/biz/ - Business & Finance

[Anonymous No.55152292]

How is value created?

[Anonymous No.55152296]

>>55152292
menger talked about it pretty well, so im not going to spoonfeed you

[Anonymous No.55152312]

Keynes was an idiot but he understood one thing of a deeper meaning. It's all about building, growing and knowing when it's time to tear shit down to rebuild a new with the knowledge acquired before. To rebuild the new better

The value is the knowledge and the keepers of knowledge

[Anonymous No.55152338]

>>55152292
if you ask a socialist, the state defines it. It's the reason you should ignore every retard who says BTC is 0.

[Anonymous No.55152347]

>>55152338
BTC's real value*

[Anonymous No.55152445]

>>55152347
BTC real value is being able to transact outside of established networks during times of tyranny and dysfunctional banking networks, nothing more nothing less. Everything build on top of this is mostly bloat, unnecessary. Somehow the necessary stuff stopped after multi key escrow was build

[Anonymous No.55152482]

scarcity and demand

[Anonymous No.55152492]

>>55152292
Energy. Entropy give value to things in the Universe.

[Anonymous No.55152495]

holistically

[Anonymous No.55152562]

Gold, gold gives value to all things

[Anonymous No.55152578]

Strength. Something can only have value if it can be defended.

[Anonymous No.55152603]

>>55152578
But if it can’t be defended then it still has value to the person who is taking it right?

[Anonymous No.55152607]

Value isn't created, things are created/done that people value

[Anonymous No.55152611]

>>55152562
Hey Midas

[Anonymous No.55152875]

>>55152603
Defence against destruction. If it's being taken then it's just found a new host to collect value in.

[Anonymous No.55152904]

>>55152875
Are you a jew?

[Anonymous No.55152906]

>>55152482

/thread

[Anonymous No.55153039]

>>55152292

Value claims are the result of the ability to notice cause and effect and the differences between things. Objective reality understood through empirical data results in differences between two things. Combined with the ability to compare proposed actions to ideal standards, aka freewill, you get value claims.

Money's value is the result of the above combined with real (gold, silver, etc) and fake scarcity (paying taxes with fiat, etc)

Crypto uses all of the above to get it's value.

[Anonymous No.55153055]

>>55152904
Is it jewish to reject the ego?

[Anonymous No.55153061]

>>55153039
>Empirical data
>Shits on your models and observations with deliberately false data
The result of the corpocratization of the internet is corporates shitting up there own data each other creating an endless false feedback loop

[Anonymous No.55153066]

>>55152292
Speculation for the most part

[Anonymous No.55153070]

>>55153055
Of course it is. It's an attempt to weaken the mind so a parasite can enter

[Anonymous No.55153079]

>>55152292
labor

[Anonymous No.55153172]

>>55152292
Belief.

[Anonymous No.55153192]

>>55152292
Future investors

[Anonymous No.55153206]

>>55153079
Nice try Marx, now fuck off

[Anonymous No.55153209]

>>55153192
Demographic decline. Liquidity not found. Trust lost

[Anonymous No.55153240]

Can you believe people actually work for money that somebody else prints for free?
Absolute madness

[Anonymous No.55153274]

>>55152292
Debt.

[Anonymous No.55153280]

>>55153274
Jew detected

[Anonymous No.55153309]

>>55153206
without labor nothing gets done. capitalist niggers btfo.

