The equilibrium price is based on both the supply and demand of a good. Demand is not really determined by the cost of labor of a good, and since demand is a component of the equilibrium price, the "value" described by the LTV cannot be the same as the equilibrium price.
Also consider that unemployment exists, thus the quantity demanded of labor is lower than the quantity supplied, meaning the price of labor is above equilibrium. If you claim equilibrium price == value, you imply that workers are paid more than the value of their labor. Heh.
It's not a circular definition, unless you also think "freezing point" is a circular definition because it refers to the freezing point of a substance. Supply and demand are both functions dependant on price, equilibrium is the intersection point Qd(P)=Qs(P).
If supply and demand set the equilibrium price, and "value" is just defined as that equilibrium price, labor does zero explanatory work. You must explain how socially necessary labor time independently calculates the price before looking at supply and demand. The moment you say "value is just whatever price supply and demand balance out at," you have abandoned the LTV and adopted neoclassical market theory while keeping the word "labor" as an empty label.
If you don't use "equilibrium price" to mean the equilibrium of supply and demand, you're just using it as a synonym for "value" as defined in the LTV. Which is meaningless.
Btw Marx himself said that "value" is NOT equal to equilibrium price. If price equaled LTV value at equilibrium capital intensive industries with few workers would have abysmal profit rates compared to labor heavy ones. Since market competition equalizes profit rates across industries, equilibrium prices permanently diverge from labor values. LTV describes a theoretical cost-anchor, not the equilibrium price.
Comments
The equilibrium price is based on both the supply and demand of a good. Demand is not really determined by the cost of labor of a good, and since demand is a component of the equilibrium price, the "value" described by the LTV cannot be the same as the equilibrium price.
Also consider that unemployment exists, thus the quantity demanded of labor is lower than the quantity supplied, meaning the price of labor is above equilibrium. If you claim equilibrium price == value, you imply that workers are paid more than the value of their labor. Heh.
No that is circular reasoning. What is the price of a good when supply and demand are in equilibrium?
The value described in the LTV is the equilibrium price, it’s not exact to real world prices because supply and demand are not exactly equal.
Sorry, what is circular reasoning? You don't mean my definition of equilibrium price surely. Because that's well established.
https://www.investopedia.com/terms/e/equilibrium.asp
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economic_equilibrium
https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/equilibr...
It's not a circular definition, unless you also think "freezing point" is a circular definition because it refers to the freezing point of a substance. Supply and demand are both functions dependant on price, equilibrium is the intersection point Qd(P)=Qs(P).
If supply and demand set the equilibrium price, and "value" is just defined as that equilibrium price, labor does zero explanatory work. You must explain how socially necessary labor time independently calculates the price before looking at supply and demand. The moment you say "value is just whatever price supply and demand balance out at," you have abandoned the LTV and adopted neoclassical market theory while keeping the word "labor" as an empty label.
If you don't use "equilibrium price" to mean the equilibrium of supply and demand, you're just using it as a synonym for "value" as defined in the LTV. Which is meaningless.
Btw Marx himself said that "value" is NOT equal to equilibrium price. If price equaled LTV value at equilibrium capital intensive industries with few workers would have abysmal profit rates compared to labor heavy ones. Since market competition equalizes profit rates across industries, equilibrium prices permanently diverge from labor values. LTV describes a theoretical cost-anchor, not the equilibrium price.