Skip to main content

Commons Futurity pg. 423-429 subsection (7) and (8)

  Subsection (7) from incorporeal to intangible property and subsection (8) commodity market and debt market

This subsection 7 starts with a good summary of Commons thinking, "the institutional set-up gives us the idea of a going concern acting by means of inducements to participants in their forecasts of working, waiting, and risking, under rules that set limits to their bargaining, managerial, and rationing transactions. "(Commons. pg 423, 1034).  A going concern is looking forward to transacting with other going concerns ( broadly defined). and here we get to a key point for Commons. The going plant, the production function in modern economics terminology, is churning out the goods and services under technical efficiency of the managerial transaction.

The going concern and the going plant are interrelated but also separable in their thinking and operations. This is a point he empathizes many times throughout the book. The going concern deals with scarcity and the changing ratios of assets and liabilities. The going plant is based on ratios of inputs and outputs and efficiency.  He again points to the fact older economists had confused and double meaning of words.  Wealth meant both things owned in a physical sense and things owned in a monetary sense but these are different concepts cost was both a monetary notion and a notion of physical inputs in a production process.

Translating between Macleod and Commons:

Macleod's particular credit was Commons incorporeal property with a specific lapse of time, a particular credit for Commons was a payment and performance required in a specific time period

Macleod's general credit was Commons intangible property with a flow of time and for Commons this was not a credit at all but a avoidance and forbearance or liberties and exposures in the bargaining process

Subsection 8 is about commodity and debt markets. Commons believes that confusion can be eliminated by thinking of price as the cost of legal transfer of rights. This covers both the commodity market and debt market.  Commons believed that earlier economists were confused by the debt market where money itself was bought and sold. Commons argues that in fact stocks are debt owed to shareholders and the other part of the debt market is money market or bonds and similar debt instruments.  

Again, Commons is mostly focusing our attention here on the fact that what is exchanged on markets is property rights and not physical things and this is crucial to understanding capitalism. The other key aspect is that its future income to be derived from the purchase of these legal rights that is the key to capitalism,

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Commons Futurity pg.526-528

Commons Futurity VII. The Margin for Profit pg 526-528  In this section, Commons turns to thinking about a specific aspect of modern banker capitalism addressing the question of profit's role in the economy. He starts with some terminology regarding profit share - the share of national income that goes to profit earners and the profit margin - the dynamic aspect that drives a going concern forward. We then move into another set of terms that are rate of profit and profit yield.  The rate of profit is related to the par value of stock and yield is related to market value of stock or outstanding equity. The social question to Commons is what the role of profit in keeping the overall economy and does society or community pay too much or too little for this service. Economists have long thought about the role of profits in driving the economy up or down.  Commons believes there are profit share theories and profit margin theories as two diction categories in economic thinking...

Commons Futurity pg. 510-526 VI. The Transactional System of Money and Value

VI. The Transactional System of Money and Value  The overall objective of this section is to understand money and its role and relationship to economic value in the institutional economics of John R. Commons. Commons writes that, "It is because Value is a two-dimensional concept (omitting futurity)—with two different causations, the one being the scarcity-value, or price, determined by supply and demand, the other being the greater or smaller output of use-value which will be created in the labor process that follows the transaction. " (Commons, pg. 517, 1934). The point here is again Commons is fighting against what he observes are the limits of other definitions of economic value such as simply individual utility or the classical case of exchange value only.   In this section, Commons make an important move on pages 520 and 521. He states that for a thing to be objective it needs to be independent of any objective will as opposed to other competing definitions. He will ...

Commons commenting on Marx and Proudhoun

Commons provides a short discussion to contrast Karl Marx (communism) and Pierre Joseph Proudhon (anarchism) in Institutional Economics.  His point in writing about these two authors is to continue to flesh out the idea of theory of efficiency versus an economic theory of value. This is section eight in the chapter of efficiency and scarcity pages 366 to 378.  Commons wants us to understand that Ricardo and later Marx led us to a theory of efficiency and not a theory of value.  This is not in itself a negative as a theory of efficiency is important to Commons. However, Commons wants us to understand that a theory of efficiency as espoused by Ricardo and Marx is only half the story of a theory of value.  Marx is the real part of the story in this section with some attention paid to Proudhon. As usual, Commons points out both the advanced and faults in the various thinkers he is addressing. Marx, Commons writes, did improve on Ricardo and others by replacing a subjec...