[Anonymous No.55153342]

>>55152292
utility

[Anonymous No.55153488]

>>55153309
without capital 99.99% of things don't get done
socialist niggers btfo

[Anonymous No.55153492]

Labor :)

[Anonymous No.55153496]

>>55153492
debunked by bohm bawerk :)

[Anonymous No.55153577]

>>55153488
>what is planned economy

[Anonymous No.55153605]

>>55153577
A complete disaster and theoretically impossible?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economic_calculation_problem

[Anonymous No.55153610]

>>55153488
>prints infinite capital
>gives it immediately to his pedo friends
>pedo friends give it to their druggy friends
>druggy friends give it to their cum rag/onlyfans bitches
>onlyfans give it to trayvon and jamal
>trayvon and jamal spend it on Gucci, nike, adidas, etc brand names
>brand names give it to shanifa who runs the cash register and stocks the supply room
>….
>you get 0.00000000000000000000000000000000000001%

[Anonymous No.55153617]

>>55153605
Jep. Arrogance paired with false feedback

[Anonymous No.55153647]

>>55153610
that's not what capital is
also the employees get 90% of profits not 0.00000000000000000000000000000000000001%
we know this because typical profit margins economy wide are 5-10%

[Anonymous No.55153675]

>>55153605
>economic calculation problem
doesn't exist, try again

[Anonymous No.55153694]

>>55153675
>Trying to make generalized predictions in multivariate spaces
There we have the arrogance

[Anonymous No.55153707]

>>55152292
Value is created when a sentient being desires something, that something in question gains value.

[Anonymous No.55153875]

>>55153061
I noticed you used empirical data to make this reply. Thanks for proving my position with your surface consequentialism.

[Anonymous No.55153901]

>>55153675
>I can't refute it so it doesn't exist
lmao

Suppose that our society has perfect information about the amount, quality, and location of all the resources available in every barn, closet, nook, and cranny of the economy. All this information is stored in an infinitely fast computer, meaning that computations are all performed instantly, with zero lag.

One thing we have to decide is how to produce a widget. There are two production processes, one that requires ten pounds of iron, and the other requires an ounce of gold. Which should we select?

Remember, we know everything that Lange and the socialists think we need to know. But they were, and are, quite wrong about that. The limiting factor is not calculating power, it is the capacity of a system to generate information. What we need to know is which resource has a greater opportunity cost, ten pounds of iron or an ounce of gold. The problem is easily solved by prices, so why not just use computers to calculate prices?

There’s the problem. Prices are not given; they are not inputs to allocation decision. Prices are the result of millions of people, all over the world, simultaneously choosing and reacting to the feedback that dynamically adjusting prices reveal about the consequences of choices by others. The “value” of iron and gold is the aggregated consequence of an impossibly complex interaction of subjective valuations of products and inputs.

The information required to “calculate” the correct choice literally does not exist until market processes are allowed to generate information about the relative opportunity costs of various resources. Having the amounts of resources in a database tells you very little. Only the fact that an ounce of gold costs more, in terms of value foregone, answers the question. But that information is not calculated by markets, it is generated by markets. It’s a different thing entirely.

[Anonymous No.55153902]

>>55153875
There is a difference between quantitative and qualitative analysis. The focus on the former has pretty much fucked up the system because the latter is way harder, more time consuming and expensive

[Anonymous No.55154018]

>>55152445
Yeah so is every other coin, it's just a block of digital information that can't be copied, but still a block of digital information as opposed to something that can actually go into your wallet or be extracted from a machine/institution. Scammers believe in e-coins, which only have value based off of real currency.

[Anonymous No.55154051]

>>55154018
Not quite. Satoshi walked away, stayed anon and wasn't a grifter. That's the difference

[Anonymous No.55154073]

All globohomo valuations are integrated from the nigger spot. The nigger spot is the continuum fundament of all world judeo-orientalist economics.

[Anonymous No.55155074]

>>55152292
Energy

[Anonymous No.55155905]

>>55154073
>- Racism
I kneel

[Anonymous No.55155989]

>>55152312
>>55155074
>Knowledge
>Energy
Only correct answers ITT

[Anonymous No.55155996]

>>55152292
Is all about what men believe. It's a shadow in the wall, as Varys would say.

[Anonymous No.55156015]

>>55152611
Such a cold finger

[Anonymous No.55156569]

>>55152292
When one recalls how humans ontologically have volition and thus have values which they act to gain and keep, one can properly establish objective value theory: how one values entirely depends contextually on the individuals needs, determined by the individuals own value-judgements; value does not appear intrinsically and instead arises contextually from person to person. When individuals volitionally trade to each other, it means that both parties benefit from the transaction since they both end up better in accordance to their own values, preferring the other's possessions and services over their own.

