Labor Theory Of Value

The labor theory of value states that value is determined by the amount of "socially necessary" labor rewired to produce it rather than focusing on scarcity and consumer demand. Marxists claim that under this system workers will receive their "full value of labor". How do you earn anything without consumer demand, how do you determine what is socially necessary and how do you correlate that with the amount of time required to produce whatever you're going to produce and how do you decide what you're going to produce especially when you have no direction since everyone in the company is on the same level working in tandem together? How does this work without a central authority?

Protip: If you sage, then you have a fragile mind.

GO!

Attached: 1506194410628.jpg (1000x820, 82.24K)

Other urls found in this thread:

core-econ.org/
marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1875/gotha/ch01.htm
twitter.com/SFWRedditVideos

Socially necessary is fucking bullshit and which is why it's better named the Lazy Nigger value.

Picture this: a lazy nigger says he needs socially 02 days to make a chair, and whines and cries oppression if anybody says otherwise.

There's no market to compare the actual time done, so the lazy nigger can get his way.

fucking kek. He'd probably charge $2000 for that chair because he thinks it's worth something.

You do realize that Das Kapital is a description of CAPITALISM right? I mean, it's in the name.

I guess we can call your theory the stupid nigger's theory.

If so, it should be right first.

Capitalists don't give shit about "labor theory of value".

It's pretty much gender is social construct tier economics.

Schizoposters have arrived

Impossible. Capitalism works based on supply and demand LTV claims to works on the concept of "Socially necessary labor" and it ignores scarcity. I'm asking how do you determine what is socially necessary?

If everybody can produce and get paid like the lazy nigger, everybody will be a lazy nigger.

How?

This.

LTV might also apply in some way to works of art. The price of a unique work of art rises the more that's written about it, it's discussed, etc.

yeah but which is causing what? it could just be that it's discussed because it's more thought-provoking in the first place.

Zig Forumsyps and /liberty/fags continue to be retarded, and sperg out when trying to argue with us, as usual. I'm not even defending the LTV, your arguments against it are just brainlet tier and if you had even the slightest intelligence you would be able to provide the actual arguments against it.

Hey, I'm here to sage just because it irritates you.

Thanks to all the polyps who contributed to turning this thread into an clear demonstration of your own imbicility.

Ok simple correction/explanation

Under capitalism:
Socially necessary labour time (SNLT) is the average time it take society to produce something. This is the long term price tendency of a commodity, exactly because of "supply and demand".
If something is more in demand than it has supply, its price rises. This means that that commodity now gets more money per hour work than another. People can earn more goods/money/value per hour worked making that thing, which makes them switch their labour, which increases that supply and lowers the supply of the other goods. Because of this, production of goods tends towards a distribution where working one hour on product A will bring as much money in as working one hour on product B. If working an hour on A made twice as much money as working an hour on B, many people working on B would switch to A. Because of this equilibrium, we can express the value of products in the labour time that it takes to make them, rather than the monetary value (which fluctuates short term due to speculation and market fluctuations). This is SNLT, and prices fluctuate around their SNLT in a market economy. SNLT is a value that explains the long term, "true" value of a product.
Why is labour time the true value of something? It is a fundamental unit. Money can be printed as the government sees fit, money prices can fluctuate violently far below or above their actual value. Bubbles are created all the time, and pop all the time. But labour is there, we cannot print twice as much labour as we have, there are no labour bubbles, you cannot speculate with or hoard labour. Labour is a fundamental unit in production, just like how much iron or coal there is in a mine. It is done, used up and transformed into a product. It is the fundamental thing that is necessary for any and all production. No production can be done without labour. An automatic weaver still requires labour in the form of replacement parts, maintenance, feeding it material, operating it. They are tools that increase the amount of stuff labour can make, just like a hammer or a combine. Robots? Same thing, they are glorified machines.

Side note: For something to have value it needs to have a use value. What this means is that a product can only have value if it has a use in and of itself, inherent to itself, in society. If the only use for something is that you can trade it for another thing, then it has no value. A mudpie has no value, because even though you could trade it to Dave if you convince him that mudpies are going to be worth massive amounts of money, mudpies in itself have no value. Same goes for bitcoins, it has no use in society other than people who endlessly push it around in cycles of speculation. They are like pyramid schemes. In the long term they will lose all monetary value when the pyramid crumbles to dust.
This also nicely illustrates the difference between monetary value (also known as exchange value) and value (its worth).

