Talk:Subjective theory of value/Archives/2014

Denial of intrinsic value? - Ambiguity

The following statement is confusingly ambiguous:

The subjective theory of value is a denial of intrinsic value.

What is meant by "intrinsic value"? Surely it can't mean the cost of production?

Maybe the intent could be restated more clearly? Vilhelmo De Okcidento (talk) 01:59, 13 March 2014 (UTC)

Value != Price

I changed a phrase in the top summary of the article that read "value here refers to exchange value or price" to "Value here is distinct from exchange value or price". Someone changed it back. I can try to find a cite (though I am not familiar with Wikipedia's citation standards), but value equaling price contradicts the entire theory, in particular the (correct) statement later in the body of the article that all voluntary trades are mutually beneficial. If the price and the value were the same, the trade would be even, and could not benefit either party. In fact, the entire point of the subjective theory of value is that (subjective) value must be distinct from (objective) price. So how does one go about fixing a factually incorrect statement in an article without starting a cycle of just continually changing it back and forth?--KB 8/22/09

I won't object if you change it again, as long as you explain it here. I reacted because it was a significant change in meaning without explanation. On the other hand, the pre-existing version wasn't ref'd adequately either. Hopefully someone can find a ref. I don't know what "subjective theory of value" is about--utility is subjective in conventional economic analysis, but this article gives the impression it's talking about something else. Finding more refs which are more modern and directly on-target would be useful (if such exist). CRETOG8(t/c) 16:22, 22 August 2009 (UTC)

It is a significant change in meaning. Subjective value is very similar to utility, but also incorporates a ranking of those values against other values for the purpose of evaluating a potential exchange, or alternative allocations of resources. It is a foundational concept in Austrian economics. It differs from most economic theories, in that those theories equate price and value, and thus leads to very different conclusions and explanations for observed phenomenon. It is the difference between the subjective value of the item received (utility) and the equally subjective value of the item given up (price) that provide the benefit in an exchange. The subjectivity of value applies to money as well as goods, and so the differential between value and price applies to mediated exchanges as well as barter exchanges. In either case, both parties see the thing they give up as the price. I have added links in the See Also section to Austrian economics and Eugen von Bohm-Bawerk, one of the early Austrians who developed the theory. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.228.159.114 (talk) 17:40, 22 August 2009 (UTC)

"Value" needs to be defined explicitly. I do not know what it means in this context. Given the rampant claims that the subjective theory of value contradicts normative claims related to a labor theory of value, it must be the case that assigning "value" is a normative claim. I doubt that this was intentional, and it seems likely that the normative stuff does not belong at all, but I do not know. Perhaps I should create another talk section for this issue, but it seemed relevant here.Cragunr (talk) 00:36, 3 July 2014 (UTC)