value of diamonds?

[voice of the voiceless]

Relating to an idea i stumbled across in a previous post of mine, i was just wondering. In a socialist/communist economy, what would a diamond be worth?

because surely diamonds are only worth a lot in capitalism because they are rare, so many buyers try to outbid each other causing competition, pushing prices up. and i guess there would be consumer competition also. In socialism/communism there would not be this competition, so would a diamond be worth only the labour value spent on extracting it, polishing it etc. I.e not very much?

(or am i completely wrong and is "developing" diamonds and other such rare minerals actually very labour intensive?)

thanks.

[TC]

the issue isn't so much that diamonds are rare but that their rarity coupled with the labor required to extract them from mines makes them valuable. Sending the same number of workers to spend the same amount of time working in a coal mine, for instance, would reliably produce a vastly greater amount of coal then if those same workers were sent to a diamond mine for the same amount of time and expense. Thats why they're valuable. There are plenty of things on the surface of the earth that are as or more rare than diamonds but they aren't valuable because they don't take much labor to aquire. The fact that diamonds and precious metals require a certain amount of intensive labor to get a certain amount of diamonds or gold or whatever is what makes them reliable currency and status symbols.

So i guess in a socialist economy a diamond would be worth the same amount that its worth in a capitalist economy...it still takes the same amount of effort to get them.

[voice of the voiceless]

blimey that was quick, thanks!

[voice of the voiceless]

oh, and coal will be worth more than diamonds in a few hundred years unless we learn how to make energy out of diamonds! :P

[apathy maybe]

There is still shit loads of coal around. You don't have to worry about that. Instead it is oil that is the trouble.
For more infomation,
http://www.revolutionaryleft.com/index.php...239&hl=diamonds (http://www.revolutionaryleft.com/index.php?showtopic=35239&hl=diamonds)

[violencia.Proletariat]

im guessing, if things wen to plan, they wouldnt be extracted anymore, if you think about it its a unproductive job. sure its usefull in capitalism, but when you dont need money anymore what use would it be. i mean, the only use would be to have a rare rock but its not necessary to obtain one. so why would any worker want to actually do that job? im guessing the diamonds would only hold sentimental value or be used in trading.

[Severian]

Diamonds are so expensive largely because of monopoly control by the DeBeers cartel. This is a case of price being much higher than value.

They'd still have some uses under communism - first, the industrial uses of the hardest substance.

Second, people will still want to decoration. People have in all societies so far.

It's just the use as a status symbol - y'know, look how rich I am - that will end.

[LSD]

Diamonds are so expensive largely because of monopoly control by the DeBeers cartel.

Although that's been waning in the last few years.

As far as I remember, they're below 60% now.


They'd still have some uses under communism - first, the industrial uses of the hardest substance.

Damn right. Industrial diamonds are essential.

The kind of diamonds used for industrial purposes, however, are not the same ones used for jewlerry. So while dimaond mining will continue, the focus will probably shift towards the useful ones rather than the "attractive" ones.


Second, people will still want to decoration. People have in all societies so far.

True enough, but as you point out, diamonds are more of a status symbol than they are "decorative".

Will diamonds still be used decoratively? Yeah, but not nearly as much.

[STI]

Three cheers for gemette.

[superiority]

Communist revolution = diamonds as jewellery no longer represent status = huge cubic zirconia shortage

['Discourse Unlimited']

Hmmm, I don't know. I think it depends how you define "value". And I believe that Marx's theories, relating to how much "labour" (or labour power) is invested in a "commodity" (at least, that was my reading of 'Das Kapital'), are pretty well useless in most situations.

I can't quite see what's wrong in applying "subjective value" to objects, or commodities. Thus, an item has no intrinsic value beyond that which the individual assigns it... Consider a poor chap who's dying of thirst, somewhere. I think he'd happily trade all the diamonds in the world for a drink of water (unless he had a death wish). Perceived utility, or perceived value, will influence "price" more than "labour power"!

Suppose a mediocre band (oh, let's say, 'Westlife') released an album, at the same time as one of Joe Satriani's recordings came on the market. Now, personally, I wouldn't touch a 'Westlife' album if you paid me. But Satch? Damn, I'd want that CD! (Of course, I'd probably download it off the net, but that's not the point...) What's more, I'm sure that the reverse would apply for all those poor deluded souls ( :P ) who enjoy the "music" of 'Westlife'... "Joe who? Nah, I don't want that!"

And yet (roughly) the same "labour power" has gone into each, in the various recording, manufacturing and marketing processes. Value, in this case, appears to be "subjective". Isn't it?

[TC]

not to be awful but i think a big appeal in diamonds is that if a man buys them for you it shows how much money he's willing to spend on you, its sort of something that he worked for so its a big gesture that way...like showing how much he cares and feels invested. Having a big diamond on your hand means someone likes you enough to get it for you, so the fact of its expense is meaningful in the symbolism. It would be rude to talk about it frankly but i think thats a lot of what its about. I'm not really sure if it would still have appeal in a socialist economy but it might; a strong enough socialist economy where everyone already had a basic standard of living would probably support a psudo-market for 'consumer goods' even if the production of those goods was collectively owned. I'm not really sure if thats a good thing or a bad thing.

Of course not everyone feels that way and in a socialist society i'm sure fewer people would feel that way about stuff like that.

[ÑóẊîöʼn]

I believe 'jewel-like' diamonds are used in lasers, IIRC.