4 ms·

You are right, but the arguments above and in Hayek are really relevant for all kinds of markets. PS: it is nice to see an actual Marxist! :) Even though I dis

by xixi77 10y ago

You are right, but the arguments above and in Hayek are really relevant for all kinds of markets. PS: it is nice to see an actual Marxist! :) Even though I disagree with them on most things (really just LTV, but you can't really take that one out, can you), they deserve my respect for having an actual theory, and for having genuinely progressive goals. Too much of the left wing is occupied these days by people with muddled, vaguely regressive ideas who have obviously never heard of historical materialism.

ue_ 10y ago
>really just LTV, but you can't really take that one out, can you Marx wasn't a proponent of the LTV, he critiqued previous formulations of it and then made his own contributions to the theory that some aspect of the value of a commodity is determined by the amount of socially-necessary labour time applied to create it. Although I'm still learning myself, I haven't rejected it outright. If I recall correctly, some work conducted by Cockshott showed validity of the LTV as a good indicator for the prices about which changes in supply and demand cause fluctuations of the UK market. I can't find it at the moment though unfortunately. I think it's a real shame that sometimes points I make are downvoted without explanation. I try to be civil, though many people feel the need to downvote and not explain. I'm not going to refer to specific comments I've made, but I'm noticing that even bringing up the theory of exploitation or alienation is enough to gather downvotes. Is HN a libertarian forum? I didn't think so.
- xixi77 10y ago
  Nope, as a kinda libertarian myself, I don't think this a libertarian forum at all, judging by all the hate for things like sharing economy and such. I think a lot of people (on all sides really) just react to keywords instead of thinking about the content :( And yes labor input determines cost, and in equilibrium cost and value are the same, and would be correlated in the data -- but reasoning from cost imo amounts to putting the carriage before the horse, and leads to all kinds of shenanigans with the "socially necessary" component...

by xixi77 10y ago

ue_ 10y ago

>really just LTV, but you can't really take that one out, can you Marx wasn't a proponent of the LTV, he critiqued previous formulations of it and then made his own contributions to the theory that some aspect of the value of a commodity is determined by the amount of socially-necessary labour time applied to create it. Although I'm still learning myself, I haven't rejected it outright. If I recall correctly, some work conducted by Cockshott showed validity of the LTV as a good indicator for the prices about which changes in supply and demand cause fluctuations of the UK market. I can't find it at the moment though unfortunately. I think it's a real shame that sometimes points I make are downvoted without explanation. I try to be civil, though many people feel the need to downvote and not explain. I'm not going to refer to specific comments I've made, but I'm noticing that even bringing up the theory of exploitation or alienation is enough to gather downvotes. Is HN a libertarian forum? I didn't think so.

xixi77 10y ago
Nope, as a kinda libertarian myself, I don't think this a libertarian forum at all, judging by all the hate for things like sharing economy and such. I think a lot of people (on all sides really) just react to keywords instead of thinking about the content :( And yes labor input determines cost, and in equilibrium cost and value are the same, and would be correlated in the data -- but reasoning from cost imo amounts to putting the carriage before the horse, and leads to all kinds of shenanigans with the "socially necessary" component...