Hello Lemmygrad. I'm trying to understand the labour theory of value, and one thing I'm wondering about is the value of 'status symbols'. For commodities like this, it seems the price is always higher than the same commodity that's not a status symbol (like fancy cars or whatever). Those commodities seem to have disproportionately more value than the extra labour needed for the non status symbol version. How does LTV explain that?

My thinking is that LTV assumes that people will choose the cheaper between two equivalent commodities, but the opposite is actually true for status symbols (like, between 2 necklaces that are exactly the same, demand for the more expensive one will actually be higher). Does that sound about right? Or am I missing something deeper?

I should really get around to reading Capital...