/lit/ - Literature

>>21627011
>Neither of these are determinants of value. There are plenty of things which take a long time, or a lot of labor to make, but are valueless.
Every single Marx thread seems to follow this pattern where some annoying cunt picks holes in particular phrasing because some Marxist hasn't just regurgitated the entirety of Capital Vols I-III explaining every basic assumption. Of course this statement assumed all the bedrock assumptions of Marx - we are talking about mass-scale commodities, we are talking about average socially necessary labour required to produce a commodity which has a use-value and therefore is necessary and useful, we're not talking about mudpies or original Van Goghs here.
>If the overall demand is not determined by supply
How and under what conditions is demand determined by supply? If demand was determined by supply you wouldn't even call it 'supply and demand', you'd just say 'supply and supply'. Supply and demand are separate factors, obviously, so nothing here has fallen apart.
>Labour is not the measure. It is equally capital
And what do you suppose capital is made of? Hint, capital takes labour to produce, it's a product of labour
>Marx never talks about concrete measurable labour hours
What the fuck? Chapter 1 Section 2, "As the coat and the linen are two qualitatively different use values, so also are the two forms of labour that produce them, tailoring and weaving. Were these two objects not qualitatively different, not produced respectively by labour of different quality, they could not stand to each other in the relation of commodities." I'd say "et seq" but that would pretty much cover the entirety of Capital.
>Labour is not the sole determinant of [exchange] value
Marx himself says this is true, and it's why I've gone to pains to say this over and over in this thread. Also please watch this entertaining and informative video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=emnYMfjYh1Q

>>11573883
>trying to change the subject to be about Marx
Is there a limit to how embarrassing petersonfags are?

>>10735984
Nicccce

>>15213

>Maybe, but most aren't.

Nice projecting your failures onto everyone else. Confirmation bias anyone?

Now collect your welfare, lazy sack of shit and urine.

>>8222222

>

>>6190613

>>6113046
>>6113094
>>6113100
this is a really amusing thread op, keep doing you man

>>6072987
>>6073538
That's pretty much exactly what this thread is about though.

It's just not very serious.

bump