3 ms·

The maximum speed or acceleration abilities of a car are objective metrics, but how much people actually value those things is subjective. Value is subjective,

The maximum speed or acceleration abilities of a car are objective metrics, but how much people actually value those things is subjective. Value is subjective, each person values the same objective metrics differently (e.g. soccer moms generally don't value sports cars as much as single guys, if they did then we'd see a bunch of soccer moms driving their kids around in sports).

vasilipupkin 9y ago
yes, but a faster car with all other features being equal gives you objectively more features. There is a reason BMW costs more than a Honda civic. Right? Or else, if there is no reason whatsoever, Honda should be able to advertise in a clever manner and sell that Honda civic for the same price as a BMW 7 series or a Tesla. I mean if it's all subjective, right? But we can all agree that no matter what a Honda civic will cost less than a tesla. Yes?
- hossbeast 9y ago
  Even your example of faster speed is subjective. Some people may prefer the limitation of less speed. It's subjective.
  - vasilipupkin 9y ago
    Some people - yes. Some people prefer all sorts of things. Some people may prefer jumping off a bridge. That's irrelevant. On average, people will prefer an objectively better thing to an objectively worse thing and pay more for it
    - hossbeast 9y ago
      You've just used the term "objective" to describe what the term "objective" means. Surely you see the problem?
      - vasilipupkin 9y ago
        Look, cars that have specific features cost more than cars that don't have those features. That's objective. Stocks of companies that are very profitable, like google are more expensive than stocks of companies that are not. That's objective. Right ?
        sbenitoj 9y ago
        Correct, but it's people's perception of value that ultimately drives the current stock price. Take Amazon as an example, in 2016 its net income was $2.4 billion, yet it currently trades at a total market capitalization (the value of all outstanding shares) of $471 billion (or approximately 196x its net income) [0] Compare that to Ford Motor Company, in 2016 its net income was $4.6 billion, yet it currently trades at a total market capitalization of $45 billion (or approximately 10x its net income) [1] So Ford was actually MORE profitable than Amazon in 2017, but it's market capitalization is only 10% of Amazon. So what's driving the differences? People's perception of value. People perceive that Amazon will be more profitable than Ford Motor Company in the future, even though objectively Ford is more profitable than Amazon right now. [0] Amazon Financials - https://finance.google.com/finance?q=NASDAQ%3AAMZN&fstype=ii&ei=-IWxWZmbHsayjAHX3brQDg https://finance.google.com/finance?q=NASDAQ%3AAMZN&fstype=ii... [1] Ford Financials - https://finance.google.com/finance?q=NYSE%3AF&fstype=ii&ei=zIWxWeHWLIzE2Aa-35KYBQ https://finance.google.com/finance?q=NYSE%3AF&fstype=ii&ei=z...
        vasilipupkin 9y ago
        they perceive it because Amazon is growing faster than Ford, which is an objective metric. Not because they simply completely subjectively decided that amazon is more promising - there are quantifiable OBJECTIVE metrics that this is the case
        sbenitoj 9y ago
        You're saying Amazon is growing faster than Ford, but they're not growing faster in terms of profitability (even if people perceive that Amazon will be more profitable in the future). Yes Amazon revenue is growing faster than Ford revenue, but is that the metric that matters most? Maybe, maybe not, it's subjective, only individuals can decide for themselves.
- sbenitoj 9y ago
  I'll give you the benefit of the doubt that you're not just trolling and you're actually trying to understand whether value is objective or subjective. Assuming you are, read the following link and let me know if you still think value is objective, and if so what parts specifically do you disagree with: https://wiki.mises.org/wiki/Subjective_theory_of_value https://wiki.mises.org/wiki/Subjective_theory_of_value
  - vasilipupkin 9y ago
    So if value is purely subjective, then surely some people would be willing to pay 100k for a Honda vs Tesla? Why doesn't Honda try to sell cars for 100k? Why isn't a cup of coffee at Starbucks 20 bucks ? If it's pure subjectivity, then surely that would work
    - sbenitoj 9y ago
      Well, all prices are still determined by the intersection of supply and demand. I'm not saying that the objective features are IRRELEVANT to a consumer's purchase decision, obviously they're not, but ultimately each person values what they're buying differently than the next person. I'll run with your coffee example: Let's say someone currently values a cup of Starbucks at $6 / cup and Starbucks is selling it for $4 / cup. If Starbucks raises their prices above $6 / cup (to $20 like you say), that person would no longer purchase Starbucks coffee unless their values change. But there's a good chance that SOME people (a small minority no doubt, but probably not zero people) currently value Starbucks at more than $20 / cup, those people would continue to buy coffee from Starbucks unless their values change. As prices for Starbucks coffee increase and exceed the amount that individuals value it, those people will begin to explore alternatives on the market to determine if there is another comparable good that meets their needs at a price less than they value it.
      - vasilipupkin 9y ago
        "but ultimately each person values what they're buying differently than the next person" that is true, but irrelevant. On average, overall value is highly correlated to objective metrics. so, this is why this conversation started. Price, including price of bitcoin, is not simply some subjective thing - it must be tied to some objective indicators. For example, price of coffee at Starbucks cannot be too far above what it costs to make coffee at home. It will be higher, since you are paying for convenience. But there is only so much that makes sense to pay for convenience and people won't pay more than that.

