scaut

[scaut @TheScaut]

@crusaderfembi @VCHK_LVNA @k4_nobody But then it’s no longer proving labour creates value. It’s just using labour as a framework to describe how production is organised. Worse than that, it doesn’t do it better than subjective value, scarcity, and marginal utility.

[scaut @TheScaut]

@crusaderfembi @VCHK_LVNA @k4_nobody That’s fine, but labour does the same thing, you said it yourself. Marx presupposes a good has use value before it counts as value creating. Once demand is necessary, what makes you think labour is the sole explanation of value?

[scaut @TheScaut]

@crusaderfembi @VCHK_LVNA @k4_nobody Then labour tells us nothing either. Use value explains why anyone wants anything at all. Subjective value explains how much someone wants something relative to alternatives. Labour can partly explain the cost side, but not value alone.

[scaut @TheScaut]

@crusaderfembi @VCHK_LVNA @k4_nobody No, but the aggregate of everybody’s personal choices do. If everybody suddenly stopped liking the taste of bread, do you think it would still hold the same value? Would bakers still produce it and sell it at the same price? Do you think people would still buy it?

[scaut @TheScaut]

@crusaderfembi @VCHK_LVNA @k4_nobody what do you think macroeconomic forces are? They’re aggregates of individual choices, production limits, money and policy. Prices form through people buying, selling and substituting under scarcity. Money makes unlike goods comparable by showing what people give up for them.

[scaut @TheScaut]

@crusaderfembi @VCHK_LVNA @k4_nobody Value is context dependent and subjective. If my fridge is full, I may prefer a PS5, since 399 loaves would mostly go to waste. But if I were starving or homeless, the bread would be far more valuable. Value depends on circumstances and preferences, not just labour time.

[scaut @TheScaut]

@crusaderfembi @VCHK_LVNA @k4_nobody That assumes what it needs to prove. A PS5 and bread become comparable through money prices and subjective choice, not a shared labour substance. Labour affects supply, but exchange rates come from valuation, scarcity and opportunity cost.

[scaut @TheScaut]

@crusaderfembi @VCHK_LVNA @k4_nobody But that only answers half of it. If I spend the average labour time digging a hole nobody wants, that still doesn’t create value. So “socially necessary” can’t be purely supply side. It also needs social demand.

[scaut @TheScaut]

@VCHK_LVNA @k4_nobody That distinction doesn’t solve the problem though. “Socially necessary” already depends on social demand, meaning labour only counts once it has been validated by people’s wants. So labour isn’t independently creating value, it’s being filtered by subjective valuation first.

[scaut @TheScaut]

@JeffreymGourley @RockChartrand To avoid conflict; conflict being defined as 2 or more parties using the same scarce means towards contradictory ends. Property rights are necessary for rational and peaceful resolution.

[scaut @TheScaut]

@DW_MidJourney I’ve got docs and assets for episode 12 of DMP. Nearly finished full design doc w/ camera script.

[scaut @TheScaut]

@DW_MidJourney What kind of project ideas you got in mind? I’d love to do whole episodes, but it is daunting alone.

[scaut @TheScaut]

@vkamikazes @BTRBT_ “If you change the definitions to be my tautology, then I’m right”.

Primacy of consciousness-tier take.

[scaut @TheScaut]

@DW_MidJourney Reddit moment

[scaut @TheScaut]

@discordspies @normal_brandon1 You don’t understand what a right is.

A right is something you’re justifiably entitled to. You’re not entitled to services because there can be times when aggression has to be used to ensure this. The problem with this is you’re justifiably entitled to non aggression.

[scaut @TheScaut]

@RioKora @realmichigander @AnCapShow Proclaiming that things are a scam or “pseudoscientific”, isn’t itself an argument, especially when you haven’t shown reasons as to why. Give me a method or set of rules I can apply to any good or service to determine “objective price”.

[scaut @TheScaut]

@realmichigander @AnCapShow You do realise that it is socialists who believe in objective value, right?

Subjective doesn’t mean false or baseless, it means down to preference. Money is valuable because most people prefer having a universal trade medium than not.

[scaut @TheScaut]

@rohaq @1HeyTC @nocontextEFC Planning regulations. Property owners are politically active and will always vote no to local development projects as it will drop their property value.

Rent caps reduce property usage. Some may sell, but buyers can’t afford current prices, so they’ll stay vacant.

[scaut @TheScaut]

@TheMindProbe2 Welcome to British politics, where basing your position on reason and principle will guarantee you’ll lose,

[scaut @TheScaut]

@JayExci @JadeWilliamsolo Roughly 65-75% of agricultural land is not arable. This can only really be used to feed livestock as they can graze where humans can’t. Animals don’t have rights. If you disagree, derive them.