So? That doesn't justify his theory of value being incomplete. Certainly even if this particular aspect of use value isn't unique to capitalism, it still exists within it!
What the fuck guys?
Gabriel Jenkins
Christopher Reed
Wot?
If you ever read Das Capital(i doubt you will) you would know that he definitely talks about use value(even it don't being the main focus), and wouldn't be a spouting shit marsoc in the first place.
Gavin Brown
Wouldn't this mean that exchange-value currency is a keystone of capitalism?
I'm doing a first read through and I really seem to notice that money in itself seems to actually be the underlying thing that causes much of the rest of what happens.
Andrew Ward
I have read das kapital, and yes I know he talks about use value. I am saying that his theory of "value" is lacking because to him value only requires use value as a prerequisite and does not take it as a factor. This is important because of the theoretical function value plays in his theory.
Indeed the soviet union attempted to create a theory for value under socialism and ran into many problems on account of this.
Landon Mitchell
yes
Gavin Fisher
Yeah, I can compare quantities of the same use-value (here: coal). But I cannot compare different use-values without the medium of value.
Three mistakes:
1 – On one hand, you only assume ramen take as much time to produce than linguine. On the other hand, you state a fact (I have to trust you on this) about their respective price on the market. You'd need to prove both for your demonstration to work; here your assumption only conveniently confirms your pre-conceived conclusion.
2 – It's probably negligible, but you have to take into consideration the labour time spent in packing the noodles.
3 – More importantly: you confuse price and value. The price of a product is not its value: it is the value the buyer is willing to concede in exchange of the product. Note that, even if the price isn't equal to the value, it doesn't mean there is a creation of value in the process of trading: only a transfer.
Andrew Bell
gigglingstirners.jpg
Angel King
I think I found it
shikimori.org
Mason Gutierrez
I don't think the point of Marx was that life should be like that, but that capitalism is like that. The low importance of use value is an issue with capitalism, not with his model of capitalism.
If you want an economy where use value is important, you should advocate for central planning with a lexicographic logic and not your free-market socialism nonsense. By that I don't mean that all products and services have to be put in a strict ranking, but there will be lexicographic tiers. We will plan with upper and lower bounds instead of instantly fixing all the quantities, and for inputs that are used for stuff in different tiers, we plan for the less important stuff with what is left after deducting the upper-bound estimates of what will go to the higher-ranked stuff.