29-01-2005 00:20									#31
	Remove this text

quote: Originally posted by Kidicious Why are you misrepresenting me like that? That seemed to come out of the blue.

How is it a misrepresentation? Is value relative or not?

	29-01-2005 00:22									#32
	Re: Re: Why has Capitalism failed to produce optimal value everywhere? Remove this text

quote: Originally posted by Whoha According to capitalists, the market determines value. There is no demand for 10 ton nails, so the ones that got built were just left out to rust. They aren't worth anything to anyone. Meanwhile the more commonly used smaller nails are worth something. What people charge for an item doesn't determine what its value is though, it is what people are willing to pay for said item.

But what people pay for an item doesn't determine it's value either. The price is just a mechanism to atract or detract supplies. If there is a shortage the price will be higher, but no value was created. There is only a situation were buyers will bid up the price.

	29-01-2005 00:25									#33
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

quote: Originally posted by Kontiki How is it a misrepresentation? Is value relative or not?

You claimed that I said a loaf of bread is just as valuable to a satisfied person as it is to a starving person, which I clearly do not agree with. In that sense yes value is relative, but just because a starving person would pay more does not mean that the bread is more valuable. I most definitely means that there is a problem with the market and there is a shortage, but shortages do not create value. Only labor can create value.

	29-01-2005 00:25									#34
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

Then what does determine value?

	29-01-2005 00:26									#35
	Full PM-box? Change here!

quote: Originally posted by Last Conformist Remind me why we should care about value anyway.

	29-01-2005 00:27									#36
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

quote: Originally posted by Kontiki Then what does determine value?

Social necessity does.

	29-01-2005 00:28									#37
	Support Apolyton, buy Alpha Centauri

LC,

So that we can get more.

	29-01-2005 00:36									#38
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations: Deluxe Edition

quote: Originally posted by Kidicious You claimed that I said a loaf of bread is just as valuable to a satisfied person as it is to a starving person, which I clearly do not agree with. In that sense yes value is relative, but just because a starving person would pay more does not mean that the bread is more valuable. I most definitely means that there is a problem with the market and there is a shortage, but shortages do not create value. Only labor can create value.

You're going around in circles and contradicting yourself. How can you agree that the bread is more valuable to the starving person in one sentence and in the very next claim that it doesn't change the value of the bread? And how can you say that falling prices create value when you say also say only labor can create value?

	29-01-2005 00:38									#39
	Inflate your Upload Space

quote: Originally posted by Kidicious Social necessity does.

What happened to labor?

	29-01-2005 00:47									#40
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

quote: Originally posted by Kontiki You're going around in circles and contradicting yourself. How can you agree that the bread is more valuable to the starving person in one sentence and in the very next claim that it doesn't change the value of the bread? And how can you say that falling prices create value when you say also say only labor can create value?

How much the bread is worth to an individual is not the same as it is to society. Some people don't need bread so it doesn't have any value to them, but the bread does have value if someone else needs it. I agree that the bread is more valuable to some individuals but the total amount of value created has not increased as a whole, only for that individual.

	29-01-2005 00:49									#41
	Full PM-box? Change here!

quote: Originally posted by Kontiki What happened to labor?

Labor creates goods and services. Whether those goods and services are valuable depends on how much value society gets from them.

	29-01-2005 00:50									#42
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

Hence, my point that from a collection of beings the sum aggregate represents the value. However, the point stands, that sum aggregate value changes over time. The value of a horse today is significantly less than that around 1850. As a consequence, expecting optimal results in dynamic systems is a fools goal.

	29-01-2005 00:52									#43
	Get a bigger avatar today!

quote: Originally posted by Ogie Oglethorpe Hence, my point that from a collection of beings the sum aggregate represents the value. However, the point stands, that sum aggregate value changes over time. The value of a horse today is significantly less than that around 1850. As a consequence, expecting optimal results in dynamic systems is a fools goal.

Expecting yes, striving for, no.

	29-01-2005 00:53									#44
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

Your question posed was "Why has Capitalism failed to produce optimal value everywhere? ". Clearly that is an unrealistic expectation for any system.

	29-01-2005 00:55									#45
	Get a bigger avatar today!

quote: Originally posted by Ogie Oglethorpe Your question posed was "Why has Capitalism failed to produce optimal value everywhere? ". Clearly that is an unrealistic expectation for any system.

Ok, you get a cookie for disproving the troll.

	29-01-2005 01:11									#46
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by Kidicious LC, So that we can get more.

Marxists think that products have an objective value proportional to how much labour was needed to make it. Capitalists, IME, argue that products have a value that is some sort of aggregation (an average?) of the individual evaluations of the members of society of the desirability of the object. Either should make for a nice textbook definition.

But what's the point? Once we know that the value of a pound of lard is twelve Apolytonian drachmas, what are we supposed to do with this knowledge? Am I supposed to feel some karmic oneness with lard for knowing its value?

