Page:The wealth of nations, volume 1.djvu/46

 Marx draws from the Ricardian theory of value the following conclusions:

1. That the value of a commodity is the labor power embodied in that commodity.

2. That the primal form of exchange is an exchange of equivalent values embodied in commodities.

3. That money is a commodity whose value is also the labor power embodied in it.

4. That in the exchange of commodities for money and of money for commodities—i.e., buying and selling—the primal form would still be the same—an exchange of equal values.

5. That in the inverted, or "commercial" form of exchange this is not so; but money is exchanged for commodities and commodities back into money, in order that money may be increased, the increase being called surplus value.

6. That it is this power of money of increasing by exchange which converts it into capital.

But next arises the question, whence comes this surplus value? How is it that money can increase itself in a way in which no other commodity can? "The common-sense mind explains it at once, by seeing in the whole affair merely a swindling transaction, in which the capitalist gets more commodities than he pays for, and is paid for more commodities than he sells. But," says Marx, "the totality of the capitalist class in a country cannot outwit itself."

"The change of value that occurs in the case of money intended to be converted into capital cannot take place in the money itself.… In order to be able to extract value from the consumption of a commodity, our friend Moneybags must be so lucky as to find within the sphere of