1/2

Attached: cockshott.png (1008x389, 311.8K)

Planned economy:
There is still demand and supply, you dont just produce 'whatever' under a planned economy. There is two paths to regulate production and it resembles how markets work in the form of price signalling, with the massive difference being that all of the economy can be immediately adjusted instead of having to wait for price signals to travel all the way up the supply chain which can take several years.
SNLT of every product is known because you know how much hours of work was put into a produce, and how much into the resources that went into that product, etc. You can calculate it for any product in any economy to within a fraction of a cent in 12 iterations of extremely simple math.
1. Hard set the prices at their SNLT. This will create shortages of some product whose supply is below what it ought to be at that price, and oversupply for product that are priced too high. Then, take note of all these oversupplies, and adjust production to produce less or more of certain products.
2. Let prices float free on the consumer level. All economy is still planned and money-free. Factories just make what is their quota. Then in the supermarket you let the prices float free. Things that have too much supply will have their prices drop below their SNLT, products that have too little supply will have their prices rise above their SNLT. You have no empty shelves or piles of stuff like the USSR had, but you have the same kind of over and undersupply as under a market economy. Then, take note of these price differences and adjust production to try and match the store price to their SNLT.

A classic case of authority confusion you have lad. Just because we do not have a single person owning a factory doesn't mean we cannot create a plan collectively and then execute said plan. You do not need a king to build a road, its called democracy (actual democracy). A horizontal mode of organisation doesn't mean there is no direction, it just means nobody as a single person has the final say, but rather than all the workers as a collective have the final say. Think of it as a judge vs a jury. The jury still makes a single decision, even though it is made up of many people.
See above. There would be a central plan, but not a small group of people who wield all the power.

Attached: basic economics.png (500x304, 31.41K)

Capped

Attached: 1544192145459.png (1495x848, 261.31K)

Example of that in the real world?

Utopian bullshit that has no basis.

Just go in and it is already bullshit. How do society produce a thing? Individuals do that, not society.

Paris Commune
Rojava
Yugoslavia
Second Spanish Republic
any Co-op in every Capitalist economy

There is no difference between a kilo of potatoes farmed by bubba in america or fritz in germany. Almost all goods in society are homogenous or highly interchangeable, and it doesnt matter who made them. All potatoes go into a big box with "potatoe" on it, and if bubba can farm only half as much potatoes as fritz, it doesnt matter, the potatoes are gonna be sold as the same product for the same price. The avarage time it takes all potatoe farmers to farm potatoes is what matters.

But I take it you are not insterested in learning jack shit and youre just gonna plug your ears and shout "muh individual, society doesnt real"

None of these societies were boss free, they all have leaders who have a final say, especially co-ops who are companies in all but name.

There is and you can tell.

You are wrong on the onset, want to continue?

...

lul, never change /liberty/

...

wrong
wrong

Oh right I forgot how every employee negotiates the price of every individual screw that he takes and uses to screw on a part of a car on the assembly line, as well as the half-made-car-that-needs-a-screw from the previous person and then negotiates the sale of that half-made-car-with-one-more-screw to the next person. You know, since you cannot generalize production at all.
When I go to the store I always see people negotiate the price of individual skittles, very common occurrence, every skittle is noticeably different.

An elected leader is not a "boss", a boss is someone who runs the factory either by owning it or at the will of the owners.
You usually cannot, but let's assume there is a large enough difference that you can, like red potatoes. All of these potatos would still have an SNLT regardless because they are mass farmed and take an avergge amount of time to grow and pick when graphed. It doesn't change the reality of an SNLT.

Understand by "own" here, I specifically mean privately own, as in a bourgeoisie who has the rights to and total control of the factory.

But that is factual though, Mondragon is a company.

Word game, a leader is a boss and wgo has the final say.
You absolutely can, taste is an incredibly simple things to distinguish.
huh? That has jack shit to do with society. These potatoes need time to grow, and these times are not socially necessary.

All that words and it still does not change that individuals create things, not society.

I thought commies think workers deserve the full fruit of their labor, whatever that means.

leaders in coops don't have the final say.

When does ownership come in? The fact these elected "leaders" have final say when they do not own shit speaks volume of "leadership".

How am I wrong?

A bunch of people work at a factory. They all produce the same thing or work together to produce a thing. There are many other factories that also make products similar or different to that factory. All these factories are part of the larger economy of a society.

