Marx failed to consider the very thing, he, wrote thousands of pages about. Tragic really.

Conservatives believe value is pulled from the aether by priests who are capable of communing with factories.

The lazy bourgeois economist's "takedown" of Marxism inevitably rests on dodging the arguments, because if you take Marxism dead-on they get bodied.

He knows all about what makes value, and understands history and how it unfolded, proving him right again and again. Marxists have never really thought about value before, and history? Marxists have been shown to be wrong over and over again. It's just history, Marxists, sorry if you don't have any framework to understand it.

This one is really causing me to twitch. Usually this kind of thing doesn't get to me, but the deep smugness behind the sheer ignorance, the smarmy certainty in their beliefs that are the exact absolute opposite of reality - it doesn't get more pure than this.

A fundamental weakness of socialism is that they don't understand that exploiting WTO enforced 0% import-fees implemented by SAPs and designed by the IMF to keep them in a debt-trap after a deal made with a dictator installed after CIA backed coup, I sell a pallets worth of pencils back to the company running our sweatshop in that poor country (where we pay the men $1/day (and that's only possible because women do all the other social work for "free" at home)) but I charge $1k per box of pencils so I can transfer all the profit made by them to our European office and this is actual how the value is created. Also, they don't even need pencils.

I've never seen a more pristine example of a straw man, let alone in the wild. Value is fundamental to what constitutes Marxist theory. It's like claiming Garfield hates pasta. Even beyond the strawman, I'm reminded of this quote

"I am, somehow, less interested in the weight and convolutions of Einstein's brain than in the near certainty that people of equal talent have lived and died in cotton fields and sweatshops" - Stephen Jay Gould

At which point he's the OP, Nick Tyrone, is going to pivot to "Capitalism lifts people out of poverty" and "it's not 0 sum" and "it's not violent, only the state is violent because starvation is a baseline" so the beauty would be wasted on him.

Marx for like 3,000 pages: trust me bro, value is just there and we just gotta take it bro

Iteration #90878720 of "Marx failed to consider [something Marx talked about in the first four pages of Capital]"

I did not spend hours of my life listening to somebody rant about linen in an audiobook to see somebody say Marx doesn't know what the fuck "value" is

we've all heard of the labor theory of value, but how about saturation and hue?
checkmate tankies

Guy has never heard of the labor theory of value, that’s embarrassing.

Capital volume 1 chapter 1: still managing to foresee and address reactionary “got-ya” moments 158 years later.

is this an example of a valuable idea created by a talented person?

what value, Gentle Nicholas, did the market assign this valuable idea? surely it is worth millions upon millions and yet you have chosen to give it away, like a turd-eating child of fools.

clearly you should keep these gems to yourself and only exchange them, quietly, with the wealthy aristocrats that can afford the splendor of your mind-diamonds.

This really is an incredibly pure gem of ideology

Talented people with ideas? Clearly, he must be referring to workers.

the value of healthcare and housing is non-obvious to the people, you need innovation. Which is why i'm launching my rent price derivatives in la on the blockchain, so that people can reduce exposure to housing prices

Um, actually, Marx never wrote about "value" at all. He does have a bunch of texts about something called "Wert," which if I'm not mistaken is a non-cancerous form of viral growth usually occurring on the hands or feet.

“All value is caused by your betters determining it is worth something! And your betters all determined what they have is valuable and you aren’t!”

Holy appeal to authority, batman. Who wants to tell them being condescending is not a good substitute for evidence?

This is why i will never like free speech, people with absolutely 0 knowledge in a subject say things with all the confidence in the world.

We should be more forgiving. Nick Tyson clearly finished reading volumes 1-3, but forgot the first half of vol 1 as it was at the beginning of his journey.

Fuck AI slop, obviously, but the “Grok is this true” schtick is fast becoming a guilty pleasure

The labour theory of value: The value is just... like... there man. It has nothing to do with going to work and doing labour.

And he ends the statement with a sprinkle of great man theory

[anti communist preacher voice] Karl Marx was always talking about the labor theory of value, but what we need today is to return to family values

Faker Theory of Value

That beard is not hidding anything, Nick