Jump to content

Wealth: Difference between revisions

From The Austrian Economics Wiki, the global repository of classical-liberal thought
← Older editNewer edit →
rm ()
clarify
Line 1: Line 1:
'''Wealth''' is a concept generally agreed to be the [[abundance]] of [[Value (economics)|valuable]] [[resource]]s or material [[Property|possession]]s, or the control of such assets. While "wealth" is considered to be an ambiguous and nebulous term, it is a concept that nonetheless has an important place in [[economics]].
'''Wealth''' is a concept generally agreed to be the [[abundance]] of [[Value (economics)|valuable]] [[resource]]s or material [[Property|possession]]s, or the control of such assets. While "wealth" is considered to be an ambiguous and nebulous term, it is a concept that nonetheless has an important place in [[economics]].


More specifically wealth can be defined as a claim on, or command of, resources ([[commodity|commodities]], [[capital equipment]], time, [[physical labor]], et cetera) that have the potential to make the individual's existence easier, more comfortable or more enjoyable (i.e. "better") than it would be in the absence of such things.
More specifically wealth can be defined as a claim on, or command of, resources ([[commodity|commodities]], [[capital equipment]], time, [[physical labor]], et cetera) that have the potential to make the individual's existence easier, more comfortable or more enjoyable (i.e. "better") than it would be in the absence of such things. Because [[Subjective theory of value|value is subjective]], wealth cannot be measured [[Cardinal utility|cardinally]], but it is possible to measure [[Ordinal utility|ordinally]].<ref>{{Citation  | last = Rothbard
  | first = Murray N.  | author-link = Murray Rothbard  | title = Toward a Reconstruction of Utility and Welfare Economics  | journal = [[The Logic of Action]]  | volume = 1  | pages =  | date = 1997  | origyear =  | year = 1997  | url = http://mises.org/resources/290  | doi =  | id =  | mr =  | zbl =  | jfm = }}</ref>


More concisely, wealth is the ability to fulfill human desire. This means that all steps in production, including the transportation and advertising of products, can generate wealth, because they move the product steps closer toward fulfilling human desire. Raw materials start out as [[land]], a good of the ''n''th order; and as soon as any productive labor is performed upon them, become  [[capital]]; the value of ''n'' diminishing as the resource progresses through each stage of the production process, until finally the [[producer's good]] has been completely transformed into a good of the first order ([[consumer's good]]) ready for immediate consumption.<ref>{{cite book|url=http://mises.org/rothbard/mes/chap1a.asp|title=Man, Economy and State|chapter=Further Implications: The Means|author=Rothbard, Murray}}</ref> The wealth represented by that material increases throughout this process.
More concisely, wealth is the ability to fulfill human desire. This means that all steps in production, including the transportation and advertising of products, can generate wealth, because they move the product steps closer toward fulfilling human desire. Raw materials start out as [[land]], a good of the ''n''th order; and as soon as any productive labor is performed upon them, become  [[capital]]; the value of ''n'' diminishing as the resource progresses through each stage of the production process, until finally the [[producer's good]] has been completely transformed into a good of the first order ([[consumer's good]]) ready for immediate consumption.<ref>{{cite book|url=http://mises.org/rothbard/mes/chap1a.asp|title=Man, Economy and State|chapter=Further Implications: The Means|author=Rothbard, Murray}}</ref> The wealth represented by that material increases throughout this process.


It is also possible for war to destroy wealth by transforming resources that were closer to being ready to satisfy human desires into goods that are less ready to satisfy human desires. For example, war can destroy a building that was capable of immediately providing shelter, and make it necessary to recycle the remnants as scrap, melt them down, shape them into girders, and use those materials to build a new building before it can again provide shelter. Likewise, if a politician takes money away from a productive entrepreneur and allocates it to wasteful projects, that too can destroy wealth. In that situation, the resources that were once under the control of a person with the ability and willingness to devote them to efficiently want-satisfying uses are now under the control of people who will devote them to uses with less want-satisfying power.
It is also possible for war to destroy wealth by transforming resources that were closer to being ready to satisfy human desires into goods that are less ready to satisfy human desires. For example, war can destroy a building that was capable of immediately providing shelter, and make it necessary to recycle the remnants as scrap, melt them down, shape them into girders, transport the girders to the building site, and use them to erect a new building, before it can again provide shelter. It will take time to return the economy to its former productivity. An injection of resources from abroad (e.g. through [[foreign direct investment]] or [[immigration]] of laborers) can speed this process, however.
 
