one of the main things i think i'm getting out of reading about marx's theory of money is how extensible it is, because the backing commodity is largely irrelevant and it fundamentally is societally dictated. even when you admit that marx thought that fiat currency would never happen, his theory still like- holds. it's not necessary for the backing commodity to be anything but a commodity, and commodities are a very general thing.
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from tulips@shrike.club
a minor bugbear is that i think that the simple exchange-form shouldn't be written
x commodity A = y commodity B
but instead something like
x commodity A -> y commodity B
because while it is technically a symmetric relation, there's a kind of understanding with "equality" in mathematics that it's a law of nature and also that the content of the equation is the same as the flipped equation. in marx's exchange-forms, the side of the equation matters A LOT.
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from tulips@shrike.club
@tulips this is actually a big part of colin drumm's issue with value theories (which i mostly agree with). exchange is not actually a symmetric equation and therefore there is no single underlying "value" that can equate things under exchange by means of a ratio. specifically exchange doesn't happen directly between producer and consumer, but producer -> dealer, and then dealer -> consumer. the dealer takes an advantageous side of both exchanges (buys low, sells high). therefore every commodity does not have one single price but it has a spread between two different prices which the dealer profits off of
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from iitalics@octodon.social
@iitalics you see, i think that there's a difference between the value-form and the price-form. the price-form is a specialized case of the exchange-form, sure, but i think that it takes a form of its own due to money/commodity fetishism. like, fundamentally, i think that the obscuring of the actual VALUE into PRICE happens as a result of that fetishism.
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from tulips@shrike.club
@iitalics so, like, i think that there is an underlying value measured in SNLT (although that value is socially dependent, that's the S). but i don't think that the price is representative of the value in SNLT or a conversion of that SNLT to money, it's representative of the market.
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from tulips@shrike.club
@tulips im not super sure what the point of positing SNLT if its not actually related to price. in fact it seems the opposite of materialist if its something we have to imagine but cannot observe
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from iitalics@octodon.social This content has been proxied by September (3851b).Proxy Information
text/gemini