Read Ebook: The Principles of Economics with Applications to Practical Problems by Fetter Frank A Frank Albert

Font size: 10 px 15 px 20 px 25 px 30 px 35 px

Background color: BlackWhiteGrayLight GrayDark GrayDim Gray

Text color: BlackWhiteGrayLight GrayDark GrayDim Gray

Apply/Save settings

Ebook has 848 lines and 173708 words, and 17 pages

now deserts. Egypt, for a time reduced to a semi-desert condition, has only in the past century been restored to a certain extent by the use of new methods and a return to the old ones. Many of the areas that were the granaries of Rome can now hardly support a sparse, half-starving population. The lands, or at any rate, the elements that gave them value, have been destroyed.

Even in young America may be seen the effect of a failure to keep land in repair. As the new rich lands of the West were opened up, the old lands in the East were allowed to wear out, and many of them were abandoned. On the new lands in turn the same methods were followed, using up the first rich store of fertility with no attempt to keep up the quality of the soil. This may have been the best policy for the time; it would not have been economical to employ Old World methods of intensive husbandry when such rich extensive areas were being opened up. But the process was one destructive of natural resources. As settlement moved westward, great forests fell in ashes, and the soil was robbed of the fertile elements which it had taken centuries for nature to store up.

There is a great difference in the length of life of manufacturing appliances. The building is fairly durable; yet an average depreciation-rate of one and one half per cent. a year must be allowed to offset a reduction in its value of over fifty per cent, in thirty years. Machinery differs greatly in durability; well-made, substantial machinery depreciates about five per cent. yearly. The engines and boilers depreciate more rapidly than the running gear; the loose tools have to be replaced every second to fourth year; while the materials consumed in the industry must be repaired and replaced at every repetition of the process of manufacture. If a factory is to be maintained in its efficiency in accordance with the terms of the renting contract, and is to continue its renting power, everything about it must be from time to time repaired and replaced.

Neglect of repairs may be economical, however, when outer conditions have first reduced the demand for the agent and consequently the rental. When the line of travel changes, it does not pay to keep an old hotel up to the same state of repair as when it had a great patronage. Old factories sometimes may better be allowed to depreciate while the price of repairs is invested in more prosperous industries. In a declining neighborhood the houses fall into decay, the owners seeing that "it would not pay" to keep them up.

The direct effect of this destruction of the supply has been the increase in the value of timber. To the settlers much of the timber was worse than useless; they paid and labored to get rid of it; now the supplies of lumber must be sought on the very margins of our territory: Florida, Maine, northern Michigan and Wisconsin, Washington, and Oregon. The supplies in Washington and Oregon are almost unavailable in the Eastern states on account of the cost of transportation. Professor Marsh, thirty years ago, strikingly characterized the policy that has been pursued: "We are breaking up the foundation timbers and the wainscoting of the house in which we live in order to boil our mess of pottage."

The indirect effects of these changes are fully as great as the direct ones. Forests greatly affect climate, temperature, and soil; they influence the humidity. They equalize the flow of streams, moderate floods, and by preventing the washing down of the rich soil, keep the mountain sides from becoming bare and sterile rocks. So, within the last two decades, the people in America have begun to think of forestry. Its purpose is to restore the forests to the condition of permanent rent-earners, to make the mountains yield not a temporary supply, but a perpetual crop of timber.

INCREASE OF RENT-BEARERS AND OF RENTS

The increase of the efficiency of agents is usually the aim of the individual producer, and thus is brought about an increase of the stock of wealth. In some cases, however, improvements such as the dredging of harbors or as the protecting of forests, are made by men collectively through the agency of governments. Somewhere, however, the desire for these changes must arise in the minds of individuals. Increase of most things involves "cost" or sacrifice, in the psychological sense; that is, man must strive, perhaps suffer, to get a certain result. This end, therefore, must be in itself desirable, and social organization must be such as to present a motive to the men to make the needed effort.

