: : 1,085 words to prove that while Gee may have read Capital, he certainly didn't understand it.
: : Perhaps I should explain all of Gee's omissions, clarify the many points that he made a mess of...
: Yes you should - otherwise youre assuming that the labor theory of value stands uncontested by making the lousy 'if you dont understand it ofcourse you wont understand it' type of circular argument, thus neatly isolating yourself from anyone who dares contest it by essentiall saying 'ah, but I understand it and if you didi then you would agree' - this is the bemusing disagreement=misunderstanding/error formula, and its rather laughable.
But YOU'RE the one who claimed to have read Capital.
Your points about weather, the passage of time, the consumer's perception of the commodity's worth have all been confronted by Marx in Capital.
If you think I'm going to spend several hours condensing all of that material for you, you overrate yourself. You're not worth that much effort.
BTW, all you forwarded was the naive notion that the CUSTOMER decides value, a concept Adam Smith dispatched around 1776.