People's Pilot, Volume 6, Number 15, Rensselaer, Jasper County, 1 October 1896 — SILVER AND WAGES. [ARTICLE]

SILVER AND WAGES.

'Bobbed of AU Flapdoodle, How Would Free Coinage Affect Labor? Will the remonetization of silver help »r hurt labor? That depends on whether it will promote or hinder production. If the remonetization of silver will promote production, it will benefit labor. On the contrary, if it will impede or lessen production, it will injure labor, for in- the final analysis the wages of labor are the share which labor gets of what is produced. If 70,000,000 people produce but $14,000,000,000 worth of products in a year, that would give to each, if evenly divided, S2OO worth and no more, and if some got more others would get less. If, however, the same population produced $21,000,000,000 worth of products, each would have S3OO worth. That is, any people can divide what they produce, and they can divide no more unless one takes from another what he had before. It is clear, then, that the more we produce the more all can have, and as wages in the end are the laborer’s share of what is produced his real wages will increase as production increases. The vital question then is, Will the remonetization of silver, by promoting industrial enterprise, increase production?! There are hardly two sides to thisf question. That the remonetization of silver will increase money supply no one will deny. That the increase of money supply will stop the fall of prices, and if the supply be sufficient #ill raise priqes, no economist will dispute. With stable prices, well directed industrial enterprise is safe; with rising prices, all industries are stimulated. Hume, the historian, said years ago: “We find that in every kingdom into which money begins to flow in greater abundance than formerly everything takes a new face. Labor and industry gain life, the merchant becomes more enterprising, the manufacturer more diligent and skillful, and even the farmer follows his plow with greater alacrity and attention. ” This has often been quoted as not only one of the accepted facts of history, but one of the truths of economic science. Seventy millions of people, with the besteducated brains of any people in the world and with hands skilled to the use of the most intricate machinery, making a greater use of the powers of steam and electricity than any other people, ought to produce at least S3OO per capita per annum. But it is doubtful if we have produced S2OO per capita the last year or in any recent year. Prices have been falling, money v rising, enterprise has been put in constant peril and production greatly retarded. With money supply sufficient to sustain prices and support productive enterprise the production of wealth would undoubtedly be largely increased. There would then be more for all and more for each. Under such conditions would the laborer get a proportionally larger share? Why not? He certainly would, be entitled to it. How would he get it? In two ways. First, by increased earnings. Earnings are wages multiplied by time. If a man gets $3 a day, but works only one day in a week, he earns but $3 a week. If another man gets $1 a day and works three days in a week, he also earns but $3, which would be earned also by one getting but 50 cents a day if he worked six days in the week. If the first two had steady work, without any increase in wages, their earnings would be largely increased. The first effect of a revival of industries would be fuller employment of labor and consequently larger earnings. Second, wages would also increase with increased production. John Bright summarized in a few words the labor question when he said it made all the difference in the world whether two men were after one job or two jobs after one man. As long as large numbers of idle men are hunting places there is little hope of better wages for any one. One is fortunate indeed if he can keep the place he has. Moreover, if prices of the products of labor continue to go down, the wages of labor must go down also. Profits may go first, but wages must yield sooner or later. Combindtions may resist inroads upon wages for a time, but cannot do so long. Larger and larger numbers will be forced into idleness, and idle men are not only dangerous competitors, but while idle they cannot buy what others produce. In order to be abje to buy one must have something to sell—labor or its products. If a man earns but 50 cents a day, he cannot buy what another produces at $2 a day. He can only buy a fourth part of it. It is doubtful if, at present prices of farm products, the entire agricultural classes—7,ooo,ooo families—earn, on the average, more than 50 cents* a day for each laborer. They can, then, Only buy at that rate. That is the chief reason just now why other industries are so prostrated. Farmers get so little for what they produce they cannot buy what others produce. Hence, for a part to get good wages all must be employed.—A. J. Warner.