Labor theory of value is nonsense. Value is determined by a consensus network of reciprocal exchange. The underlying logic of money markets is mimetic. Marxists are materialist essentialists who fail to comprehend the mimetic nature of our desires.
Sorry to drop this convo earlier, travelling. A financial asset's value is not solely determined by network consensus/mimesis, it also depends on fundamentals. Money is just another fin asset in practice and is subject to same constraint.
-
-
What are these constraints and how do you define money?
-
the constraint is that the value of a financial asset is tethered to the underlying cash-flows, indefinite divergence is not sustainable
-
so bubbles eventually pop
-
money I'm defining as whatever instruments circulate as money in practice. this is context dependent, eg bank deposits in a retail context, repo in wholesale
-
Sure, but that doesn't say anything about mimetic desire. The motivation for the underlying cash flows are still mimetic desire other than the most basic instinctual needs.
-
also you mentioned that stocks and bonds were not purely mimetic. how so? and money is? how are you distinguishing money from other credit instruments?
-
Yes, because you can do fundamental analysis for of companies for stocks and bonds. Money is the medium of exchange (mimetic/reciprocal behavior in the domain of valuation) itself.
-
now we get to the meat. what do you mean by "fundamental anaysis"?
- 1 more reply
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.