Question 1 What did Marx mean with his formu - University of Utah

U of Utah Econ 5080 2007fa 63
[76] Ashley: Commodities Are Like Paintings. A commodity is an article of trade or
commerce. The value is the substance of that commodity. In economics, we discuss how
important commodities are in society, but in order to truly understand what a commodity is,
we need to understand the meaning of it, the value, which is what is most important. The
value is the different labors and uses that make up the commodity which, at most times,
is overlooked. Most people look at the total package, not at what its contents are. I like
to compare this subject to a painting. Everybody “aaaahhhh’s” at the picture when it is
complete, but they don’t know the work that goes in to each stroke by the artist, however,
without the strokes, there would be no painting. The same goes for a commodity. The
commodity is the painting as a whole, and the value is like the strokes. It is impossible
for one to exist without the other, and at the same time, the strokes (value) are what’s most
important.
Commodities are the MAIN subject of this chapter, we are just going into detail about its
components, and that’s why it’s the title of the first chapter.
Message [76] referenced by [81]. Next Message by Ashley is [265].
[80] ZACH: Problem with the word ‘Value’. There is a problem with the word value. I
believe that the reason the first chapter is called commodities and not value is because some
people don’t value things the same as others. For example, an oil company doesn’t “value”
a piece of plywood as much as a lumber company does. Plywood is definitely a commodity,
but it has no value to the oil company. This piece of wood makes the lumber company a lot
of money when sold in large quantities, yet that plywood’s value is zero for the oil company.
That is why the first chapter was called commodities, because each company can relate to
commodities and what their “value” is to that specific company. Not every commodity is
valued the same.
Message [80] referenced by [81] and [401]. Next Message by ZACH is [270].
[81] Hans: Cancerous Value. Value, in Marx’s theory, is not a subjective attitude which
varies from person to person as ZACH says in [80]. It is also not primarily the meaning
of the commodity, as Ashley says in [76], although there is some truth in it: value is some
immaterial substance inside the commodities. Value is at the same time something inside
the commodities and a social relation.
The problem with value is that in capitalism, value is not static but it is moving. It
jumps from commodity to commodity and becomes bigger and bigger. Its self-aggrandizing
movement, which can be compared with a cancer, is the main driver of the economy. Marx
hasn’t said this yet in the assigned readings, he will say this in Chapter Four. What drives the
capitalist economy is therefore not the greed of the capitalists but the inner necessity of the
social relation “value” to accumulate, to become bigger and bigger and to be concentrated
in fewer and fewer hands.
Marx holds that social relations, generally, cannot be explained by individual motivations
but they have their own dynamic. The topic of the whole book Capital is the anatomy of the
social relation “value,” the explanation how it can and why it must accumulate relentlessly.
Since social relations cannot be derived from individuals, it would be wrong to begin such
an anatomy-book with individuals. Instead, Marx begins with the commodity, because the
64 2007fa Econ 5080 U of Utah
commodity is a simple and concrete object which gives us the entry point into the social
relation “value.”
Message [81] referenced by [83], [178], [188], [220], [2012fa:132], and [2012fa:456]. Next Message by Hans is
[90].
[83] Chris: value as the components of the whole “Commodity”. Marx entitled his first
chapter “Commodities” because commodities are at the heart of everything he discusses on
capitalism. The in-depth discussion on values helps us to understand what makes a commodity,
what makes an object more than something that merely satisfies needs or wants but
makes it worth something in an exchange market, what gives it exchange-value. Before reading
the first chapter I would have wrongly asserted that anything that has use or a use-value
should accordingly be held to be a commodity but Marx discusses in length the exchange
values and a commodity meant something different to me after that. If Marx had stepped
right into commodities and overlooked what values meant to them he would have left a large
gap in an already deep subject.
Hans: Chris, in the long message [81] I wanted to say that the true subject of Marx’s work is indeed value, and the
first chapter is called ”commodity” because the commodity is a good starting point for studying value.
Chris: So I think I turned this around then. He starts with commodities because it is an easy way to begin an
earnest discussion of value which drives capitalists.
Hans: Exactly.
Next Message by Chris is [115].
[173] Poppy: The first Chapter of Capital is called “Commodities” despite the heavy focus
and discussions on value. This is because Marx wants to introduce his strong theory/view of
what the relationship between both Commodities and Value truly is. His viewpoint is new
and somewhat liberating to what other economists and possibly most people first assume
when comparing the two. Previously and currently the relationship is thought to be linked to
its exchange-worth, however this is contradictory to what Marx tell us. A commodity’s value
heavily depends on what service or need it provides, not necessarily on what its exchange
proportion is. Thus, making the importance of a commodity is its relationship to its value.
They go hand in hand.
Because it is too easy, and can be quickly comprehended, that the relationship between
commodities and value is determined by its exchange-proportion to other commodities, it
was important that Marx introduced this book with A: commodities, and by B: strongly
associating them to their values, and explaining exactly what their value really meant.
Hans: You are right that Marx distinguishes between value and exchange-value, but value in his theory is not
determined by importance but by labor content.
Next Message by Poppy is [437].
[178] BHales: Commodities vs. Value. Marx labels the first chapter “Commodities”
because it gives him a good entry to explaining the social relation tied to value. Once a
person can understand the concept of a commodity, it becomes easier for him to understand
value and its social relation. As Hans said in [81] “value is some immaterial substance inside
the commodities. Value is at the same time something inside the commodities and a social
relation.”
Hans: You seem to say that “commodity” is a more fundamental concept than “value,” just as integers are more
fundamental than rational numbers and therefore must be studied first. But this is not the case. “Value” is the more
fundamental concept.
Next Message by BHales is [311].