6 THE GENERAL THEORY OF EMPLOYMENT BK. I

of competition which qualify the first postulate. Dis-utility must be here understood to cover every kind ofreason which might lead a man, or a body of men, towithhold their labour rather than accept a wage whichhad to them a utility below a certain minimum.

This postulate is compatible with what may be called“frictional” unemployment. For a realistic interpreta-tion of it legitimately allows for various inexactnessesof adjustment which stand in the way of continuousfull employment: for example, unemployment due to atemporary want of balance between the relative quan-tities of specialised resources as a result of miscalcu-lation or intermittent demand; or to time-lags con-sequent on unforeseen changes; or to the fact that thechange-over from one employment to another cannotbe effected without a certain delay, so that there willalways exist in a non-static society a proportion ofresources unemployed “between jobs”. In addition to“frictional” unemployment, the postulate is also com-patible with “voluntary” unemployment due to therefusal or inability of a unit of labour, as a result oflegislation or social practices or of combination forcollective bargaining or of slow response to change orof mere human obstinacy, to accept a reward cor-responding to the value of the product attributable to itsmarginal productivity. But these two categories of“frictional” unemployment and “voluntary” unemploy-ment are comprehensive. The classical postulates donot admit of the possibility of the third category, whichI shall define below as “involuntary” unemployment.

Subject to these qualifications, the volume ofemployed resources is duly determined, according tothe classical theory, by the two postulates. The firstgives us the demand schedule for employment, thesecond gives us the supply schedule; and the amountof employment is fixed at the point where the utilityof the marginal product balances the disutility of themarginal employment.