- Capitalism and Alternatives -
Golly, Gee, you're wrong
In Reply to: Labor theory of value - lay it to rest posted by Gee on May 24, 1999 at 15:31:32:
First off, Marx didn't just talk about one type of value. You're assertion that somethings have value without labor being applied to them is true, he called it use-value. For example, an orange has obvious use-value--it can be eaten. However, does an orange hanging on a tree have exchange-value? In certain circumstances it might, but by and large we have no use for it. However, an orange in a supermarket certainly has exchange-value. Now, unless that orange walked there by itself and hopped up onto a table to be bought, labor was certainly applied to it.