[p2p-research] Profit Measures the Payer's lack of Physical Source Ownership

[Kevin Carson]

On 2/17/10, Ryan Lanham <rlanham1963 at gmail.com> wrote:

> To call what Smith wrote a labor theory of value is clearly a miss reading
> in the sense Marx meant.  Smith understood supply and demand.  He did not
> work out that S&D would be self-regulating (which it isn't), but he saw
> price and value as elementally driven my the market, not by cost or inputs.
> Of course there is a relationship...but it is only half the relationship (at
> best).

I think this is misreading what Ricardo and Marx meant by a labor
theory of value.  The LTV did not imply any inherent, mystical value
in a product like a platonic form.  It was, rather, the natural
equilibrium price toward which prices gravitated--and supply and
demand was the mechanism by which this took place.

-- 
Kevin Carson
Center for a Stateless Society http://c4ss.org
Mutualist Blog:  Free Market Anti-Capitalism
http://mutualist.blogspot.com
The Homebrew Industrial Revolution:  A Low-Overhead Manifesto
http://homebrewindustrialrevolution.wordpress.com
Organization Theory:  A Libertarian Perspective
http://mutualist.blogspot.com/2005/12/studies-in-anarchist-theory-of.html