Talk:Subjective theory of value/Archives/2013
 | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Bad 'criticism' section
Economist Paul Mattick argued that STV leads to circular reasoning. Prices are supposed to measure the "marginal utility" of the commodity. However, prices are required by the consumer in order to make the evaluations on how best to maximise their satisfaction. Hence subjective value "obviously rested on circular reasoning. Although it tries to explain prices, prices were necessary to explain marginal utility"
Trade unionist Allan Engler namely prices exist before subjective evaluations can take place so "prices are determined marginal utility; marginal utility is measured by prices. Prices... are nothing more or less than prices. Marginalists, having begun their search in the field of subjectivity, proceeded to walk in circle".
Some economists argue that, in the long term and under perfect competition, the price of a capitalist commodity is equal to its production price, which in turn determines supply and demand. If demand changes, which it of course can and does as consumer values change, this will have a short term effect on prices but the average production price is the price around which a capitalist commodity sells for.
This is unclear and unsourced. --184.175.3.217 (talk) 16:22, 26 August 2011 (UTC)
Furthermore the part that's actually still in the article as of now (2013/6/8) seems to misunderstand the entire purpose of the SVT. I'd rather not have a Criticisms section than have one, from one economist, which is almost straw-man-esque. Perhaps some discussion of other theories of value would be appropriate here? (ex: a Marxian critique of SVT from the viewpoints of labour TV) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.11.206.90 (talk) 21:39, 8 June 2013 (UTC)