Because [[Subjective theory of value|value is subjective]], wealth cannot be measured [[Cardinal utility|cardinally]], but it is possible to measure [[Ordinal utility|ordinally]].<ref>{{Citation  | last = Rothbard
  | first = Murray N. | author-link = Murray Rothbard  | title = Toward a Reconstruction of Utility and Welfare Economics  | journal = [[The Logic of Action]]  | volume = 1  | pages =  | date = 1997  | origyear =  | year = 1997  | url = http://mises.org/resources/290  | doi =  | id =  | mr =  | zbl =  | jfm = }}</ref>


[[Henry Hazlitt]] writes that real wealth "consists in what is produced and consumed: the food we eat, the clothes we wear, the houses we live in. It is railways and roads and motor cars; ships and planes and factories; schools and churches and theaters; pianos, paintings and hooks. Yet so powerful is the verbal ambiguity that confuses money with wealth, that even those who at times recognize the confusion will slide back into it in the course of their reasoning."<ref>{{cite book|title=Economics in One Lesson|author=Hazlitt, Henry|url=http://www.fee.org/library/books/economics-in-one-lesson/|chapter=The Mirage of Inflation}}</ref> Since money is a commodity that helps fulfill the human need to engage in indirect exchange, it could be regarded as a form of wealth, but that does not mean that printing additional paper money will add an amount of wealth to the economy equal to its face value. It could, instead, diminish the ability of each monetary unit to satisfy the desire to engage in useful indirect exchange.
Likewise, if a politician takes money away from a productive entrepreneur and allocates it to wasteful projects, that too can destroy wealth. In that situation, the resources that were once under the control of a person with the ability and willingness to devote them to efficiently want-satisfying uses are now under the control of people who will devote them to uses with less want-satisfying power. Hence, proposals by [[leftist]]s such as [[Barack Obama]] to force the rich to share or "spread the wealth" through [[welfare]] programs<ref>{{cite news|url=http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/282634/obama-s-new-poverty-measure-spreads-wealth-robert-rector|title=Obama’s New Poverty Measure ‘Spreads the Wealth’|author=Rector, Robert and Sheffield, Rachel|date=9 November 2011|publisher=National Review Online}}</ref> are also proposals to destroy wealth or prevent it from ever coming into being.


Leftists such as [[Barack Obama]] have often advocated that the rich be forced to share or "spread the wealth" through [[welfare]] programs.<ref>{{cite news|url=http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/282634/obama-s-new-poverty-measure-spreads-wealth-robert-rector|title=Obama’s New Poverty Measure ‘Spreads the Wealth’|author=Rector, Robert and Sheffield, Rachel|date=9 November 2011|publisher=National Review Online}}</ref> To the extent that these program reduce the economy's overall ability to fulfill human desire, they actually destroy wealth, or in some cases prevent it from ever coming into being.
[[Henry Hazlitt]] writes that real wealth "consists in what is produced and consumed: the food we eat, the clothes we wear, the houses we live in. It is railways and roads and motor cars; ships and planes and factories; schools and churches and theaters; pianos, paintings and hooks. Yet so powerful is the verbal ambiguity that confuses money with wealth, that even those who at times recognize the confusion will slide back into it in the course of their reasoning."<ref>{{cite book|title=Economics in One Lesson|author=Hazlitt, Henry|url=http://www.fee.org/library/books/economics-in-one-lesson/|chapter=The Mirage of Inflation}}</ref> Since money is a commodity that helps fulfill the human need to engage in indirect exchange, it could be regarded as a form of wealth. That does not mean that printing additional paper money will add an amount of wealth to the economy equal to its face value. It could, instead, diminish the purchasing power of each monetary unit, making economic transactions more cumbersome (e.g. through the need to carry around bulky stacks of cash), therefore diminishing the ability of money to efficiently satisfy the desire to engage in useful indirect exchange.