The capitalist response - IIUC - is gonna be that in a free market, the price will approximate the value (in their definition). This raises some questions wrt to discounts and the like, but let's say they're right. So what? What does this give me beyond reason to suppose they set up their definition of value to achieve precisely this? Why not simply forget about values, and concentrate on working out arses off to earn the many to pay the prices of the gadgets we covet?

The commie response - well, this, I suppose, is where you come in. What is the commie response?

	29-01-2005 01:16									#47
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by Kidicious Labor creates goods and services. Whether those goods and services are valuable depends on how much value society gets from them.

But does society value all goods and services equally, even with optimal supply and perfect distribution?

	29-01-2005 01:21									#48
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

quote: Originally posted by Last Conformist The commie response - well, this, I suppose, is where you come in. What is the commie response?

Wages are a price. If wages are below the value of work then workers are exploited.

	29-01-2005 01:23									#49
	Browse Apolyton AD-FREE

quote: Originally posted by Kontiki But does society value all goods and services equally, even with optimal supply and perfect distribution?

The value would be directly proportional to the labor input with education factored in, assuming that workers are all equally good.

	29-01-2005 01:35									#50
	Support Apolyton, buy Alpha Centauri

quote: Originally posted by Kidicious The value would be directly proportional to the labor input with education factored in, assuming that workers are all equally good.

A) That's a rediculous assumption.
B) So you're saying that society values all goods and services that can be produced with a high school diploma exactly the same, and all the goods and services that can be produced with an undergrad degree exactly the same, etc.?

	29-01-2005 01:39									#51
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

quote: If wages are below the value of work then workers are exploited.

Does the worker's opinion matter?

	29-01-2005 01:44									#52
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

quote: Originally posted by Kontiki A) That's a rediculous assumption. B) So you're saying that society values all goods and services that can be produced with a high school diploma exactly the same, and all the goods and services that can be produced with an undergrad degree exactly the same, etc.?

I'm saying that the value that it gets from goods and services produced with a high school diploma is the same. If if doesn't get as much value from one good as the other even though they took the same amount of labor then it is allocating labor inefficiently.

	29-01-2005 01:46									#53
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

quote: Originally posted by Berzerker Does the worker's opinion matter?

Why should it? I may be under the opinion that the sky is yellow, but it's clearly blue.

	29-01-2005 01:57									#54
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

quote: Originally posted by Kidicious Wages are a price. If wages are below the value of work then workers are exploited.

If I recall correctly, that's the definition of exploitation in the Marxist sense. As long as I'm not accepting your notion of value, I'm not gonna care for a definition of exploitation that depends on it.

Or do you have some argumentation to convince me that wages below the Marxian value of the labour necessarily implies exploitation in a, well, pre-theoretical sense?

	29-01-2005 01:58									#55
	Support Apolyton, buy GURPS/ Alpha Centauri

quote: Originally posted by Berzerker Does the worker's opinion matter?

Apparently not-- I've been over this ground with kid before . . . a ditchdigger can make $10 an hour and not be exploited but he IS exploited if a capitalist provides a tractor that lets him work 10 times as fast but "only paid him $50 an hour-- ( since the tractor is irrelevant to kid)

You see -- a capitalist can pay much much more but still be exploiting the worker if it doesn't meet kids view of the "true value" of the work. Oh ya and of course this value may not be actually ascertainable

	29-01-2005 01:59									#56
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

quote: Originally posted by Kidicious I may be under the opinion that the sky is yellow, but it's clearly blue.

Your opinion that the sky is yellow would be closer to reality that most of your statements

	29-01-2005 02:07									#57
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

quote: Originally posted by Last Conformist If I recall correctly, that's the definition of exploitation in the Marxist sense. As long as I'm not accepting your notion of value, I'm not gonna care for a definition of exploitation that depends on it. Or do you have some argumentation to convince me that wages below the Marxian value of the labour necessarily implies exploitation in a, well, pre-theoretical sense?

If you don't think that it's exploitation then I have no argument with you, but you should really use the definition the way most people do. It's hardly just Marxian.

	29-01-2005 02:11									#58
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

quote: Originally posted by Flubber Apparently not-- I've been over this ground with kid before . . . a ditchdigger can make $10 an hour and not be exploited but he IS exploited if a capitalist provides a tractor that lets him work 10 times as fast but "only paid him $50 an hour-- ( since the tractor is irrelevant to kid)

Since that's not a real situation I don't see how it matters really if we disagree. In the real world the worker gets paid the same whether he has the tractor or not.

	29-01-2005 02:16									#59
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

quote: Why should it? I may be under the opinion that the sky is yellow, but it's clearly blue.

So the worker's opinion doesn't matter. Kid knows better than me if I'm being exploited and freedom means Kid gets to make my decisions.

	29-01-2005 02:21									#60
	Suffering from ads?

Defining exploitation with reference with reference to the labour theory of value is "hardly just Marxian"? I challenge you to find one non-Marxist who would agree with it.

(People being idiots, you'll probably find one if you look a bit, but the challenge sounds good. )

Anyway, the point isn't about exploitation, but about the utility of the concept of "value" in the Marxist sense. Saying that the Marxist definition of exploitation rests on it won't cut it unless you can give some independent motivation for that.