IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/jhisec/v20y1998i02p215-233_00.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Smith's Uniform “Toil and Trouble”: A “Vain Subtlety?”

Author

Listed:
  • Hueckel, Glenn

Abstract

The subject of this essay is best introduced by two statements written many years apart. One is by J. S. Mill:[Adam Smith] speaks as if labour were intrinsically the most proper measure of value, on the ground that one day's ordinary muscular exertion of one man, may be looked upon as always, to him, the same amount of effort or sacrifice. But this proposition, whether in itself admissible or not, discards the idea of exchange value altogether, substituting a totally different idea, more analogous to value in use. If a day's labour will purchase in America twice as much of ordinary consumable articles as in England, it seems a vain subtlety to insist on saying that labour is of the same value in both countries, and that it is the value of the other things which is different. Labour, in this case, may be correctly said to be twice as valuable, both in the market and to the labourer himself, in America as in England (Mill, 1909, p. 567).

Suggested Citation

  • Hueckel, Glenn, 1998. "Smith's Uniform “Toil and Trouble”: A “Vain Subtlety?”," Journal of the History of Economic Thought, Cambridge University Press, vol. 20(2), pages 215-233, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:cup:jhisec:v:20:y:1998:i:02:p:215-233_00
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S1053837200001899/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Meacci, Ferdinando, 2014. "Ricardo's and Malthus's common error in their conflicting theories of the value of labour," MPRA Paper 55948, University Library of Munich, Germany.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cup:jhisec:v:20:y:1998:i:02:p:215-233_00. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/het .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.