• marcos@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    4 months ago

    For example, the entire labor theory of value doesn’t hold up on the real world and Economics had already better explanations for the phenomenon it was trying to explain.

    • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      4 months ago

      What part of Marx’s LTV doesn’t hold up? What theories explain Value better?

      Are you capable of specifics, or can you only gesture? I am genuinely trying to see if you have an actual argument, I’m a Marxist and I encourage you to point to something that could maybe test that.

      • marcos@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        4 months ago

        None of the LTV hold up. For a start, it predicts that people won’t ever trade. That’s quite a big flaw because, you know, people do trade. Theories of value predicting people won’t trade was a big problem by the time Marx was young. His one doesn’t solve the problem at all, but well, it wasn’t a problem anymore when he published.

        The family of theories of value that predict that trade happens are called “subjective theories of value”.

        • Funkytom467@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          4 months ago

          Labour theory of value puts value on goods for the sole purpose of trading and explaining trades. Both LTV and STV does.

          Marx’s use of LVT is to criticize how Capitalism leads to exploitation. But although the specifics differ SVT could still be used to raise the same critiques.

        • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          edit-2
          4 months ago

          None of the LTV hold up. For a start, it predicts that people won’t ever trade

          What on Earth are you talking about? Do you know what “Exchange-Value” represents? Can you point to that in Marx’s writings? If this is your best, then you need to read more of Marx before you randomly start pretending it’s debunked or outdated, lmao.

          • marcos@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            5
            ·
            4 months ago

            Do you know what “Exchange-Value” represents?

            An attempt of pushing some amount of subjectivity into his value theory, but still in a way that keeps it objective and still fails to predict trade.

            • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              6
              ·
              edit-2
              4 months ago

              Exchange-Value isn’t subjective.

              Can you answer my main question, where did you invent the idea that the LTV doesn’t believe trade exists? This is PragerU level, try harder please.