Whilst I appreciate the Dickens allusion, this is kind of garbled.
Surplus is a value judgement; it means unnecessary, that which is left over when needs and goals are met. In economic jargon it means unutilized, but Darity says flat out that this “surplus” population has economic utility - it serves to depress wages, facilitating the cheap labor conservatism he seems to be endorsing.
Personally I suspect that the boardrooms of most multinational corporations are entirely filled with surplus population. Surplus from my point of view, perhaps not Darity’s or Charles Dickens’.
Anyway, we can avoid that muddle by substituting unemployed population for “surplus” population. Then it states half a truth - “An unemployed population under capitalism has a purpose &etc”. It’s only half of the truth because the relationship between supply of labor and demand for labor under capitalism doesn’t exist only when supply outstrips demand; it doesn’t disappear when one hundred percent employment is reached. When demand exceeds supply, that drives up wages and makes a society more wealthy overall, since it gives more buying and bargaining power to more people.
