ter, we might, as a second step, give him his head in regard to the gold-standard and his redeemable tokens of value. If this were nicely timed so that his subsequent evidence had to go over till the following day we would get all the terminal certainty of another isolated economic chapter. But if we pinned him down the next day to the mathematical redeemability of his tokens he would assert that this rested on the power of the government to get back sufficient gold into the Treasury by taxation to provide for redemption.
The value of our currency and bonds rests on their redeemability: redeemability rests on taxation; and taxation rests on the art of hitting whatever head is most exposed[1]—a pretty sequence!
Looking at the matter from another angle, if our scientific unit of value should be based solely upon a number of square feet of national area determined by population-density with their calculable control of human freedom, we would then have a representative of domination only—a unit of tyranny, not of value. To be fully representative of value our unit must be a lien on measurable area, enriched by measurable population and basically modified by a precise pro-rata burden of responsibility for order, measured in the same terms—the whole of the foregoing argument being predicated upon the assumption that the science of economics is actually concerned with economic value—which means nothing if it lacks basic precision.
Since value is due to the basic relation of effort to resistance, and it is contended that a scientific measure of value must express this pre-focal relationship, there are some very advan-
- ↑ Professor Seager at the outset includes taxation as a basic cost, but abandons this (and his hope of precision) when he goes on to say: “Taxes are another irregular charge from which many producers are exempt. Their amount depends upon the arbitrary decision of the taxing power and for this reason and because they do not affect at all many branches of production we may leave them out of account in our treatment of distribution.
“Summarizing the results of the preceding discussion it appears that the items in the expense of production may be reduced to four: (1) Expense for replacement or maintenance of capital goods, (2) interest, (3) wages, (4) rent.”—Introduction to “Economics,” H. R. Seager. 3rd edition, pages 163 and 164. Henry Holt & Co., New York.
