labour theory of value

the doctrine, in classical economics (and especially in MARXIST ECONOMICS), that labour alone is the source of VALUE and that the value and price of commodities is directly related to the labour-time embodied in their production. On this formulation CAPITAL represents past or ‘dead’ labour, and this, together with new labour and land, is combined in the process of production. Apart from general arguments for and against Marxism, debates also exist within Marxism over the extent to which empirical prices, profits, etc. bear a systematic and calculable relation to value in its theoretical sense. Often it is accepted that they do not, but that nevertheless the general concept of labour values is useful in indicating levels of ‘exploitation’, tendencies to crisis, etc. within capitalism (e.g. see Wright, 1981,1985,1989). On the other hand, even within Marxism, there are arguments that the labour theory of value is unjustified (see Steedman et al, 1981). Both Pierre Sraffa (1960), in a so-called ‘neo-Ricardian’ analysis, and Roemer (1982), using a game-theory approach, have elaborated the technical reasons for this. Sraffa, for example, argues that the standard of absolute ‘value’ cannot be ‘labour’ in the way that both Ricardo and Marx suggested, but must instead be the ‘standard commodity’ (in which the proportions in which commodities enter net outputs is assumed equal to that in which they enter the aggregate means of production); this standard commodity includes labour, but not labour exclusively. It can be argued, as by Hodgson (1982), that: ‘the extent to which the propositions of Capital depend on the labour theory of value has been over estimated by both supporters and opponents of Marxian analysis’, and that this analysis remains a powerful tool for the analysis of capitalist societies and capitalist economic relations, especially in its focus on production, forms of PROPERTY, and on inequalities – see also CAPITALIST LABOUR CONTRACT, EXPLOITATION, CONTRADICTORY CLASS LOCATIONS. Against this, there exist very real problems for Marxism from any detachment from the labour theory of value, not least an undermining of the LAW OF VALUE and doctrines of an inherent tendency to final crisis in capitalism that have been central, at least to 'S cientistic’ forms of Marxism (see CRISES OF CAPITALISM, ORGANIC COMPOSITION OF CAPITAL, TENDENCY TO DECLINING RATE OF PROFIT). Accordingly, the account of capitalism provided by contemporary Marxism is far less determinate than that given previously

labour theory of value

a doctrine developed by the classical economists (particularly Adam SMITH and David RICARDO) that states that the value of a GOOD is determined by the amount of LABOUR input needed to produce that good. Thus, the ratio of the equilibrium prices of two commodities is directly proportional to the ratio of labour required to produce them.

Smith was the first to tentatively suggest a labour theory of value, although he acknowledged that the value of a good must be determined by a number of input costs: RENT, WAGES and PROFIT, even if labour did constitute the greatest part of final value. Ricardo accepted that profits and rent may have to be taken into account but that it did not detract from his main argument of relative values between two goods being fundamentally determined by labour cost. Karl MARX developed Ricardo's ideas, decomposing labour value into three constituent parts. The three parts are ‘constant capital’ (the capital used up in production),‘variable capital’ (human labour input), and ‘surplus value’ (the excess value over and above labour and capital used in the production process). Where surplus value exists, there is exploitation of the labour input insomuch as they are being paid less than their full input value.

The labour theory of value was replaced towards the end of the 19th century by the MARGINAL PRODUCTIVITY THEORY OF DISTRIBUTION, which took into account the contribution of all factor inputs into the production process, not just labour. See CLASSICAL ECONOMICS.

单词	labour theory of value
释义	labour theory of value labour theory of value the doctrine, in classical economics (and especially in MARXIST ECONOMICS), that labour alone is the source of VALUE and that the value and price of commodities is directly related to the labour-time embodied in their production. On this formulation CAPITAL represents past or ‘dead’ labour, and this, together with new labour and land, is combined in the process of production. Apart from general arguments for and against Marxism, debates also exist within Marxism over the extent to which empirical prices, profits, etc. bear a systematic and calculable relation to value in its theoretical sense. Often it is accepted that they do not, but that nevertheless the general concept of labour values is useful in indicating levels of ‘exploitation’, tendencies to crisis, etc. within capitalism (e.g. see Wright, 1981,1985,1989). On the other hand, even within Marxism, there are arguments that the labour theory of value is unjustified (see Steedman et al, 1981). Both Pierre Sraffa (1960), in a so-called ‘neo-Ricardian’ analysis, and Roemer (1982), using a game-theory approach, have elaborated the technical reasons for this. Sraffa, for example, argues that the standard of absolute ‘value’ cannot be ‘labour’ in the way that both Ricardo and Marx suggested, but must instead be the ‘standard commodity’ (in which the proportions in which commodities enter net outputs is assumed equal to that in which they enter the aggregate means of production); this standard commodity includes labour, but not labour exclusively. It can be argued, as by Hodgson (1982), that: ‘the extent to which the propositions of Capital depend on the labour theory of value has been over estimated by both supporters and opponents of Marxian analysis’, and that this analysis remains a powerful tool for the analysis of capitalist societies and capitalist economic relations, especially in its focus on production, forms of PROPERTY, and on inequalities – see also CAPITALIST LABOUR CONTRACT, EXPLOITATION, CONTRADICTORY CLASS LOCATIONS. Against this, there exist very real problems for Marxism from any detachment from the labour theory of value, not least an undermining of the LAW OF VALUE and doctrines of an inherent tendency to final crisis in capitalism that have been central, at least to 'S cientistic’ forms of Marxism (see CRISES OF CAPITALISM, ORGANIC COMPOSITION OF CAPITAL, TENDENCY TO DECLINING RATE OF PROFIT). Accordingly, the account of capitalism provided by contemporary Marxism is far less determinate than that given previously labour theory of value labour theory of value a doctrine developed by the classical economists (particularly Adam SMITH and David RICARDO) that states that the value of a GOOD is determined by the amount of LABOUR input needed to produce that good. Thus, the ratio of the equilibrium prices of two commodities is directly proportional to the ratio of labour required to produce them. Smith was the first to tentatively suggest a labour theory of value, although he acknowledged that the value of a good must be determined by a number of input costs: RENT, WAGES and PROFIT, even if labour did constitute the greatest part of final value. Ricardo accepted that profits and rent may have to be taken into account but that it did not detract from his main argument of relative values between two goods being fundamentally determined by labour cost. Karl MARX developed Ricardo's ideas, decomposing labour value into three constituent parts. The three parts are ‘constant capital’ (the capital used up in production),‘variable capital’ (human labour input), and ‘surplus value’ (the excess value over and above labour and capital used in the production process). Where surplus value exists, there is exploitation of the labour input insomuch as they are being paid less than their full input value. The labour theory of value was replaced towards the end of the 19th century by the MARGINAL PRODUCTIVITY THEORY OF DISTRIBUTION, which took into account the contribution of all factor inputs into the production process, not just labour. See CLASSICAL ECONOMICS. AcronymsSeeLTV
随便看	diacylglycerole diacyl glycerol kinase epsilon diacylglycerol lipase diad diadae diad axis dia (defense intelligence agency) object-oriented model of intelligence operations diadegma terebrans ichnovirus dia de la madre dia de la raza dia de las brujas dia del nino dia del niño dia de los muertos diadelphia diadelphian diadelphous diadelphous stamen diadem diadematacea diadematidae diadematoida diademed diademing diadem lemur