrwert seinerseits aber bestimmt ist durch den überschüssigen Teil des Arbeitstags, so folgt: Der Mehrwert verhält sich zum variablen Kapital, wie die Mehrarbeit zur notwendigen, oder die Rate des Mehrwerts m/v = (Mehrarbeit)/(Notwendige Arbeit). Beide Proportionen drücken dasselbe Verhältnis in verschiedner Form aus, das eine Mal in der Form vergegenständlichter, das andre Mal in der Form flüssiger Arbeit.

Ratio in value and time

The value of variable capital equals the value of the labour-power it buys. The value of this labour-power determines the necessary part of the working day. Surplus-value, in turn, is determined by the surplus part of the working day. It follows that surplus-value relates to variable capital as surplus labour relates to necessary labour, or that the rate of surplus-value m/v = surplus labour / necessary labour. Both proportions express the same relation in different forms: once in the form of objectified labour, once in the form of living, flowing labour.

Die Rate des Mehrwerts ist daher der exakte Ausdruck für den Exploitationsgrad der Arbeitskraft durch das Kapital oder des Arbeiters durch den Kapitalisten.^30a

Degree of exploitation

The rate of surplus-value is therefore the exact expression for the degree of exploitation of labour-power by capital, or of the worker by the capitalist.

Nach unsrer Annahme war der Wert des Produkts = 410 Pfd.St. + 90 Pfd. St + 90, das vorgeschoßne Kapital = 500 Pfd.St. Da der Mehrwert = 90 und das vorgeschoßne Kapital = 500, würde man nach der gewöhnlichen Art der Berechnung herausbekommen, daß die Rate des Mehrwerts (die man mit der Profitrate verwechselt) = 18%, eine Verhältniszahl, deren Niedrigkeit Herrn Carey und andre Harmoniker rühren möchte. In der Tat aber ist die Rate des Mehrwerts nicht = m/C oder m/c + v , sondern = m/v , also nicht 90/500 , sondern 90/90 =100%, mehr als das Fünffache des scheinbaren Exploitationsgrads. Obgleich wir nun im gegebnen Fall die absolute Größe des Arbeitstags nicht kennen, auch nicht die Periode des Arbeitsprozesses (Tag, Woche usw.), endlich nicht die Anzahl der Arbeiter, die das variable Kapital von 90 Pfd.St. gleichzeitig in Bewegung setzt, zeigt uns die Rate des Mehrwerts m/v durch ihre Konvertibilität in (Mehrarbeit)/(Notwendige Arbeit) genau das Verhältnis der zwei Bestandteile des Arbeitstags zueinander. Es ist 100%. Also arbeitete der Arbeiter die eine Hälfte des Tags für sich und die andre für den Kapitalisten.

Profit-rate appearance

On our assumption, the product's value was 410 pounds sterling + 90 pounds sterling + 90, and the advanced capital was 500 pounds sterling. Since surplus-value = 90 and advanced capital = 500, the usual way of calculating would give a rate of surplus-value, confused with the profit rate, of 18% -- a ratio whose smallness might move Mr. Carey and other Harmonizers.

In truth, however, the rate of surplus-value is not m/C, or m/(c + v), but m/v: not 90/500, but 90/90 = 100%, more than five times the apparent degree of exploitation. Although in the case given we do not know the absolute size of the working day, or the period of the labour-process, day, week, and so on, or the number of workers simultaneously set in motion by the variable capital of 90 pounds sterling, the rate of surplus-value m/v, because it can be converted into surplus labour / necessary labour, shows us exactly the relation between the two parts of the working day. It is 100%. So the worker worked one half of the day for himself and the other half for the capitalist.

Die Methode zur Berechnung der Rate des Mehrwerts ist also kurzgefaßt diese: Wir nehmen den ganzen Produktenwert und setzen den darin nur wiedererscheinenden konstanten Kapitalwert gleich Null. Die übrigbleibende Wertsumme ist das einzige im Bildungsprozeß der Ware wirklich erzeugte Wertprodukt. Ist der Mehrwert gegeben, so ziehn wir ihn von diesem Wertprodukt ab, um das variable Kapital zu finden. Umgekehrt, wenn letztres gegeben und wir den Mehrwert suchen. Sind beide gegeben, so ist nur noch die Schlußoperation zu verrichten, das Verhältnis des Mehrwerts zum variablen Kapital, m/v , zu berechnen.

The calculation recipe

The method for calculating the rate of surplus-value is therefore, in short, this. We take the whole product-value and set the constant capital-value that only reappears in it equal to zero. The remaining value-sum is the only value-product really created in the commodity's formation process.

If surplus-value is given, we subtract it from this value-product to find variable capital. Conversely, if variable capital is given and we are looking for surplus-value, we subtract variable capital from the value-product. If both are given, only the final operation remains: calculate the ratio of surplus-value to variable capital, m/v.

So einfach die Methode, scheint es doch passend, den Leser in die ihr zu Grunde liegende und ihm ungewohnte Anschauungsweise durch einige Beispiele einzuexerzieren.

Examples to practice method

Simple as the method is, it still seems fitting to exercise the reader, through a few examples, in the unfamiliar way of seeing that lies beneath it.

Zunächst das Beispiel einer Spinnerei von 10.000 Mulespindeln, die Nr. 32 Garn aus amerikanischer Baumwolle spinnt und 1 Pfund Garn wöchentlich per Spindel produziert. Der Abfall ist 6 %. Also werden 10.600 Pfund Baumwolle wöchentlich in 10.000 Pfund Garn und 600 Pfund Abfall verarbeitet. Im April 1871 kostet diese Baumwolle 7 3/4 d. per Pfund, also für 10.600 Pfund rund 342 Pfd.St. Die 10.000 Spindeln, inklusive Vorspinnmaschinerie und Dampfmaschine, kosten 1 Pfd.St. per Spindel, also 10.000 Pfd.St. Ihr Verschleiß beträgt 10% = 1.000 Pfd.St. oder wöchentlich 20 Pfd.St. Die Miete des Fabrikgebäudes ist 300 Pfd.St. oder 6 Pfd.St. per Woche. Kohlen (4 Pfund per Stunde und Pferdekraft, auf 100 Pferdekraft (Indikator), und 60 Stunden per Woche inklusive Heizung des Gebäudes) 11 tons per Woche, zu 8 sh. 6 d. die Tonne, kosten rund 4 1/2 Pfd.St. per Woche; Gas 1 Pfd.St. per Woche, Öl 4 1/2 Pfd.St. per Woche, also alle Hilfsstoffe 10 Pfd.St. per Woche. Also ist der konstante Wertteil 378 Pfd.St. per Woche. Der Arbeitslohn beträgt 52 Pfd.St. per Woche. Der Garnpreis ist 12 1/4 d. per Pfund oder 10.000 Pfd. = 510 Pfd.St., der Mehrwert also 510 - 430 = 80 Pfd.St. Wir setzen den konstanten Wertteil von 378 Pfd.St. = 0, da er in der wöchentlichen Wertbildung nicht mitspielt. Bleibt das wöchentliche Wertprodukt von 132 = 52 + 80 Pfd.St. Die Rate des Mehrwerts also = 80/52 = 153 11/13 %. Bei zehnstündigem durchschnittlichem Arbeitstag ergibt dies: Notwendige Arbeit = 3 31/33 Stunden und Mehrarbeit = 6 2/33 Stunden.³¹

Manchester spinning calculation

First take a spinning mill with 10,000 mule spindles, spinning No. 32 yarn from American cotton and producing 1 pound of yarn per spindle each week. Waste is 6%, so each week 10,600 pounds of cotton are worked up into 10,000 pounds of yarn and 600 pounds of waste. In April 1871 this cotton costs 7 3/4 d. per pound, or about 342 pounds sterling for 10,600 pounds.

The 10,000 spindles, including pre-spinning machinery and steam-engine, cost 1 pound sterling per spindle, or 10,000 in all. Their wear is 10%, or 1,000 pounds a year, which is 20 pounds a week. Rent for the factory building is 300 pounds a year, or 6 pounds a week. Coal, at 4 pounds per hour and horsepower, for 100 indicated horsepower and 60 hours a week including heating, comes to 11 tons a week; at 8 sh. 6 d. per ton, that is about 4 1/2 pounds a week. Gas is 1 pound a week, oil 4 1/2 pounds, so all auxiliary materials are 10 pounds a week. The constant value-part is therefore 378 pounds a week.

Wages are 52 pounds a week. The yarn price is 12 1/4 d. per pound, so 10,000 pounds of yarn are worth 510 pounds sterling, and surplus-value is 510 - 430 = 80. We set the constant value-part of 378 to zero, since it does not play a role in the week's value-formation. That leaves the weekly value-product of 132 = 52 + 80. The rate of surplus-value is therefore 80/52 = 153 11/13%. With an average ten-hour working day, this gives necessary labour = 3 31/33 hours and surplus labour = 6 2/33 hours.

Jacob gibt für das Jahr 1815, bei Annahme eines Weizenpreises von 80 sh. per Quarter und eines Durchschnittsertrags von 22 Bushels per acre, so daß der acre 11 Pfd.St. einbringt, folgende durch vorherige Kompensation verschiedner Posten sehr mangelhafte, aber für unsren Zweck genügende Rechnung.

Jacob's farm data

Jacob gives, for the year 1815, and assuming a wheat price of 80 sh. per quarter and an average yield of 22 bushels per acre, so that the acre brings in 11 pounds sterling, the following calculation. Because different items have already been offset against each other, it is very imperfect, but it is enough for our purpose.

Wertproduktion per acre
Samen(Weizen) 1 Pfd.St. 9 sh.
Zehnten, Rates, Taxes 1 Pfd.St. 1 sh.
Dünger 2 Pfd.St. 10 sh.
Rente 1 Pfd.St. 8 sh.
Arbeitslohn 3 Pfd.St. 10 sh.
Pächters Profit u. Zins 1 Pfd.St. 2 sh.
Summa: 7 Pfd.St. 9 sh.
Summa: 3 Pfd.St. 11 sh.

