Jerry asks, "why?" in responce to my post as the following:
> 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?
Chai-on:
To say that the value of commodities are created by labor only after
excluding the non-labor products from the captegory of commodity
is the same as saying that all the balls in a sack is yellow without
allowing non-yellow balls to be put into the sack, which Bohm Bawerk
already pointed out.
Jerry:
What is your basis for arguing that products of *nature alone* are
commodities? If they are commodities, what determines their value?
Chai-on:
-------
Products of nature alone can only become a commodity when they are
sold and bought with money. Usually reporducible and reproduced
goods are commodities but land is not reproducible and yet is sold and
purchased with money. What determines their value? No, they have no
value but a price form. Its price is determined by the supply and
demand which rely on its rent.
Jerry:
------
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.
Chai-on:
-------
I agree.
In OPE-L Solidarity,
Chai-on