| This question <70|90> overall <73|75> ElGuey: <40|149>. graded A– |
| Question 117: Can a commodity express its value in the value of another commodity? |
| [74] ElGuey: The value of a commodity inside another commodity. I believe that the statement is right, however, the value may be higher or lower than our expectation. I will discuss both scenarios: |
| I believe that a commodity can express its value in the value of a commodity, however, as Hans states in the annotations “The second form of the commodity must therefore be the form in which the value contained in the commodity expresses itself, i.e., it must be a form of value.” Where we need to focus our attention is in the last part of this statement in that “it must be a form of value.” Let's use the example of a coat. There is the value of the linen, and the value of the coat. Let's assume we go to Nordstroms to buy us a sport jacket and that we have no limit on the amount we can spend. Of course, I cannot speak for everyone but I would buy the coat that is made with the finest linen. The coat will obviously be high priced because of a name brand and because of the type of linen used. If I get a coat made out of camels hair, it will be priced higher than that of a coat made of wool and I will get a very valuable jacket. Therefore, the linen used can express its value in the value of another commodity, the coat. I believe that both commodities complement each other and both express value. |
| Minaret states earlier that a hard drive can be purchased separate as can a computer, but together they potentially have a higher value. The only problem we run into in this case (it could also be as in my example of the coat and linen) is that as Minaret states, “The computer's value will also go up or down depending on the ”value“ of the hard drive.” If I were to purchase a snowboarding coat for the winter and it had no real fleece lining but an imitation, the value of the commodity as a whole is relatively lower compared to that of a coat with fleece lining. As Marx states in Capital “That second commodity is not the one whose value is expressed. Its function is merely to serve as the material in which the value of the first commodity is expressed.” |
| Yes commodities can express their value in the value of another commodity, however, the value may be high or low, depending on the commodity being expressed as value. |
|
|
|||||