> This just confirms what I said above. Why? Because you said so? > The cognitive dissonance of not having a real theory is causing you to lash out at me, for

> This just confirms what I said above. Why? Because you said so? > The cognitive dissonance of not having a real theory is causing you to lash out at me, for no reason other than pointing out your missing theory. I wasn't aware that you're a mind reader. > It's pretty simple really, if there's a way to determine value then there must be a way to say that it's correct in one way or another. There's a shortcut: I simply define value in terms of supply and demand, the exchange of goods and services, based on subjective disposition. If you are clamoring for some other theory of value, feel free to do so. I think that's a waste of time. > If things are always just worth whatever someone will pay for them "because of the market" then you aren't saying anything at all. If you believe that, then any further discussion must be fruitless. > Plus you can't explain a number of common observations. I probably can, but you won't like the explanation.