There is no RationalWiki without you. We are a small non-profit with no staff – we are hundreds of volunteers who document pseudoscience and crankery around the world every day. We will never allow ads because we must remain independent. We cannot rely on big donors with corresponding big agendas. We are not the largest website around, but we believe we play an important role in defending truth and objectivity.
If everyone who saw this today donated $5, we would meet our goal for 2021.
| Fighting pseudoscience isn't free.|
We are 100% user-supported! Help and donate $5, $20 or whatever you can today with !
Talk:Labour Theory of Value
Capitalisation of title
Should this be in lower case? Most sources don't capitalise "labo(u)r theory of value", e.g. Wikipedia, Britannica, and various academic source (except in situations where all words in titles are capitalised) --Gospatric (talk) 13:44, 15 June 2018 (UTC)
This article is pretty poor
The labor theory of value is rejected by the overwhelming majority of economists. The mainstream consensus is that the subjective theory of value holds true. Value is not determined by the labor put into producing a product, but by what people deem the value of that product to be. This is basic economics. --Sailor Haumea (talk) 00:34, 20 July 2018 (UTC)
- I already explained myself. --Sailor Haumea (talk) 00:42, 20 July 2018 (UTC)
- Merely asserting that it's "debunked" and "go read a textbook" is not considered "explaining". This edit did a better job at disputing the content than yours. --It's-a me, LeftyGreenMario! 01:05, 20 July 2018 (UTC)
- BTW not going to modlock for now. Seems drastic for a short, petty edit war. Yeah, @Sailor Haumea it's best not to edit war. --It's-a me, LeftyGreenMario! 02:57, 20 July 2018 (UTC)