/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.3593154]

>Labour was the first price, the original purchase-money that was paid for all things. It was not by gold or by silver, but by labour, that all the wealth of the world was originally purchased; and its value, to those who possess it, and who want to exchange it for some new productions, is precisely equal to the quantity of labour which it can enable them to purchase or command.

Why have this man's ideas disappeared in our world?

[Anonymous No.3593164]

because machines bro

[Anonymous No.3593957]

>>3593164
But machines also created jobs.

[Anonymous No.3593960]

Because labour theory of value got associated with Marx and no one wants to be an evil Marxist.

[Anonymous No.3593963]

because labour theory of value is fundamentally irrelevant now

[Anonymous No.3594005]

>>3593963
Explain.

[Anonymous No.3594038]

>>3594005

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticisms_of_the_labour_theory_of_value

[Anonymous No.3594083]

>>3594038

Why do they act like it has to be Labour or Marginal utility? Couldn't value just arrise from both then that would solve half the criticisms on that page.

[Anonymous No.3594126]

Baudrillard wrote a nice essay called The End of Production, where he shows value is completely arbitrary.

[Anonymous No.3594199]

>>3594038
That the author of this post has abandoned the argument is revealing.

No doubt there are people who actually believe that if an idea is criticized on Wikipedia it is therefore "irrelevant," but these people do not matter and should be ignored.

Wealth Of Nations, etc., are still in print and read by the genuinely curious and otherwise properly educated. If the OP thinks these ideas have disappeared he should remove his head from his butthole.

[Anonymous No.3594240]

>>3593960
This, but Marx's understanding of labor theory was better than Smith's and anyone before him.

[Anonymous No.3594247]

Because he doesn't take into account economically exceptional goods or other anomalies in terms of value (art is a good example, why does barnett newman get paid ~5 million per hour to paint paintings when average joe painting a house gets $13 per hour?)

[Anonymous No.3594250]

>>3594083
marginal utility is problematic too. I agree that things like food or clothes seems to fit within the model, but what about other goods like music, books, literature, etc? Reading a good book inspires me to go find more books to read, it doesn't make me sick of them.

[Anonymous No.3594269]

Bump for interest

[Anonymous No.3594335]

The value of labor is still a necessity for production, even in the age of machine production since there are still people who need to create, improve and maintain those machines.

Machines are just labor multipliers, since a sewing machine will allow a tailor to produce more in the same amount of time, his labor plus the utility of the machine creates more product. This means that the demand for clothing will be met with less labor-time of individuals, so those who might have gone into clothing production can use their labor to meet others needs that are in demand.

Labor is a necessity in the production of value, but it is not a sufficient factor of value. The natural world has plenty of value for people, even though it is not a product of human production. Nor does the production of something give it any sort of inherent value. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, so to speak.

[Anonymous No.3594420]

>>3594250

They are both slightly problematic, but I can't think of a different theory that would be better..

[Anonymous No.3595886]

>>3594199
By disappeared I meant taken away from general politics. Of course liberalism is thriving in places like Hong Kong, Singapore etc, but it has endured a huge downfall and in most universities Adam Smith is being if not forgotten, being put in a place of 'historial curiosity'. I've bought the Wealth of Nations and I still can't understand why isn't this more widespread.

[Anonymous No.3596912]

I'm amazed they don't teach The Wealth of Nations in high school and barely in college.