 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
tag removal edit
no discussion and state exemplary for a simple concept, but didn't check state of > yr ago, when it was placed. 72.228.177.92 (talk) 19:19, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
The role of use value in political economy edit
This section appears to consist almost entirely of criticisms of Sweezy and Uno, and interpretation of Marx, phrased as the positions of Wikipedia, rather than attributed to reliable source. This seems to violate either WP:NOR, if these are original contributions by a Wikipedia editor, or WP:NPOV, if these are in fact the positions of sources which are being endorsed, rather than described, by the article.VoluntarySlave (talk) 20:21, 15 September 2010 (UTC)
Difference between labour and labour-power = surplus value edit
Might want to briefly mention that Marx's main contribution to political economy was 1) analysing the two fold character of labour, according to whether it is expressed as use-value or exchange value and 2) the treatment of surplus value independently of its particular forms as profit, interest, rent, etc.
The use-value of one particular commodity (labour-power) is very important for it produces more (surplus) value than the commodity itself is worth. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.84.68.252 (talk) 07:48, 15 January 2014 (UTC)
A mess edit
This article on use value has become a mess. It has been repeatedly re-edited by people who don't really have a clue about the topic. It will need to be substantively rewritten to restore a quality text.Jurriaan (talk) 10:41, 20 June 2014 (UTC)
- Unfortunately, we have to present a mainstream view, rather than letting this article reflect the views of a minority who actually believe in such concepts. bobrayner (talk) 14:32, 21 June 2014 (UTC)