投资 · 西方古典

大卫·李嘉图:政治经济学及赋税原理·摘录 333

大卫·李嘉图《政治经济学及赋税原理》· On the Principles of Political Economy and Taxation · 投资

Mr. Buchanan appears to have seen the fallacy of Dr. Smith's arguments respecting bounties, and on the last passage which I have quoted, very judiciously remarks: "In asserting that nature has stamped a real value on corn, which cannot be altered by merely altering its money price, Dr. Smith confounds its value in use, with its value in exchange. A bushel of wheat will not feed more people during scarcity than during plenty; but a bushel of wheat will exchange for a greater quantity of luxuries and conveniences when it is scarce, than when it is abundant; and the landed proprietors, who have a surplus of food to dispose of, will therefore, in times of scarcity, be richer men; they will exchange their surplus for a greater value of other enjoyments, than when corn is in greater plenty. It is vain to argue, therefore, that if the bounty occasions a forced exportation of corn, it will not also occasion a real rise of price." The whole of Mr. Buchanan's arguments on this part of the subject of bounties, appear to me to be perfectly clear and satisfactory.

出处: https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/33310
定位:Excerpt 333 · 核对日期:2026-10-19 · 核验:短摘录

白话

布坎南先生看出了斯密关于补贴的论证有漏洞,对我引的末段评论得很到位:斯密说“自然给谷物烙上真实价值,改货币价格改不了它”,这是把使用价值和交换价值混为一谈。一蒲式耳小麦在荒年并不比丰年能多喂人,但荒年能换到更多奢侈品和便利品;有余粮的地主因此在荒年更富,能用余粮换到更多享受。所以,说补贴即使强迫出口也不会真正抬价,是站不住的。布坎南这部分论证,我认为完全清楚、令人满意。

上下文

李嘉图引用布坎南对亚当·斯密谷物补贴论的批评,讨论使用价值与交换价值之别。

今日一问

你能否举一个例子,说明“东西没变多,但能换到更多”如何影响价格?

公版作品;原文逐字取自 Project Gutenberg,仅摘录段落并附全书链接。

本文本为公版;底本与原文链接见上。 版权

← 返回原文库