Austrian School of refutation?

[Supertramp]

capitalist libertarians often say:

Carl Menger refuted "surplus value" with the theory of subjective value.

Eugen refuted the "theory of labor exploitation."

The "calculation problem" of Mises.

Hayek refuted socialism with the "problem of information under the economic calculus', etc ... blah blah blah


What Marxists, anarchists, leftists in general... think about it? There are answers to these "refutations" ?

[blake 3:17]

Could you please ask the question more clearly? If you are looking to argue please go to the Opposing Ideologies section of the board. Thanks!

[tuwix]

That answer is simple: those guys refuted nothing of Marx. And Somalia is showing how their free-market stupidity works because Somalia is the closest to their mythical free-market but free-market can't even exist because its own definitions deny its existence.

[Questionable]

I might know a few sources that could help you with this.


Carl Menger refuted "surplus value" with the theory of subjective value.

Nikolai Bukharin refuted the theory of subjective value. His work is rather dense if you're a newcomer to economics, but the information is invaluable even today.

http://www.marxists.org/archive/bukharin/works/1927/leisure-economics/


Eugen refuted the "theory of labor exploitation."

I'm not familiar with this person. Could somebody explain what his exact criticisms are? That would help me find a relevant source.


The "calculation problem" of Mises.

There's a dozen articles about this online, but I can't seem to locate any at the moment. I'll try to find some and edit them into my post later

[slum]

until these geniuses can explain where actual value comes from i think you're pretty safe in ignoring them.

[Theophys]

capitalist libertarians often say:
Ron Paul 2012.


Carl Menger refuted "surplus value" with the theory of subjective value.

I'll try my hand at this from what little I know, I may very well be wrong on multiple points.

According to the LTV, during an exchange the seller has no use-value for the product he is selling, he is only interested in its exchange value while the buyer is interested int he use-value of the product he is buying and not the exchange value. The LTV is a more extreme form of the theory of subjective value in that specific instance. The seller does not "value" his product as much as he "values" the item he is receiving in exchange.

We could argue that the intrinsic value remains, but this aforementioned subjective "value" (top) could very well be linked to a subjective sense of worth, not the "actual" intrinsic value of the good, i.e. that which is embedded by labor-power according to the LTV. In other words, the LTV refers to an intrinsic value not determined by subjective means, while the STV refers to a "value" known as "worth". The LTV allows for subjective "value" by stating that price can differ from the value of an object, that is, the subjective "value" (worth) of the product can be reflected through price, but not value. The LTV almost sets the value "in stone" not to be determined by the buyers. Demand and supply also play an important part when it comes to prices. Prices fluctuate even in the case of the LTV meaning that the LTV has a subjective "value" (a subjective worth) given to an object by the buyer when determining the price, but it still retains the intrinsic value embedded by labor-power.

Also, not all trade is mutually beneficial because not all trade is voluntary and equal.

Anyway, Menger and Co. with their subjective value had little to do with surplus value as much as they had to do with the idea that labor creates value.


Eugen refuted the "theory of labor exploitation."

Refuted by Bukharin, Questionable cited "Economic Theory of the Leisure Class" as a refutation of Menger's claims when it was more of a direct refutation of Bohm Bawerk's theories/beliefs which also included the STV.


The "calculation problem" of Mises.

A thousand and one refuations of this nonsense ranging from Market Socialistic theories to the works of Paul Cockshott and Co. Do a simple google search and you'll get numerous articles critiquing the economic calculation argument.


Hayek refuted socialism with the "problem of information under the economic calculus', etc ... blah blah blah

Paul Cockshott and Co. as well as Market Socialism. That and the criticism that the market is not perfect, cannot include the thousand and one information that would be left out due to artificial barriers on entry into the market, the threat of monopolies and restrictions on knowledge, the creation of state-enforced patents (they will exist without a state through private enterprises enforcing their patents through private militaristic means, collusion, agreements, etc. such as through the formation of a state based on private enterprises).


What Marxists, anarchists, leftists in general... think about it? There are answers to these "refutations" ?

Google is your friend.