Increase in machinery may be either in quality or quantity. The two causes have in most cases the same result. If the quality or efficiency of looms is doubled, it is as if their number had grown in like proportion. In its economic function the beast of burden may not illogically be classed with inanimate machines. The horses in America have been remarkably improved of recent years by the importation of thoroughbred stock from Europe. Ten or fifteen years ago the number of horses in the United States was found to have decreased, and there was much comment on this evidence of a declining industry. It was not at once recognized that there was embodied in horse-flesh more horse-power than ever before, as a single Norman horse has the strength of several Mexican mustangs. Numbers alone are not the measure of efficiency.

As the number of agents increases they are distributed so as to be where most useful to the owner. A man having two umbrellas keeps one at his office and the other at home; a student having two books of the same kind keeps one at his room and the other at the university; a farmer having two hoes keeps one at the barn and the other in a distant field, and by this distribution the agents are increased in efficiency.

The aim of a progressive society is to enlarge the environment, and constantly to adapt it better to the service of wants. This is done largely by mechanical agents, which capture the natural forces of the world, put them into the right place at the right time, and make them do the right thing, or which group and relate the materials of the world in the right ways. Some of the groupings in the chemical and physical world that do not fit man's purposes may be made to do so. The world in this way becomes more and more a great workshop, better and better adjusted to man's wants.

Social changes are constantly causing agents to shift from lower to higher uses. As population grows and groups about new industries, farm land is used for residence lots, and in turn for business purposes. Rents therefore rise, and this rise is reflected in the higher selling value of the land. If a new demand arises for the product of any machine, its rent rises, although it may continue to turn out the same product as measured by number or quantity. For, if consumers increase, a given supply of agents becomes relatively smaller than before.

A rise in the value of any agent at once causes an attempt to duplicate it or to find a substitute for it; this attempt, if successful, puts a check or sets a limit to the rise. In this search for new devices the man who can see most quickly and clearly has a key to wealth. Some kinds of agents, as rare minerals or tools that can be produced only by highly skilled labor, cannot be increased rapidly in number and remain high in price for a long period; and favorably located building sites illustrate the same principle. In some cases, it is true, the demand may be due to some temporary cause, as in a period of unsound land speculation, but usually the growing value of location is due to a steady and abiding change in population or business.

In most cases, however, social changes are impersonally caused. The individual owner who profits by them is powerless to affect the result. He can only adapt his conduct in some measure so as to reap an advantage. He can strive to increase the number and quality and to get control of such agents as he foresees will yield higher rents. In making such a forecast there is chance of loss as well as of gain. The term "unearned increment" has been frequently used in recent years. It is often assumed to be a peculiar thing, sharply in contrast to other changes in value. The foregoing hasty review may serve to suggest how manifold and complex are the instances of it, and what an important part it plays in modern industry.

DIVISION C--CAPITALIZATION AND TIME-VALUE

MONEY AS A TOOL IN EXCHANGE

In considering the problem of exchange of consumption goods, we have assumed that it is possible to weigh small differences in the marginal utility of goods, and that such differences have influence on exchange. Now in exchange by barter such a small estimate is impossible. In barter things are exchanged directly for each other in kind. If the two things do not chance to coincide in value, the exchange cannot be completed. An equivalent must be found, or a multiple, if the marginal utility of two goods is to be equalized for either party by exchange. As in most cases this adjustment must be very incomplete, many exchanges that otherwise would be advantageous cannot take place. In the earlier stages of development, this careful estimate of value is not found. Children do not make it. The typical trade of the small boy is a "trade even"; Johnny exchanges his gingerbread for Jimmie's jack-knife. It marks an epoch in the industrial development of the boy when he begins to keep store with pins, and no longer trades candy for apples, but both for pins, which have become the medium of exchange in his boy world. He then can express values in much more exact terms. In our society most children begin early to grow familiar with this conception; but travelers find some savage tribes still in the earlier childish stage of development, unable to grasp the thought of a general medium of exchange. When, through lack of a medium of exchange, there is a failure to adjust utilities, there is a loss of the possible advantage in each defeated exchange. There is a further waste of time and of vain efforts to find something that will be accepted in exchange, and the loss offsets a large part of the gain even when the barter is effected.

