[lbo-talk] value form

[boddi satva]

No no no, we produce commodities because individually we produce a
narrow scope of goods and services but we want a much larger basket of
goods and services than what we produce ourselves. Therefore, what we
produce must go out to the community and a system of exchange must be
set up to administer distribution. And to be fair you have to know how
many chocolate bars it takes to have about the same value as a pot of
redcurrant jelly because some people like chocolate and some people
like redcurrant jelly.

Let's be realistic here.

boddi

On 9/27/06, Bill Bartlett <billbartlett at aapt.net.au> wrote:
> At 7:04 PM -0700 27/9/06, joanna wrote:
>
> >I don't think he's saying it's evil; I think he's saying it's not necessary.
> >I don't quite see how creating something that I myself don't want,
> >necessarily results in a commodity.
> >
> >I just made many pints of raspberry and strawberry jam. Some I'll
> >eat; some I'll give away. I don't think that makes the jam a
> >commodity.
>
> No, stuff you make to give away isn't a commodity. My raspberries are
> not going to do well this year, so its a pity I can't take advantage
> of your jam. I'll have to make more redcurrent jelly. I can always
> give away a lot of that, it makes great presents.
>
> The question of whether commodifying everything is necessary is still
> an open one though I suppose. If I was starving I might not be so
> generous. People turn their produce and indeed their bodies, into
> commodities to sell because they need to, not because they prefer it.
> Is this necessary? Is it the case that human society is unable to
> produce enough for everyone to live securely, or is it perhaps the
> case that people wouldn't contribute without the threat of starvation
> hanging over them? Nobody seems to thinks so, yet we still have an
> economic system based on just those assumptions.
>
> Bill Bartlett
> Bracknell Tas
> ___________________________________
> http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk
>