450 lotka: objective standard of value 



This means that the direct effect of such increase in the rate of 

 doing labor, considered alone and apart from any accompanying 

 or compensating influences (such as the additional wages received 

 or their equivalent in product acquired) would be to decrease the 

 natural rate of increase per head of the species (i.e., the excess of 

 births over deaths) by 0.005. Thus, if before the change in the 

 rate of doing labor, the rate of increase per head of the species 

 had been 0.01, after the change it would be 0.005. 



This result may at first sight appear greatly at variance with 

 observed facts. In construing it, however, and making com- 

 parisons with actual observations, we have to bear in mind a 

 number of points. 



In the first place it has been assumed above that the dollar is a 

 definite and stable unit of value. If this condition is not satisfied 

 (and in practice it is not) then evidently large changes in the 

 average daily wage may take place without necessarily any change 

 at all in the average rate of doing labor, and hence without nec- 

 essarily any change in the natural rate of increase r. In other 

 words, equations (27), (28), (29) apply of course only if a constant 

 and consistent unit of value is employed. 



Furthermore, we have proceeded on the assumption that there 

 is absolutely open competition, no sort of monopoly, in the com- 

 munity under consideration, so that every person either consumes 

 directly the products of his own labor, or receives a "fair" wage, 

 i.e., the exact equivalent of the pains of his labor. The effect of 

 monopolies would in general be to lower wages, since the employer 

 is thereby placed in a position to dictate terms. This implies 



that the estimate of -^ obtained above would be too great (in 



absolute amount — it is of course a negative quantity) . A similar 

 effect would result from the influence of capital, which we have 

 left out of account. 



Again, our assumption above, that e is a small quantity requires 

 a little more careful examination than we have so far given it. 

 This assumption is probably justified for most of the common 

 commodities of life, viewed generally. But if we single out some 

 one commodity, we have no guarantee that it may not, through 