The value of the money material may fall so greatly as a result of greater production, as in the case of iron, tin, copper, that it becomes unsuitable. Again, as wealth grows, as exchanges increase, as the use of money develops, as commerce extends to more distant lands, the heavier, less precious metals fail to serve the money need, especially in the larger transactions. Thus, in a sense, different commodities compete, each trying to prove its fitness to be a medium of exchange; but only one, or two, or three at the most, can at one time hold such a place. Silver and gold, step by step, often making little progress in a century, have displaced other commodities, and are the staple and dominant forms of money in the world to-day. Every community has witnessed some stage of this evolution. Now nations are divided into two great groups, silver- and gold-using, in accordance with the metals they use as standards. The gold-using countries are the most advanced industrially, requiring the most valuable money metal. Many countries have passed in the last century from the silver to the gold standard, and in an intermediate period have tried to use both standards. The Asiatic and South American countries mainly use silver, while most of those in North America and Europe use gold.

While industrial changes thus affect the choice of money, in turn money reacts upon the other industrial conditions. If a new and more convenient material is found, or the value of the money metal changes to a degree that affects the generalness of its use, industry is greatly affected. The discovery of mines in America brought into Europe, in the sixteenth century, a great supply of the precious metals, and this change in the use of money reacted powerfully on industry. Money being itself one of the most important of the industrial conditions, is affected by and in turn affects all others.

A poor community has little money because it cannot afford more; it gets along with less money than is convenient just as it gets along with fewer indirect agents of every other kind than it could use. Pioneers in a poor community where the average wealth is low, cannot afford to keep a large number of wagons, plows, good roads, or school-houses. If the community were wealthy enough it would have more of these and of other things, and great as is the convenience of money, poorer communities have to do with little of it. It is, therefore, a confusion of cause and effect for poor communities to imagine that their poverty is due to lack of money.

The use of money as a storehouse of saving was more common formerly than it is now, when better ways than the hoarding of money are found for "laying up for a rainy day." In some measure, however, money is hourly serving this use, which is still an important one. Money kept to be used to-morrow or five years hence is a storehouse of value for twenty-four hours or for five years. In either case it is being kept to complete at a later time its use as a medium of exchange. A thing ceases to be money, logically viewed, the moment its owner keeps it without the purpose that it shall be spent ultimately. The typical miser is a man who has lost his reason as regards the money use. Money must be deemed, therefore, to perform the same essential service as a storehouse of saving that it does as a medium of exchange. In either case it is to be kept only to the moment when it will afford the maximum of pleasure.

THE MONEY ECONOMY AND THE CONCEPT OF CAPITAL

There is greater use of money in the cities of the outlying countries than in the rural districts. In the cities of Mexico banks and credit agencies are employed as in the American cities. The rural districts are more backward and make far less use of money than is the case in the United States. The great ports of China are provided with all the facilities of modern banking. In the great cities of India one can get a bank draft that will be paid in any part of the world. But go a very little way out of the cities of China and India, and conditions greatly change; money is far less used and principally as a storehouse of saving.

The condition of the serf appears to have been, under these circumstances, inevitably connected with the "barter economy" as applied to the renting of land. A farm cannot be moved, and in medieval conditions its products mainly had to be used on the spot. If the serf was to use and enjoy the land, he had to stay upon it. Having no money he had to pay in labor or in products, for its usufruct. In those times the powerful man, politically, was also a wealthy man whose wealth consisted of landed estates. Between the landlord and the serf existed a lasting relation, inherited rather than voluntary, but similar in its conditions to the renting contract. The villein had the use of the stock, pastures, fields, woodlands, provided he kept them undiminished and undestroyed to transmit to his children. Under such conditions there was great fixity of economic relations. While in some respects this was a happy condition, it had its disadvantages. The renting contract, in connection with a fixed rotation of crops and some communal modes of cultivation, hindered improvements. The more intelligent cultivator could not change his methods for the better. It may be seen not only that the use of money on a medieval manor was slight, but that the conditions for the growth of the money habit were most unfavorable. The terms of agricultural contracts, the modes of speech, the habits and thought of the mass of the people, were therefore determined by the conditions of the barter economy. A change in these respects was slowly worked by forces originating outside, in a very different industrial environment.