==Notes==
==Notes==

Revision as of 23:40, 13 July 2012

Wealth is a concept generally agreed to be the abundance of valuable resources or material possessions, or the control of such assets. While "wealth" is considered to be an ambiguous and nebulous term, it is a concept that nonetheless has an important place in economics.

More specifically wealth can be defined as a claim on, or command of, resources (commodities, capital equipment, time, physical labor, et cetera) that have the potential to make the individual's existence easier, more comfortable or more enjoyable (i.e. "better") than it would be in the absence of such things. Because value is subjective, wealth cannot be measured cardinally, but it is possible to measure ordinally.[1]

More concisely, wealth is the ability to fulfill human desire. This means that all steps in production, including the transportation and advertising of products, can generate wealth, because they move the product steps closer toward fulfilling human desire. Raw materials start out as land, a good of the nth order; and as soon as any productive labor is performed upon them, become capital; the value of n diminishing as the resource progresses through each stage of the production process, until finally the producer's good has been completely transformed into a good of the first order (consumer's good) ready for immediate consumption.[2] The wealth represented by that material increases throughout this process.

It is also possible for war to destroy wealth by transforming resources that were closer to being ready to satisfy human desires into goods that are less ready to satisfy human desires. For example, war can destroy a building that was capable of immediately providing shelter, and make it necessary to recycle the remnants as scrap, melt them down, shape them into girders, transport the girders to the building site, and use them to erect a new building, before it can again provide shelter. It will take time to return the economy to its former productivity. An injection of resources from abroad (e.g. through foreign direct investment or immigration of laborers) can speed this process, however.

Likewise, if a politician takes money away from a productive entrepreneur and allocates it to wasteful projects, that too can destroy wealth. In that situation, the resources that were once under the control of a person with the ability and willingness to devote them to efficiently want-satisfying uses are now under the control of people who will devote them to uses with less want-satisfying power. Hence, proposals by leftists such as Barack Obama to force the rich to share or "spread the wealth" through welfare programs[3] are also proposals to destroy wealth or prevent it from ever coming into being.

Henry Hazlitt writes that real wealth "consists in what is produced and consumed: the food we eat, the clothes we wear, the houses we live in. It is railways and roads and motor cars; ships and planes and factories; schools and churches and theaters; pianos, paintings and hooks. Yet so powerful is the verbal ambiguity that confuses money with wealth, that even those who at times recognize the confusion will slide back into it in the course of their reasoning."[4] Since money is a commodity that helps fulfill the human need to engage in indirect exchange, it could be regarded as a form of wealth. That does not mean that printing additional paper money will add an amount of wealth to the economy equal to its face value. It could, instead, diminish the purchasing power of each monetary unit, making economic transactions more cumbersome (e.g. through the need to carry around bulky stacks of cash), therefore diminishing the ability of money to efficiently satisfy the desire to engage in useful indirect exchange.

Notes

  1. ↑ Rothbard, Murray N. (1997), "Toward a Reconstruction of Utility and Welfare Economics", The Logic of Action 1, http://mises.org/resources/290 
  2. ↑ Rothbard, Murray. "Further Implications: The Means". Man, Economy and State. http://mises.org/rothbard/mes/chap1a.asp. 
  3. ↑ Rector, Robert and Sheffield, Rachel (9 November 2011). "Obama’s New Poverty Measure ‘Spreads the Wealth’". National Review Online. 
  4. ↑ Hazlitt, Henry. "The Mirage of Inflation". Economics in One Lesson. http://www.fee.org/library/books/economics-in-one-lesson/. 

Links

Retrieved from "https://wiki.freecapitalists.org/index.php?title=Wealth&oldid=16574"