Chai-on wrote in [OPE-L:2363]:
> Question:
> If land is excluded from the category of the commodity for the reason that
> it has no value. Then the LTV could not but become a tautology.
Why?
> To say that the value of commodities are created by labor only after
> excluding the non-labor products from the captegory of commodity?
Although certain objects may come to have a use-value and an
exchange-value, this does not by itself necessarily mean those objects are
commodities. What is your basis for arguing that products of *nature
alone* are commodities? If they are commodities, what determines their
value?
> But we can argue that the substance of value is labor even without
> precluding the non-labor products from the category of commodity if
> we properly interpret the meaning the substance.
Products are produced by ... whom? Land is not produced, but is instead
appropriated by humans. Under capitalism, of course, land becomes private
property or state property. What has changed is the ownership and title to
the land.
In OPE-L Solidarity,
Jerry