VALUE PRODUCED PER ACRE
Seed £1 9s. 0d.
Tithes, Rates, and taxes, £1 1s. 0d.
Manure £2 10s. 0d.
Rent £1 8s. 0d.
Wages £3 10s. 0d.
Farmer’s Profit and Interest £1 2s. 0d.
TOTAL £7 9s. 0d.
TOTAL £3 11s 0d.

Der Mehrwert, stets unter der Voraussetzung, daß Preis des Produkts = seinem Wert, wird hier unter die verschiednen Rubriken, Profit, Zins, Zehnten usw. verteilt. Diese Rubriken sind uns gleichgültig. Wir addieren sie zusammen und erhalten einen Mehrwert von 3 Pfd.St. 11 sh. Die 3 Pfd.St. 19 sh. für Samen und Dünger setzen wir als konstanten Kapitalteil gleich Null. Bleibt vorgeschoßnes variables Kapital von 3 Pfd.St. 10 sh., an dessen Stelle ein Neuwert von 3 Pfd.St. 10 sh. + 3 Pfd.St. 11 sh. produziert worden ist. Also beträgt m/v = (3 Pfd.St. 11 sh.)/(3 Pfd.St. 10 sh.), mehr als 100%. Der Arbeiter verwendet mehr als die Hälfte seines Arbeitstags zur Produktion eines Mehrwerts, den verschiedne Personen auf verschiedne Vorwände hin unter sich verteilen.^31a

Farm rate above 100%

Surplus-value, always assuming that the product's price equals its value, is here distributed under different headings: profit, interest, tithes, and so on. These headings are indifferent for us. We add them together and get a surplus-value of 3 pounds 11 shillings.

The 3 pounds 19 shillings for seed and manure we set equal to zero as the constant capital part. What remains is advanced variable capital of 3 pounds 10 shillings, in whose place a new value of 3 pounds 10 shillings + 3 pounds 11 shillings has been produced. So m/v = 3 pounds 11 shillings / 3 pounds 10 shillings, more than 100%. The worker uses more than half his working day to produce a surplus-value that different persons divide among themselves under different pretexts.

§2

2. Darstellung des Produktenwerts in proportionellen Teilen des Produkts

The previous section established the rate of surplus-value by comparing surplus-value with variable capital; this section takes that result as settled and shows how the same value-parts can be represented in pieces of the finished yarn.

Kehren wir nun zum Beispiel zurück, das uns zeigte, wie der Kapitalist aus Geld Kapital macht. Die notwendige Arbeit seines Spinners betrug 6 Stunden, die Mehrarbeit desgleichen, der Exploitationsgrad der Arbeitskraft daher 100%.

Return to the spinner example

Let us return to the example that showed how the capitalist turns money into capital. The spinner's necessary labour was 6 hours, and his surplus-labour was another 6 hours. The degree of exploitation of labour-power was therefore 100%.

Das Produkt des zwölfstündigen Arbeitstags sind 20 Pfd. Garn zum Wert von 30 sh. Nicht weniger als 8/10 dieses Garnwerts (24 sh.) sind gebildet durch den nur wieder erscheinenden Wert der verzehrten Produktionsmittel (20 Pfd. Baumwolle zu 20 sh., Spindel usw. zu 4 sh.) oder bestehn aus konstantem Kapital. Die übrigen 2/10 sind der während des Spinnprozesses entstandne Neuwert von 6 sh., wovon eine Hälfte den vorgeschoßnen Tageswert der Arbeitskraft ersetzt oder das variable Kapital und die andre Hälfte einen Mehrwert von 3 sh. bildet. Der Gesamtwert der 20 Pfd. Garn ist also folgendermaßen zusammengesetzt:

Total value split

The product of the twelve-hour working day is 20 lb of yarn worth 30 sh. No less than 8/10 of this yarn-value, 24 sh., is made up of the value of the used-up means of production merely appearing again: 20 lb of cotton worth 20 sh., and spindle and the like worth 4 sh. In other words, it consists of constant capital.

The remaining 2/10 are the new value of 6 sh. created during the spinning process. Of that, one half replaces the daily value of the labour-power advanced, or the variable capital; the other half forms a surplus-value of 3 sh. So the total value of the 20 lb of yarn is made up as follows:

Garnwert von 30 sh. = 24 sh. + 3 sh. + 3 sh.

The yarn-value equation

Yarn-value of 30 sh. = 24 sh. + 3 sh. + 3 sh.

Da dieser Gesamtwert sich in dem Gesamtprodukt von 20 Pfd. Garn darstellt, müssen auch die verschiednen Wertelemente in proportionellen Teilen des Produkts darstellbar sein.

Representing value-parts in product-parts

Since this total value is represented in the total product, 20 lb of yarn, the different elements of value must also be able to be represented in proportional parts of the product.

Existiert ein Garnwert von 30 sh. in 20 Pfd. Garn, so 8/10 dieses Werts, oder sein konstanter Teil von 24 sh. in 8/10 des Produkts, oder in 16 Pfd. Garn. Davon stellen 13 1/3 Pfd. den Wert des Rohmaterials dar, der versponnenen Baumwolle zu 20 sh. und 2 2/3 Pfd. den Wert der verzehrten Hilfsstoffe und Arbeitsmittel, Spindel usw. zu 4 sh.

The sixteen-pound constant part

If a yarn-value of 30 sh. exists in 20 lb of yarn, then 8/10 of that value, or its constant part of 24 sh., exists in 8/10 of the product, or in 16 lb of yarn. Of these 16 lb, 13 1/3 lb represent the value of the raw material, the cotton spun up, worth 20 sh.; and 2 2/3 lb represent the value of the used-up auxiliary materials and instruments of labour, spindle and the like, worth 4 sh.

13 1/3 Pfund Garn stellen also alle im Gesamtprodukt von 20 Pfd. Garn versponnene Baumwolle vor, das Rohmaterial des Gesamtprodukts, aber auch weiter nichts. In ihnen stecken zwar nur 13 1/3 Pfd. Baumwolle zum Wert von 13 1/3 sh., aber ihr zusätzlicher Wert von 6 2/3 sh. bildet ein Äquivalent für die in den andren 6 2/3 Pfd. Garn versponnene Baumwolle. Es ist, als ob letztren die Wolle ausgerupft und alle Wolle des Gesamtprodukts in 13 1/3 Pfd. Garn zusammengestopft wäre. Sie enthalten dagegen jetzt kein Atom des Werts der verbrauchten Hilfsstoffe und Arbeitsmittel noch des im Spinnprozeß geschaffnen Neuwerts.

Cotton-value packed into one part

So 13 1/3 lb of yarn represent all the cotton spun into the total product of 20 lb of yarn, the raw material of the total product, and nothing more. They do contain, physically, only 13 1/3 lb of cotton worth 13 1/3 sh.; but their extra value of 6 2/3 sh. is an equivalent for the cotton spun into the other 6 2/3 lb of yarn.

It is as if the fibre had been pulled out of those latter pounds and all the fibre of the total product had been stuffed into 13 1/3 lb of yarn. By contrast, these 13 1/3 lb now contain not an atom of the value of the used-up auxiliary materials and instruments of labour, nor of the new value created in the spinning process.

Ebenso stellen weitre 2 2/3 Pfd. Garn, worin der Rest des konstanten Kapitals (= 4 sh.) steckt, nichts dar außer dem Wert der im Gesamtprodukt von 20 Pfd. Garn vernutzten Hilfsstoffe und Arbeitsmittel.

Tools-value in the next part

In the same way, another 2 2/3 lb of yarn, in which the rest of the constant capital, 4 sh., sits, represent nothing except the value of the auxiliary materials and instruments of labour used up in producing the total product of 20 lb of yarn.

Acht Zehntel des Produkts, oder 16 Pfd. Garn, obgleich leiblich, als Gebrauchswert betrachtet, als Garn, ebensosehr Gebilde der Spinnarbeit wie die restierenden Produktteile, enthalten daher in diesem Zusammenhang keine Spinnarbeit, keine während des Spinnprozesses selbst eingesaugte Arbeit. Es ist, als ob sie sich ohne Spinnen in Garn verwandelt hätten und als wäre ihre Garngestalt reiner Lug und Trug. In der Tat, wenn der Kapitalist sie verkauft zu 24 sh. und damit seine Produktionsmittel zurückkauft, zeigt sich, daß 16 Pfd. Garn - nur verkleidete Baumwolle, Spindel, Kohle usw. sind.

Constant capital in disguise

So 8/10 of the product, or 16 lb of yarn, are, physically and as use-values, just as much products of spinning labour as the remaining parts of the product. Yet in this connection they contain no spinning labour, no labour absorbed during the spinning process itself.

It is as if they had turned into yarn without spinning, and as if their yarn-shape were pure trick and deceit. In fact, when the capitalist sells them for 24 sh. and with that money buys back his means of production, it becomes clear that 16 lb of yarn are only cotton, spindle, coal, and so on in disguise.

Umgekehrt stellen die übrigbleibenden 2/10 des Produkts oder 4 Pfd. Garn jetzt nichts dar außer dem im zwölfstündigen Spinnprozeß produzierten Neuwert von 6 sh. Was vom Wert der vernutzten Rohmaterialien und Arbeitsmittel in ihnen steckte, ward bereits ausgeweidet und den ersten 16 Pfd. Garn einverleibt. Die in 20 Pfd. Garn verkörperte Spinnarbeit ist konzentriert auf 2/10 des Produkts. Es ist, als ob der Spinner 4 Pfd. Garn in der Luft gewirkt oder in Baumwolle und mit Spindeln, die ohne Zutat menschlicher Arbeit, von Natur vorhanden, dem Produkt keinen Wert zusetzen.

New value in four pounds

Conversely, the remaining part of the product, 4 lb of yarn, now represents nothing except the new value of 6 sh. produced in the twelve-hour spinning process. Whatever value from the used-up raw materials and instruments of labour was in those 4 lb has already been gutted out and incorporated into the first 16 lb of yarn. The spinning labour embodied in 20 lb of yarn is concentrated in 2/10 of the product.

It is as if the spinner had spun 4 lb of yarn in the air, or had spun them with cotton and spindles that existed by nature, without any addition of human labour, and therefore added no value to the product.

Von den 4 Pfd. Garn, worin so das ganze Wertprodukt des täglichen Spinnprozesses existiert, stellt die eine Hälfte nur den Ersatzwert der vernutzten Arbeitskraft dar, also das variable Kapital von 3 sh., die andren 2 Pfd. Garn nur den Mehrwert von 3 sh.

Variable capital and surplus

Of the 4 lb of yarn in which the whole value-product of the daily spinning process exists, one half represents only the replacement value of the used-up labour-power, the variable capital of 3 sh. The other 2 lb of yarn represent only the surplus-value of 3 sh.

Da 12 Arbeitsstunden des Spinners sich in 6 sh. vergegenständlichen, sind im Garnwert von 30 sh. 60 Arbeitsstunden vergegenständlicht. Sie existieren in 20 Pfd. Garn, wovon 8/10 oder 16 Pfd. die Materiatur von 48 vor dem Spinnprozeß vergangnen Arbeitsstunden sind, nämlich der in den Produktionsmitteln des Garns vergegenständlichten Arbeit, 2/10 oder 4 Pfd. dagegen die Materiatur der im Spinnprozeß selbst verausgabten 12 Arbeitsstunden.

The same split in hours

Since 12 working hours of the spinner are objectified in 6 sh., 60 working hours are objectified in the yarn-value of 30 sh. They exist in 20 lb of yarn. Of that, 8/10, or 16 lb, are the material form of 48 working hours that passed before the spinning process: the labour objectified in the yarn's means of production. The other 2/10, or 4 lb, are the material form of the 12 working hours spent in the spinning process itself.

Früher sahen wir, daß der Garnwert gleich der Summe des in seiner Produktion erzeugten Neuwerts plus der bereits in seinen Produktionsmitteln präexistierenden Werte ist. Jetzt hat sich gezeigt, wie die funktionell oder begrifflich verschiednen Bestandteile des Produktenwerts in proportionellen Teilen des Produkts selbst darstellbar sind.

What the representation showed

Earlier we saw that the yarn's value equals the new value added in spinning plus the old value already present in cotton and tools. Now we have seen how those different value-parts can be shown as matching pieces of the yarn itself.

Diese Zerfällung des Produkts - des Resultats des Produktionsprozesses - in ein Quantum Produkt, das nur die in den Produktionsmitteln enthaltne Arbeit oder den konstanten Kapitalteil, ein andres Quantum, das nur die im Produktionsprozeß zugesetzte notwendige Arbeit oder den variablen Kapitalteil, und ein letztes Quantum Produkt, das nur die im selben Prozeß zugesetzte Mehrarbeit oder den Mehrwert darstellt, ist ebenso einfach als wichtig, wie ihre spätre Anwendung auf verwickelte und noch ungelöste Probleme zeigen wird.

Simple split, later use

This breaking-up of the product, the result of the production process, is as simple as it is important. One quantity of product represents only the labour contained in the means of production, or the constant-capital part. Another quantity represents only the necessary labour added in the production process, or the variable-capital part. A final quantity represents only the surplus-labour added in the same process, or the surplus-value. Its later use on tangled and still unsolved problems will show how important the split is.

Wir betrachteten eben das Gesamtprodukt als fertiges Resultat des zwölfstündigen Arbeitstags. Wir können es aber auch in seinem Entstehungsprozeß begleiten und dennoch die Teilprodukte als funktionell unterschiedne Produktenteile darstellen.

Following the product in time

We have just considered the total product as the finished result of the twelve-hour working day. But we can also follow it as it comes into being and still represent the partial products as functionally different parts of the product.

Der Spinner produziert in 12 Stunden 20 Pfd. Garn, daher in einer Stunde 1 2/3 und in 8 Stunden 13 1/3 Pfd., also ein Teilprodukt vom Gesamtwert der Baumwolle, die während des ganzen Arbeitstags versponnen wird. In derselben Art und Weise ist das Teilprodukt der folgenden Stunde und 36 Minuten = 2 2/3 Pfd. Garn und stellt daher den Wert der während der 12 Arbeitsstunden vernutzten Arbeitsmittel dar. Ebenso produziert der Spinner in der folgenden Stunde und 12 Minuten 2 Pfd. Garn = 3 sh., ein Produktenwert gleich dem ganzen Wertprodukt, das er in 6 Stunden notwendiger Arbeit schafft. Endlich produziert er in den letzten 6/5 Stunden ebenfalls 2 Pfd. Garn, deren Wert gleich dem durch seine halbtägige Mehrarbeit erzeugten Mehrwert. Diese Art Berechnung dient dem englischen Fabrikanten zum Hausgebrauch, und er wird z.B. sagen, daß er in den ersten 8 Stunden oder 2/3 des Arbeitstags seine Baumwolle herausschlägt usw. Man sieht, die Formel ist richtig, in der Tat nur die erste Formel, übersetzt aus dem Raum, wo die Teile des Produkts fertig nebeneinander liegen, in die Zeit, wo sie aufeinander folgen. Die Formel kann aber auch von sehr barbarischen Vorstellungen begleitet sein, namentlich in Köpfen, die ebenso praktisch im Verwertungsprozeß interessiert sind, als sie ein Interesse haben, ihn theoretisch mißzuverstehn. So kann sich eingebildet werden, daß unser Spinner z.B. in den ersten 8 Stunden seines Arbeitstags den Wert der Baumwolle, in der folgenden Stunde und 36 Minuten den Wert der verzehrten Arbeitsmittel, in der folgenden Stunde und 12 Minuten den Wert des Arbeitslohns produziert oder ersetzt, und nur die vielberühmte "letzte Stunde" dem Fabrikherrn, der Produktion von Mehrwert widmet. Dem Spinner wird so das doppelte Wunder aufgebürdet, Baumwolle, Spindel, Dampfmaschine, Kohle, Öl usw. in demselben Augenblick zu produzieren, wo er mit ihnen spinnt, und aus einem Arbeitstag von gegebnem Intensitätsgrad fünf solcher Tage zu machen. In unsrem Fall nämlich erfordert die Produktion des Rohmaterials und der Arbeitsmittel 24/6 = 4 zwölfstündige Arbeitstage und ihre Verwandlung in Garn einen andren zwölfstündigen Arbeitstag. Daß die Raubgier solche Wunder glaubt und nie den doktrinären Sykophanten mißt, der sie beweist, zeige nun ein Beispiel von historischer Berühmtheit.

Correct formula, barbarous reading

The spinner produces 20 lb of yarn in 12 hours; therefore he produces 1 2/3 lb in one hour and 13 1/3 lb in 8 hours. So in 8 hours he produces a partial product equal in total value to the cotton spun during the whole working day. In the same way, the partial product of the next hour and 36 minutes is 2 2/3 lb of yarn, and it therefore represents the value of the instruments of labour used up during the 12 working hours. Likewise, in the following hour and 12 minutes, the spinner produces 2 lb of yarn worth 3 sh.: a product-value equal to the whole value-product he creates in 6 hours of necessary labour. Finally, in the last 6/5 hours, he also produces 2 lb of yarn, whose value equals the surplus-value created by his half-day of surplus-labour.

This way of calculating serves the English manufacturer for in-house use. For example, he will say that in the first 8 hours, or 2/3 of the working day, he beats out his cotton, and so on. We can see that the formula is correct. In fact, it is only the first formula translated from space, where the parts of the finished product lie side by side, into time, where they follow one another.

But the same formula can also support a very crude mistake, especially among people who profit from capital's growth and want a theory that excuses it. Someone can imagine, for example, that our spinner produces or replaces the value of the cotton in the first 8 hours of his working day, the value of the used-up instruments of labour in the following hour and 36 minutes, the value of wages in the following hour and 12 minutes, and devotes only the famous "last hour" to the factory owner, to the production of surplus-value.

In that way the spinner is loaded with a double miracle: producing cotton, spindle, steam-engine, coal, oil, and so on at the very moment when he spins with them, and turning one working day of a given intensity into five such days. In our case, the raw material and instruments of labour require 24/6 = 4 twelve-hour working days, and turning them into yarn requires another twelve-hour working day. Greed is ready to believe miracles like that, and it can always find a learned defender. A famous example comes next.

§3–4

3. Seniors "Letzte Stunde" · 4. Das Mehrprodukt

The previous section staged the last-hour error; this section makes Senior's version intelligible, refutes it by separating transferred product-value from newly created value, and then defines surplus-product and the working day without beginning Chapter 8.

An einem schönen Morgen des Jahres 1836 wurde der wegen seiner ökonomischen Wissenschaft und seines schönen Stils berufene Nassau W. Senior, gewissermaßen der Clauren unter den englischen Ökonomen, von Oxford nach Manchester zitiert, um hier politische Ökonomie zu lernen, statt sie in Oxford zu lehren. Die Fabrikanten erkoren ihn zum Preisfechter gegen den neulich erlaßnen Factory Act und die darüber noch hinausstrebende Zehnstundenagitation. Mit gewohntem praktischen Scharfsinn hatten sie erkannt, daß der Herr Professor "wanted a good deal of finishing" <"noch tüchtigen Schliff brauchte">. Sie verschrieben ihn daher nach Manchester. Der Herr Professor seinerseits hat die zu Manchester von den Fabrikanten erhaltne Lektion stilisiert in dem Pamphlet: "Letters on the Factory Act, as it affects the cotton manufacture", London 1837. Hier kann man u.a. folgendes Erbauliche lesen:

Senior enters Manchester

One fine morning in 1836, Nassau W. Senior, famous for his economic science and fine style, a kind of Clauren among English economists, was summoned from Oxford to Manchester. There he was to learn political economy instead of teaching it at Oxford. The manufacturers chose him as their champion against the recently passed Factory Act and against the Ten Hours agitation that wanted to go further still. With their usual practical sharpness, they had seen that the learned Professor "wanted a good deal of finishing." So they ordered him to Manchester.

For his part, the Professor turned the lesson he received from the Manchester manufacturers into the pamphlet Letters on the Factory Act, as it affects the cotton manufacture, London, 1837. In it one can read, among other things, the following edifying passage:

"Unter dem gegenwärtigen Gesetz kann keine Fabrik, die Personen unter 18 Jahren beschäftigt, länger als 11 1/2 Stunden täglich arbeiten, d.h. 12 Stunden während der ersten 5 Tage und 9 Stunden am Sonnabend. Die folgende Analyse (!) zeigt nun, daß in einer solchen Fabrik der ganze Reingewinn von der letzten Stunde abgeleitet ist. Ein Fabrikant legt 100.000 Pfd.St. aus - 80.000 Pfd.St. in Fabrikgebäude und Maschinen, 20.000 in Rohmaterial und Arbeitslohn. Der jährliche Umsatz der Fabrik, vorausgesetzt, das Kapital schlage jährlich einmal um und der Bruttogewinn betrage 15%, muß sich auf Waren zum Wert von 115.000 Pfd.St. belaufen ... Von diesen 115.000 Pfd.St. produziert jede der 23 halben Arbeitsstunden täglich 5/115 oder 1/23. Von diesen 23/23, die das Ganze der 115.000 Pfd.St. bilden (constituting the whole 115.000 Pfd.St.), ersetzen 20/23, d.h. 100.000 von den 115.000, nur das Kapital; 1/23 oder 5.000 Pfd.St. von den 15.000 Brutto-Gewinn (!) ersetzen die Abnutzung der Fabrik und Maschinerie. Die übrigbleibenden 2/23, d.h. die beiden letzten halben Stunden jedes Tages produzieren den Reingewinn von 10%. Wenn daher bei gleichbleibenden Preisen die Fabrik 13 Stunden statt 11 1/2 arbeiten dürfte, so würde, mit einer Zulage von ungefähr 2.600 Pfd.St. zum zirkulierenden Kapital, der Reingewinn mehr als verdoppelt werden. Andrerseits, wenn die Arbeitsstunden täglich um 1 Stunde reduziert würden, würde der Reingewinn verschwinden, wenn um 1 1/2 Stunden, auch der Bruttogewinn."³²

Senior's last-hour analysis

"Under the present law, no factory employing persons under 18 can work more than 11 1/2 hours a day: 12 hours on each of the first 5 days, and 9 hours on Saturday. The following analysis (!) now shows that in such a factory the whole net profit comes from the last hour.

A manufacturer lays out 100,000 pounds sterling: 80,000 in factory buildings and machinery, 20,000 in raw material and wages. If the capital turns over once a year and gross profit is 15%, the factory's yearly turnover must be goods worth 115,000 pounds sterling. Of this 115,000, each of the 23 half-hours of daily work produces 5/115, or 1/23. Of the 23/23 that make up the whole 115,000, 20/23, or 100,000, merely replace the capital. One more 1/23, or 5,000 of the 15,000 gross profit, replaces the wear and tear of the factory and machinery. The remaining 2/23, that is, the last two half-hours of each day, produce the net profit of 10%.

So, if prices stayed the same and the factory could work 13 hours instead of 11 1/2, then with about 2,600 pounds sterling added to circulating capital, net profit would more than double. On the other hand, if the working hours were reduced by 1 hour a day, net profit would disappear; if by 1 1/2 hours, gross profit would disappear too."

Und das nennt der Herr Professor eine "Analyse"! Glaubte er den Fabrikantenjammer, daß die Arbeiter die beste Zeit des Tags in der Produktion, daher der Reproduktion oder dem Ersatz des Werts von Baulichkeiten, Maschinen, Baumwolle, Kohle usw. vergeuden, so war jede Analyse überflüssig. Er hatte einfach zu antworten: Meine Herren! Wenn ihr 10 Stunden arbeiten laßt statt 11 1/2 , wird, unter sonst gleichbleibenden Umständen, der tägliche Verzehr von Baumwolle, Maschinerie usw. um 1 1/2 Stunden abnehmen. Ihr gewinnt also grade so viel, als ihr verliert. Eure Arbeiter werden in Zukunft 1 1/2 Stunden weniger für Reproduktion oder Ersatz des vorgeschoßnen Kapitalwerts vergeuden. Glaubte er ihnen nicht aufs Wort, sondern hielt als Sachverständiger eine Analyse für nötig, so mußte er vor allem, in einer Frage, die sich ausschließlich um das Verhältnis des Reingewinns zur Größe des Arbeitstags dreht, die Herren Fabrikanten ersuchen, Maschinerie und Fabrikgebäude, Rohmaterial und Arbeit nicht kunterbunt durcheinanderzuwirren, sondern gefälligst das in Fabrikgebäude, Maschinerie, Rohmaterial usw. enthaltne konstante Kapital auf die eine, das in Arbeitslohn vorgeschoßne Kapital auf die andre Seite zu stellen. Ergab sich dann etwa, daß nach der Fabrikantenrechnung der Arbeiter in 2/2 Arbeitsstunden, oder in einer Stunde, den Arbeitslohn reproduziert oder ersetzt, so hatte der Analytiker fortzufahren:

Two ways to answer Senior

And the Professor calls this an "analysis"! If he believed the manufacturers' complaint that the workers waste the best part of the day producing, and therefore reproducing or replacing, the value of buildings, machines, cotton, coal, and so on, then any analysis was pointless. He only had to answer: Gentlemen, if you work 10 hours instead of 11 1/2, then, other things equal, the daily using-up of cotton, machinery, and so on will fall by 1 1/2 hours. You gain exactly as much as you lose. In future your workers will waste 1 1/2 fewer hours reproducing or replacing the capital-value you advanced.

If, on the other hand, he did not take them at their word, but as an expert thought analysis was needed, then he first had to ask the manufacturers not to jumble together machinery and factory buildings, raw material and labour. Since the question turns only on the relation of net profit to the size of the working day, he had to ask them to put the constant capital contained in buildings, machinery, raw material, and so on, on one side, and the capital advanced in wages on the other. If the manufacturers' calculation then showed that the worker reproduces or replaces his wage in two half-hours, or in one hour, the analyst should have continued like this:

Nach eurer Angabe produziert der Arbeiter in der vorletzten Stunde seinen Arbeitslohn und in der letzten euren Mehrwert oder den Reingewinn. Da er in gleichen Zeiträumen gleiche Werte produziert, hat das Produkt der vorletzten Stunde denselben Wert wie das der letzten. Er produziert ferner nur Wert, soweit er Arbeit verausgabt, und das Quantum seiner Arbeit ist gemessen durch seine Arbeitszeit. Diese beträgt nach eurer Angabe 11 1/2 Stunden per Tag. Einen Teil dieser 11 1/2 Stunden verbraucht er zur Produktion oder zum Ersatz seines Arbeitslohns, den andren zur Produktion eures Reingewinns. Weiter tut er nichts während des Arbeitstags. Da aber, nach Angabe, sein Lohn und der von ihm gelieferte Mehrwert gleich große Werte sind, produziert er offenbar seinen Arbeitslohn in 5 3/4 Stunden und euren Reingewinn in andren 5 3/4 Stunden. Da ferner der Wert des zweistündigen Garnprodukts gleich der Wertsumme seines Arbeitslohns plus eures Reingewinns ist, muß dieser Garnwert durch 11 1/2 Arbeitsstunden gemessen sein, das Produkt der vorletzten Stunde durch 5 3/4 Arbeitsstunden, das der letzten ditto. Wir kommen jetzt zu einem häklichen Punkt. Also aufgepaßt! Die vorletzte Arbeitsstunde ist eine gewöhnliche Arbeitsstunde wie die erste. Ni plus, ni moins. <Nicht mehr, nicht weniger.> Wie kann der Spinner daher in einer Arbeitsstunde einen Garnwert produzieren, der 5 3/4 Arbeitsstunden darstellt? Er verrichtet in der Tat kein solches Wunder. Was er in einer Arbeitsstunde an Gebrauchswert produziert, ist ein bestimmtes Quantum Garn. Der Wert dieses Garns ist gemessen durch 5 3/4 Arbeitsstunden, wovon 4 3/4 ohne sein Zutun in den stündlich verzehrten Produktionsmitteln stecken, in Baumwolle, Maschinerie usw., 4/4 oder eine Stunde von ihm selbst zugesetzt ist. Da also sein Arbeitslohn in 5 3/4 Stunden produziert wird und das Garnprodukt einer Spinnstunde ebenfalls 5 3/4 Arbeitsstunden enthält, ist es durchaus keine Hexerei, daß das Wertprodukt seiner 5 3/4 Spinnstunden gleich dem Produktenwert einer Spinnstunde. Ihr seid aber durchaus auf dem Holzweg, wenn ihr meint, er verliere ein einziges Zeitatom seines Arbeitstags mit der Reproduktion oder dem "Ersatz" der Werte von Baumwolle, Maschinerie usw. Dadurch, daß seine Arbeit aus Baumwolle und Spindel Garn macht, dadurch, daß er spinnt, geht der Wert von Baumwolle und Spindel von selbst auf das Garn über. Es ist dies der Qualität seiner Arbeit geschuldet, nicht ihrer Quantität. Allerdings wird er in einer Stunde mehr Baumwollwert usw. auf Garn übertragen als in 1/2 Stunde, aber nur weil er in 1 Stunde mehr Baumwolle verspinnt als in 1/2 . Ihr begreift also: Euer Ausdruck, der Arbeiter produziert in der vorletzten Stunde den Wert seines Arbeitslohns und in der letzten den Reingewinn, heißt weiter nichts, als daß in dem Garnprodukt von zwei Stunden seines Arbeitstags, ob sie vorn oder hinten stehen, 11 1/2 Arbeitsstunden verkörpert sind, grade so viel Stunden, als sein ganzer Arbeitstag zählt. Und der Ausdruck, daß er in den ersten 5 3/4 Stunden seinen Arbeitslohn und in den letzten 5 3/4 Stunden euren Reingewinn produziert, heißt wieder nichts, als daß ihr die ersten 5 3/4 Stunden zahlt und die letzten 5 3/4 Stunden nicht zahlt. Ich spreche von Zahlung der Arbeit, statt der Arbeitskraft, um euren slang zu reden. Vergleicht ihr Herren nun das Verhältnis der Arbeitszeit, die ihr zahlt, zur Arbeitszeit, die ihr nicht zahlt, so werdet ihr finden, daß es halber Tag zu halbem Tag ist, also 100%, was allerdings ein artiger Prozentsatz. Es unterliegt auch nicht dem geringsten Zweifel, daß, wenn ihr eure "Hände" statt 11 1/2 Stunden 13 abschanzt und, was euch so ähnlich sieht wie ein Ei dem andren, die überschüssigen 1 1/2 Stunden zur bloßen Mehrarbeit schlagt, letztre von 5 3/4 Stunden auf 7 1/4 Stunden wachsen wird, die Rate des Mehrwerts daher von 100% auf 126 2/23 %. Dagegen seid ihr gar zu tolle Sanguiniker, wenn ihr hofft, sie werde durch den Zusatz von 1 1/2 Stunden von 100 auf 200% und gar mehr als 200% steigen, d.h. sich "mehr als verdoppeln". Andrerseits - des Menschen Herz ist ein wunderlich Ding, namentlich wenn der Mensch sein Herz im Beutel trägt - seid ihr gar zu verrückte Pessimisten, wenn ihr fürchtet, mit der Reduktion des Arbeitstags von 11 1/2 auf 10 1/2 Stunden werde euer ganzer Reingewinn in die Brüche gehn. Beileibe nicht. Alle andren Umstände als gleichbleibend vorausgesetzt, wird die Mehrarbeit von 5 3/4 auf 4 3/4 Stunden fallen, was immer noch eine ganz erkleckliche Rate des Mehrwerts gibt, nämlich 82 14/23 %. Die verhängnisvolle "letzte Stunde" aber, von der ihr mehr gefabelt habt als die Chiliasten vom Weltuntergang, ist "all bosh" <"lauter Unsinn">. Ihr Verlust wird weder euch den "Reingewinn" noch den von euch verarbeiteten Kindern beiderlei Geschlechts die "Seelenreinheit" kosten.^32a

Counter-arithmetic against Senior

According to your figures, the worker produces his wage in the next-to-last hour and your surplus-value, or net profit, in the last hour. Since he produces equal values in equal stretches of time, the product of the next-to-last hour has the same value as the product of the last. He produces value only so far as he spends labour, and the amount of his labour is measured by his labour-time. You say that this is 11 1/2 hours a day. He uses one part of those 11 1/2 hours to produce or replace his wage, and the other part to produce your net profit. He does nothing else during the working day. But since, by your account, his wage and the surplus-value he supplies are equal values, he plainly produces his wage in 5 3/4 hours and your net profit in another 5 3/4 hours. And since the value of the yarn-product of two hours equals the value of his wage plus your net profit, this yarn-value must be measured by 11 1/2 working hours: the product of the next-to-last hour by 5 3/4 working hours, and the product of the last hour the same.

Now we come to a ticklish point. So pay attention. The next-to-last working hour is an ordinary working hour like the first: no more, no less. How, then, can the spinner produce in one working hour a yarn-value that represents 5 3/4 working hours? In fact he performs no such miracle. What he produces in one working hour, as a use-value, is a definite quantity of yarn. The value of this yarn is measured by 5 3/4 working hours, of which 4 3/4 were already stuck, without his help, in the means of production used up during that hour: cotton, machinery, and so on. Only 4/4, or one hour, is added by him. Since his wage is produced in 5 3/4 hours, and the yarn-product of one spinning hour also contains 5 3/4 working hours, there is no witchcraft in saying that the new value created by his 5 3/4 spinning hours equals the total value of the product of one spinning hour.

But you are completely on the wrong track if you think he loses a single atom of his working day reproducing or "replacing" the values of cotton, machinery, and so on. Because his labour makes yarn out of cotton and spindle, because he spins, the value of cotton and spindle passes over to the yarn of itself. This is owed to the quality of his labour, not to its quantity. Of course in one hour he transfers more cotton-value and so on to the yarn than in half an hour, but only because in one hour he spins more cotton than in half an hour. So you understand: your expression that the worker produces the value of his wage in the next-to-last hour and net profit in the last means nothing more than this: in the yarn-product of two hours of his working day, whether those hours stand at the front or the back, 11 1/2 working hours are embodied, exactly as many hours as his whole working day contains. And the expression that in the first 5 3/4 hours he produces his wage and in the last 5 3/4 hours your net profit means, again, nothing more than this: you pay the first 5 3/4 hours and do not pay the last 5 3/4 hours. I speak of payment for labour, instead of payment for labour-power, to use your slang.

Now, gentlemen, compare the working time you pay with the working time you do not pay. You will find that the relation is half a day to half a day, or 100%, which is certainly a handsome percentage. Nor is there the slightest doubt that if you make your "hands" toil for 13 hours instead of 11 1/2, and, as would be just like you, add the extra 1 1/2 hours to mere surplus labour, surplus labour will grow from 5 3/4 hours to 7 1/4 hours, and the rate of surplus-value from 100% to 126 2/23%. But you are far too wild as optimists if you hope that by adding 1 1/2 hours it will rise from 100% to 200%, or even more than 200%, that is, "more than double." On the other hand, the human heart is a strange thing, especially when a person carries his heart in his purse: you are far too crazed as pessimists if you fear that reducing the working day from 11 1/2 to 10 1/2 hours will wreck your whole net profit. Not at all. If all other circumstances stay the same, surplus labour will fall from 5 3/4 to 4 3/4 hours, which still gives a quite respectable rate of surplus-value, namely 82 14/23%. But the fatal "last hour," about which you have spun more fables than the millenarians about the end of the world, is "all bosh." Losing it will cost neither you your "net profit" nor the boys and girls you process in your mills their "purity of mind."

Wenn einmal euer "letztes Stündlein" wirklich schlägt, denkt an den Professor von Oxford. Und nun: In einer beßren Welt wünsch' ich mir mehr von eurem werten Umgang. Addio!³³... Das Signal der von Senior 1836 entdeckten "letzten Stunde" ward am 15. April 1848, polemisch gegen das Zehnstundengesetz, von James Wilson, einem der ökonomischen Hauptmandarine, im "London Economist" von neuem geblasen.

Farewell and later revival

When your "last little hour" really strikes, think of the Professor from Oxford. And now: in a better world I wish for more of your valued company. Addio!...

The signal of the "last hour," discovered by Senior in 1836, was blown again on April 15, 1848, in the London Economist, by James Wilson, one of the chief economic mandarins, in a polemic against the Ten Hours Act.

4. Das Mehrprodukt

Den Teil des Produkts ( 1/10 von 20 Pfd. Garn oder 2 Pfd. Garn in dem Beispiel sub 2), worin sich der Mehrwert darstellt, nennen wir Mehrprodukt (surplus produce, produit net). Wie die Rate des Mehrwerts durch sein Verhältnis nicht zur Gesamtsumme, sondern zum variablen Bestandteil des Kapitals bestimmt wird, so die Höhe des Mehrprodukts durch sein Verhältnis nicht zum Rest des Gesamtprodukts, sondern zum Produktteil, worin sich die notwendige Arbeit darstellt. Wie die Produktion von Mehrwert der bestimmende Zweck der kapitalistischen Produktion, so mißt nicht die absolute Größe des Produkts, sondern die relative Größe des Mehrprodukts den Höhegrad des Reichtums.³⁴

Surplus-produce defined

The part of the product in which surplus-value is represented -- in the earlier example, 1/10 of 20 lbs. of yarn, or 2 lbs. of yarn -- we call surplus-produce.

Just as the rate of surplus-value is determined by its relation not to the total sum of capital, but to the variable part of capital, so the relative quantity of surplus-produce is determined by its relation not to the rest of the total product, but to the part of the product in which necessary labour is represented.

Capitalist production is built around making surplus-value. So its wealth is measured not by how big the whole product is, but by how large the surplus-produce is compared with the necessary product.

Die Summe der notwendigen Arbeit und der Mehrarbeit, der Zeitabschnitte, worin der Arbeiter den Ersatzwert seiner Arbeitskraft und den Mehrwert produziert, bildet die absolute Größe seiner Arbeitszeit - den Arbeitstag (working day).

The working day defined

Necessary labour and surplus labour together -- the stretches of time in which the worker produces the replacement value of his labour-power and produces surplus-value -- make up the absolute size of his labour-time: the working day.

§1

Section 1 — The Degree of Exploitation of Labour-Power

The surplus-value generated in the process of production by C, the capital advanced, or in other words, the self-expansion of the value of the capital C, presents itself for our consideration, in the first place, as a surplus, as the amount by which the value of the product exceeds the value of its constituent elements.

Surplus first appears as excess

The capital C is made up of two components, one, the sum of money c laid out upon the means of production, and the other, the sum of money v expended upon the labour-power; c represents the portion that has become constant capital, and v the portion that has become variable capital. At first then, C = c + v: for example, if £500 is the capital advanced, its components may be such that the £500 = £410 const. + £90 var. When the process of production is finished, we get a commodity whose value = (c + v) + s, where s is the surplus-value; or taking our former figures, the value of this commodity may be (£410 const. + £90 var.) + £90 surpl. The original capital has now changed from C to C', from £500 to £590. The difference is s or a surplus-value of £90. Since the value of the constituent elements of the product is equal to the value of the advanced capital, it is mere tautology to say, that the excess of the value of the product over the value of its constituent elements, is equal to the expansion of the capital advanced or to the surplus-value produced.

Capital split and surplus named

Nevertheless, we must examine this tautology a little more closely. The two things compared are, the value of the product and the value of its constituents consumed in the process of production. Now we have seen how that portion of the constant capital which consists of the instruments of labour, transfers to the production only a fraction of its value, while the remainder of that value continues to reside in those instruments. Since this remainder plays no part in the formation of value, we may at present leave it on one side. To introduce it into the calculation would make no difference. For instance, taking our former example, c = £410: suppose this sum to consist of £312 value of raw material, £44 value of auxiliary material, and £54 value of the machinery worn away in the process; and suppose that the total value of the machinery employed is £1,054. Out of this latter sum, then, we reckon as advanced for the purpose of turning out the product, the sum of £54 alone, which the machinery loses by wear and tear in the process; for this is all it parts with to the product. Now if we also reckon the remaining £1,000, which still continues in the machinery, as transferred to the product, we ought also to reckon it as part of the value advanced, and thus make it appear on both sides of our calculation. ¹ We should, in this way, get £1,500 on one side and £1,590 on the other. The difference of these two sums, or the surplus-value, would still be £90. Throughout this Book therefore, by constant capital advanced for the production of value, we always mean, unless the context is repugnant thereto, the value of the means of production actually consumed in the process, and that value alone.

Only consumed value counts

This being so, let us return to the formula C = c + v, which we saw was transformed into C' = (c + v) + s, C becoming C'. We know that the value of the constant capital is transferred to, and merely re-appears in the product. The new value actually created in the process, the value produced, or value-product, is therefore not the same as the value of the product; it is not, as it would at first sight appear (c + v) + s or £410 const. + £90 var. + £90 surpl.; but v + s or £90 var. + £90 surpl., not £590 but £180. If c = 0, or in other words, if there were branches of industry in which the capitalist could dispense with all means of production made by previous labour, whether they be raw material, auxiliary material, or instruments of labour, employing only labour-power and materials supplied by Nature, in that case, there would be no constant capital to transfer to the product. This component of the value of the product, i.e., the £410 in our example, would be eliminated, but the sum of £180, the amount of new value created, or the value produced, which contains £90 of surplus-value, would remain just as great as if c represented the highest value imaginable. We should have C = (0 + v) = v or C' the expanded capital = v + s and therefore C' - C = s as before. On the other hand, if s = 0, or in other words, if the labour-power, whose value is advanced in the form of variable capital, were to produce only its equivalent, we should have C = c + v or C' the value of the product = (c + v) + 0 or C = C'. The capital advanced would, in this case, not have expanded its value.

Value-product, not product-value

From what has gone before, we know that surplus-value is purely the result of a variation in the value of v, of that portion of the capital which is transformed into labour-power; consequently, v + s = v + v', or v plus an increment of v. But the fact that it is v alone that varies, and the conditions of that variation, are obscured by the circumstance that in consequence of the increase in the variable component of the capital, there is also an increase in the sum total of the advanced capital. It was originally £500 and becomes £590. Therefore in order that our investigation may lead to accurate results, we must make abstraction from that portion of the value of the product, in which constant capital alone appears, and consequently must equate the constant capital to zero or make c = 0. This is merely an application of a mathematical rule, employed whenever we operate with constant and variable magnitudes, related to each other by the symbols of addition and subtraction only.

Why set c to zero

A further difficulty is caused by the original form of the variable capital. In our example, C' = £410 const. + £90 var. + £90 surpl.; but £90 is a given and therefore a constant quantity; hence it appears absurd to treat it as variable. But in fact, the term £90 var. is here merely a symbol to show that this value undergoes a process. The portion of the capital invested in the purchase of labour-power is a definite quantity of materialised labour, a constant value like the value of the labour-power purchased. But in the process of production the place of the £90 is taken by the labour-power in action, dead labour is replaced by living labour, something stagnant by something flowing, a constant by a variable. The result is the reproduction of v plus an increment of v. From the point of view then of capitalist production, the whole process appears as the spontaneous variation of the originally constant value, which is transformed into labour-power. Both the process and its result, appear to be owing to this value. If, therefore, such expressions as “£90 variable capital,” or “so much self-expanding value,” appear contradictory, this is only because they bring to the surface a contradiction immanent in capitalist production.

Variable capital as process

At first sight it appears a strange proceeding, to equate the constant capital to zero. Yet it is what we do every day. If, for example, we wish to calculate the amount of England’s profits from the cotton industry, we first of all deduct the sums paid for cotton to the United States, India, Egypt and other countries; in other words, the value of the capital that merely re-appears in the value of the product, is put = 0.

Everyday use of c=0

Of course the ratio of surplus-value not only to that portion of the capital from which it immediately springs, and whose change of value it represents, but also to the sum total of the capital advanced is economically of very great importance. We shall, therefore, in the third book, treat of this ratio exhaustively. In order to enable one portion of a capital to expand its value by being converted into labour-power, it is necessary that another portion be converted into means of production. In order that variable capital may perform its function, constant capital must be advanced in proper proportion, a proportion given by the special technical conditions of each labour-process. The circumstance, however, that retorts and other vessels, are necessary to a chemical process, does not compel the chemist to notice them in the result of his analysis. If we look at the means of production, in their relation to the creation of value, and to the variation in the quantity of value, apart from anything else, they appear simply as the material in which labour-power, the value-creator, incorporates itself. Neither the nature, nor the value of this material is of any importance. The only requisite is that there be a sufficient supply to absorb the labour expended in the process of production. That supply once given, the material may rise or fall in value, or even be, as land and the sea, without any value in itself; but this will have no influence on the creation of value or on the variation in the quantity of value. ²

Necessary means, bracketed value

In the first place then we equate the constant capital to zero. The capital advanced is consequently reduced from c + v to v, and instead of the value of the product (c + v) + s we have now the value produced (v + s). Given the new value produced = £180, which sum consequently represents the whole labour expended during the process, then subtracting from it £90 the value of the variable capital, we have remaining £90, the amount of the surplus-value. This sum of £90 or s expresses the absolute quantity of surplus-value produced. The relative quantity produced, or the increase per cent of the variable capital, is determined, it is plain, by the ratio of the surplus-value to the variable capital, or is expressed by s/v. In our example this ratio is 90/90, which gives an increase of 100%. This relative increase in the value of the variable capital, or the relative magnitude of the surplus-value, I call, “The rate of surplus-value.” ³

The rate named

We have seen that the labourer, during one portion of the labour-process, produces only the value of his labour-power, that is, the value of his means of subsistence. Now since his work forms part of a system, based on the social division of labour, he does not directly produce the actual necessaries which he himself consumes; he produces instead a particular commodity, yarn for example, whose value is equal to the value of those necessaries or of the money with which they can be bought. The portion of his day’s labour devoted to this purpose, will be greater or less, in proportion to the value of the necessaries that he daily requires on an average, or, what amounts to the same thing, in proportion to the labour-time required on an average to produce them. If the value of those necessaries represent on an average the expenditure of six hours’ labour, the workman must on an average work for six hours to produce that value. If instead of working for the capitalist, he worked independently on his own account, he would, other things being equal, still be obliged to labour for the same number of hours, in order to produce the value of his labour-power, and thereby to gain the means of subsistence necessary for his conservation or continued reproduction. But as we have seen, during that portion of his day’s labour in which he produces the value of his labour-power, say three shillings, he produces only an equivalent for the value of his labour-power already advanced ⁴ by the capitalist; the new value created only replaces the variable capital advanced. It is owing to this fact, that the production of the new value of three shillings takes the semblance of a mere reproduction. That portion of the working-day, then, during which this reproduction takes place, I call “necessary” labour time, and the labour expended during that time I call “necessary” labour. ⁵ Necessary, as regards the labourer, because independent of the particular social form of his labour; necessary, as regards capital, and the world of capitalists, because on the continued existence of the labourer depends their existence also.

Necessary labour-time

During the second period of the labour-process, that in which his labour is no longer necessary labour, the workman, it is true, labours, expends labour-power; but his labour, being no longer necessary labour, he creates no value for himself. He creates surplus-value which, for the capitalist, has all the charms of a creation out of nothing. This portion of the working-day, I name surplus labour-time, and to the labour expended during that time, I give the name of surplus-labour. It is every bit as important, for a correct understanding of surplus-value, to conceive it as a mere congelation of surplus labour-time, as nothing but materialised surplus-labour, as it is, for a proper comprehension of value, to conceive it as a mere congelation of so many hours of labour, as nothing but materialised labour. The essential difference between the various economic forms of society, between, for instance, a society based on slave-labour, and one based on wage-labour, lies only in the mode in which this surplus-labour is in each case extracted from the actual producer, the labourer. ⁶

Surplus labour and surplus-value

Since, on the one hand, the values of the variable capital and of the labour-power purchased by that capital are equal, and the value of this labour-power determines the necessary portion of the working-day; and since, on the other hand, the surplus-value is determined by the surplus portion of the working-day, it follows that surplus-value bears the same ratio to variable capital, that surplus-labour does to necessary labour, or in other words, the rate of surplus-value, s/v = (surplus labour)/(necessary labour). Both ratios, s/v and (surplus labour)/(necessary labour), express the same thing in different ways; in the one case by reference to materialised, incorporated labour, in the other by reference to living, fluent labour.

Ratio in value and time

The rate of surplus-value is therefore an exact expression for the degree of exploitation of labour-power by capital, or of the labourer by the capitalist. ⁷

Degree of exploitation

The rate of surplus-value is therefore the exact expression for the degree of exploitation of labour-power by capital, or of the worker by the capitalist.

We assumed in our example, that the value of the product = £410 const. + £90 var. + £90 surpl., and that the capital advanced = £500. Since the surplus-value = £90, and the advanced capital = £500, we should, according to the usual way of reckoning, get as the rate of surplus-value (generally confounded with rate of profits) 18%, a rate so low as possibly to cause a pleasant surprise to Mr. Carey and other harmonisers. But in truth, the rate of surplus-value is not equal to s/C or s/(c+v), but to s/v: thus it is not 90/500 but 90/90 or 100%, which is more than five times the apparent degree of exploitation. Although, in the case we have supposed, we are ignorant of the actual length of the working-day, and of the duration in days or weeks of the labour-process, as also of the number of labourers employed, yet the rate of surplus-value s/v accurately discloses to us, by means of its equivalent expression, surplus-labour/necessary labour the relation between the two parts of the working-day. This relation is here one of equality, the rate being 100%. Hence, it is plain, the labourer, in our example, works one half of the day for himself, the other half for the capitalist.