[Anonymous No.55157079]

>>55155996
I want to believe Anon, but it's getting harder every day...

[Anonymous No.55157088]

>>55152292
The law of supply and demand states that if a product has a high demand and low supply, the price will increase. Contrarily, if there is low demand and high supply, the price will decrease.

[Anonymous No.55157252]

>>55152292
Depends what level of apocalypse you're at

[Anonymous No.55157265]

>>55153901
Computers are more than capable of large-scale economic planning via cybernetics. If 70s computers in allende's chile could do it, today's modern technology also certainly can.
>Prices are the result of millions of people, all over the world, simultaneously choosing and reacting to the feedback
That's how it would work in an ideal world but in practicality you and I know that capitalism doesn't work like that. There are too many external variables involved and in reality the capitalists are mainly responsible for setting prices. Especially so in present-day late-stage capitalism where production is so heavily monopolized. If they want to raise prices they can do so at will with artificial scarcity or buyouts and face no repercussions.
>The information required to “calculate” the correct choice literally does not exist until market processes are allowed to generate information about the relative opportunity costs of various resources
Ever thought about deciding the correct choice democratically, according to the needs of the population rather than the choice that will produce the highest expected profits for the 1%?

[Anonymous No.55157385]

>>55157265
>BIG COMPUTER CAN MAGICALLY KNOW EVERY VARIABLE IN A CONSTNATLY CHANGING ECONOMY
lmao you people are a religious cult
this has been debunked a million times

>If 70s computers in allende's chile could do it
Except they couldn't and it was a collasal failure.
Jarvis pull up massive wage stagnation and inflation in alldende's chile.

>but in practicality you and I know that capitalism doesn't work like that.
That's literally how it works though and central planning is obviously not a solution.

>and in reality the capitalists are mainly responsible for setting prices.
Prices are set by supply and demand, not the "greed" of capitalists.

>where production is so heavily monopolized.
Source?

>Ever thought about deciding the correct choice democratically
HAHA Jesus christ. So everyone would be forced to fill out surveys every 5 minutes, which would be inaccurate in the next 5 minutes as desires/consumption/production changes. Suuuure bud.

>according to the needs of the population
This is already happening.

[Anonymous No.55157439]

>>55157265
>late-stage capitalism
also, this is beyond hilarious
you people have been saying this for over 100 years

[Anonymous No.55157900]

>>55157385
>Except they couldn't and it was a collasal failure
Socialism doesn't work. When you try it you're overthrown in a CIA-backed coup.
>Prices are set by supply and demand, not the "greed" of capitalists
If you're a multi-billion dollar corpo like google, apple and walmart you can set whatever prices you want and people will be forced to buy your product at your price. They have little to no competition so they can fuck us over and increase their profits pretty much at will. I'm sure you've noticed record high grocery store prices. Same thing goes for the energy industry. Last year during record high oil prices there was this story all over the news of a gas station in Wisconsin getting sued by BP and some other energy corpo for selling gas below market value. Best part is the courts will always side with porky due to lobbying (it's almost as if capital dominates capitalism). Capitalism is so great, amirite
>>where production is so heavily monopolized.
Are you serious? The monopolization trend is present in every industry you look at
>car manufacturing
we used to have oldsmobile, pontiac, saturn and plymouth
>cell phones
nokia and blackberry used to be big players and have since been overshadowed by apple
>fast food
mcdonald's has taken the biggest piece of the pie and is still growing, while its competitors KFC and burger king are closing locations.
Those are just to name a few. If you bothered to read books you would've already known about the inherent laws of capitalism, one being the trend towards monopolization.
>So everyone would be forced to fill out surveys every 5 minutes
No one would have to fill surveys. There would be local community representatives to assess the material conditions and then decide allocations and production quotas. This should be simple to follow anon.

