1. The purpose of this exercise is to search for some socially just relationship between average wage levels and average profit levels. No simple relationship is found but nine interesting propositions are developed, some of which are in conflict with today's ruling right-wing paradigm.
2. A simple model of risk-free capital formation is considered.
3. In this model a plausible sequence of events leads to significant capital formation, initial substantial allocation of the benefits to the capitalists, but then a more just equilibrium, resulting in an increase in the national standard of living of all citizens.
4. Continuation of the model, however, leads to extreme inequality in income and wealth distribution with no mitigating improvement in the national standard of living.
5. The conclusion of the model sees an excessive populist backlash actually destroying the engine of economic prosperity.
6. From consideration of this model, nine propositions are developed as follows:
   1. Wages will rise with capital-induced productivity increases
   2. The amount of the wage-rise from capital-induced productivity will be influenced by the value of the opportunity available to the capitalist
   3. The values of the opportunities available are not under the control of either the capitalists or the workers
   4. The equitable carving up of a capital-induced productivity increase between capital and labour is really a question of defining what return on capital is fair (there is no other just division)
   5. The fair return on risk-free capital is the minimum return that will induce capital formation (but how is that determined?)
   6. Social justice requires that there be some mechanism that will reduce (or, where necessary, increase) the return on risk-free capital to the foregoing minimum (but what is that mechanism?)
   7. Excessive inequality in the distribution of wealth and income is socially unjust
   8. Some reactions against inequality can throw out the baby with the bathwater
   9. Today's ruling right-wing paradigm rejects the social justice arguments of propositions 5, 6, and 7 but the Ocandida case seems to support the propositions

Your views?

Next Section

Return to the top page for this topic