Yes, if you can fully track labor input, you can use LTV (Labor Theory of Value) to determine how much work went into a product and price it accordingly - that's what the poster above was referring to.
Yes, if you can fully track labor input, you can use LTV (Labor Theory of Value) to determine how much work went into a product and price it accordingly - that's what the poster above was referring to.
But why would you base anything on an incorrect theory? If you value things by LTV, you're not going to like the results.
How would you know if there's no empiric evidence? Let me tell you, I'm not loving the results of the current pricing system, fwiw.
Well first let's agree on terms. What do you think the purpose of a price is? What should it represent?
I tend to agree with the LTV definition:
> The labor theory of value (LTV) posits that the economic value of a good or service is determined by the socially necessary labor time required to produce it under prevailing conditions
>How would you know if there's no empiric evidence?
If theres no empiric evidence, how can you claim that you can simply use LTV to price market inputs?
We can't make a claim either way without empiric evidence.
We do, however, have plenty of empiric evidence for how the current pricing mechanism works and based on that I figure it might be time to try something new?
Current pricing (as a system) is honestly pretty good, its largely the limitation of corporate liability that permits the scale to be out of balance.