Talk:Use value

Politics Mid‑importance

	Politics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Socialism Low‑importance

	Socialism portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Socialism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of socialism on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SocialismWikipedia:WikiProject SocialismTemplate:WikiProject Socialismsocialism articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Economics Low‑importance

	Business and economics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Economics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Economics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.EconomicsWikipedia:WikiProject EconomicsTemplate:WikiProject EconomicsEconomics articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

tag removal

no discussion and state exemplary for a simple concept, but didn't check state of > yr ago, when it was placed. 72.228.177.92 (talk) 19:19, 11 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The role of use value in political economy

This section appears to consist almost entirely of criticisms of Sweezy and Uno, and interpretation of Marx, phrased as the positions of Wikipedia, rather than attributed to reliable source. This seems to violate either WP:NOR, if these are original contributions by a Wikipedia editor, or WP:NPOV, if these are in fact the positions of sources which are being endorsed, rather than described, by the article.VoluntarySlave (talk) 20:21, 15 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Difference between labour and labour-power = surplus value

Might want to briefly mention that Marx's main contribution to political economy was 1) analysing the two fold character of labour, according to whether it is expressed as use-value or exchange value and 2) the treatment of surplus value independently of its particular forms as profit, interest, rent, etc.

The use-value of one particular commodity (labour-power) is very important for it produces more (surplus) value than the commodity itself is worth. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.84.68.252 (talk) 07:48, 15 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

A mess

This article on use value has become a mess. It has been repeatedly re-edited by people who don't really have a clue about the topic. It will need to be substantively rewritten to restore a quality text.Jurriaan (talk) 10:41, 20 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately, we have to present a mainstream view, rather than letting this article reflect the views of a minority who actually believe in such concepts. bobrayner (talk) 14:32, 21 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Use of the Mises Institute as a source

The section labelled ""Indifference" of capitalists" is already a mess of [citation needed] markers on nearly every point made in it, but additionally, the single actual citation within the section not only no longer refers back to the article in question, but cites the Mises Institute, a think tank that skews heavily to the right and explicitly places itself in opposition to "hypothesis-testing" on their About page. The citation may also violate WP:NPOV, given that the Mises Institute is not mentioned in reference to the citation (which is itself using weasel words such as "arguably".) Castleofwarriors (talk) 20:11, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]