| This question <67|67> overall <31|33> Ranger: <7|121>. |
| Question 38: What is value (according to Marx)? |
| [32] Ranger: According to Marx, labour is the substance of value. Also, a commodity will not contain value if that commodity does not serve as an object of utility. Labour, in a useless commodity is worthless and does not create value. The key is that a commodity's value depends on the amount of labour “socially necessary for its production”. |
| Hans: What you are calling here “the key” is an elaboration of how the quantity of value is determined. Marx himself always downplays the quantitative side of it. He says repeatedly that the mainstream economists of his time were so concerned about the quantity of value that they forgot to look at the quality of value-creating labor. This is also an aspect which is completely missing in your response. |
| [32] Ranger: It is also worth mentioning that a thing can have use-value without being a value. This occurs when the thing's utility is not determined through labour, examples include; air, unplanted forests, and virgin soil. These examples can be useful but are not commodities. |
| Hans: The utility of something is never determined through labor. Marx writes about the use value in 126:1 “This characteristic of a commodity is independent of the amount of labor required to appropriate its useful qualities.” But I guess this was just an unfortunate formulation of yours. You meant to say: “this occurs when the thing has utility without containing labor.” |
| [32] Ranger: To be a commodity the thing must not only contain use-values but social use-values. Marx states, “nothing can be a value without being an object of utility.” |
| Hans: Ok. |
|
|
|||||