When Oppy is talking about Marx with his waifu he says that Marx said "Property is theft" when that was never said by Marx and he infact endorsed the idea of property.
When Oppy is talking about Marx with his waifu he says that Marx said "Property is theft" when that was never said by Marx and he infact end...
No idea who that marx fellow might be, but he does sound like a huge tard.
that is because Nolan is a moron
Nothing more moronic than trying to act smarter than a famous director over a misattributed quote.
>NOOO YOU CAN'T SAY THAT YOU KNOW MORE THAN SOMEONE FAMOUS! HE IS A FAMOUS DIRECTOR SO HE IS SMARTER THAN YOU!!
>>NOOO YOU CAN'T SAY THAT YOU KNOW MORE THAN SOMEONE FAMOUS!
A bit of trivia knowledge doesn't make you more knowledgeable than someone else midwit.
Rewriting history is a big part of their belief system.
This is why limited knowledge is a bad thing. Marx didn't say property is good but that as a slogan "property is theft!" is infantile. Since, it was the bougies who made the laws and defined what can be "theft".
Why did Marx think the labour theory of value was a good idea to base his predictions on? Was he schizo?
Labor is the only thing gives a good any value. That’s why society would collapse without farmers and truckers and miners and construction workers, while if politicians, “actors”, professors, ~~*bankers*~~ and baristas disappeared, few would give a shit and society would be able to function after a short transition period.
No it wasn’t. At the time many believed that value was determined by the cost of the good not the amount of labour time. The LTV was Marx’s own brand of crazy. It wasn’t unit the 1800s with the marginalist revolution did the LTV and cost determining price began to be questioned and slowly phased out by the subjective theory of value. But none of this stopped commies and socialist from repackaging their ideas under some moral grandstanding to avoid the criticism at large.
>At the time many believed that value was determined by the cost of the good
The value of the good is determined by its value... damn, how brilliant, why did Marx not think of this??
I think he meant that the price of the good was intrinsic to it's value, which is in function what the labour theory of value operates. The price of the good scales linearly with the amount work that has gone into it, whichever way. It's cooky.
lot of big words in this post, you must be very clever!!
Imagine being proud of being ignorant.
It’s goes to show you know nothing. What is meant by cost is monetary. From the classicalist point of view if it costs the business $100 to produce the good he will choose a price that will net him a profit that will be greater than the cost of $100 but let’s say the cost increases to $200 for the business to make or keep their previous profits they would have to increase the price and thus the monetary costs determined the price. The labour theory of value is heavily based on opportunity cost which states that the value of good is based on the labor time and effort put into making that good. It uses the decision between labour and leisure as determining the price. The whole thing fell apart due to the water and diamond paradox. If someone finds a diamond on the road from the classicalist point of view its price would be zero and from the the LTV pov its price would be zero as the foundered the diamond didn’t labour to make it and the cost in. Making it was zero. But yet if he goes to sell it he will still receive payment for the diamond so what gives? All of this is fully explained by the STV hence why the LTV and CDP died out.
did oil become more laborious lately because my gas prices are fricking insane right now?
what a stupid thing to say
Labor theory of value was basically accepted as a fact at the time. He wasn't anymore a fool than someone writing about how newtonian mechanics are rock solid and then making a model of the solar system. Its only later that people realize that's not how value works at all much like people eventually realized newtonian mechanics is just an approximation.
How does it work then?
Value is is derived by supply and demand. If people want gizmos rather than doodads, the value will be different assuming supply is identical. All labor does is act as a constraint on supply since often someone has to physically perform a task to make the thing or just bring it to you. Labor itself doesn't automatically create demand either. People might value the item because people worked a lot on it but that's typically not the case, most of the time people aren't interested in the fact that you spent so and so many hours making a thing because they just wanted a product that performs a task for them. If that thing is something that make their giant factory machine keep going they might pay you absurd amounts of money even though you only spent five minutes making the thing. If people don't want the thing you make it doesn't matter you spent a million years making it.
>Labor itself doesn't automatically create demand either. People might value the item because people worked a lot on it but that's typically not the case, most of the time people aren't interested in the fact that you spent so and so many hours making a thing because they just wanted a product that performs a task for them
Yes, that is why Marx distinguishes between use value and exchange value. As you say, there is no point in producing something that has no use-value (in your terms the product must "perform a task for people"). A product without use value has no exchange value either because no one would buy it. The exchange value, however, is determined by the socially average labour time required to produce it.
>The exchange value, however, is determined by the socially average labour time required to produce it.
No, its still just supply and demand. Labor might play into the total supply but if you overproduce something the value of each item will drop because nobody wants the surplus, least of all the people who made it.
Then how would explain the fall in proce of a good that has use value, if the supply and labour time remained the same. I mean it’s not like the price of the good is determined by the subjective evaluation individuals rather than how much effort went into it.
"I haven't read anything about marx's ideas at all": the post
Nope, it was never accepted as a fact. Actually Marx was BTFOd by his contemporary Eugen von Böhm-Bawerk, which dismantled labor theory of value and had proven it was internally inconsistent.
Nobody who isn’t a philosophy nerd or Chinese reads or cares about Marx in depth in 21st century. You’d be hard pressed to find a western leftoid who knows what a “commodity” or “capital” even is.
"property is theft" is an oxymoron because the idea of theft requires the property rights exist in the first place
Being a Marxist in the 21st century is hilarious. You would think enough trial and error would let people know it’s a failed ideology
Nah. All of those examples you can list of failed Communism weren't actually real Communism because real Communism wouldn't fail. Checkmate chud.
and yet "marxists" who espouse this belief will cry if you take their shit
there are three children in a music class
one child creates their own musical instrument, from scratch. it's pretty good.
one child cannot play any musical instrument, but their parents give them a huge allowance so they can buy the really good instrument from the student who created it. the creator would get cash money and the incentive to create more instruments. the buyer might have no talent but the transaction has value.
the third student can neither create, or buy, the instrument, but this final student can use it to play music and entertain others, which neither of the other two students can.
who deserves the instrument? and why?
the answer, and the reasoning behind it, will tell you a lot about a person's beliefs about property.
the only person who get to decide the question is the kid that made the fricking flute. all Black folk must hang.
how can the concept of theft exist if you don't recognize the concept of private property? it's impossible to steal if no one owns anything.
Marxists do recognize it, that's why they are able to identify it as theft.
how is it possible to steal if there is no such thing as ownership? "theft" means "taking something that does not belong to you". if nothing belongs to anyone then it is impossible to have theft.
the labor theory of value is incompatible with the idea of private property though.
not that Marx necessarily realized that, he was a weirdo NEET midwit and likely just said whatever the person he was addressing wanted to hear.
>the labor theory of value is incompatible with the idea of private property though.
The by far dumbest post in a thread filled with dumb posts, congrats.
A Marxist misinterpreting Marx is pretty normal actually.
Lot of chuddies are suddenly economic theorists lmao
This is stuff is extremely basic economics anon. It'd be like if someone said Marx can't do math properly and we were discussing issues the Pythagorean theorem and irrational numbers.
OP, why are you lying? He specifically says "onwership" and she corrects his with "property" to which he responds than in German Marx meant ownership, not property but never confronts this with her, because he wants that pussy. The entire scene was to just indicate that she is more radical than he and just superficially interpreted it to fit her worldview.
Also this thread basically exposes the sad truth that no one here watched it. No, seriously, why no one called Black person homosexual OP out on this. Do you even watch movies?
>how dare you people not be able to have perfect recall of minor scene in a movie that you saw months ago
There was also a scene in movie that says if you let OP put his wiener in your mouth you will live 10 years longer. I hope you will follow through with that too. No need to check.
Sorry OP but I know when you're trying to trick me with your homosexualry
Lame movie with way to much nudity and sex scenes
make like u235 when bombared by neutrons and split
Nolan is lazy and average as a writer but his stylistic choices in both visuals and soundscapes elevate the milquetoast material to something approaching sacred according to the hylic midwits who populate most of this board.