[Anonymous No.55158265]

>>55152292
Value is relative rather than fixed.
Everyone values different things.
It is a mistake to break everything into monetary value when there are other forms of value like relationships, family, status, freedom, and so on.

The reason that sales transactions take place is because each person values what the other gives them more then what they exchange for it.

A bottle of water is worth 10$ on an isolated tourist trap in Dubai, but is worth 0$ inside your own house. Value is relative.

There are a million different ways to create value.
An example is if Gordon Ramsey puts his name and recipes on a restaurant, suddenly they can charge 5x higher prices and draw into a much larger crowd.

[Anonymous No.55158378]

>>55157900
>When you try it you're overthrown in a CIA-backed coup.
This is the go-to commie cope lol.
Far more socialist states have failed on their own merits than have been negatively affected by muh cia interference.
Socialism simply doesn't work.

>If you're a multi-billion dollar corpo like google, apple and walmart you can set whatever prices you want
This isn't true whatsoever. If iphones cost a million dollars each, almost nobody would buy them.
It's incredible you retards deny basic things like supply and demand.
Also lol, it's funny you mention walmart because they made their money by lowering prices for consumers, selling to low income people.
>They have little to no competition
They have a massive amount of competition. What the hell are you talking about?
>and increase their profits pretty much at will.
Why don't they simply raise them to a million dollars then?
>I'm sure you've noticed record high grocery store prices.
Yes, due to government intervention through the central banks you people love so much.
>during record high oil prices
Why did oil prices come down if capitalists can simply raise them all the time? lol
>Capitalism is so great, amirite
Yes, it lifts people out of poverty and pushes down prices. In the past when we had actual free markets with no central banks, prices would come down constantly for decades.
>The monopolization trend is present in every industry you look at
Again, source?
Just because a company is massive doesn't mean they are a monopoly.
>we used to have oldsmobile, pontiac, saturn and plymouth
LOL WHAT? Cars are one of the most competitive, non-monopolized industries. Also 3 of those companies were just brand names of the same company.
>and have since been overshadowed by apple
Apple's market share is 22%. That's not a monopoly. You're dumb.
>mcdonalds
their market share is 21.4% lmfao

[Anonymous No.55158393]

>>55157900
>f you bothered to read books
We all know marxists refuse to read critiques of their ideology.
Why don't you read mises, bohm bawerk, rothbard etc?
>one being the trend towards monopolization.
Yet it still isn't happening lmao
You've been saying this since the 1800s

>No one would have to fill surveys.
So how would the state magically know human desires every moment like the market already does?
>There would be local community representatives
lmao so the majority would vote for corrupt politicians and the minority of the population doesn't get the products they want
You people are actually evil.
>material conditions
More meaningless marxist made up terms.
>then decide allocations and production quotas.
That's actually fucking insane.
You literally advocate not being able to choose the products and services that you want and need and are forced to receive only what politicians want you to. The majority of the population gets the products they want and the minority does not. Have fun losing the vote 50% of the time and not getting what you want.
You're an actual cuckold.

The economic calculation problem already refuted your retarded cult ideology a long time ago. It's not possible for the state to know in advance what people need. The fact people vote on these politicians doesn't change this.
You have zero refutation to anything we are saying.

[Anonymous No.55158402]

>>55158378
>Why don't they simply raise them to a million dollars then?
*raise prices to a million dollars

[Anonymous No.55158420]

>>55157900
also
>monopolies are LE BAD!
>the government should definitely monopolize everything though and throw people in prison for trying to compete with them

[Anonymous No.55158421]

:O

brrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr

[Anonymous No.55158441]

>>55152292
Why does anything exist?

[Anonymous No.55158443]

Why, charging interest on lent money of course!

[Anonymous No.55158456]

>>55152292
Value is imaginary

[Anonymous No.55158466]

Agriculture is the foundation of all value.

