4C SOCIAL SCIENTIST in terms of the money commodity) stays above the now reduced value of labour power. To give a numerical example, let the working day be 10 hours, equal in money terms to Rs 40. Let the value of labour power be 5 hours, equal to Rs 15. To begin with, let the wage (the money price of labour power) be equal to the value of labour power, that is Rs 15. Now let an improvement in productivity take place that reduces necessary labour to 3 hours, equal to Rs 9. If the price of labour power does not decline to its new value, but only to Rs 12, equal to 4 hours, we have the result that (a) the rate of surplus value has gone up (7/3 as against 5/5), but yet (b) the goods and services that can be consumed by the worker also goes up. As Marx puts it, ^In this way, it is possible with an increasing productiveness of labour, for the price of labour power to keep on falling, and yet this fall to be accompanied bv a constant growth in the mass of the labourer's means of subsistence.55^ One can see from this c{uote how absurd it is to ascribe to Marx any theory of declining real wages.8 One aspect of what Marx means by "immiserisation of the working class" an expression misinterpreted by many to mean declining wages, becomes clear in the sentence immediately following the above c[uote: ^But even in such case, the fall in the value of labour power would cause a corresponding rise of surplus value, and thus the abyss between the labourer's position and that of the capitalist would keep widening." Marx's analysis in this context also makes clear tliat che price of labour power (wages) as distinct from the value of labour power is influenced to some extent by immediate and particular circumstances especially "^the pressure of capital on one side, and the resistance of the labourer on the other.'5* (b) The productivity of labour and the length of the working day are kept constant: In this case, an increase in the rate of surplus value is brought about by an increase in the intensity of labour. A working day of hi^ht-r intensity contains more value than a working day of some length, but nornal intensity. The greater intensity of labour leads to more rapid consumption of labour power, that is, a greater expenditure of energy by the worker, and hence to a higher value of labour power. Thus often an increase in the wage to compensate for speed-ups conceals a decline of it relative to the new, higher value of labour power. If the new level of intensity becomes general.that is,comes to prevail in all or most branches of production, it then ceases to be a source of additional surplus value. One must keep in mind, however, that international differences in labour intensity may still persist, even though within a given national economy there exists a tendency toward uniform intensity. (c) Let the intensity of labour and its productivity be held constant. Here, an increase in surplus value (and its rate) necessarily takes place only through a lengthening of the working day. This of course implrcs, as in case (b),, an increased wear and tear of labour power, and thus an