Sep

28



In a free-society with individuals having complete self-ownership, (Capitalist society) the production of wealth vitally depends on division of labor, a system of production in which all the labor required is broken down into separate, distinct occupations. Obviously, each individual is free and self-responsible enough to decide at his own to what occupation suits him well and serves his self-interests in most proficient way. A society of free self-governing individuals essentially depends on each individual’s self-interest and his ability to exploit his own talent and efforts for fulfilling his needs, desires and self-interests and that makes rational-selfishness as the virtue of the free individual. Division of labor increases the amount of knowledge used in production in ratio to the number of specializations and sub-specializations involved in the process of production. Auto producers have different body of knowledge than that of petroleum, refinery producers, wheat producers have different set of knowledge from both of the previous, and further they have different set of knowledge than the farmers engaged in producing other foodstuffs, vegetable growers, or dairy farmers.
In a non-division of labour system like that of socialist system or the collectivist systems, self-sufficiency becomes the central motive of individuals as they acts as collectivist and self-interest is forgotten. The total capacity of society to incur and further develop knowledge decreases abruptly as all individuals engage in acquiring self-sufficiency by means of adopting and following the common set of wealth production.

Division of Labour and Benefits of Talent

A division of labour system provides enough space and incentive for the individuals occupied in different sets of knowledge of specialization and sub-specializations to devote all their human intellect and efforts to not only use the current knowledge but also to discover, invent and innovate new ways and knowledge to increase production. Division of labour enables a society to use the benefits of geniuses to the maximum extent, while it provides maximum incentive for the genius to use his intellect in development, innovations and entrepreneurship. In a collectivist society, this is not possible, as the genius in such societies, along with other common individuals, must devote most of his time in attaining self-sufficiency first. In India, some decades ago and even at present, division of labour is not definitely present; most of the young students devote their time to achieve degrees from governmental education system in order to gain some or any sort of job in government or private service sector. Hardly anyone devotes his intellect and abilities to any set of specialization of knowledge based on his interest and abilities. Hardly anyone think of devoting his time in research works and furthering knowledge, hence, Indian society lacks innovators. That doesn’t mean that Indian society is or was incompetent of innovations and inventions in present or past, the lack of it only represents the partial slavery imposed by the collectivist system and socialist government under which, the genius amongst the collective is wasted upon. Even if some genius struggle such situation and still manages to radiate his intellect, he never gains the full essence of his own efforts and hence is lost due to the lack of incentives.

Division of labour increases the efficiency of learning process in connection with production by making education and communication and all activities concerned with transmission, storage and development of knowledge into specializations.
Division of labour increases the efficiency of learning process in connection with production by making education and communication and all activities concerned with transmission, storage and development of knowledge into specializations.
In a free society with division of labor, geniuses are able to devote their time to science, invention, organization and direction of productive activity of others and thus instead of being lost in obscurity, they becomes Einsteins, Darwins, Brails and Fords. In a free society not only the genius but everyone is enabled to concentrate on the kind of work he is best suited and that promotes his self-interest based on his intellectual capacity and body endowments. Hence, such a society helps the individuals with rare talents in music, arts, sports, medicines, engineering, etc. In absence of division of labour, along with productive geniuses, such people with specific talents to be athletes, or painters, writers, philosophers, actors, sculptors, musicians, surgeons, engineers etc often lacks enough opportunities and are forced either to forget about their specific interests and talents, or to pursue their talents and suffer poverty and scarcity of opportunities. Since division of labour provides enough opportunities and complete freedom for the innovators, inventors, developers and directors of labour, such a free society necessarily provides enough space for machinery usage and modernization of process of production, also, it provides complete freedom for the genius and common producers to use the resources with utmost efficiencies hence increase the wealth production manifolds. Division of labour increases the efficiency of learning process in connection with production by making education and communication and all activities concerned with transmission, storage and development of knowledge into specializations. In a free society with individual sovereignty, individual may remain unemployed only because of his own choice; otherwise, market provides enough opportunities for the individual to engage in any productive process or service to earn self-dependency. Such few, who by nature lacks any potential to attain self-dependence (naturally disabled or victims of accidents etc) can easily attain benevolent support from the free individuals of the society in attaining self-dependency. As a free-society essentially represents most beneficial conditions for wealth production under division of labour, individuals in such society prospers with ease and further their life in the pursuit of their happiness.

Division of labour and consistency with freedom

Private ownership of the means of wealth production is the fundamental pre-condition of the pursuit of self-interest. Division of labour essentially depends on private ownership of means of production, which is based on the nature of gains of free division of labour. The most important ones are the multiplication and transmission of knowledge and benefits of the talented. The rational idea of private property ownership comes out from the fact that individuals possess unique independent minds, which permits and necessitates them to have separate independent knowledge and to make independent judgements, decision, and act on them with his separate independent calibre. In a free society every individual gains from the fact that other people possess knowledge that he does not and an intelligence separate and often much greater than his own. To maintain maximum benefits, it is necessary that others be able to acquire and apply their knowledge in production on their own initiative with perfect decision making freedom, without having his approval, orders, permissions or license, as he would be certainly unable to give in any rational way as he necessary lacks the knowledge and intelligence that would be required to make such decisions. To act, work and produce, people must possess material means of actions and production, In order for them to act independently from one another, they must possess wealth independently from one another that is there must be private property, including private ownership of natural resources and other means of production. Private property rights are essential condition for proficient production, prosperity and more importantly individual freedom as it provides maximum space for efficient usage of resources in virtue of producing wealth hence eradicating poverty of masses.