The use of money grew up in the city. The density of population made it easy, the growth of wealth made it possible, and the nature of the exchanges made it necessary. Whereas the relation of landlord and serf under the renting contract continues from year to year, the relation of the buyer and seller of shoes, hats, etc., in the city, is temporary, these things forming only a part of man's economic needs. Barter with a particular individual is much more inconvenient if exchange is only occasional than where the contract is a continuing one, and there is an annual balancing and settlement of accounts. So, as city industry and commerce grew the use of money increased, both in small neighborhood trade and in the larger transactions with distant countries; and thus the business methods of the cities grew into sharper contrast with those of the rural districts.

Indeed, for centuries the sharper features of the contrast have been steadily softened. The money economy of the city gradually spread to the rural districts, but never entirely displaced barter, which lingers everywhere. Important steps toward a money economy were the commuting of forced or customary labor of the serfs into a money payment to the lord, and at the same time the substitution of money payments for payments in kind to the peasants. Thus arose a free peasant class receiving wages. But land continued to be rented and landed estates to be hereditary throughout Europe. As they did not pass from hand to hand as a commercial or marketable form of wealth, their value was rarely, if ever, expressed in terms of money and as a ratio to the rent they bore. The result was the fixing of the erroneous idea that agricultural wealth is essentially different in the character of its service and yield from wealth used in manufactures. One phase of the error was the idea held by the physiocratic writers and by Adam Smith that in agriculture "nature labors along with man," while in manufacture "nature does nothing, man does all." This view was corrected by later critics , but the main portion of the fallacy persisted in the supposed contrast between the characters of the services performed by natural resources and by artificially produced wealth.

Interest on money is the contractual form in which more and more the use of wealth is paid for. The borrower does not ask the wealthy man to buy for him a factory and to rent it to him. It is not impossible for the transaction to take that form; but in practice it is inconvenient. The capital concept, the expression of wealth in the form of money, spreads over almost the whole face of the economic world. In promissory notes, mortgages, capital stock, bonds, and many other forms, are expressed the obligations of borrowers bound to pay regularly a sum called interest for the use of the multifarious wealth they have chosen to employ.

It has been seen above that there is no reason for keeping things unless they will increase in value, that is, unless a rental is logically attributable to them. Everything kept for a day, a month, a year, is kept because thus it will continually give off uses or by accumulating them it will become more useful. Hence, when interest is defined as the payment for the use of capital, it is connected with all wealth that is expressed in the capital form. In practical business and in theoretical discussion this is the idea of capital that alone can be consistently followed. Capital is the value equivalent of a sum of money "invested," "clothed" in forms of wealth purchased and exchanged. Wealth has become fluid in modern times; it was crystallized in medieval times. Under the new conditions, wealth, expressed in the mobile form of capital, flows into the most distant corners of the industrial world.

The caution contained in this proposition may appear to some to be superfluous, but it is most needed. The mind is so prone to identify things that are expressed currently by the same words. The ease with which money and capital are thus confused has led to various popular fallacies on practical economic questions.

As here presented, the essence of the capital concept is in the mode or form of expression of wealth, not in the physical nature, the origin of its value, or any peculiarity in the kind of wealth; the content of the concept is limited only by man's thought of wealth, every good becoming capital when it is capitalized, that is, when the totality of its uses is expressed as a present sum of values. The difference between the wealth concept and the capital concept is therefore subjective, not objective; it is a difference in the mode of man's thought regarding wealth. The rent contract and the interest contract are modes of borrowing and lending which reflect this difference of conception. In their effort to express more exactly to themselves and to others the relative felt importance of their environment, men take in turn different points of view, and use different modes of expression. The most developed and exact of these devices for the social expression of valuations, which became possible only with a money economy and widened markets, is the capital concept, whose nature has been analyzed here.