Profit-rate appearance

The method of calculating the rate of surplus-value is therefore, shortly, as follows. We take the total value of the product and put the constant capital which merely re-appears in it, equal to zero. What remains, is the only value that has, in the process of producing the commodity, been actually created. If the amount of surplus-value be given, we have only to deduct it from this remainder, to find the variable capital. And vice versâ, if the latter be given, and we require to find the surplus-value. If both be given, we have only to perform the concluding operation, viz., to calculate s/v, the ratio of the surplus-value to the variable capital.

The calculation recipe

Though the method is so simple, yet it may not be amiss, by means of a few examples, to exercise the reader in the application of the novel principles underlying it.

Examples to practice method

Simple as the method is, it still seems fitting to exercise the reader, through a few examples, in the unfamiliar way of seeing that lies beneath it.

First we will take the case of a spinning mill containing 10,000 mule spindles, spinning No. 32 yarn from American cotton, and producing 1 lb. of yarn weekly per spindle. We assume the waste to be 6%: under these circumstances 10,600 lbs. of cotton are consumed weekly, of which 600 lbs. go to waste. The price of the cotton in April, 1871, was 7¾d. per lb.; the raw material therefore costs in round numbers £342. The 10,000 spindles, including preparation-machinery, and motive power, cost, we will assume, £1 per spindle, amounting to a total of £10,000. The wear and tear we put at 10%, or £1,000 yearly = £20 weekly. The rent of the building we suppose to be £300 a year, or £6 a week. Coal consumed (for 100 horse-power indicated, at 4 lbs. of coal per horse-power per hour during 60 hours, and inclusive of that consumed in heating the mill), 11 tons a week at 8s. 6d. a ton, amounts to about £4½ a week: gas, £1 a week, oil, &c., £4½ a week. Total cost of the above auxiliary materials, £10 weekly. Therefore the constant portion of the value of the week’s product is £378. Wages amount to £52 a week. The price of the yarn is 12¼d. per. lb. which gives for the value of 10,000 lbs. the sum of £510. The surplus-value is therefore in this case £510 - £430 = £80. We put the constant part of the value of the product = 0, as it plays no part in the creation of value. There remains £132 as the weekly value created, which = £52 var. + £80 surpl. The rate of surplus-value is therefore 80/52 = 153 11/13%. In a working-day of 10 hours with average labour the result is: necessary labour = 3 31/33 hours, and surplus-labour = 6 2/33. ⁸

Manchester spinning calculation

One more example. Jacob gives the following calculation for the year 1815. Owing to the previous adjustment of several items it is very imperfect; nevertheless for our purpose it is sufficient. In it he assumes the price of wheat to be 8s. a quarter, and the average yield per acre to be 22 bushels.

Jacob's farm data

Assuming that the price of the product is the same as its value, we here find the surplus-value distributed under the various heads of profit, interest, rent, &c. We have nothing to do with these in detail; we simply add them together, and the sum is a surplus-value of £3 11s. 0d. The sum of £3 19s. 0d., paid for seed and manure, is constant capital, and we put it equal to zero. There is left the sum of £3 10s. 0d., which is the variable capital advanced: and we see that a new value of £3 10s. 0d + £3 11s. 0d. has been produced in its place. Therefore s/v = £3 11s. 0d. / £3 10s. 0d., giving a rate of surplus-value of more than 100%. The labourer employs more than one half of his working-day in producing the surplus-value, which different persons, under different pretexts, share amongst themselves. ⁹

Farm rate above 100%

§2

Section 2 — Proportional Parts of the Product

Let us now return to the example by which we were shown how the capitalist converts money into capital.

Return to the spinner example

The product of a working-day of 12 hours is 20 lbs. of yarn, having a value of 30s. No less than 8/10ths of this value, or 24s., is due to mere re-appearance in it, of the value of the means of production (20 lbs. of cotton, value 20s., and spindle worn away, 4s.): it is therefore constant capital. The remaining 2/10ths or 6s. is the new value created during the spinning process: of this one half replaces the value of the day’s labour-power, or the variable capital, the remaining half constitutes a surplus-value of 3s. The total value then of the 20 lbs. of yarn is made up as follows:

Total value split

30s. value of yarn = 24s. const. + 3s. var. + 3s. surpl.

The yarn-value equation

Yarn-value of 30 sh. = 24 sh. + 3 sh. + 3 sh.

Since the whole of this value is contained in the 20 lbs. of yarn produced, it follows that the various component parts of this value, can be represented as being contained respectively in corresponding parts of the product.

Representing value-parts in product-parts

Since this total value is represented in the total product, 20 lb of yarn, the different elements of value must also be able to be represented in proportional parts of the product.

If the value of 30s. is contained in 20 lbs. of yarn, then 8/10ths of this value, or the 24s. that form its constant part, is contained in 8/10ths of the product or in 16 lbs. of yarn. Of the latter 13 1/3 lbs. represent the value of the raw material, the 20s. worth of cotton spun, and 2 2/3 lbs. represent the 4s. worth of spindle, &c., worn away in the process.

The sixteen-pound constant part

Hence the whole of the cotton used up in spinning the 20 lbs. of yarn, is represented by 13 1/3 lbs. of yarn. This latter weight of yarn contains, it is true, by weight, no more than 13 1/3 lbs. of cotton, worth 13 1/3 shillings; but the 6 2/3 shillings additional value contained in it, are the equivalent for the cotton consumed in spinning the remaining 6 2/3 lbs. of yarn. The effect is the same as if these 6 2/3 lbs. of yarn contained no cotton at all, and the whole 20 lbs. of cotton were concentrated in the 13 1/3 lbs. of yarn. The latter weight, on the other hand, does not contain an atom either of the value of the auxiliary materials and implements, or of the value newly created in the process.

Cotton-value packed into one part

In the same way, the 2 2/3 lbs. of yarn, in which the 4s., the remainder of the constant capital, is embodied, represents nothing but the value of the auxiliary materials and instruments of labour consumed in producing the 20 lbs. of yarn.

Tools-value in the next part

We have, therefore, arrived at this result: although eight-tenths of the product, or 16 lbs. of yarn, is, in its character of an article of utility, just as much the fabric of the spinner’s labour, as the remainder of the same product, yet when viewed in this connexion, it does not contain, and has not absorbed any labour expended during the process of spinning. It is just as if the cotton had converted itself into yarn, without help; as if the shape it had assumed was mere trickery and deceit: for so soon as our capitalist sells it for 24s., and with the money replaces his means of production, it becomes evident that this 16 lbs. of yarn is nothing more than so much cotton and spindle-waste in disguise.

Constant capital in disguise

On the other hand, the remaining 2/10ths of the product, or 4 lbs of yarn, represent nothing but the new value of 6s., created during the 12 hours’ spinning process. All the value transferred to those 4 lbs, from the raw material and instruments of labour consumed, was, so to say, intercepted in order to be incorporated in the 16 lbs. first spun. In this case, it is as if the spinner had spun 4 lbs. of yarn out of air, or, as if he had spun them with the aid of cotton and spindles, that, being the spontaneous gift of Nature, transferred no value to the product.

New value in four pounds

Of this 4 lbs. of yarn, in which the whole of the value newly created during the process, is condensed, one half represents the equivalent for the value of the labour consumed, or the 3s. variable capital, the other half represents the 3s. surplus-value.

Variable capital and surplus

Since 12 working-hours of the spinner are embodied in 6s., it follows that in yarn of the value of 30s., there must be embodied 60 working-hours. And this quantity of labour-time does in fact exist in the 20 lbs of yarn; for in 8/10ths or 16 lbs there are materialised the 48 hours of labour expended, before the commencement of the spinning process, on the means of production; and in the remaining 2/10ths or 4 lbs there are materialised the 12 hours’ work done during the process itself.

The same split in hours

On a former page we saw that the value of the yarn is equal to the sum of the new value created during the production of that yarn plus the value previously existing in the means of production.

It has now been shown how the various component parts of the value of the product, parts that differ functionally from each other, may be represented by corresponding proportional parts of the product itself.

What the representation showed

To split up in this manner the product into different parts, of which one represents only the labour previously spent on the means of production, or the constant capital, another, only the necessary labour spent during the process of production, or the variable capital, and another and last part, only the surplus-labour expended during the same process, or the surplus-value; to do this, is, as will be seen later on from its application to complicated and hitherto unsolved problems, no less important than it is simple.

Simple split, later use

In the preceding investigation we have treated the total product as the final result, ready for use, of a working-day of 12 hours. We can however follow this total product through all the stages of its production; and in this way we shall arrive at the same result as before, if we represent the partial products, given off at the different stages, as functionally different parts of the final or total product.

Following the product in time

The spinner produces in 12 hours 20 lbs. of yarn, or in 1 hour 1⅔ lbs; consequently he produces in 8 hours 13⅔ lbs., or a partial product equal in value to all the cotton that is spun in a whole day. In like manner the partial product of the next period of 1 hour and 36 minutes, is 2⅔ lbs. of yarn: this represents the value of the instruments of labour that are consumed in 12 hours. In the following hour and 12 minutes, the spinner produces 2 lbs. of yarn worth 3 shillings, a value equal to the whole value he creates in his 6 hours’ necessary labour. Finally, in the last hour and 12 minutes he produces another 2 lbs. of yarn, whose value is equal to the surplus-value, created by his surplus-labour during half a day. This method of calculation serves the English manufacturer for every-day use; it shows, he will say, that in the first 8 hours, or ⅔ of the working-day, he gets back the value of his cotton; and so on for the remaining hours. It is also a perfectly correct method: being in fact the first method given above with this difference, that instead of being applied to space, in which the different parts of the completed product lie side by side, it deals with time, in which those parts are successively produced. But it can also be accompanied by very barbarian notions, more especially in the heads of those who are as much interested, practically, in the process of making value beget value, as they are in misunderstanding that process theoretically. Such people may get the notion into their heads, that our spinner, for example, produces or replaces in the first 8 hours of his working-day the value of the cotton; in the following hour and 36 minutes the value of the instruments of labour worn away; in the next hour and 12 minutes the value of the wages; and that he devotes to the production of surplus-value for the manufacturer, only that well known “last hour.” In this way the poor spinner is made to perform the two-fold miracle not only of producing cotton, spindles, steam-engine, coal, oil, &c., at the same time that he spins with them, but also of turning one working-day into five; for, in the example we are considering, the production of the raw material and instruments of labour demands four working-days of twelve hours each, and their conversion into yarn requires another such day. That the love of lucre induces an easy belief in such miracles, and that sycophant doctrinaires are never wanting to prove them, is vouched for by the following incident of historical celebrity.

