Because Marx's great achievement is the rigorous, fully-elaborated reductio ad absurdum of the (classical economic) labor theory of value, and no one is properly incentivized to recognize that.
-
-
Replying to @Outsideness @MorlockP
Marx: "Ricardo is a genius, but take his ideas (LTV) to the limit and it results in ruinous contradiction. Jehu: Revolution! Austrians: Or maybe we could try for a realistic theory of prices?
2 replies 1 retweet 39 likes -
Replying to @Outsideness @MorlockP
You gammon watch a Micheal Heinrich lecture on value theory, you might learn something other than mArxS ValUE tHeOry WaS jUsT rIcaRdO’s
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @ORGONEACCUMULA1 @MorlockP
Not just, but mostly. And Ricardo's Iron Law of Wages is the most robust thing to have come out of it.
2 replies 0 retweets 5 likes -
... By the end of Capital III, Marx has demonstrated conclusively that the LTV can't explain prices, so to say there's still a "theory" remaining at all is quite a stretch. ...
2 replies 0 retweets 9 likes -
LTV was never to explain prices
2 replies 0 retweets 3 likes -
Utter bullshit. There's no suggestion in Vol. I that it's meant to do anything else. The market price of labor, in particular, is Marx's focused problem.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
-
Not when you're doing economics.
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @Outsideness @wokeytliberal and
The pop culture meme quote here would be "price is what you pay, value is what you get". But if you're getting at what I think you're getting at, there's a lot of "for whom" questions in between every station here.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes
But Marx uses "price" and "value" interchangeably on both sides of the trade. It's not a discrepancy between price and value, but between two mathematically interconnected values / sets of prices.
-
-
Replying to @Outsideness @wokeytliberal and
I'd need to comb the text to see for sure if the wording is as arbitrary as you say, and my German is terrible, but my prior reading has been that value is a true figure that can be known in advance, and price is the corrupted outcome, related to but distinct from value.
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @bindtortureill @wokeytliberal and
In that case, "value" would have no economic meaning. Since "surplus value" is meant to describe the difference between industrial input and output prices (i.e. production profits), it's hard to make any such separation.
1 reply 1 retweet 3 likes - 3 more replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.