Summarizing the thought of this chapter, it may be said that the capital concept has gradually developed with industry, and is now the most widely prevailing mode of expressing the quantity of wealth. It is used in the discussion of all the most important problems of modern industry. The questions of income from wealth, of trusts and corporations, nearly all that is most notable in the development of modern industry, require the use of the capital concept. Yet in many of the outlying districts other modes of looking upon wealth are employed. References to modern industry must be understood usually as applying to the most developed capitalistic conditions.

THE CAPITALIZATION OF ALL FORMS OF RENT

The practice was allowed by the church, though interest and the lending of money were forbidden. The loan was substantially a loan of capital and the rent-charge was substantially interest, but in the eyes of the church moralists there was a marked difference, in that the obligation to the purchaser of the rent-charge was secured by a permanent and substantial form of wealth, and the contract usually was favorable to the borrowers. In its origin the practice was not merely an evasion of the law against usury, but a convenient form of contract. It doubtless came, however, to be used as a means of evading the law of the church against usury, and thus became an entering wedge for the general use of money loans.

This attains the thought of the present value of the estate, or capital sum in it, though the capital sum is thought of as a multiple of the income, instead of the income being calculated as a percentage of the capital value. Now at the rate of "ten years' purchase" an investment of money in land affords an annual interest of ten per cent., as each year the rental is one tenth of the original investment; twelve years' purchase yields eight and one third per cent., twenty years' purchase, five per cent., and twenty-five years' purchase, four per cent. Increase in the number of years' purchase corresponds to a decrease in the rate of interest which the original investment of money, the capital sum, is expected to yield. This is equally true whether the investment be in the legal form of a purchase of the fee-simple of land, or in that of the purchase of a rent-charge. We are brought to this conclusion: that the present value of the rents in perpetuity, of any given wealth, is the capital value of the wealth; and that the reciprocal of the number of years' purchase is the rate of interest that an investment is expected to yield.

The purchase of rent-charges was long looked upon as a very different thing from the loan of money, but to modern eyes it is not, and the old distinctions between the moralities of the two kinds of income appear now mainly quibbles, justified in a slight degree by certain social facts of the time. The rise of industry led to different ideas on the lending of money; the prejudice against it weakened in large classes of the population, especially in Protestant countries, and its use rapidly spread. Not until 1830 did a decision of Rome remove all disapproval on the part of the church. Rent-charges are instructive now as showing the mode in which rents began to be capitalized in earlier centuries.

But the approach from the side of income has been shown to be in some important cases the historical origin of the rate of interest, and we need but reconsider reasoning that has gone before to see that this is the logical order in all cases. Rent, or income, is a link in the chain of value, connecting gratification or psychic income, consumption goods, rent or usufruct value, and finally capital value. To one keeping in mind the logical cause of value, it becomes inconceivable that capital value could precede income, a view possible only when a fragment of the problem is seen. This being true, the mere mention of a capital sum implies the interest problem, and assumes the interest rate. The capital is of that amount because the anticipated incomes, discounted at some rate, equal that sum. The capital sum is a certain number of years' purchase of the series of rents which can be secured by the use of wealth in various industries. The owner of a number of dollars has open to him various investments. The value of any wealth is due to the possibility of deriving incomes from it. If, however, the expected income fails to be realized, the capital loses its value, or it is revalued on the basis of the new rents. The investment is then said to be a losing one. Thus, at each stage in the valuation of capital, before it is invested and at every moment thereafter when the valuation is readjusted to the rents realized or expected, rents are logically primary, the source from which the capital sum is derived.

