Interest.
That part of wealth which is the
return for the use of capital.
In common parlance, a borrower pays "interest" to a creditor
for money loaned to him or her. In economic theory, however,
inasmuch as money is not capital, the meaning of interest is
different. Reapers and silos are a part of a farmer's capital,
which when employed in harvesting and storing wealth in the form
of wheat, earn of their contribution to production a portion
called "interest."

George defines his terms carefully in advance, and sticks
consistently with his definitions. It is all too common for
economists to muddy the waters by not defining their terms, then
by using them in shifting ways.
The three factors of production work together to produce a
"pie" that we call "wealth." (Or to use more common terminonogy, we can say "the
product," which includes all goods and services.) When we seek to identify the Laws
of Distribution, we are looking for the principles that determine what proportional shares go to the three factors under certain conditions.
It is not Land itself that gets rent, of course, but those who own land. It is not Capital itself that gets interest, but the owners of capital. If someone owns both, and manages them himself, then that person gets an income, called “profit,” which contains all three elements: rent, interest, and wages-of-management. We don’t consider profits here,* because our job in this course is to analyze functional distribution — to show how wealth is distributed among the three factors that account for it. This is a study of patterns and relationships that affect the entire community. Individual or “personal” distribution is not concerned with the whole community, and uses terms differently, for different goals.
*We'll return to the subject of profits in the next lesson.
Want to try those categories again?
-- Back to the course -- Back to the book -- Get your bearings --