The professor is a treasure to this world. Thank you!

I could listen to Wolff all day.

Professor Wolff is such a marvelous teacher. I'm so grateful to him for his gifts to us. Thanks for bringing this discussion to us. Have him return soon !

Good on Michael for not interrupting him.

I am going to miss these conversations between Michael and Richard Wolff 😢 Always insightful, but very digestible for anyone who isn't super academic. Rest in power, Michael. You've definitely help shape my worldview for the better, along with so many others who watched/listened to your show.

Wolff has enlightened me at 46! Never too old to learn!

Michael plus prof Wolff. My two favorite intellectuals on KZfaq. You guys need to do more together

Another master class from Richard Wolff. He always brings the knowledge.

A fabulously succinct explanation. Conclusion: Don't hate the player, hate the game.

That was a great way to break it down. Thank you so much Mr. Wolfe and Michael

Thank you: The biggest difference possible between the cheapest labor input and the extraction of excess value equals the depravity of the capitalist system. Please have Professor Wolff on again soon. And vote Bernie!!! 2020 and beyond. Miss Jenny

Well said, obviously. I had to learn that after I graduated with a degree in finance and banking, and had to pivot. Don't want to be part of this system

When Richard speaks, l listen.

Richard Wolff is a national treasure. He's like a bond super villain without the villain.

Bernie ad interrupted half-way through Wolff's explanation to be like, "Hey! I know you're trying understand the progression of feudalism to capitalism as a backdrop to Marx's Theory of Value, but I've got a small favor to ask you."

Once again: Bravo, Dr. Wolff.

I have never learnt so much and so clearly. Thank you Sir.

Honestly, a full video on economics would be several days, if not weeks, long: it's a very complex subject. I appreciate that Bernie couches it in rhetoric about empowering the people and workers, over corporations. I think that's easy to understand for most voters, and keeps us away from "proletariat talk", which is just too abstract for a lot of voters.

Best explanation for LTV I have ever heard.

Wow. Thank you! I get it. The more I hear from Mr. Wolff, the more I learn.

I am going to show parts of this video to my students. It is not easy to explain economic theories in a way that keep the audience's attention. Wolff not only keeps your attention up, he captures it completely.

Amazing to hear Professor Wolff speaking truth to power! Americans for the most part have such tunnel vision when it comes to the concept of socialism. Take some time and educate yourselves(don't depend on the government and MSM), then employ critical thinking. This is too important not to be fully informed before deciding who to vote for.

This lecture by Prof Wolff has been the most profound of all the other lectures he has given. I Know I'm at risk of minimizing all the other stuff but this has crystalizing my hard head!

Thank god for Richard Wolff.

It’s something we all know instinctively but it’s actually pretty difficult put so clearly into words. Great explanation 👍

The end of this video is the best shit ever. And I would like to draw attention to the oscar film parasite. It's main theme is exactly what Wolff is saying. It's not about being mad at a greedy worker or a greedy boss. It's the capitalist system that we operate under that's the source of all this human suffering. I tend to side with the worker since they tend to be the better and more reasonable folks out there compared to the rich... But still... It's the system man...

I appreciate that Marx placed the human value above the value of the thing. He was was among the first to recognize the human component of Capitalism. His Theory of Alienation is a spot on analysis

not gonna lie, TMBS > Majority Report

Often I’ll come back to this video and many other videos with Michael Brooks in them and just start weeping. Tears of sadness but also tears of happiness. Michael Brooks was the first political content creator I found that actually spoke to what I believed but wasn’t able to but into words. I found Michael when I was 20 years old and he passed shortly after that. I mourn the loss of a wonderful man who was able to beautifully weave humor and politics, a man who could break down a very complex topic and make it make sense to the average person, and a man that is needed on this planet now more than ever. But I quickly remember that Michael would want all of us to keep pushing forward. Keep fighting for the rights of all human beings around the world, and if true equality doesn’t come in my generation, I’ll do my best to prepare the next. Thank you so much Michael Brooks for everything you did in life, and for how you to continue to inspire others now and for generations on ❤️ Left is best and solidarity forever!

Actually, Ibn Khaldun elaborated the labour theory of value in the 14th century and so (briefly) did Guru Nanak , the founder of Sikhism, in the 15th century. There's no indication that he'd read Ibn Khaldun, though he may have done so. Guru Nanak and especially the fizzing polymath, Ibn Khaldun, are well worth reading.

Awesome clip! Thanks for that.

Thank you for these videos! I learn so much from Wolff. We need to hear from him more often. 🙌

This was excellent. Thank you 🙏

a good introduction in the theory of labor, with historical perspective. these days everything else is simplified

Another excellent discussion. . . . explaining the corruption of 'Capitalism' and the fruits of one's labor.

Mystery of the Market ayy? Call Rave Dubin. He's got the ideas lololol

The bit from 10:15 on about utility theory and its relation to the exploitation of labor is required listening. Wolff puts it very clearly and succinctly, as he does.

That was absolutely fantastic.

Fascinating conversation !

