| This question <12|12> overall <12|14> Stonewall: <50|16>. |
| Question 42: If the exchange-value of a commodity cannot be derived from its use-value, then a used commodity should have the same exchange-value as a new commodity, as long as it is not broken. Right or wrong? |
| [13] Stonewall: Mother's blender. I believe the answer lies with each individual but I believe that a used commodity should have the same exchange value as a new commodity. If you wanted a blender and could buy one from you mother for say $5 or you could buy one a Target for $35 which would you do? A used one has just as much power in it than a new one and is 85% cheaper. An apple core has no value to someone who wants an apple. We're talking about commodities that can be reused over and over. An apple core does nothing for a person except take 5 years to grow into something which will bear fruit then but not when needed. |
| Hans: You are considering exchange-value to be something subjective. Marx uses the word “exchange-value” for a social property of the products. And he is not discussing what exchange-value a commodity should have, but is exploring the rules how exchange-values are in fact assigned in a commodity society. |
|
|
|||||