Tweet
Vel and Kid have this love-hate relationship thingy down to a perfection.
-
A lot of Republicans are not racist, but a lot of racists are Republican. -
Bull Og. Value is the satisfaction of a human need. Specifically, regarding economics, it is the satisfaction of an economic human need.Originally posted by Ogie Oglethorpe
Wasn't there a whole thread a while ago from Kid on what defines value? IIRC there never was a clear answer to it from Kid, but I couldn't be arsed to go through all the posts so perhaps he did ultimately find a definition that met his internal criteria.I drank beer. I like beer. I still like beer. ... Do you like beer Senator?
- Justice Brett KavanaughComment
-
There's love in there somewhere??
"Just puttin on the foil" - Jeff Hanson
“In a democracy, I realize you don’t need to talk to the top leader to know how the country feels. When I go to a dictatorship, I only have to talk to one person and that’s the dictator, because he speaks for all the people.” - Jimmy CarterComment
-
Yes there is -- but it's like a puzzle challenge -- you have to look closely to find it.
A lot of Republicans are not racist, but a lot of racists are Republican.Comment
-
Satisfaction being the key term in your definition which allows you the ability to tie in labor as the ONLY value creation component.Originally posted by Kidicious
Bull Og. Value is the satisfaction of a human need. Specifically, regarding economics, it is the satisfaction of an economic human need.
Please define labor.
That being said the need component of the above statement clearly is independent of labor."Just puttin on the foil" - Jeff Hanson
“In a democracy, I realize you don’t need to talk to the top leader to know how the country feels. When I go to a dictatorship, I only have to talk to one person and that’s the dictator, because he speaks for all the people.” - Jimmy CarterComment
-
I'm not being ambiguous in the least.
Marx clearly states that Labor is the source (the only source) of all value.
Blatt's refutation blows that right out of the water.
The only person being ambiguous here is...Kidicious. Well, and Marx, but he's here only as the fodder, which Kid and the other Marxist regurgitate endlessly, much to the amusement of the rest of us.
So...labor is the source of all value (cos big daddy marx said so), and yet, per the definition of utility value, which is derived from personal satisfaction, there seems to be some other (at least one) mechanism at work here.
It seems then, that Kid has run smack into the same logical problem with his ideology that Marx did...imagine that!
Mr. Fun...yep...actually Kid is my DL, and I just love to talk to myself...
Og! Welcome, good sir! (but good luck getting Kid to do anything besides waffle...as always...some things NEVER change, you know...
-=Vel=-Comment
-
The context of this discussion is Das Kapital. Take the Marxist definition from Part I which is the specific portion we are discussing.Originally posted by Ogie Oglethorpe
Please define labor.I drank beer. I like beer. I still like beer. ... Do you like beer Senator?
- Justice Brett KavanaughComment
-
That was Adam Smith.Originally posted by Velociryx
Marx clearly states that Labor is the source (the only source) of all value.
No he doesn't. It's nothing but cheap propaganda.Blatt's refutation blows that right out of the water.I drank beer. I like beer. I still like beer. ... Do you like beer Senator?
- Justice Brett KavanaughComment
-
The utility of a thing makes it a use value.[4] But this utility is not a thing of air. Being limited by the physical properties of the commodity, it has no existence apart from that commodity. A commodity, such as iron, corn, or a diamond, is therefore, so far as it is a material thing, a use value, something useful. This property of a commodity is independent of the amount of labour required to appropriate its useful qualities. When treating of use value, we always assume to be dealing with definite quantities, such as dozens of watches, yards of linen, or tons of iron. The use values of commodities furnish the material for a special study, that of the commercial knowledge of commodities.[5] Use values become a reality only by use or consumption: they also constitute the substance of all wealth, whatever may be the social form of that wealth. In the form of society we are about to consider, they are, in addition, the material depositories of exchange value.
Exchange value, at first sight, presents itself as a quantitative relation, as the proportion in which values in use of one sort are exchanged for those of another sort,[6] a relation constantly changing with time and place. Hence exchange value appears to be something accidental and purely relative, and consequently an intrinsic value, i.e., an exchange value that is inseparably connected with, inherent in commodities, seems a contradiction in terms.[7] Let us consider the matter a little more closely.
Can anyone read the bold type and tell me what planet Vel is on?I drank beer. I like beer. I still like beer. ... Do you like beer Senator?
- Justice Brett KavanaughComment
-
We did the value/labor thing a while back, and you, Kid, got hung on my example of two gold fields, one with a labor cost to extract gold of around $200 per ounce, and one with a labor cost to extract gold of around $400 per ounce, and which was the more valuable.
Market value represents nothing more than a momentary settlement point of supply and demand. In economics, that's the only real value that counts.When all else fails, blame brown people. | Hire a teen, while they still know it all. | Trump-Palin 2016. "You're fired." "I quit."Comment
-
MtG: time to put this thread to rest.Comment
-
I got hung up on nothing.Originally posted by MichaeltheGreat
We did the value/labor thing a while back, and you, Kid, got hung on my example of two gold fields, one with a labor cost to extract gold of around $200 per ounce, and one with a labor cost to extract gold of around $400 per ounce, and which was the more valuable.
Not if you consider economics to be the science of fulfilling economic wants and needs.Market value represents nothing more than a momentary settlement point of supply and demand. In economics, that's the only real value that counts.I drank beer. I like beer. I still like beer. ... Do you like beer Senator?
- Justice Brett KavanaughComment
-
Vel said,
Marx actually said,Originally posted by Velociryx
The only person being ambiguous here is...Kidicious. Well, and Marx, but he's here only as the fodder, which Kid and the other Marxist regurgitate endlessly, much to the amusement of the rest of us.
So...labor is the source of all value (cos big daddy marx said so), and yet, per the definition of utility value, which is derived from personal satisfaction, there seems to be some other (at least one) mechanism at work here.
A thing can be a use value, without having value [due to labor]. This is the case whenever its utility to man is not due to labour. Such are air, virgin soil, natural meadows, &c. A thing can be useful, and the product of human labour, without being a commodity. Whoever directly satisfies his wants with the produce of his own labour, creates, indeed, use values, but not commodities.
Looks like someone can't read.I drank beer. I like beer. I still like beer. ... Do you like beer Senator?
- Justice Brett KavanaughComment
-
and then I said . . . . . . .A lot of Republicans are not racist, but a lot of racists are Republican.Comment
-
Yeah, it was nothing - you insisted that the gold ore which required more labor to extract the gold was more valuable.Originally posted by Kidicious
I got hung up on nothing.
Wants and needs are too vague and too variable in scope to be treated by any "science."Not if you consider economics to be the science of fulfilling economic wants and needs.When all else fails, blame brown people. | Hire a teen, while they still know it all. | Trump-Palin 2016. "You're fired." "I quit."Comment
Comment