I can't believe I had to fucking explain to you how factories and the people who work in them are part of society, but here we are.

not our fault you don't understand the concepts of Fordism and Taylorism

Yes they fucking do.

The Mondragon CEO and board of directors? He got final say.
The national co-ops? The ministers have final say.

Read Cockshott

So individuals create something.

When does society create anything?

Not my fault you are wrong.

it's not the same as a bureaucratic corporation where the board of directors is all run by wealthy individuals. if you think otherwise enjoy being classcucked.

no man is an island. stay retarded though

Ever heard of a pyramid?

It is the absolute same shit and you are getting fucked by your boss. Enjoy that, classcuck.

Society did not create pyramid.

You mean the social pyramid?

Yet here we are.

No, there is a clear difference. A boss either has private property rights or works for someone who has private property rights of the factory/farm/business which is enforcable by law. The leader of a collectively owned factory does not have enforcable private property rights over a factory/farm/business, he has collective power given to him by the workers. If you think communists are against all hierarchy, we are not. Just capitalist economic hierarchy.
What? They still have a socially necessary labour time, that is the average time calculated among all potato's of the same variety to be cultivated and picked. You're literally arguing averages don't exist. I have a potato that takes three months to be cultivated and picked, many potatos that take 3 months and half to be picked, and another that takes four months to be cultivated and picked. The average time can be calculated from all these numbers by graphing them. Are you ok?

...

"Rather than focusing on scarcity"? If something can be produced quickly and with little work, would it be scarce?
gives the correct reply. Lassalle stated something like that (and he probably liked the sound of it and didn't mean it literally). Marx (being logical, but also autistic) strongly bashed Lassalle's claim in Critique of the Gotha Programme:
>From this must now be deducted: First, cover for replacement of the means of production used up. Second, additional portion for expansion of production. Third, reserve or insurance funds to provide against accidents, dislocations caused by natural calamities, etc.
marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1875/gotha/ch01.htm
How does it follow from the means of production not being privately owned that there isn't consumer demand? That was a rhetorical question.

You need more than one person doing the work, but you don't need a market to compare time. Real-world capitalist firms also rarely use something like a market mechanisms internally to determine something like that, work done by different people inside the firm is usually directly measured.

Nope, a word game. A boss means leader, it means jack to what he owns, since he owns all.
The fucking what m8? Potatoes need time to grow, and this has nothing to do with society let alone socially necessary, the fuck does that mean?

A society is a group of people?

You absolutely do. Because market means competition, and that means faster time is needed.
A direct lie, they constantly measure worker performance and thus determine the fastest way of doing things.

What are individuals are part of user?

Attached: pleb.jpg (400x402, 24.54K)

Askhually I am here there is no "we" you dirty red commie pinko devil

Learn English you fucking nigger.

Where is the lie?
That was said in the post you reply to.
That doesn't mean it's a market. Measuring how many units per hour a worker moves in a warehouse does not constitute a market.

Society, family, group?

No, you learn English, commie.

Goddamn Stalin was called a boss by his goons.

I mean, there's usually more than one person involved in the production of a given thing. Assembling, say, a laptop is just the final step in the production process; the person assembling the laptop doesn't make each individual part, and the person making those parts doesn't go out and make each individual component of those parts and so on. We live in a(n industrial) society bottom text
Er. Just because Jim-Bob is elected manager of factory #4873 doesn't mean he can just do what he wants with the factory and its machinery, since socialism abolishes private ownership of the means of production.
That… isn't a market mechanism, it's just measuring performance. Are you being deliberately obtuse, or something?

"socially necessary" literally means "average".
it is not prescriptive, it is descriptive.
this entire thread is retarded.

And what's 'ownership', Sir Word Game Observer? What does that have to do with power (I am not saying that it doesn't have anything, I'm asking you to clarify your terms)? Before you start, legal relations can only ever be a subset of power relations if not a red herring which liberals conveniently like to hide behind when talking about how capitalism solves a given set of problems. Law does not equal enforcement, and legal enforcement may not do the job correctly either.

You don't know what collusion is. Not true capitalism, now, is it? Of course it isn't for you, because your definition of capitalism is a perfect system - a bourgeois utopia in which things are solved by the market.

Market constitutes competition, so it is a market. The workers are working as fast as possible to get paid, otherwise, they are not paid.

