hey since you're a mod can you just click the off button for ads
Hey I'm having trouble with the Labor theory of Value. It is the whole "socially necessary" thing as a qualifier. Marx defines that as socially unseccary. I'll take one of the examples I found on Wikipedia
"Robert Nozick has criticised the qualifier "socially necessary" in the labor theory of value as not well-defined and concealing a subjective judgement of necessity. For example, Nozick posits a laborer who spends his time tying knots in a piece of cord. The laborer does his job as efficiently as is humanly possible, but Marx would likely agree that simply tying knots in cords is not a socially necessary use of labor. The problem is that what is "socially necessary" depends entirely on whether or not there is demand for the finished product, i.e., the knotted cord. In this way, introducing the "socially necessary" qualifier into the labor theory of value simply converts the theory into a roundabout and imprecise description of supply and demand."
nah i dont care about drama. gn
yeah ill get bored soon
pretty good. ill prolly fuck off to facebook soon
unfortunately I'm not in contact with 870 though there's a chance at a Marxist reading group both of us will attend here so I'll send your regards.
Hi, you should probably check this thread out: http://www.revleft.com/vb/history-ph....html?t=194832
Psst, those quotes aren't from 870
sick with irony
Strength through spontaneity
Radical Burger Flipper
DO YOU EVEN LIFT?!