But social changes alter rental values, and so far as these changes are foreseen, these anticipated or expected rents are made the basis for present capitalization. Investors and owners alike may foresee that a piece of land used only for agriculture will, within a few years, be taken up for city lots, or will be needed for a factory or as the site of a railroad station. The capitalized value would not in this case be based upon a series of uniform rents each of the amount yielded annually now, but on the progressive series expected. In some cases the physical output of an agent may decline while the price of the product increases. Modern foresters foresee that the selling price of the timber will be greater twenty-five years from now than it is to-day, and they therefore estimate the rental value of the forest on the basis of the future price, thus justifying expenditure that would be unwise if present prices were to continue.

Again the expected series of incomes may be declining, as the royalties secured from mines. If the income is expected steadily to fall, and to disappear at the end of the twenty-fifth year, the value of the mine would be the capitalized sum of a limited and degressive series of incomes.

Every exchange of a durable agent involves an estimate, rough and imperfect it may be, of that agent's future. The practical men, however, who are thus fixing the "capital value" of goods, are usually only dimly conscious of the logical nature of the process. In fact the process goes on in a way much less analytical and conscious, much more empirical, than this analysis would indicate. Most men simply buy as cheap as they can the agents which at the price they believe will add most to their income. The future changes are only roughly, not accurately estimated. The shrewd bargainer is the one who foresees more clearly than his fellows the complex changes to come. Other men blindly follow. The ability and the inability to foresee such changes make men rich and poor. In all this bidding for capital the logical basis of the value is the series of rents. When the agent is bought outright, the very concluding of the bargain fixes a relation between the expected value of the income and the value of the capital invested. In other words, the exchange of durable agents virtually wraps up in them a net income, which it is expected will unfold year by year when rents mature and are secured. At the moment of the investment, the expected rents are expressed as a percentage of the capital sum.

Notable cases of this sort arise in connection with public franchises. If a street-railway or a gas-company is given the exclusive right to operate in a given locality, any income above average interest on the investment is capitalized either in the higher price of the stock or in additional stock issued without the addition of any material to the plant. If the franchise is unlimited, the income may be capitalized as practically perpetual; if the franchise is limited, and is to expire in thirty or forty years, only the limited series of privileged incomes can ordinarily be capitalized. When, however, the managers are able to exert influence enough to have the franchise extended, and the investors believe in the skill of the managers and perhaps in their power to bribe the legislators, the value of the stock continues higher than it could usually be under a limited franchise. Such circumstances becloud the question whether the exceptional income arising under the franchise should go to the public or to the company. Granted, however, that the company is entitled to the income, the burden of proof is on those who object to the capitalizing of the income as is done in every other business.

In this way it may be seen that an earning power not known to bidders in the market does not enter into capitalization; a fictitious earning power, however, is capitalized so long as the investors continue to be deceived. Instances of this kind present problems not only of private morality, but of the preservation of free industrial institutions. The solution of these problems would perhaps be hastened if the a economic nature of capitalization were more clearly understood. Capital value in modern industry is everywhere the expression of the serial rents of wealth, discounted at a prevailing rate of time discount.

INTEREST ON MONEY LOANS

The last three cases involve interest more or less clearly. Time-discount, as will be more fully explained, is the basis of interest. The interest may be greater or less than the time-discount in the goods, owing to miscalculation on the part of the borrower or to an unforeseen change in the conditions. Men bid for the use of wealth with the intention of repaying it at some future time, and the interest they agree to pay is based on their estimate of the discount of future rents, which they think is involved in the present valuations of the goods. Time-discount is involved in goods, however, in numberless cases where there is no contract interest. Even a Robinson Crusoe must recognize in his consumption goods and in his various indirect agents differences in value at different periods of time, of which he must take account.

The lender must also, in estimating net interest, count the cost of placing, supervising, and collecting the loan. A pawnbroker lends only small sums and spends much time and effort to keep at interest a moderate capital. Five thousand dollars loaned in sums averaging ten dollars represents five hundred transactions, and yet if placed at five per cent, it yields but two hundred and fifty dollars a year. While, therefore, the borrower of a small sum estimates the economic interest even higher than the oppressively high contract-interest he may be forced to pay, the lender must credit a large part of the gross interest to the labor he expends in carrying on the business.

