| This question <50|55> overall <50|52> Konnen: <630|200>. |
| Question 81: How is the value of raw materials determined in Marx's theory? How does the scarcity of these materials influence their value? Is Marx's argument still valid in the case of an exhaustible resource, which is present only in finite supply? |
| [51] Konnen: labor value of finite resources. Marx determines the value of raw materials by the amount of labor required to make the raw materials available for production. To Marx the value of scarce materials is related to the amount of labor required to find these materials. Marx writes, “Diamonds are of very rare occurrence on the earth's surface, and hence their discovery requires on average a great deal of labor-time.” He does not account the value of a diamond to its limited supply and therefore very steep demand curve, instead he believes that the “labor-time” is so great for a diamond that it must receive a high value. |
| In the case of an exhaustible resource, let us assume a readily available exhaustible resource, such as a rare fish only found in one location. The fish are easy to catch, they are in a finite amount, and they are not found anywhere else. Marx's theory would no longer be valid. The labor-time required to acquire the resource is not increased, however the resource is scarce. Therefore Marx's theory of labor would fail to explain the high value of the resource. |
| However, his theory may hold up in many cases. Gasoline would be an example to a certain extent, when one oil well runs out, there is much labor-time committed to searching for new drilling locations. Again another argument to his theory is that when we are down to the last gallon, the laws of supply and demand will take over and the price of that gallon will equal the demand. |
| There is only one Mona Lisa, is its value high because it took Van Gogh such a long time to paint? Or is its value high because it has a very high demand? I believe the second question is correct. |
| Hans: Grade penalty because your submission completely ignores Stonewall's earlier submission about the same issue, even though both of you use oil as an example. |
|
|
|||||