Great explanation. Never taught so succinctly in Am schools

Blew my mind

I can see the "labor" and "utility" side. Where I think we realize that labor unions are so important, though, when that labor becomes redundant and easily trained, them it's very easy for labor value to be minimized (in favor of the utility value taking most of the profit, which oftentimes is the owners of the business, usually not laborers). We need public unions and public laws to protect the value of labor, as a principle, over just basic utility.

I could listen to Professor Wolff all day. Completely fascinating discussion on the creation of Capitalism and the introduction of Marxism and the contradictions of a Capitalist economic system.

There's a point to the idea that "usefulness" is the root of value. After all it doesn't matter how much work you put into a certain product, if no one wants to buy it it still doesn't have any value in the marketplace. Also if you have access to a rare resource (like, idk genuine wasabi) then even if it doesn't take a lot of work to produce it it will still have a lot of value (assuming there's demand for it).

Great show! Thanx TMBS! Great job Professor,as always. It is absolutely necessary for the american(as well as any other) public to become educated on Mrx's labour theory of value,since noone knows about this theory,that is in fact a fact, that every activist and organiser before 1920 and nearly every worker from 1920 to 1947( at least in Europe,cut that to 1944 in the US) was informed about and intellectuals and students from 1965 to 75 or something like that knew about and educated many workers around the globe on this theory that explains the exploitative and oppressive nature of capitalism. In CAPITALism,capitalists are the establishment, are the ruling class. That's why it's called capitalism. And it's a system,that by it's nature, is competitive in a way that no capitalist can just step out and say "I'm going to be a moral and humane capitalist from today on", because they would just get crushed by their competition. The wealth of the capitalists is stolen from the workers,Pierre Joseph Proudhon would have said. Which us not comely true but sounds good and in my gut I feel like it's the truth. Economics are more complex than Proudhon's "property is theft" ,but it's not so far away from that. How can 8 people(or was that families?) own as much or more than the 50% of the poorest people on earth? Well, because they exploit their workers and the planet and through imperialism get richer and richer. Imperialism as late stage capitalism is not only imperialist wars, but also sanctions of countries that don't comply with the interests of,mostly, US-capital by the USA. At thus time more than 80 countries are sanctioned by the US. Sanctions wars, foreign pressure of all kind on behalf of the capitalist ruling class establishment is imperialism. This can only end in a world war, a climate or other environmental disaster or the fall of capitalism and the rise of socialism! Socialism or Barbarism!-as Rosa Luxemburg once wisely said. Although the revolution will most likely come from the third world encircling the first world, it is very good that more and more americans become interested in Marxism and Socialism. We need you in the belly of the beast! The more the better, the better educated the better! And I don't mean university educated, but class conscious. Workers of the world unite! Down with US-imperialism!

I swear watching stuff like this now got me thinking back to middle/high school history and smh

that was amazing

All the conservatives needs education in economics.

I'm a simple man I see Richard Wolff and I click on it.

RIP MB! just revisited this great video. take care everyone

Very informative!

Excellent lecture

Wolff is a worldwide treasure and people don't even know it

I’m so glad these two work in the same areaish

If I keep listening I'm going to expect Masters credits in economics.

Michael has put me onto so many people who are amazing i wouldn't know about professor wolf without him RIP the legend

That last part was just perfect 💙💚

GET THIS GUY ON AGAIN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

well said big up prof wolff

Yes Labour is the source of all human economic value

Brilliant synopsis.

The German speaking author was Carl Menger (Principles of Economics, 1871), not Eugen von Böhm-Bawerk , who was Menger' student. (10:41)

I love it when Michael tells me "Don't be foolish"

An American Hero, professor Wolff

Where was the Nevada debate clip?

Instead of immediately redistributing the profit to the workers, why not have the profit be loaned from the workers and payable back to workers over a term of, say, several years? Any thoughts on that?

stunning

This is actually a pretty decent explanation of why the originators of labour theory of value had their flaws they did approach the question for a scientific purpose, rather than an ideological pseudoscientific process that Marx was engaged in.

Economics one on one!! 👍👍👍

I was expecting Dr. Wolff to use the term, 'surplus value' - which was really Marx's key point that is extension from Smith/Ricardo's Labor Theory of Value. That 'surplus' value is extracted by the capitalist in the form of money value (=profit), which to Marx is at the root of economic exploitation!

I support Richard Wolff.

So, the problem is that no matter how much time anyone puts into their work that no one other than themselves will find value in it?

Eloquently described

It's amazing that Dr. Wolff was granted a PhD given the education system he was working within.

They exist for many reasons that include a general misunderstanding about banking, fraud, and voluntary exchange, vested interests, rent seekers, prevailing Keynesian and Monetarist economic thought that is wrong, and too many people foolishly advocating for socialism which exacerbates the problem.

14:00 - 15 That 1 minute perfectly sums the main problem with capitalism. It also shows why we need a descent minimum wage, set collectively in accordance to the needs of the times, as well as a fair taxing system with a gradually ascending percentage.

