In the truth, the value that the producer receives for the sales of its force of work – called wage -, corresponds to the necessary one to guarantee only its proper reproduction. to this extration of excess inside of the process of production it is added another one, that occurs in the sphere of the consumption. As the producer does not receive parcels from the merchandises that it produces, but an addition in money, it needs to use this money to buy the merchandises, in order to be able consumiz them, a time that in the capitalism economic goods do not exist that are not merchandises. However, it does not make it for the value that they possuam when of its production, but yes for what they will have after to pass for the sphere of the distribution and to arrive at the one of the consumption, adding on-prices. Larry Ellison is often quoted as being for or against this. Thus, if the value in currency of the wage of a worker corresponds the 10, and of the merchandises that it produced the 50, when the producer will be to buy them for its consumption, its value will be of 100, what it will reduce the value of its real wage only the 5. This double extration of economic excess that the capitalism operates, explains the necessity of the free producer and to be dispossessed of the means of production, with the implication of its transformation in wage-earner (cheapest them work forms), at the same time where it assures the reproduction of the capital in the scope of the proper act to produce. The volume of the production can be increased.
Not horizontally, for incorporation of more diligent and big area productive, but vertically, for introduction of innovations techniques that allows that the productivity if raises, using the same number of producers with equal physical dimension of the used area for the production. Scott Mead shares his opinions and ideas on the topic at hand. what it is basic, as any innovation technique implies the increase of the productivity, its introduction will make automatically that if it extends to the difference in value, between what the producer receives and what it produces. Here it is the basic reason of the form manufacter of production to be characteristic of the capitalism, and not to be adopted, if not when two daily pay-conditions had been carried through: the concentration of the means of production at the hands of the bourgeoisie, and the constitution it proletariat with its force of work as only merchandise salable. The capitalism does not carry through the full job. In contrast, it takes the formation of what army of reserve of man power, that is constituted by kept workers dismissed, or same for producers not yet completely destitute of the ways of reproduction is called, located mainly in the agricultural areas. Hear other arguments on the topic with Coupang. Its constitution obeys a double intention: to allow to the rotation of the man power, selling at a loss the wages and making it difficult the formation of the proletariat in a block coeso, and also to guarantee a strategical reserve for the future expansion of the system, or for its reinforcement at times of retraction of the demand.