RationalWiki's 2020 Fundraiser

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 PayPal Logo.png!

Donations so far: $2120Goal: $3500

Talk:Labour Theory of Value

From RationalWiki
Jump to: navigation, search
Icon economics.svg

This Economics related article has been assessed as SIGNIFICANTLY PROBLEMATIC in one or more ways. See RationalWiki:Article rating for more information.

This article requires attention for the following reason(s):
  • In desperate need of more sources.
  • Needs a rewrite and an overall cleanup.

Capitalisation of title[edit]

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[1][2][3] (except in situations where all words in titles are capitalised) --Gospatric (talk) 13:44, 15 June 2018 (UTC)

This article is pretty poor[edit]

There are a lot of misconceptions and poor language in this article. Primary sources would be helpful. FᴜᴢᴢʏCᴀᴛPᴏᴛᴀᴛᴏ, Esϙᴜɪʀᴇ (talk/stalk) 23:38, 19 July 2018 (UTC)

Fringe theory[edit]

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)


@LeftyGreenMario Can you Modlock this article until SH gets their shit together and explains themselves? ☭Comrade GC☭Ministry of Praise 00:37, 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, Lgm sigpic.png 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, Lgm sigpic.png LeftyGreenMario! 02:57, 20 July 2018 (UTC)