> Paul: "Since gold changes its value relatively slowly, it gave the illusion
> of being an invariable standard of value,
> but no such standard can in fact exist."
>
> The issue is not whether *exchange-values* can be compared over time -- Marx
> agreed with Bailey that no invariable standard of value can exist -- but
> whether *intrinsic values* can be compared over time.
>
> Andrew Kliman
One can of course say that the labour required to make things changes
over
time, and by doing this one is making an inter-temporal comparison. But
the value
of a commodity is a relationship between the commodity and the
allocation of
social labour at the time it was made. This is an inherently time
specific
relationship.
I am not sure that I see what you mean by intrinsic value.
As I understand it value is not something intrinsic in a commodity but
a relation between it as a product and the division of social labour
which produced it.
Because of this there is no law of conservation of value across time.