There is a Wikipedia page for the Labor Theory of Value.
There is a Wikipedia page for the Criticisms of the Labor Theory of Value.
But there is no Wikipedia page for "Criticisms of the Criticisms of the Labor Theory of Value". Even Google doesn't turn anything up.
I have not read enough theory to even fully understand LTV, let alone understand its criticisms. But I'm assuming there are some Marxists who have written the "Criticisms of the Criticisms of the Labor Theory of Value". What would these be? Right now you get the impression that the "Criticisms of the Labor Theory of Value" are going unchallenged.
In my experience, a lot of criticisms rely on the assumption that value and price are the same thing, whereas every Marxist knows that price is exchange value.
PRICE IS THE MONEY-FORM OF EXCHANGE VALUE RAAAAAAAAAAAAA
:agony-turbo:
Although since Marx we have moved money form being gold based and simply a commodity to being fiat which complicates it a lot
I mean reserve banking precedes Marx so this isn't really the case, but it's certainly more extreme than it used to be
deleted by creator
It's more or less the same but the relation is a bit more murky
deleted by creator
I think Anwar Shaikh has shown empirically that the price of wholesale commodities still directly reflects the price of gold however. Gold is in effect still the dominant money commodity.
If I said price is derived from exchanged value would that be more accurate?
I think it's accurate enough to say price is exchange value tbh, I was just being a pedant.
I'll have you know I'm a survivor of impostor syndrome.
What do you think about the Ecological Economics or the Post-Keynesian argument?
The Post-Keynesian arguments are the same dreck as earlier Keynesians, namely that the market allocates resources based on "marginal utility" or "preference". These people live in a fantasy land where the market magically determines the value of all products, sets the price accordingly, and there's an omnipotent force (the State/central bank) who is supposed to step in if Mr. Market isn't doing his self-care and keeping up with therapy.
As TankieTanuki said, these criticisms ultimately get back to the idea that price is value, which is something that Marxists fundamentally disagree with (fwiw, stock market gurus like Warren Buffett are on the same side as Marx, "value investing" requires price/value mismatches on a fundamental level!).
The ecological economics theory from Wiki sounds like some ecofash b.s. on first read. "Labor doesn't create value because labor takes energy to produce" - no shit, that's the "v" part of the "c+v+s". "Cultural differences can change the use-value of goods" - yes to some extent, but this sounds an awful lot like "those primitive people don't value those resources".
IDK I've already shared about as much as I know 🤷. Ask my cousin, TheoryTanuki.