vasilipupkin 9y ago

yes, but a faster car with all other features being equal gives you objectively more features. There is a reason BMW costs more than a Honda civic. Right? Or else, if there is no reason whatsoever, Honda should be able to advertise in a clever manner and sell that Honda civic for the same price as a BMW 7 series or a Tesla. I mean if it's all subjective, right? But we can all agree that no matter what a Honda civic will cost less than a tesla. Yes?

hossbeast 9y ago
Even your example of faster speed is subjective. Some people may prefer the limitation of less speed. It's subjective.
- vasilipupkin 9y ago
  Some people - yes. Some people prefer all sorts of things. Some people may prefer jumping off a bridge. That's irrelevant. On average, people will prefer an objectively better thing to an objectively worse thing and pay more for it
  - hossbeast 9y ago
    You've just used the term "objective" to describe what the term "objective" means. Surely you see the problem?
    - vasilipupkin 9y ago
      Look, cars that have specific features cost more than cars that don't have those features. That's objective. Stocks of companies that are very profitable, like google are more expensive than stocks of companies that are not. That's objective. Right ?
      - sbenitoj 9y ago
        Correct, but it's people's perception of value that ultimately drives the current stock price. Take Amazon as an example, in 2016 its net income was $2.4 billion, yet it currently trades at a total market capitalization (the value of all outstanding shares) of $471 billion (or approximately 196x its net income) [0] Compare that to Ford Motor Company, in 2016 its net income was $4.6 billion, yet it currently trades at a total market capitalization of $45 billion (or approximately 10x its net income) [1] So Ford was actually MORE profitable than Amazon in 2017, but it's market capitalization is only 10% of Amazon. So what's driving the differences? People's perception of value. People perceive that Amazon will be more profitable than Ford Motor Company in the future, even though objectively Ford is more profitable than Amazon right now. [0] Amazon Financials - https://finance.google.com/finance?q=NASDAQ%3AAMZN&fstype=ii&ei=-IWxWZmbHsayjAHX3brQDg https://finance.google.com/finance?q=NASDAQ%3AAMZN&fstype=ii... [1] Ford Financials - https://finance.google.com/finance?q=NYSE%3AF&fstype=ii&ei=zIWxWeHWLIzE2Aa-35KYBQ https://finance.google.com/finance?q=NYSE%3AF&fstype=ii&ei=z...
        vasilipupkin 9y ago
        they perceive it because Amazon is growing faster than Ford, which is an objective metric. Not because they simply completely subjectively decided that amazon is more promising - there are quantifiable OBJECTIVE metrics that this is the case
        sbenitoj 9y ago
        You're saying Amazon is growing faster than Ford, but they're not growing faster in terms of profitability (even if people perceive that Amazon will be more profitable in the future). Yes Amazon revenue is growing faster than Ford revenue, but is that the metric that matters most? Maybe, maybe not, it's subjective, only individuals can decide for themselves.
sbenitoj 9y ago
I'll give you the benefit of the doubt that you're not just trolling and you're actually trying to understand whether value is objective or subjective. Assuming you are, read the following link and let me know if you still think value is objective, and if so what parts specifically do you disagree with: https://wiki.mises.org/wiki/Subjective_theory_of_value https://wiki.mises.org/wiki/Subjective_theory_of_value
- vasilipupkin 9y ago
  So if value is purely subjective, then surely some people would be willing to pay 100k for a Honda vs Tesla? Why doesn't Honda try to sell cars for 100k? Why isn't a cup of coffee at Starbucks 20 bucks ? If it's pure subjectivity, then surely that would work
  - sbenitoj 9y ago
    Well, all prices are still determined by the intersection of supply and demand. I'm not saying that the objective features are IRRELEVANT to a consumer's purchase decision, obviously they're not, but ultimately each person values what they're buying differently than the next person. I'll run with your coffee example: Let's say someone currently values a cup of Starbucks at $6 / cup and Starbucks is selling it for $4 / cup. If Starbucks raises their prices above $6 / cup (to $20 like you say), that person would no longer purchase Starbucks coffee unless their values change. But there's a good chance that SOME people (a small minority no doubt, but probably not zero people) currently value Starbucks at more than $20 / cup, those people would continue to buy coffee from Starbucks unless their values change. As prices for Starbucks coffee increase and exceed the amount that individuals value it, those people will begin to explore alternatives on the market to determine if there is another comparable good that meets their needs at a price less than they value it.
    - vasilipupkin 9y ago
      "but ultimately each person values what they're buying differently than the next person" that is true, but irrelevant. On average, overall value is highly correlated to objective metrics. so, this is why this conversation started. Price, including price of bitcoin, is not simply some subjective thing - it must be tied to some objective indicators. For example, price of coffee at Starbucks cannot be too far above what it costs to make coffee at home. It will be higher, since you are paying for convenience. But there is only so much that makes sense to pay for convenience and people won't pay more than that.