{"title":"Paul Baran’s Economic Surplus Concept, the Baran Ratio, and the Decline of Feudalism","authors":"T. Lambert","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3555182","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In his book, the Political Economy of Growth (1957), and in an article he wrote several years earlier (1953), the economist Paul A. Baran noted how in an economic system characterized by a hierarchy of classes and where economic and political power are concentrated in the top class of such a system, the amount of output and income above what is consumed by most people (e.g., food, clothing, housing, public safety, education) mostly goes to the top class. This extra amount is what he called the economic surplus, a form of savings or income left over after consumption. In a feudalistic system, there is little incentive to use the proceeds of this type of surplus to buy more tools and equipment for more production of output and income. The lord or baron has little incentive to lend or give serfs money because he may not benefit from any increased productivity by them. It is with capitalism that such incentives to re-invest in production become important. This paper uses recently published and estimated historical data to illustrate Baran’s observations and thoughts on feudalism. It is shown that during the 13th and 14th centuries in England that the economic surplus declined, and this decline helps to explain the “crisis of feudalism” that started in the 13th century. It is not until several centuries later when capitalism becomes the dominant economic system that the economic surplus begins to rise on a consistent basis probably due to the reinvestment of a portion of the surplus into productive activities and a greater ratio of capital income to rental income and a greater ratio of investment to economic surplus. However, and somewhat surprisingly, by the 19th Century the surplus still does not attain levels reached in the 13th Century.","PeriodicalId":253619,"journal":{"name":"History of Economics eJournal","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-03-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"History of Economics eJournal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3555182","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1
Abstract
In his book, the Political Economy of Growth (1957), and in an article he wrote several years earlier (1953), the economist Paul A. Baran noted how in an economic system characterized by a hierarchy of classes and where economic and political power are concentrated in the top class of such a system, the amount of output and income above what is consumed by most people (e.g., food, clothing, housing, public safety, education) mostly goes to the top class. This extra amount is what he called the economic surplus, a form of savings or income left over after consumption. In a feudalistic system, there is little incentive to use the proceeds of this type of surplus to buy more tools and equipment for more production of output and income. The lord or baron has little incentive to lend or give serfs money because he may not benefit from any increased productivity by them. It is with capitalism that such incentives to re-invest in production become important. This paper uses recently published and estimated historical data to illustrate Baran’s observations and thoughts on feudalism. It is shown that during the 13th and 14th centuries in England that the economic surplus declined, and this decline helps to explain the “crisis of feudalism” that started in the 13th century. It is not until several centuries later when capitalism becomes the dominant economic system that the economic surplus begins to rise on a consistent basis probably due to the reinvestment of a portion of the surplus into productive activities and a greater ratio of capital income to rental income and a greater ratio of investment to economic surplus. However, and somewhat surprisingly, by the 19th Century the surplus still does not attain levels reached in the 13th Century.
经济学家保罗·a·巴兰(Paul a . Baran)在他的著作《增长的政治经济学》(1957年)和几年前他写的一篇文章(1953年)中指出,在一个以阶级等级为特征的经济体系中,经济和政治权力集中在这种体系的上层阶级手中,大多数人消费(如食物、衣服、住房、公共安全、教育)之外的产出和收入大部分都流向了上层阶级。这些额外的金额就是他所说的经济盈余,一种消费后剩余的储蓄或收入形式。在封建制度下,人们几乎没有动力用这类剩余的收益来购买更多的工具和设备,以提高产出和收入。领主或男爵没有动力借钱或给农奴钱,因为他可能不会从农奴提高的生产力中受益。正是在资本主义制度下,这种再投资于生产的激励措施才变得重要。本文使用最近出版和估计的历史数据来说明巴兰对封建制度的观察和思考。这表明,在13和14世纪,英国的经济盈余下降,这种下降有助于解释13世纪开始的“封建主义危机”。直到几个世纪后,当资本主义成为占主导地位的经济体系时,经济盈余才开始持续上升,这可能是由于部分盈余再投资于生产活动,资本收入与租金收入的比例更高,投资与经济盈余的比例更高。然而,有些令人惊讶的是,到了19世纪,盈余仍然没有达到13世纪的水平。