I do not agree with that. People always eat, drink, use tools, etc. Some things will always have value no matter what subjective value people give them. I can always use some metal, food, water … but virtual value on stock is not always at my disposal, except to burn paper when I’m cold.
Without subjective value, there is no such thing as exchange. Why exchange an item with another item if they are of equal value?
In that case, you’re premising that all value is subjective (don’t disagree) and some assets of value are intrinsic. That said, there are many reasons to exchange an item with another item if they are equal value. Just consider the variable of “time” and future application as well as “value” and whether you are talking about value between just 2 people or equal value among a larger group of people.
Every product has price that is set by seller. When you buy car you know the value. I don’t see the reason for speculation.
And I never said that there is no subjective value. I just said that there are things that have “natural value” as far as human beings are concerned.
No there isn’t. The point of exchanging is getting some of greater value at the cost of something with lesser value. A price tag on something isn’t value, it’s the cost to the buyer. Whatever use(s) the buyer has for the item is what determines value.
Be careful not to conflate the price of something and the value of something.
Without speculation there is no action. Entrepreneurship and investment of any kind entails speculation.
No there isn’t due to transaction costs.
There is no such thing as items of equal value. Value rankings are always ordinal, and never cardinal. There is no unit of utility or value.
You can’t say Rick prefers A three times more then B. You can only say Rick prefers A over B.
Speculation on company or product value is not necessary for action nor it is required for business. I have a small business and no one earned anything on speculation on my products. I do the product, sell it at my price and someone else buys it. I don’t understand why do you think speculation is needed? Needed for who? For people who cannot create anything so they need to get money from speculation on other peoples products?
The process is exactly in reverse. Costs are imputed backwards from buyer to seller, and it is the valuation of consumers that determines the price of the car.
All entrepreneurship is speculation.
The stock market becomes a casino when the government gets involved; It’s not a casino by its very nature.
The Stock Market, Credit and Capital Formation is available on mises.org as a pdf
Not to sound disrespectful but did you not read the rest of my post Giant Joe?
I stated… “Just consider the variable of ‘time’ and future application”
Meaning, I could easily exchange $1.45 US currency for $1.00 Euro. This particular asset (currency) has equal value as well as equal price or cost or whichever semantical term you choose to use. You can’t argue the value since both could purchase the same amount of STUFF today. Now, to answer your question, what if in the future I feel it is to my advantage to own EURO’s due to US Dollar policy? - So yes, TIME matters.
Also…
I stated… “whether you are talking about value between just 2 people or equal value among a larger group of people” ? I stated this because there are scenarios in which you can exchange something of equal value with another party only because a 3rd party values it more, thus in return creating a scenario where you benefit from the EVEN transaction.
Case in Point: PERSON A exchanges a green apple for a red one with Person B. Person B is impartial on what color his or her apple is. Person A is also impartial with what color his or her apple is but knows that Person C prefers RED apples and thus might be more likely (but not gauranteed) to trade their banana for a red apple.
Say Person C decides, today they’d prefer to keep the Banana. An exchange of equal assets with equal values still happened.
Rick. new here? Its great to see the boards expanding member base… please take the following as brief pointers aimed to nudge you in the right direction.
you seem to be confused about the difference between price and value.
you should also be aware that value inequality is necessary for trade to occur, be it autistic or between any number of parties.
if there is no value inequality there is no motive to engage in the act. now, if you try detail a motive for the act over and above not engaging in the act, you will prove the point, as you will be fleshing out a value inequality.
I did, and it’s a non-sequitir. You are conflating price, cost, and value. I would be willing to exchange a USD for a EU at the market rate, because I speculate that in the future, I will get a better deal when converting back to USD. I am exchanging because having the EU is worth more to me than having the USD. Hence, more valuable. There are many variables and factors determining someone’s valuation of something. Clearly, the person had a higher valuation of EU than USD, and that is why they exchanged USD for EU. So in his eyes, they are not equal.
When you produce something, you speculate that there will be buyer for that stuff. When you buy some machine, you speculate that you’ll find enough buyers for some time till you pay off your investment.
Thank you NirgrahamUK
The confusion isn’t between price and value as I know the difference of both. Where I either mispoke or continue to be stubborn is in unrealized, uncertain, intangible value added to any transaction. As much of a student of Austrian Economics as I am, I too often times try to find holes in which can be poked.
I’m just a jerk.
Well no. I work only when I have orders, so basically my sale is guarantied. No speculation here, sorry.
But I don’t talk about producers speculation or faith in sale. I talk about speculation of third party that makes profit only on speculation not on production.
Every moment of your life you are gambling, speculating, etc, that the action you choose to take this moment, will bring you (subjective) satisfaction greater than your other options would have 