...

So literally communist word game?

What in the hell does average translate to socially necessary?

The 100 meter Olympics is a market?
Competition is not a market bruv. Get your own basic ecoics right first. A market is a place where buyers and sellers get together to exchange goods and services and money with each other. Competition not required.

So it is still a person who work, and not society.
Yes he can, he can directly manage who work on what as his position of the manager while personally not doing any work?
Measuring performance and paying for it is what the market does.

There is a reason there is seperate words for free and non free markets

...

If people are paid to do so, yes.
Competion is required and necessary and it is how buyers choose the sellers.

What the fuck do you call multiple people working together on a given product?

Boss and leader are synonymps.
When it involves money or capitals, it is absolutely a market.

If this were true monopolies wouldn't rise and stay where they are. In boxing you don't have the same guy stay the champ for multiple generations because he can cripple any upstarts before they get off the ground.

Individual who work on a certain part of a product?

Socially necessary LABOUR TIME is the NECESSARY TIME it takes ON AVERAGE for society to produce to commodity. A group of people takes about four hours to make something, and another about five hours for the same thing, and all of these people constitute the same society. What is the average time between these people to make the thing?

So society is a group of people.

But it is the individual who work, not society.

So you don't call it a colony of ants? It's individual ants all just doing their thing and it happens to resemble something outside of themselves?

4.5.

And thus, slow.

You mean socially necessary translates to slow.

The individuals, who work TOGETHER in a coordinated fashion, organized by larger structures OUTSIDE of themselves you dense motherfucker

retarded commies: Economics is where you make analogies about trading hamburgers for apples, and then scream "Common sense" when someone isn't happy with the coca-cola death squads. this is all irrelevant anyway, because there was already a college professor who proved communism can't work by averaging the grades of all his students.

Attached: 38e3d170de29a6223592788d62168fe34fb04800d1b52477f6b4f58180aefe17.jpg (1080x991, 149.17K)

Listen to Mr speedy gonzales over here

It is the individual antz, worker ants work to feed the queen ants create more ants.

What does the colony of ants do? Nothing.

I though you were dead ms tatcher

This is like saying the guitarist, bassist, singer, and drummer all make music but somehow the band does nothing

We recently changed the local leader of our party, and I'm happy about it. Taking inspiration from this, I will change things at work. I'll tell my boss that we will vote him out because a fagot on the internet told me that bosses and leaders are synonyms

Never change, lolberts

Individuals work in a society and you can measure the average time it takes all individuals making a certain product to make one product. All these identical or similar products are grouped together and are recorded as such when making observations about the economy. Are you seriously telling me that when people do censuses on products or materials, they should count each individual scrap of iron as a completely different scarp of iron and make a different chart for each individual scrap?

Good luck getting those people working without, y'know, society. Even discounting the process of direct production, the average person's house, clothes, food, warmth are all social products produced by others - unless you're saying that you believe that humanity is some kind of race of Renaissance men who are entirely self-sufficient from start to finish.
…a manager performs managerial work, well done. What he can't do is take exclusive possession of the products of the factory, sell them to whomever he wishes and pay his fellow workers subsistence pay, since said factory would still be beholden to a socially-determined plan.

This is quite literally missing the forest for the trees. Should we count every single atom now? People don't exist, were all just atoms and they're doing everything. Nothing exists, its all just particles that happen to be occupying the same space.

Society made pyramid.

Attached: Egypt.Giza.Sphinx.02.jpg (2272x1704, 1.32M)

Shitty rigged competition is still competition.

No individual is capable of doing all the tasks necessary to create a laptop. I don't just mean that the time wasted transferring from point A to point B would make this insane (mining some material on one continent, machine assembly on another), I mean they don't even intellectually grasp all the steps. Nobody, not even John Carmack.

You understand that by saying this you are arguing that all industries currently competitive in existence right now in capitalism are slow, right? The SNLT is already the general average fastest time something can be done because if companies weren't producing at this time, they would be uncompetitive and be driven out by those who adopted practices that match the time. If there were any practices that went far below this time, they would be the most competitive and companies would have to adopt them to stay in business making the new SNLT that time.

Can we address that were not even at the point of talking about private ownership or anything, were all literally being held up from moving forward because a lolbert doesn't understand what society or groups?

it is the truth then.

Ok, go thank your boss. It makes no differencem