The contract in the case of each kind of these loans provides for a fixed term after which the borrower must repay or renew, and for a fixed rate on the nominal or par value of the loan. Nearly all the securities are salable at a market rate. It is therefore the income that is fixed, the selling price fluctuating above or below the nominal sum except just at the moment when it is payable. The long-time loan thus is very similar in its economic character to the old-time rent-charge.

Sometimes this higher estimate of the present good is unwise, viewed in the light of wider experience. Goods that meet momentary desire make an exaggerated appeal to untrained minds. The child, the spendthrift, the savage, cannot properly estimate the relative values of present and future. The improvident sometimes lightly agree to pay an exorbitant interest for an immediate consumption loan, making a ruinous difference between present and future gratifications.

But how is it in case the agent is used to gratify persons other than the owner? The music-teacher who buys a piano on credit expects to increase his earnings by a sum greater than the interest he has to pay. If the addition to his earnings exceeds the interest charge, it is because he has found a use for the borrowed capital greater than that on the basis of which it was capitalized in the market. The amount of the interest is secured through the pleasures and services the piano affords to the patrons of the teacher. In the most complex cases of the borrowing and use of indirect agents, there is ultimately this same basis for the interest: enjoyment afforded by the use of capital in the particular period. To the borrower, what the capital makes possible is an addition to his income as great as, or greater than, the prevailing interest. Most loans in our society are now of this sort. Money is borrowed to invest in business, to get better machinery or a larger stock; with this capital is secured a better or larger product, and the product finally being sold at a profit, the business man is at a point where he can satisfy his wants without encroaching on his capital. Logically, therefore, the consumer of the product pays the interest in the price, and the final consumer's enjoyment must be deemed the logical source of the money interest. The borrower's motive for paying interest on these indirect goods evidently is his hope of profit through realizing a greater money rent than he has contracted to pay for their use.

Evidently the price of these goods, to control which is the real object of the loan, is merely the sum of the expected rents they will yield, capitalized at the prevailing rate of time-discount. The borrower expects either to make these particular goods earn rents larger than those on the basis of which they have been capitalized, or to transfer them to an economy where goods are capitalized at a higher rate than he is paying. The income yielded by these goods, if the borrower's expectation is fulfilled, is but the difference between present and future rents that has been wrapped up in their capitalization. As time elapses and the rents emerge in wisely chosen investments, the borrower has a surplus large enough to pay the contract interest. It appears, therefore, that the motive of the borrower is to get control of future rents at prices that already involve, in their capitalization, a rate of discount somewhat greater than the interest he contracts to pay.

THE THEORY OF TIME-VALUE

All the other cases of time-value can, by the practical device of substituting other goods of equivalent value, be reduced to the typical case of comparison of the same thing at different times. The comparison may be between very similar things, the one consumed being replaced by a duplicate. An apple borrowed now may be returned next year in the form of one of the same size and quality. The essential thing in this comparison is not physical identity, but equivalence in size, sort, and quality at the two periods. This is borrowing under the renting contract.

But two or more quite different things may be expressed in terms of another thing and so be made comparable. Money becomes the value-unit through which different things may be reduced to the same terms for comparison. With this mode of expressing the value-equivalence of various goods, the interest contract first becomes possible, money being the thing exchanged at two periods of time. What is really compared are various gratifications which may be produced by very different material things or services. In its last analysis comparison of values at different periods of time must be a comparison of psychic incomes, of two sums of gratification. The comparison of the value of a bushel of apples with that of a barrel of potatoes or a suit of clothes at the same moment appears simple enough. When all are expressed in terms of money, the comparison of each with its value-equivalent at a later date becomes easy. The simplicity and obviousness of time-value in the case of money loans at interest led men at first to recognize that phase of the problem exclusively, and later the term "interest," not without much confusion of thought, was given a wider significance. Let us now see how large a part of the whole problem of time-value is outside of the money loan.

Share on: WhatsApp @Hash Facebook Tweet