From: hal@finney.org
Date: Tue Nov 16 1999 - 15:47:02 MST
Dan Fabulich, <daniel.fabulich@yale.edu>, writes:
> Consider a case where I'm trying to build widgets, and widgets require
> iron to build, along with $1 of labor to make the widget.
>
> Now, you can read this in one or two ways. One way of looking at it is to
> say that the cost to make a widget is the cost of the labor plus the cost
> of the capital. If the iron needed for one widget costs $5, then, the
> cost to make a widget is $6. This is what I'd normally think of if I
> tried to specify a production cost. Note that it DOESN'T depend on the
> demand for widgets, but it STILL depends on the cost of *capital*.
I think what Billy is saying is that the iron (which would normally be
considered raw material, not capital) costs $5 ultimately because that
is the cost of the labor to make that iron. Someone had to mine it,
refine it, etc., and the efforts of all of those people are what produce
the cost of $5 for the iron.
The one correction I would offer is that there is a profit component to
the cost. These widgets are going to be sold, hopefully, for a profit.
Ultimately they are worth more to society than the work which went into
producing them. The resulting profit gets distributed among the people
who created the labor.
Some share of this profit goes to the people who made the iron, and
some I can keep. This is where the market factors come into play.
Those profits which are retained by the iron makers look to me like
costs of production. They reduce my own profits.
If iron is scarce and iron-production is profitable, then iron will be
more expensive and iron makers get to keep more of the profits than me.
If iron is plentiful and there is little profit in its production,
then it will be cheap and I get to keep most of the profits.
In your golden egg example, suppose your goose doesn't lay golden eggs,
but some kind of super-advanced computer chips. Suppose it is a nanotech
goose that you have invented and no one else has this technology.
Now electronics companies want to buy your chips and use them in their
devices, which they can sell for a lot of money. However because of your
monopoly you can retain most of the profits which those companies receive.
To them, the cost of your chips is high, even though the human labor
going into producing them is not very great.
Hal
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Nov 01 2002 - 15:05:47 MST