3 ms·

You're confusing use-value (the intrinsic value of something) with exchange-value (what the thing can be exchanged for - aka price). Much of mainstream economi

You're confusing use-value (the intrinsic value of something) with exchange-value (what the thing can be exchanged for - aka price). Much of mainstream economics reduces the broad philosophical concept of value to the narrow economic concept of exchange-value or price. And it's not warm and fuzzy: what's the "value" of an unpolluted atmosphere? What's the value of good health? These things generally defy attempts to be priced (though what attempts have been made are risible), yet are fundamental - perhaps even more so than money - to a decent human existence.

tatsuke95 15y ago
In no way is the value of an unpolluted atmosphere or good health some abstract concept. They have a value. The point of putting a dollar figure on it is for comparison purposes. You may disagree with the value placed on these things, or perhaps value them differently than "the average", but don't assume that their value can't be calculated.
- brianprogrammer 15y ago
  Economists and policy makers don't know how to calculate the monetary value of a clean atmosphere, nor do they know who should pay for it or how. So when making decisions they quietly assume the value is zero. We would be better off if they assumed the value was infinite.
  - rflrob 15y ago
    There are plenty of ways to calculate the value of a clean atmosphere, though I agree that a good calculation is difficult, and the question of who should pay for it and how isn't easy either (but more of an ethics-politics question than the value itself). I disagree that we'd be better off if they assumed the value was infinite. Under that calculus, anything that might possibly impact the atmosphere would be banned: things like energy generation of nearly any form, which most reasonable people would agree is of positive benefit. There is a value to it, that value is hard to calculate, but unfortunately, 0 is much closer to the real value than infinity.

tatsuke95 15y ago

In no way is the value of an unpolluted atmosphere or good health some abstract concept. They have a value. The point of putting a dollar figure on it is for comparison purposes. You may disagree with the value placed on these things, or perhaps value them differently than "the average", but don't assume that their value can't be calculated.

brianprogrammer 15y ago
Economists and policy makers don't know how to calculate the monetary value of a clean atmosphere, nor do they know who should pay for it or how. So when making decisions they quietly assume the value is zero. We would be better off if they assumed the value was infinite.
- rflrob 15y ago
  There are plenty of ways to calculate the value of a clean atmosphere, though I agree that a good calculation is difficult, and the question of who should pay for it and how isn't easy either (but more of an ethics-politics question than the value itself). I disagree that we'd be better off if they assumed the value was infinite. Under that calculus, anything that might possibly impact the atmosphere would be banned: things like energy generation of nearly any form, which most reasonable people would agree is of positive benefit. There is a value to it, that value is hard to calculate, but unfortunately, 0 is much closer to the real value than infinity.