Labour theory of value and potatoes (slightly stupid thread)
- This topic has 29 replies, 13 voices, and was last updated 7 years, 7 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
Yeah, I probably haven't thought this through but I was just wondering about the labour theory of value.
Is the value of two differently sized potatoes the same? Because both took the same amount of human labour to produce. Yet the bigger potato has a larger utility than the smaller one, because it reduces hunger more. Does this affect its value?
Does a big lump of coal represent more value than a small lump of coal?Yes, but not because a large lump of coal gives more utility than a small one.Coal and usually vegetables etc are sold by weight, and kilo of any particular batch of coal or veg is going to represent the same amount of value on a kilo per kilo basis, that's what we are interested in..
This reminds me of that story of the Soviet Union factory that produced nails and to meet its quota made one enormous sized nail.
DJP wrote:"Does a big lump of coal represent more value than a small lump of coal? Yes…"But doesn't this go against the labour theory of value if one uses the LTV when talking about food? They both took the same amount of labour time, wouldn't the labour theory of value mean that if there were only these two potatoes that were socially produced, they would have the same value?
Value is not price and it is not actual concrete labour time. It's the socially necessary average labour time taken to produce something. Does that help?
Sympo wrote:But doesn't this go against the labour theory of value if one uses the LTV when talking about food? They both took the same amount of labour time, wouldn't the labour theory of value mean that if there were only these two potatoes that were socially produced, they would have the same value?No. Because the LTV does not say that the amount of labour time determines value, as DJP and Tim have tried to explain it is average socially necessary labourPotatoes and coal are measured in weight so the value of a potato weighing 1.5 kilo will be one and half times the value of a potato weighing 1 kilo.Utility-wise, a larger potato may have the same utility as a smaller potato, if the large potato was eaten by a larger person with a bigger appetite and the small potato was eaten by a smaller person with a small appetite.Value on the other hand is not a physical property of coal, potatoes or the people eating them. Value is a social relationship and is only applicable to commodities NB If there were only two potatoes produced then they would probably cost a fortune.
Didn't I write a new post in this thread? Was it deleted or did I forget to send it?Ugh, it was pretty long one…is there any way to get it back?
This was written by a Trotsky group in regard to the theory of valuehttp://www.marxist.com/in-defence-of-ltv.htm
Sympo wrote:Didn't I write a new post in this thread? Was it deleted or did I forget to send it?Ugh, it was pretty long one…is there any way to get it back?No posts on this thread have been deleted or removed.
If bigger potatoes are sold together they would be have more value than a bag of potatoes of all sizes due to the extra labour involved in picking them out …
ALB wrote:If bigger potatoes are sold together they would be have more value than a bag of potatoes of all sizes due to the extra labour involved in picking them out …Does it really take more labour to pick up a potato that is bigger than another? It's slighly heavier, but surely the weight would be very light for the average person?Does it take more labour to pick up two coins than to pick up one coin?
Of course it takes time to sort out bigger potatoes from smaller ones. It's a question of time not weight.
ALB wrote:Of course it takes time to sort out bigger potatoes from smaller ones. It's a question of time not weight.But does it take more time to sort out bigger potatoes from smaller ones than the other way around? Isn't it the same thing? If so, shouldn't they have the same value, considering that it takes as much time to sort out big or small potatoes?I don't have any clue about potato cultivation so my vision of potato farming is basically someone digging up a bunch of potatoes and putting the big ones in a bowl and the small ones in another bowl. Why does one take more time than the other?I mentioned the weight because it takes more time to move a piano than it takes to move a small chair, i.e. I am under the impression that weight can have an effect on how much labour it takes to do certain things with objects (for example, moving them around).
A bag of the same weight of small potatoes would have the same value as a bag of larger ones. That wasn't the distinction I was making. It was between a bag of selected potatoes and a bag of not selected ones.You are the one who said this was a silly thread.
Sympo wrote:I don't have any clue about potato cultivation so my vision of potato farming is basically someone digging up a bunch of potatoes and putting the big ones in a bowl and the small ones in another bowl. Why does one take more time than the other?You cannot apply the LTV to two potatoes and I wonder where your vision of potato production comes from. Today the production of potatoes is a complex social process. It is with this that the exchange value is concerned. How much socially necessary labour time goes into it.. How much potatoes sell for, is probably a close approximation to their 'exchange value' but they are not the same thing. 'Exchange Value' merely tries to explain what it is that commodities have in common that causes them to exchange at a constant ratio. Socially necessary labour time is what is common to exchange values. http://www.cals.uidaho.edu/edcomm/pps/inside-book.html
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.