- Capitalism and Alternatives -

Lewis Carroll economics don't invalidate the LTV

In Reply to: More objections OR Barry Strikes Out (better post) posted by Joel Jacobson on December 01, 1999 at 10:35:34:

: [N]owhere does Marx’s LTV explain the difference between labor and mere physical exertion.

Ever heard of use-value?

As in 'the utility of a thing makes it a use-value' (page 2 of Capital, emphasis added)?

Or: 'A commodity is, in the first place, an thing that by its properties satisfies human wants of some sort or another' (Ibid, p. 1, emphasis added)?

Your x's and y's are real pretty, though...

What an army of straw men.

Follow Ups:

• What is something has NO use-value DonS USA December 02 1999 (7)
  • Things without use-value don't get produced for very long Stoller December 02 1999 (6)
    • What do you mean DonS USA December 03 1999 (5)
      • Here it is (with correct link) Stoller December 04 1999 (3)
        • The above is true if consumer demand is being met. DonS USA December 09 1999 (1)
          • Fundamental error Stoller December 10 1999 (0)
        • Another correction Stoller December 04 1999 (0)
      • Here it is Stoller December 04 1999 (0)
• The Market invalidates the LTV. Dr. Cruel December 02 1999 (1)
  • Doc confuses himself first, then others who try to get through his posts Stoller December 02 1999 (0)