[Anonymous No.55158485]

>>55152292
People want something. Simple as.

[Anonymous No.55158557]

>>55157385
>>BIG COMPUTER CAN MAGICALLY KNOW EVERY VARIABLE IN A CONSTNATLY CHANGING ECONOMY
>lmao you people are a religious cult
>this has been debunked a million times
What do you think crypto mining is?

[Anonymous No.55158616]

>>55158557
>What do you think crypto mining is?
not centrally planning an economy, that's for sure

[Anonymous No.55158649]

>>55158265
>A bottle of water is worth 10$ on an isolated tourist trap in Dubai, but is worth 0$ inside your own house. Value is relative.
That's use value. There's also objective value which is equivalent to the average number of labor hours required to produce a given commodity

[Anonymous No.55158731]

>>55158649
There is no such thing as objective value and labor hours has absolutely nothing to do with how valuable a commodity is.
You can spend a year producing something, if nobody wants it's it has no value.

[Anonymous No.55158760]

>>55158649
also how do you reconcile the concept of socially necessary labor time, with the fact that labour is heterogenous?

[Anonymous No.55158780]

>>55153079
>>55153206
>>55153309
The RM was based on value of labor. If you know what that means, you're a fren.

[Anonymous No.55158791]

>>55158649
The fundamental issue of 'socially necessary labour time' is how Marxists claim that skilled labour can be seen as multiples of unskilled labour, because how do we establish quantitative ratios between different jobs? For example, how is it that we commensurate the labour time of a doctor, to that of a computer scientist into a quantitative ratio in which we say that the work of a doctor is worth exactly 3.5x more than that of the computer scientist. In order to do so would require taking the subjective values of the commodities/services produced into some sort of standard of measurement (5 utils for example) and then comparing the subjective value of those goods and services between individuals in the whole society against the labour time of each job. an interpersonal utility function by which all the utils (representing subjective values) can be calculated together in order to commensurate skilled and unskilled labour into some ratio between all the different jobs. The issue is that there doesn't exist such a standard of measurement and function.

[Anonymous No.55158794]

>>55158378
>This isn't true whatsoever. If iphones cost a million dollars each, almost nobody would buy them.
>It's incredible you retards deny basic things like supply and demand.
They would because of the brand name. It's why people buy all sorts of overpriced shit like louis vuitton, gucci, now tesla cars. You're calling socialism cucked but western consumerism is the most cucked lifestyle imaginable. And no, I'm not denying supply and demand. No one denies it but there's a plethora of other factors affecting prices which you're pretending don't exist.
>Apple's market share is 22%. That's not a monopoly
They have a monopoly on the apple brand name
>>55158731
>There is no such thing as objective value
Commodities have a physical essence to them other than market value that every economist acknowledges. If it takes twice as long to produce a table as it does to produce a chair, the table is worth two chairs
>You can spend a year producing something, if nobody wants it's it has no value
Again you're conflating use value with tangible value. Also key word: average

[Anonymous No.55158799]

>>55152292
Value is created by the money printer.

[Anonymous No.55158800]

>>55158760
What is there to reconcile?

[Anonymous No.55158813]

>>55158791
what book are you copy-pasting from?

[Anonymous No.55158824]

>>55152445
its most important function by far is scarcity, fixed supply, impossible do dilute. some other (centralized) money could have done it but bitcoin just does it all; fixed supply, censorship resistance, global. it's just probably impossible to make a better money, local attempts will all fail in comparison, and it will inevitably compete/be compared.

[Anonymous No.55158895]

>>55158794
>They would because of the brand name.
Not if each phone cost a million dollars. People value prestigious brands and are willing to pay a premium for those products.
There is a hard limit to what consumers will actually pay for. Prices are obviously determined by supply and demand.

> louis vuitton, gucci, now tesla cars.
Yes because they value the brand. If these products cost double, the amount of people buying them would decrease and the companies would lose money.

