Thread replies: 10
Thread images: 3
Thread images: 3
File: Karl-Marx1-d9076c70d7110a86690306d6cc7a16bc (1).jpg (40KB, 444x444px) Image search:
[Google]
40KB, 444x444px
Let's compare theories:
Labour Theory of (Objective) Value:
>Value consists of the amount of necessary labour time one puts into making a commodity. The exchange value of the commodity will be a function of relative costs of production between different commodities i.e the aggregate labour time of all other commodities
Labour Theory of Subjective Value (orthodox economics)
>HURR DURR these items just appear out of thin air so I guess their value is based on the average personal evaluations of all the world's plebs. No point in knowing the cost of production i.e. labour-time etc. let's all just have a guess because we think it has some utility for us
Really can't believe people take the second view in 2017.
>>
Yes, the second makes alot more sense.
>>
>>2395289
Labor time does not translate into value. You can spend all day moving rocks from one side of a field to another, with loads of both time and labor invested into it and still not create one iota of value.
>>
>>2395289
Subjective theory of value makes more sense even when you try to mock it.
Most buyers don't know or care how much toil went into making something, they just have a price they're willing to pay to get something.
Check out the diamond-water paradox, my friend.
>>
&humanities strikes again
>>
>>2395289
Here's why you are wrong and I'm right.
https://www.youtube.com/user/CSLewisDoodle/videos
>>
>>2395365
What did he mean by this?
>>
People confuse work with productivity. Productivity is best thought of as work times effect over time.
You can work all day with little to no effect, and thus get nothing done.
>>
File: 1484779582075.png (42KB, 399x322px) Image search:
[Google]
42KB, 399x322px
>>2395289
>>
>>2395353
Way to completely miss his point by ignoring the role of labor entirely.
Thread posts: 10
Thread images: 3
Thread images: 3