投资 · 西方古典
弗雷德里克·巴斯夏:经济诡辩·摘录 253
弗雷德里克·巴斯夏《经济诡辩》· Economic Sophisms · 投资
* I do not particularize the parts of the remuneration falling to the lessee, the capitalist, etc., for several reasons:--1st, Because, on looking at the thing more closely, you will see that the remuneration always resolves itself into the reimbursement of advances or the payment of anterior labour. 2dly, Because, under the term labour, I include not only the wages of the workmen, but the legitimate recompense of everything which co-operates in the work of production. 3dly (and above all), Because the production of manufactured products is, like that of raw materials, burdened with auxiliary remunerations other than the mere expense of manual labour; and, moreover, this objection, frivolous in itself, would apply as much to the most delicate processes of manufacture, as to the rudest operations of agriculture.
出处:
https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/44145
定位:Excerpt 253 · 核对日期:2026-10-19 · 核验:短摘录
白话
巴斯夏加注说明:他不细分租金、资本利息等报酬,原因有三:一,细看会发现报酬最终都还原为对预付或先前劳动的补偿;二,他把“劳动”广义化,包括工人工资和所有合作生产者的合理报酬;三,工业品和原料一样,都有超出体力劳动费用的辅助报酬。这个反对意见本身琐碎,且同样适用于最精细的工业流程和最粗放的农业。
上下文
巴斯夏在《经济诡辩》中为简化论证,用脚注解释为何不区分各种报酬形式,强调劳动概念的广义性。
今日一问
当你计算成本时,是否只看到直接工资,而忽略了资本、土地等间接劳动的贡献?
公版作品;原文逐字取自 Project Gutenberg,仅摘录段落并附全书链接。
你的邮箱
只用于发送原典。不发广告,不卖名单。
本文本为公版;底本与原文链接见上。 版权