LTV Doesnt Explain Everything?

[Viva Fidel]

from wikipedia

Inapplicability of LTV

The LTV cannot claim to explain the value of everything. Problematic cases are:
-pieces of art (which could be explained as an instance of monopoly)
-uncultivated land (which has value, even if there is no labor involved. The value of land is explained by the theory of rent. Both Ricardo and Marx developed theories of land-rent based on the LTV.)
-paper money
-value of shares (explained similarly like the value of land)



however, there are no sources available for this section.

any responses to this?

[JazzRemington]

Paper money really has no value in and of itself. Rather, it REPRESENTS the value of something else. Fiat money has value as long as people consider it valid as money (which is subjective in nature) but commodity based money represnts the value of whatever commodity is backing it.

Thus, money that is backed by labor (Labor Time Vouchers, for instance) would represent the value of the labor.

[KC]

I suggest that you view this thread:

http://www.revolutionaryleft.com/index.php?showtopic=51868

[Clarksist]

-pieces of art (which could be explained as an instance of monopoly)

Pieces of art are almost all labor! The materials are usually much less that the actual price, it all comes down to artistic creation and labor. It is actually an example of the correctness of LTV!


-uncultivated land (which has value, even if there is no labor involved. The value of land is explained by the theory of rent. Both Ricardo and Marx developed theories of land-rent based on the LTV.)

Uncultivated land has expense to it, because it has potential. It is the raw goods. Much like a CEO might have ore purchased as raw goods, the proletarian workers would smelt it into something with more value, but not more material. Thus, the labor created value.

This same thing goes with uncultivated land. You have peasants clear it and prepare it for commercial building, it will have technically less, and be worth much more.


-paper money

Paper money is a representation of capital. Capital was created through labor and resources. Thus, paper money is a round-about way of labor creating value.


-value of shares (explained similarly like the value of land)

Shares are purchased as a way to fund a company, and through yearly profits those shares will have dividends payed on them. Those shares are closely linked to the profit margins and economic viability of the company. All those are still, in the end, related to labor.

[bezdomni]

Yeah, my response to that would be "READ WAGE, LABOR AND CAPITAL!"

I would also say what Clarksist said. He is right.