This thread is dedicated to the literal Marxist Singaporean poster yesterday who posted a thread discussing the Labour Theory of Value at around this time. Not sure if he was baiting or playing Devil's advocate, but he put forth the LVT and defended it, even though the Haitian mud pie rebuttal (Haitian mud pies require long hours to create, but are worth little to nothing) was presented.
So, are there "any valid objections to the LVT?"
Other urls found in this thread:
courses.nus.edu.sg
twitter.com
Bumping once.
I think he died. He hasn't responded to my pm's.
There's something to be said about the relationship between bait-like nature of posts and the replies you get.
He did say he had to go, maybe some Chinese business meeting gone awry?
idk, i have him on kikebook. He hasn't replied since yesterday though.
>Singaporean
>Marxist
But the only reason their place isn't an Indonesia-tier hellhole is becaused they Keynsed harder than anyone since Hitler... I don't get it.
I really doubt Marx himself believed he had perfected economic theory.
So what are your thoughts? Is the amount of labour the defining factor behind the worth of a good/service, or was that something Marx just came up with on the toilet?
Also how are monopolies and other worst case scenarios avoided in a totally free market, or are regulations required to maintain some level of order? Does this always result in a net negative?
My objection to the LVT is that most commodities are not demanded until they are invented. Nobody demanded a phone until it was invented. So the idea of the phone is probably worth a lot, but how do you quantify with LVT?
Here's what I posted yesterday and he has yet to respond.
My issue with communism is that I don't buy into to the the labor value theory. If you think about it, what really is behind the supply and demand? Most companies actually create the demand first and then supply it. Nobody demanded a phone before it was invented. This is why I emphasized the value of an idea. All commodities come from ideas, which is seemingly not quantifiable in terms of labor.