Skip to main content

Commons Futurity pg. 472-483

 Here we start with section III, the creation of debt. The focus of Commons turns to Ralph Hawtrey’s thinking in 1919 and understanding the relationship between debts and commodities. Hawtrey was a British civil servant and monetary theorist who lived from 1879-1975.


Hawtrtey wrote that money like all creations of human beings serves as a purpose, which may change over time but is artificial and not natural phenomena.  For Hawtrey as with Commons, the purpose of money is not as a store of value but rather as a measure of debt release in an unequal transaction. Critically, a debt is a portion of wealth that is owed to another in exchange for a promise or obligation.  Money is simply the measure we use to account for a transfer of wealth from one person to another to release the debt. Common writes that for Hawtrey, the economy is a system to produce and deliver wealth to another in the exchange process. This is a very different starting point from the individual liberty of Locke and classical economists.


Hawtrey has combined credit and production theories of the economy whereas the classical economists had separate theories for these parts of the economy.   In essence, production creates a debt from one to another who must repay for that service via wealth delivery. The debt and credit are created at the same time which is not true in the classical economic system. Hawtrey’s system of debt creation can be linked to Knapps idea of a releasable and unreleased debt.  Over time, changes in society occur as to what can be thought of releasable and unreleasable debt. Commons notes in a subsequent paragraph that in fact Hawtreys ideas developed in the abstract that any society must create a system of money accounts to release debt in fact coincides with the findings of anthropologists about societies across the world.


Another question arises as to how this money account will be stabilized over time to ensure that transactions can occur in stability and security between community members. In earlier societies, custom was the process by which that money account system was stabilized.  In modern times, the banker system is what stabilizes that money system of account. So, at this time we see that Hawtrey has corrected or advanced on the work of both Knapp and Macleod.


Commons then summarizes the development up to this point as he moves towards his conception of futurity.  Macleod expanded our understanding by writing about the fact that exchange is the core of economics and that both corporeal and incorporeal property can be transferred in an exchange or transaction. Knapp moved beyond Macleod noting that there was a pay community whereby adept could be transferred along with a commodity in a market.  Hawtrey moved eve further by noting that in fact commodity and debt markets were all a part of one system and untied by the concept of price where placed a value of the transactions. Commons writes that, “Thus a debt instead of a commodity becomes the subject-matter of a science that would unite in one functional relation of mutual dependence the production of wealth, the relative scarcities of wealth and of money, and the laws of property. “ This is key statement that ends this section. 


Next we move on to IV. Scarcity of Debt leading us both backwards to Hume and Turgot and forwards to Cassel, Wicksell, Mises, Hayek, Keynes, and Fisher - and we see some names that we recognize.


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...