Private property rights are essential condition for proficient production, prosperity and more importantly individual freedom as it provides maximum space for efficient usage of resources in virtue of producing wealth hence eradicating poverty of masses.
Private property rights are essential condition for proficient production, prosperity and more importantly individual freedom as it provides maximum space for efficient usage of resources in virtue of producing wealth hence eradicating poverty of masses.
A libertarian society provides property rights in order to provide peaceful, justified, conflict-free and productive usage of resources. Unlike human body, external bodies and natural resources are not directly controlled by one’s will and initially they are unowned. In order to provide a rational, conflict-free rule of assignment of property rights, a libertarian society prefers the Lockean law of homestead that provides the relevant objective link of appropriation that is the transformation and using of the previously unowned resource. This approach provides the relevant objective motive of justice as the first user of a previously unowned resource naturally have a better claim than the second or consequent users. This is pertinent with independence of Individuals as the first owner of the resource can definitely let others to possess the resource for production at some rent or dealing for a period, or he may completely sell-off his property rights to other. The relevant question in such situations is not that who possess the resource; rather it is who the owner of the resource is. As explained earlier, a natural resource is not wealth until a man uses his talent and labour to make the resource productive and useful for the men, as the first user transformed that unowned resource into wealth making it possible to be used for the benefits of men, he naturally is the reasonable owner of the resource and deserves complete property rights over it. Obviously all the consequent wealth produced by the help of that resource is also inadvertently the rightful property (in fact, the results of his labour and intellect) and he holds complete right over it. In case, he suffers lack of talent to use the resource to maximum beneficial extent, he obviously gains the chance to sell-off his property right freely to other individual interested and able in using that resource proficiently. Such a system essentially provides justice and peace as it avoids any specific conflict, it is based on reason as the first user of the resource definitely posses a far important link with the resource than the later users. Once the first comer sells his property right to others, he naturally abolishes any objective link with that resource, wealth or property. Self-ownership and property rights essentially provide complete freedom for individuals to possess and accumulate wealth and further produce it freely and hence abolishes the common norms of partially slavery under government in the form of compulsory taxation, fiat currency, licensing system, censors, bans and criminalization of acts that in no way involves any aggression of a man by other.

Related Posts

1 views

No Responses to “Division of Labor, Productivity and Prosperity of Labor”

  1. Gopi Krishnan Says:

    … or to pursue their talents and suffer poverty and scarcity of opportunities.”

    Even if there is division of labour, wouldn’t certain people with certain talent suffer poverty & scarcity of opportunities? maybe because there are a lot many people aspiring in that industry (excess supply) or if that particular proffession does not provide much to others (less demand). for eg. singing.. even though singing is the best thing i can do in life, there might be a million others who are better at it than me.

    It’s just a thought. I’m for division of labour because it is simply an extended version of the law of comparitive advantage. But to claim that division of labour will create an environment in which all those who pursue their talents will not suffer poverty is a bit far fetched, dont u think?

  2. Unpretentious Diva Says:

    Even if there is division of labour, wouldn’t certain people with certain talent suffer poverty & scarcity of opportunities? maybe because there are a lot many people aspiring in that industry (excess supply) or if that particular proffession does not provide much to others (less demand). for eg. singing.. even though singing is the best thing i can do in life, there might be a million others who are better at it than me.

    Obviously Division of labour provides freedom for competition. So the best talent would be the most succesful singer, yet it is also true that in presence of division of labour, the opportunities extends too much.
    Now as Indian market is opening up gradually, even with a littlemore than average singer can make a refreshed opening in music industry at very lower investments needed, obviously if you have any potential to be a profitabl singer, you will get investors, you won’t need tobe xtra rih or exeptionally talented, because Kishor Kumar(oh sorry he died) or anyone of his potential won’t be coming to compete with you. His competition would be on higher level, you may compete on local, or regional levels, you may issue your private musical album, the consumers are deciders, if your album won’t make profits,you won’t be wasting any of your potential further.
    Just because you think your voice is good doesn’t make it profitable too, and as said earlier, anyone may enjoy singing, but he won’t make singing as profession if he is not getting the desired materialistic profits. The profit will indicate whether your singing potential is enough to be a professional singer for you or not.

    During 60’s, 70’s, 80’s and 90’s when the entertainment industry was strictly governed by censorboards and entertainment ministry and investment was controlled, there were not as many singers nor as many opportunities as there are right now, furthermore, the best singers of those days were not earning that much profits which today even the average singers can easily make.

  3. renegade_division Says:

    It’s just a thought. I’m for division of labour because it is simply an extended version of the law of comparitive advantage. But to claim that division of labour will create an environment in which all those who pursue their talents will not suffer poverty is a bit far fetched, dont u think?

    Sure! But if not all those people are not going to suffer poverty because there is a too much supply, then there is no other system which could get them out of poverty by allocating them to a better job.

    I mean what’s the other options we have? A central Planner puts people for job? Everybody produce food for themselves, produce clothes for themselves, grow a cow for milk for themselves? Sing for themselves?
    Are you suggesting that?

    If 1000 people are trying to be an actor, and there are only 5 acting positions available, what do you think the rest of the struggling actors do in real life? They work in a restaurant as a waiter. Nobody really remains unemployed for long, people move in for other things, give their labor for other things.

  4. Pravin Says:

    given a free market in labor unencumbered by minimum wage restrictions, employment will always be 100%

  5. Unpretentious Diva Says:

    Well, in a free market unecumbered by minimum wage restrictions or any other form of government intervnetions, the only possible form of unemployment would be self-chosen unemployment. That is, if a person willingly decides not to do work, than only he would be unemployed, otherwise, there will always be enormous possibilities of various works and jobs he may do for earning an honest living.

  6. Failure of Democracy | Reason for Liberty Says:

    […] Division of Labor, Productivity and Prosperity of Labor […]

Leave a Reply

CommentLuv Enabled

Subscribe without commenting