This question <70|84> overall <75|77> Pike: <510|224>. graded A

Question 142: Why doesn't Marx say that the simplest value relation is that between commodity and money?

[76] Pike: Is value real?   While I understand Hans and TheDude's viewpoints, I am still questioning if the simplest value relation (SRV) could be simply a moneyless, two-commodity market. Could an SRV example be two neighbors living in the middle of nowhere (in a closed economy) in which one farms wheat and the other raises sheep? Money is not needed as an intermediary and they only trade meat for wheat. Even if they do not use money to relate value, they still know the exchange-value of both items in the market. In this case, value is (still) only mental, as TheDude stated. Is this not the most basic SRV?

Should the SRV be used in a more complex scenario where the value of basketball cards, mines, or factories are involved? I understand that value is relative to different economies at different times, but I am looking for some clarification as to why factories are included in analyzing a basic, “simple value relation.”

	Students enrolled for Econ 5080 in 2009fa are invited to give feedback to the above message Pseudonym:      UofU ID:   Text: