Law of Value 4: Value (2 of 2)

"And this is where any social theory must begin: with a study of the productive activity of people as they work to create the world they live in. Not only is this the best starting place for an analysis of society, it is also the best starting point for a radical social theory whose aim is to investigate the possibility of changing the world. If we realize that human society is not the result of some natural or divine eternal logic but merely the creation of our own labor then that means that we have the power to mold and shape that society as we see fit. In a capitalist society these creative powers take the form of an external world of value and capital that acts back upon society, shaping it against the will of its creators. Yet, in the end the world of capital is nothing but the product of our own creation. If we truly want to change the world it is not up to nature, God, fate or experts, but up to us. This is the radical challenge of the law of value."

full text at: kapitalism101.wordpress.com/2010/06/13/law-of-value-4-value/

Category:

Education

Tags:

• marx
• value
• capitalism
• economics
• politics
• market
• use
• exchange
• bohm-bawerk
• crisis
• communism
• left

[DesecrateConformity]

The only thing I have reservations about is natural resources. If a pair of shoes usually takes twice as long to produce as a pair of pants, for example, then shoes are twice as valuable as pants. In the long run, the competitive price of shoes will be twice the price of pants, regardless of the value of the physical inputs., this is the important part. It disregards the value of the natural resources, which didn't require labor to come into existence.

[brendanmcooney]

@DesecrateConformity Natural resources have no value until people perform labor to dig them out of the ground. Would you pay for a pile of coal under the ground if you had no plan to ever have it dug up?

[ipwnorcs]

ONly thing i object to is your use of the word "intrinsic value." I don't recall Marx using the term, he used just the term "value" i believe in Capital. I know what you mean when you use the term but it can confuse people and make them believe you are saying that commodities have a value contained within them, which I know is the opposite of what you said.

[brendanmcooney]

@ipwnorcs. I agree that people can draw the wrong conclusion from the term. But Marx does use the term "intrinsic" and it is a very important step in the argument for why the category "exchange value" is inadequate and points to a deeper, more fundamental category called "value."For there to be value in the abstract we must 1st show exchange value can only be an expression of something, of an underlying intrinsic value. But by intrinsic Marx still maintains that value is relational and social.

[brendanmcooney]

@BobbyW3363. Yes. It's also important to understand that value and price are not the same thing. If demand falls that will cause prices to fall below values and this triggers the reapportioning of labor in production. Once supply and demand meet again value=price. This creates the illusion that changes in consumer preferences CREATE value. But all they can do is reapportion value.

[mauroprovatos]

good job once again.

[mart83648]

Why would anybody produce for use value? If that were the system everybody would starve to death!

[tvdogum]

good explanation of prices x value

[cogar48]

@Coteincdr mises.org is indeed BS.

[Coteincdr]

hahahaha, this is BS!! mises.org!!!

[TheForwardGaze]

@TheForwardGaze I just watched your crisis videos which answered my first question.

[TheForwardGaze]

Did Marx foresee technology and productivity leading to high levels of unemployment and a drastic change in the oraganization of labor, or perhaps the end of capitalism? Do you think there's a model for a satisfactory mixed economy? Have you looked at the 1936 Anarchist experiment in Catalonia? I think they tried to replace money with a voucher for social labor time.