- 花と高橋是清
new s…
- ケインズの『一般理論』を訳す１４６
now some part of these involuntary losses, whilst they are unavoidable, are ― broadly speaking ― not unexpected; such as losses through the lapse of time irrespective of use, and also normal obsolescence which, as professor pigou expresses it, is sufficiently regular to be foreseen, if not in detail, at least in the large , including, we may add, those losses to the community as a whole which are sufficiently regular to be commonly regarded as insurable risks . let us ignore for the moment the fact that the amount of the expected loss depends on when the expectation is assumed to be framed, and let us call the depreciation of the equipment, which is involuntary but not unexpected, i.e. the excess of the expected depreciation over the user cost, the supplementary cost, which will be written v. it is, perhaps, hardly necessary to point out that this definition is not the same as marshall's definition of supplementary cost, though the underlying idea, namely, of dealing with that part of the expected depreciation which does not enter into prime cost, is similar.
- ケインズ『一般理論』を訳す２８
on the other hand it would be impracticable to resist every reduction of real wages, due to a change in the purchasing- power of money which affects all workers alike; and in fact reductions of real wages arising in this way are not, as a rule, resisted unless they proceed to an extreme degree. moreover, a resistance to reductions in money-wages applying to particular industries does not raise the same insuperable bar to an increase in aggregate employment, which would result from a similar resistance to every reduction in real wages.
- ケインズ『一般理論』を訳す１７
now ordinary experience tells us, beyond doubt, that a situation where labour stipulates (within limits) for a money-wage rather than a real wage, so far from being a mere possibility, is the normal case. whilst workers will usually resist a reduction of money-wages, it is not their practice to withdraw their labour whenever there is a rise in the price of wage-goods. it is sometimes said that it would be illogical for labour to resist a reduction of money-wages but not to resist a reduction of real wages. for reasons given below (section iii), this might not be so illogical as it appears at first; and, as we shall see later, fortunately so. but, whether logical or illogical, experience shows that this is how labour in fact behaves.
|
