Student A labors two hours researching and writing his paper...

Why just you don't try to explain leftshitags?

hurr bait

durr read a book

Every single time Holla Forums gets btfo they sagebomb thread until eventually a mod deletes the thread.

This board is anti intellectual at its core and is pure cancer.

hurr durr

I'm not suprised.

The LTV deals with the production of circulating commodities under capitalist relations under the putting-out or factory system. It says noting about non-capitalistic relations or grading standards inside an academic institution.

You guys are really upset about us refusing to engage with you, aren't you?

Here, read something.

Holla Forums cannot tell the difference between concrete labour time and abstract labour time.
My level of surprise is reaching dangerously low levels.

For what it's worth, I'm pretty sure Gintis and Bowles are no longer Marxists.

wait holy shit was this thread for real

The question in the OP was retarded, people mocked it, you got butthurt. Just make your next bait thread already.

Try harder, m8.

See

you fucking mong.

Firstly a paper is not a commodity so your entire argument is worthless right off the bat, but let's imagine you're producing shoes instead or something.
Value according to Marxian LTV is determined NOT by individual labour hours put into individual commodities but instead by socially necessary labour time. Five seconds on wikipedia would have been enough to dispel this retarded argument of yours.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socially_necessary_labour_time

Try actually reading about the Marxian LTV before trying to criticize it, this is a really pathetically stupid argument and it's not really surprising people are just telling you to read a book, it's so dumb that most people are not even paying attention to you at all.

Get that fucking nuance out of my fucking face, leftist scum. I need simple answers to complex questions or else the Jews win.

Here let me try:

Student A gets an A because he spent more time on his paper. Student B gets a C because he spent less time on his paper.
There, now I'm right and you're wrong. Because I said so.

This exact question is addressed in Chapter 1 of Capital by Karl Marx.

Well done, you found an example where a misapplied abstraction breaks down. Clap clap clap.

The difference between Holla Forums and Holla Forums is that people on Holla Forums already know that these things are just abstractions which provide a simplified picture of a complex reality. Holla Forums are so deep in ideological id-pol that they can't even conceive of any situations in which their own abstractions break down and assert that every contradiction must be fucking Jewish propaganda.

More female than male students these days, black women even the most educated group in the US these days.

Holla Forums BTFO and according to its own logic intellectually inferior to all and especially to black women.

...

kek'd

Instead of arguing over socially necessary labor in which every single thing manufactured has to be evaluated, why not use something easier and more concrete, like the price determined in a free market?

both involve all the firms in the given field or industry, and prices are subject to fluctuations independent of the work-time involved in production. markets arent even that free anymore because crises threw them into tailspins. so how about nah

Not in a free market, my dude

No shit. When they invented the cotton gin the price of a slaves work fluctuated a lot and that was a good thing. When prices fluctuate you have an opportunity to make money by buying low and selling high. Even if you're flustered about prices going up I'm positive you're complaining about a non essential getting more expensive. Water and food are pretty cheap.

And the government regulated them. When they were free people just weathered the storm. They had savings they could use until the markets corrected themselves. They always will.

But it does, if I can transport something from across the world instead of manufacture it nearer to me. unless you are a Nazi who is going to try to impose borders on capital. capitalism made itself into a world market purely of its own accord.

See, now I know you are trolling or a retard

what about housing? we both know housing markets are insane (gentrification, needing rent control in cities, spending over half one's income on rent, etc)

wew all hail the market

See user with the material abundance of capitalism, I think your protestant work ethic is obsolete as is your market theology

Two companies negotiating a price is much more efficient than a burocrat determining the price.

Every action that has a buying price and a selling price can be easily measured, even if it's a slave. You subtract the cost of the slave and it's upkeep from the money you make off is labor. It's just like determining the value of a machine or an employee. It's not that hard to figure out.

Rent is high because you're willing to pay it. If a landlord raised the rent so high that no one could afford it, they'd go bankrupt. Hoovervilles existed because people were looking for work. The homestead act was still in effect, they could all have gone west and claimed their ten acres of they wanted.

two companies negotiating a price sounds very cartel-like and not very free market at all user

So we agree that wage work is basically slavery? Cool we agree!

absolute gems!

Rent is high because of the inherent implied violence of private property. Sort of like how I'm "willing to pay" a robber holding a gun to my head.

Just FYI

You're wrong. No one is forcing you to rent housing. There's no law saying you have to. It's just very preferable.

Taxes on the other hand…

Noone is forcing you to not go and live in Somalia.
You just prefer to pay taxes :^)

But the legal structure allows someone to be a landlord and rent land instead of getting a job like everyone else. No laws outright DISALLOW landlordism. Hmm.

I guess no one is forcing you to pay the robber either, getting shot is your choice!

...