A Catechism on Political Economy
I surely should have heard about J.B. Say's Catechism on Political Economy, but in fact I don't recall knowing about it. It appears in this newly uploaded and bookmarked volume Letters to Malthus.
So a short sample:
What do you understand by the word Products?
I understand all those things to which men have consented to give a value.
How is value given to a thing?
By giving it utility.
How is the utility of a thing the cause of its having a value?
Because persons are then to be found who are in want of this thing; they desire to have it from those who produce it. These, on their side, will not part from it until they are paid the expenses they have been at in producing it, including their profits, The value of the thing is established by the result of this opposition between the producer and the consumer.
But there are many things of great utility, and no value, as water. Why have they no value?
Because nature gives them gratuitously, and without stint, and we are not obliged to produce them.
In general, it seems to hold up pretty well, given that it appeared first in 1821.
Comments (3)
This is indeed a fantastic work. It is a masterpiece of clarity in exposition, and persuasive as it can be.
Some updated version of this book could be a best-seller today.
J.B. Say is one of the biggest economic geniuses of all time. More innovative, more lucid, and far clearer than Adam Smith -who was also one of the greats, and whom Say and Mises admired.
Published: April 23, 2008 6:55 PM
But water and air do have utility. People would pay to have them were they scarce.
But they are not scarce? Well if all water supplies and the oxygen in the air was divided up and sold then those who owned them would be able to limit access to them and therefore cause scarcity and hence a price to be paid for their consumption.
Thank God the government keeps these essential items as common property/
Published: April 23, 2008 7:14 PM
Owen: "Thank God the government keeps these essential items as common property"
I hope that this was tongue-in-cheek. The government does indeed play a role in preventing more rational use and husbanding of these resources, and it's not a role we should applaud.
Published: April 24, 2008 6:20 AM