The Marginalist Theory of value did not "praise" the inventors of the LTV (Smith, Ricardo) and "undercut" Marxian Theory, they attempted to solve the Paradox of Value that the Classical Economists, including Marx, couldn't solve. It became clear that labor has no effect on the valuations of consumers in the market. Consumers (and producers who are consumers as well) look for the means to serve an end in the objects they wish to bid for. Value is a creation of the human mind to solve the problems of human existence and suffering. Prices are the expression in money (the medium of exchange) that the different individual actors in the market attribute to the goods offered for sale. I would suggest that the publication of Menger's Principles of Economics was a contributing factor to Marx never finishing his last 2 volumes of Das Kapital do to his economic theory being destroyed.

I am still curious about the labor theory of value when it comes to digging holes in a field and filling them back in... tons of labor can go into such a project with no change in value. Toxic fumes are also produced via labor (it takes a certain amount of effort to make them) but they aren't worth much (not valuable) and are arguably harmful to others.

Now, I have a conundrum. By labour theory of value it means that it is labour who creates the value then let's say hypothetically , an entire nation focuses on production of a single product then , will the price of the product remain the same? If it doesn't and if it plummets , then it clearly shows it is not labour that creates value but the forces of demand and supply - Smithonian invisible hand.

Boom!

Where does the consumer factor, factor in? They’re either going to want the cheaper of the product or a price that reflects their own work output in a comparable time of labor making their own product. I think this is where a monopoly, (unless broken up by a government stepping in to level the field) would otherwise disrupt the comparable value of labor time. Or if an employer finds a way to create a finished product cheaper and does not redistribute that profit which would have otherwise gone back into the economic well-being of the society which pays the same amount for the product. Labor time is less, productivity up and the ones benefitting are of a small minority who may not hardly work at all?

Wouldn't profit sharing be an equitable compromise? Workers and employers are then both motivated towards a common goal.

Was the reason for dropping the LTV because Marx was using it, or because it was a bad theory?

I have to say that even Smith didn't invent the labor theory of value but an author called William Petty. And if I want to go further, the author is Ibn Caldhoum...

They make their bathrooms exceptionally dirtier so as to make it tougher by having to hold in your shit, which causes migraines.

More of these ABC's of socialism videos would be a great idea!

Or what the employer prefers to say about final sale price...whatever the market will bear!

So to humor Prof Wolff- if it takes a factory full of 100 workers to produce a widget- The price of what that widget sells for should encompass all the labor that when into it. What if nobody has a need for that widget? I just spent six months painting a self portrait-which I feel is outstanding. A masterpiece. I put so much effort into it. Hours apron hours. For a half a year! I think it should sell for at least $800,000. Let's start the bidding... Again all this from Professor Wolff sounds good- total nonsense.

ECONOMIC SOCIAL UTILITY IS AT WAR WITH ECONOMIC TYRANNY

Even a honest theory of utility based value would be better than gambling based value, which would be better than out right theft of commons. The only market that really works properly is the legislature for sale.

Dr Wolff is bae

There can be a conflict between employer and employee interests, but it's not an inherent one. Assuming that people have the freedom to make choices an exchange is always a win win. That's why we have laws against monopolies, false advertising, and coercive violence tyranny is likely the greatest threat to a free market.

engagement

#learnmmt

Engagement

Utility is irrelevant in terms of supply, but it is obviously a factor in terms of demand. Nobody is going to buy sawdust because someone took the time to produce it at a labour equivalent cost of say 1 dollar per gram, unless its ceder and you want to get high. On the flipside of that coin, if you find gold in some wild area with no jurisdiction, the the value of whatever you produce with it will depend on the demand for it, BUT you will not sell a lump of gold for less than an amount of money you as the labourer find you can or want to based on your own evaluation of what effort you put into it, and what you will get in return for it. All of these evaluations is based on utility and availability of trade to you as an independent decision maker, at least in an idealised situation. When you are not in an idealised situation, the power dynamics of the particular situations, your ability to project the future and social conditioning will affect your decision greatly. Therefor the labour theory is a partial description of what value to a member of society and to the collective really is. What you really need is a theory of organisation of societies, a theory of realistic projection of value creation and a proper ethical framework for dealing with humans within societies. Economic models cannot integrate what social pressure is on you to lie to an investor about the potential of the rnd you are conducting, or how a regulation on pesticides will effect the intelligence of a demographic eating certain foods, resulting in less accurate accounting and therefor more lawsuits. Every aspect of society ultimately sets the conditions for the monetary currents and value created and consumed in a society, what the best principles of value even is depends on collective psychology. That said i agree with the analysis, and largely detest the arguments made against a society of both efficiency and solidarity, both love and social civility based on some degree of control. These questions are hard, i think our species needs to chill with the arrogance take a step back without letting go of disagreements, and work out progressivly better ways to better our societies for more and more people. Bernie down the white house 2020

This is so cool. I skimmed over Wealth of Nations years ago, maybe a decade ago, and when I read Smith's labor theory of value, it was a shock to learn that he thought of it way before Marx. And I always suspected exactly what the prof is saying here. Capitalists ditched a key theory of their ideology just because it was politically inconvenient for them. It's a house of cards!

utility theory goes way back to Aristotle

We are flip the page in history and we are in the George Jetson age

succinct.