Talk:Use value: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 20:03, 6 July 2014

Politics Start‑class 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
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Socialism Unassessed

	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
???	This article has not yet received a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
???	This article has not yet received a rating 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]

Bob Rayner, in the terms of wikipedia protocol you are quite wrong. It is incorrect to replace a minority view (if it is one) with a mainstream view, because that is biased. Rather, both mainstream and minority views can and should be acknowledged as such. It is not the job of Bob Rayner as ideological dictator to tell us what we must think about the topic.Jurriaan (talk) 20:03, 6 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Beware of Bob Rayner's "editing"

The scam editor Bob Rayner User:Bobrayner specializes in cutting large bits out of articles that he doesn't like, for no reason at all or for some spurious reason. He doesn't understand anything about the subjectmatter. The article then has to be reset to what is was before his vandalism. This article is still being worked on from time to time and Rayner's destructive habits are unwanted here. Jurriaan (talk) 19:23, 6 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 20: / Line 20: @@
 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.[[User:Jurriaan|Jurriaan]] ([[User talk:Jurriaan|talk]]) 10:41, 20 June 2014 (UTC)
 :Unfortunately, we have to present a mainstream view, rather than letting this article reflect the views of a minority who [[WP:INUNIVERSE|actually believe in such concepts]]. [[User:Bobrayner|bobrayner]] ([[User talk:Bobrayner|talk]]) 14:32, 21 June 2014 (UTC)
+::::Bob Rayner, in the terms of wikipedia protocol you are quite wrong. It is incorrect to replace a minority view (if it is one) with a mainstream view, because that is biased. Rather, both mainstream and minority views can and should be acknowledged as such. It is not the job of Bob Rayner as ideological dictator to tell us what we must think about the topic.[[User:Jurriaan|Jurriaan]] ([[User talk:Jurriaan|talk]]) 20:03, 6 July 2014 (UTC)
+==Beware of Bob Rayner's "editing"==
+The scam editor Bob Rayner [[User:Bobrayner]] specializes in cutting large bits out of articles that he doesn't like, for no reason at all or for some spurious reason. He doesn't understand anything about the subjectmatter. The article then has to be reset to what is was before his vandalism. This article is still being worked on from time to time and Rayner's destructive habits are unwanted here. [[User:Jurriaan|Jurriaan]] ([[User talk:Jurriaan|talk]]) 19:23, 6 July 2014 (UTC)