In
neoclassical economics, the value of an object or service is often seen as nothing but the price it would bring in an open and competitive market. This is determined primarily by the demand for the object relative to
supply in a
perfectly competitive market. Many neoclassical economic theories equate the value of a commodity with its price, whether the market is competitive or not. As such, everything is seen as a commodity and if there is no market to set a price then there is no economic value. In
classical economics, the value of an object or condition is the amount of discomfort/labor saved through the consumption or use of an object or condition (
Use value). Though
exchange value is recognized,
economic value is not, in theory, dependent on the existence of a market and price and value are not seen as equal. This is complicated, however, by the efforts of classical economists to connect price and labor value.
Karl Marx, for one, saw exchange value as the "form of appearance" (This interpretation of Marx is along the lines of the Marxist thinker
Michael Heinrich) [
Erscheinungsform] of value, in his
critique of political economy which implies that, although value is separate from exchange value, it is meaningless without the act of exchange. In this tradition,
Steve Keen makes the claim that "value" refers to "the innate worth of a commodity, which determines the normal ('equilibrium') ratio at which two commodities exchange." To Keen and the tradition of
David Ricardo, this corresponds to the classical concept of long-run cost-determined prices, what
Adam Smith called "natural prices" and Marx called "
prices of production". It is part of a
cost-of-production theory of value and price. Ricardo, but not Keen, used a "
labor theory of price" in which a commodity's "innate worth" was the amount of labor needed to produce it. "The value of a thing in any given time and place", according to
Henry George, "is the largest amount of exertion that anyone will render in exchange for it. But as men always seek to gratify their desires with the least exertion this is the lowest amount for which a similar thing can otherwise be obtained." In another classical tradition, Marx distinguished between the "value in use" (
use-value, what a commodity provides to its buyer), labor cost which he calls "value" (the
socially-necessary labour time it embodies), and "
exchange value" (how much labor-time the sale of the commodity can claim, Smith's "labor commanded" value). By most interpretations of his
labor theory of value, Marx, like Ricardo, developed a "labor theory of price" where the point of analyzing value was to allow the calculation of
relative prices.
Others see values as part of his sociopolitical interpretation and critique of capitalism and other societies, and deny that it was intended to serve as a category of economics. According to a third interpretation, Marx aimed for a theory of the dynamics of price formation but did not complete it. In 1860,
John Ruskin published a critique of the economic concept of value from a moral point of view. He entitled the volume
Unto This Last, and his central point was this: "It is impossible to conclude, of any given mass of acquired wealth, merely by the fact of its existence, whether it signifies good or evil to the nation in the midst of which it exists. Its real value depends on the moral sign attached to it, just as strictly as that of a mathematical quantity depends on the algebraic sign attached to it. Any given accumulation of commercial wealth may be indicative, on the one hand, of faithful industries, progressive energies, and productive ingenuities: or, on the other, it may be indicative of mortal luxury, merciless tyranny, ruinous chicanery."
Gandhi was greatly inspired by Ruskin's book and published a paraphrase of it in 1908. Economists such as
Ludwig von Mises asserted that "value" is a subjective judgment. Prices can only be determined by taking these subjective judgments into account, and that this is done through the price mechanism in the market. Thus, it was false to say that the economic value of a good was equal to what it cost to produce or to its current replacement cost. ==Connected concepts==