Correct formula, barbarous reading

§3–4

Sections 3–4 — Senior’s “Last Hour” · Surplus-Produce

One fine morning, in the year 1836, Nassau W. Senior, who may be called the bel-esprit of English economists, well known, alike for his economic “science,” and for his beautiful style, was summoned from Oxford to Manchester, to learn in the latter place, the Political Economy that he taught in the former. The manufacturers elected him as their champion, not only against the newly passed Factory Act, but against the still more menacing Ten-hours’ agitation. With their usual practical acuteness, they had found out that the learned Professor “wanted a good deal of finishing;” it was this discovery that caused them to write for him. On his side the Professor has embodied the lecture he received from the Manchester manufacturers, in a pamphlet, entitled: “Letters on the Factory Act, as it affects the cotton manufacture.” London, 1837. Here we find, amongst others, the following edifying passage:

Senior enters Manchester

“Under the present law, no mill in which persons under 18 years of age are employed, ... can be worked more than 11½ hours a day, that is, 12 hours for 5 days in the week, and nine on Saturday.

“Now the following analysis (!) will show that in a mill so worked, the whole net profit is derived from the last hour. I will suppose a manufacturer to invest £100,000: — £80,000 in his mill and machinery, and £20,000 in raw material and wages. The annual return of that mill, supposing the capital to be turned once a year, and gross profits to be 15 per cent., ought to be goods worth £115,000.... Of this £115,000, each of the twenty-three half-hours of work produces 5-115ths or one twenty-third. Of these 23-23rds (constituting the whole £115,000) twenty, that is to say £100,000 out of the £115,000, simply replace the capital; — one twenty-third (or £5,000 out of the £115,000) makes up for the deterioration of the mill and machinery. The remaining 2-23rds, that is, the last two of the twenty-three half-hours of every day, produce the net profit of 10 per cent. If, therefore (prices remaining the same), the factory could be kept at work thirteen hours instead of eleven and a half, with an addition of about £2,600 to the circulating capital, the net profit would be more than doubled. On the other hand, if the hours of working were reduced by one hour per day (prices remaining the same), the net profit would be destroyed — if they were reduced by one hour and a half, even the gross profit would be destroyed.”¹⁰

Senior's last-hour analysis

And the Professor calls this an “analysis!” If, giving credence to the out-cries of the manufacturers, he believed that the workmen spend the best part of the day in the production, i.e., the reproduction or replacement of the value of the buildings, machinery, cotton, coal, &c., then his analysis was superfluous. His answer would simply have been: — Gentlemen! if you work your mills for 10 hours instead of 11½, then, other things being equal, the daily consumption of cotton, machinery, &c., will decrease in proportion. You gain just as much as you lose. Your work-people will in future spend one hour and a half less time in reproducing or replacing the capital that has been advanced. — If, on the other hand, he did not believe them without further inquiry, but, as being an expert in such matters, deemed an analysis necessary, then he ought, in a question that is concerned exclusively with the relations of net profit to the length of the working-day, before all things to have asked the manufacturers, to be careful not to lump together machinery, workshops, raw material, and labour, but to be good enough to place the constant capital, invested in buildings, machinery, raw material, &c., on one side of the account, and the capital advanced in wages on the other side. If the Professor then found, that in accordance with the calculation of the manufacturers, the workman reproduced or replaced his wages in 2 half-hours, in that case, he should have continued his analysis thus:

Two ways to answer Senior

According to your figures, the workman in the last hour but one produces his wages, and in the last hour your surplus-value or net profit. Now, since in equal periods he produces equal values, the produce of the last hour but one, must have the same value as that of the last hour. Further, it is only while he labours that he produces any value at all, and the amount of his labour is measured by his labour-time. This you say, amounts to 11½ hours a day. He employs one portion of these 11½ hours, in producing or replacing his wages, and the remaining portion in producing your net profit. Beyond this he does absolutely nothing. But since, on your assumption, his wages, and the surplus-value he yields, are of equal value, it is clear that he produces his wages in 5¾ hours, and your net profit in the other 5¾ hours. Again, since the value of the yarn produced in 2 hours, is equal to the sum of the values of his wages and of your net profit, the measure of the value of this yarn must be 11½ working-hours, of which 5¾ hours measure the value of the yarn produced in the last hour but one, and 5¾, the value of the yarn produced in the last hour. We now come to a ticklish point; therefore, attention! The last working-hour but one is, like the first, an ordinary working-hour, neither more nor less. How then can the spinner produce in one hour, in the shape of yarn, a value that embodies 5¾ hours’ labour? The truth is that he performs no such miracle. The use-value produced by him in one hour, is a definite quantity of yarn. The value of this yarn is measured by 5¾ working-hours, of which 4¾ were, without any assistance from him, previously embodied in the means of production, in the cotton, the machinery, and so on; the remaining one hour alone is added by him. Therefore since his wages are produced in 5¾ hours, and the yarn produced in one hour also contains 5¾ hours’ work, there is no witchcraft in the result, that the value created by his 5¾ hours’ spinning, is equal to the value of the product spun in one hour. You are altogether on the wrong track, if you think that he loses a single moment of his working-day, in reproducing or replacing the values of the cotton, the machinery, and so on. On the contrary, it is because his labour converts the cotton and spindles into yarn, because he spins, that the values of the cotton and spindles go over to the yarn of their own accord. This result is owing to the quality of his labour, not to its quantity. It is true, he will in one hour transfer to the yarn more value, in the shape of cotton, than he will in half an hour; but that is only because in one hour he spins up more cotton than in half an hour. You see then, your assertion, that the workman produces, in the last hour but one, the value of his wages, and in the last hour your net profit, amounts to no more than this, that in the yarn produced by him in 2 working-hours, whether they are the 2 first or the 2 last hours of the working-day, in that yarn, there are incorporated 11½ working-hours, or just a whole day’s work, i.e., two hours of his own work and 9½ hours of other people’s. And my assertion that, in the first 5¾ hours, he produces his wages, and in the last 5¾ hours your net profit, amounts only to this, that you pay him for the former, but not for the latter. In speaking of payment of labour, instead of payment of labour-power, I only talk your own slang. Now, gentlemen, if you compare the working-time you pay for, with that which you do not pay for, you will find that they are to one another, as half a day is to half a day; this gives a rate of 100%, and a very pretty percentage it is. Further, there is not the least doubt, that if you make your “hands” toil for 13 hours, instead of 11½, and, as may be expected from you, treat the work done in that extra one hour and a half, as pure surplus-labour, then the latter will be increased from 5¾ hours’ labour to 7¼ hours’ labour, and the rate of surplus-value from 100% to 126 2/23%. So that you are altogether too sanguine, in expecting that by such an addition of 1½ hours to the working-day, the rate will rise from 100% to 200% and more, in other words that it will be “more than doubled.” On the other hand — man’s heart is a wonderful thing, especially when carried in the purse — you take too pessimist a view, when you fear, that with a reduction of the hours of labour from 11½ to 10, the whole of your net profit will go to the dogs. Not at all. All other conditions remaining the same, the surplus-labour will fall from 5¾ hours to 4¾ hours, a period that still gives a very profitable rate of surplus-value, namely 82 14/23%. But this dreadful “last hour,” about which you have invented more stories than have the millenarians about the day of judgment, is “all bosh.” If it goes, it will cost neither you, your net profit, nor the boys and girls whom you employ, their “purity of mind.” ¹¹

Counter-arithmetic against Senior

Whenever your “last hour” strikes in earnest, think of the Oxford Professor. And now, gentlemen, “farewell, and may we meet again in yonder better world, but not before.”

Senior invented the battle cry of the “last hour” in 1836. ¹² In the London Economist of the 15th April, 1848, the same cry was again raised by James Wilson, an economic mandarin of high standing: this time in opposition to the 10 hours’ bill.

Farewell and later revival

When your "last little hour" really strikes, think of the Professor from Oxford. And now: in a better world I wish for more of your valued company. Addio!...

SECTION 4.

The portion of the product that represents the surplus-value, (one tenth of the 20 lbs., or 2 lbs. of yarn, in the example given in Sec. 2) we call “surplus-produce.” Just as the rate of surplus-value is determined by its relation, not to the sum total of the capital, but to its variable part; in like manner, the relative quantity of surplus-produce is determined by the ratio that this produce bears, not to the remaining part of the total product, but to that part of it in which is incorporated the necessary labour. Since the production of surplus-value is the chief end and aim of capitalist production, it is clear, that the greatness of a man’s or a nation’s wealth should be measured, not by the absolute quantity produced, but by the relative magnitude of the surplus-produce. ¹³

Surplus-produce defined

The part of the product in which surplus-value is represented -- in the earlier example, 1/10 of 20 lbs. of yarn, or 2 lbs. of yarn -- we call surplus-produce.

Capitalist production is built around making surplus-value. So its wealth is measured not by how big the whole product is, but by how large the surplus-produce is compared with the necessary product.

The sum of the necessary labour and the surplus-labour, i.e., of the periods of time during which the workman replaces the value of his labour-power, and produces the surplus-value, this sum constitutes the actual time during which he works, i.e., the working-day.

The working day defined