>You're calling socialism cucked but western consumerism is the most cucked lifestyle imaginable.
Sooooo mass production of goods and services right to your doorstep, far far cheaper than they were 20-40 or even 100 years ago is cucked? lol why?
How is freedom to buy whatever products you want instead of having a political monopoly gatekeep what you can get cucked?
>I'm not denying supply and demand.
You are. You said companies can raise their prices as high as they want and consumers will just eat the costs.
>No one denies it but there's a plethora of other factors affecting prices which you're pretending don't exist.
I'm the one saying those factors exist. You're the one saying prices are simply determined by how greedy the capitalists are.
>They have a monopoly on the apple brand name
HAHAHA Goalposts status = moved.
That's like saying you have a monopoly over your body or that an ice cream shop owner has a monopoly over that shop, or that you have a monopoly over your clothes. That's not what monopoly means.

>Commodities have a physical essence to them
Wrong. This is mystical nonsense. There are no prices embedded in goods and services.
>that every economist acknowledges
Wrong. Almost all economists today are marginalists, not marxists or labor theory economists.
>If it takes twice as long to produce a table as it does to produce a chair, the table is worth two chairs
What if nobody wants the table? Then it's worth less than the chair even though more labor went into it.

[Anonymous No.55158905]

>>55158800
see: >>55158791

>>55158813
I wrote this?

How do you deal with the fact bohm bawerk already refuted marx over 100 years ago?

[Anonymous No.55159026]

>>55152292
Value is subjective. It also depends on the benefits that something can bring to you, regardless of what it cost you monetarily.

[Anonymous No.55159054]

>>55152292
I have this thing. How much will you pay?
$20
Going once going twice sold for $20
It’s that simple

[Anonymous No.55159142]

Usage of the product/the availability of it; figures /biz/ would try to make something this simple into a complicated subject.

[Anonymous No.55159196]

>>55158895
Not gonna waste any more time arguing with you when you're failing to acknowledge the distinction between use value and tangible value. I can't make progress talking to you if you keep bringing up use value and markets when I'm trying to make a point about objective value. I don't feel like writing more long autist posts with greentext and would rather take it one point at a time.

There is definitely something objective to commodities besides their market value and denying that fact is a deviation from material reality. Marxists just gave that essential property of commodities a name and people like you started seething over it and saying it doesn't exist. If you're denying there being more to price calculation than supply and demand you're literally denying material reality. The classical economists who weren't even Marxists like smith and ricardo acknowledged the LTV. Marx also acknowledged supply and demand so let's get that out of the way. I was hyperbolic about companies being able to raise their prices as high as they want but that doesn't change the fact that they have an overwhelming influence on prices

[Anonymous No.55159243]

>>55159026
Too many things to take in count, if you gonna make a financial decision you have to do a research for everything

[Anonymous No.55159477]

>>55152292
Its just demand.
People want shit louis vuitton bags to be the top nigger in the jungle
Boom value was just created
The same with everything else

[Anonymous No.55159974]

>>55159196
>Not gonna waste any more time arguing with you
because you lost and couldn't refute these posts: >>55158378
>>55158393

>when I'm trying to make a point about objective value
I already explained how objective value doesn't exist and you have yet to respond to that.
>There is definitely something objective to commodities besides their market value
Why? Because you feel there is?
>Marxists just gave that essential property of commodities a name and people like you started seething over it and saying it doesn't exist.
Because it doesn't exist. It only exists in your mind.
>If you're denying there being more to price calculation than supply and demand
You have yet to give any evidence there is anything else.
>The classical economists who weren't even Marxists like smith and ricardo acknowledged the LTV.
LMAO holy shit is this supposed to be an own or something?
Have you seriously ignored the past 120+ years of economic history?
Do you not know what the marginal revolution is?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marginalism#Marginal_Revolution
Do you not know who Carl Menger was? Smith, Riccardo and Marx were refuted by him.
>I was hyperbolic about
more like you were wrong about

[Anonymous No.55160149]

>>55159142
Doesn't take into account demand...