Labor Theory of Value: still relevant or hopelessly out of date?

Labor Theory of Value: still relevant or hopelessly out of date?

Other urls found in this thread:

marxists.org/archive/rubin/value/
econlib.org/library/Enc/Marxism.html
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

...

It's still valuable, it was never 'disproven'.
Most mainstream economists don't even understand it, because they've never actually read marx.

I thought Adam Smith postulated that theory but Marx merely expanded on it.

Marx expanded on Ricardo's LToV mostly.

This

Austrian econs never really engaged with it, they just side tracked the discussion by using the subjective market price bullshit, which has nothing really to do with surplus value.

It really is very well explained in the first few chapters of Capital Vol 1. It's important that Marx differentiates price from value. Just read Capital OP goddamnit

If you find a diamond in your back yard according to labor theory of value it should be worthless because no labor went into making it.

Labor theory of valid was invalid from the get go.

...

Nature labored to create the value of the diamond, so the LTV still works.

This fucking meme

Similarly, if you take a bunch of fucks and dig a hole in the middle of nowhere, suddenly said hole becomes valuable.

checkmate pinkos

...

LtV deals heavily with social average cost of reproduction. If the average diamond was found by someone walking outside in their back yard, the value and price would reflect that.

you just went full mudpie, comrade.

never go full mudpie.

I wouldn't advise this. Marx makes a lot of unjustified a-priori claims in chapter 1 about value that seem totally out of the blue and don't make sense until much later.
I'd advise reading I.I.Rubin's essays on it:
marxists.org/archive/rubin/value/

two people actually replied to this
top b8 m8

This. Who the fuck keeps making these low-effort threads?

there's no harm in responding with reading materials so said low-effort poster has the option of learning about what they've asked about

Holla Forums could do well to take a page out of the hacker culture handbook and make people FUCKING GOOGLE IT instead of continuously letting shitposters like this get the spotlight, because bumping these threads isn't doing anyone any favors.

Still relevant.

The value of the diamond is determined by the cost of labour to obtain one like it.

Its the cost of labour to produce the same again. If its cheaper to make tables now, all tables are worth less, even if at the time it was made it cost lots.

Its socially necessary labour time that matters.

HOLY CRAP

Labour theory of value analyses the production of COMMODITIES that are produced using CAPITAL and it takes into account the fact that price is cost + markup.

Marx never said that all value comes from labour, nature itself has use value. Nature also has exchange value when sold and the reason diamonds are so damn expensive is because of huge monopoly, price = cost + markup.

Repeat after me, LTV is an analysis and deconstruction of the production and money circuit vis a vis Say's Law, nothing else. If a commodity doesn't enter its own circuit of production, that is if the consumer base is not the same as the labour base then the LTV doesn't apply and was never meant to apply.

I feel like most economists cant avoid random, pointless hypotheticals like this.

Read.
econlib.org/library/Enc/Marxism.html