Home » Uncategorized » Why the Labor Theory of Value Doesn’t Solve the Calculation Problem.

Why the Labor Theory of Value Doesn’t Solve the Calculation Problem.

Start here


Loyal followers of this humble blog know all about the calculation problem by now. And all you curious newcomers can just settle in and read https://smilingdavesblog.wordpress.com/2013/08/06/calculation-problem-all-in-one-place/.

The ultra short version. Mises noted that, since a communist or socialist economy means the state owns all means of production, then obviously the means of production are not for sale. Which means, obviously, that they have no price. Which means that a socialist economy will make things with no clue about their costs of production, since there is no market price for the factors of production, since they are not for sale, ever. He then showed that such a state of affairs, no way of knowing costs of production, must lead to disaster, for reasons we need not go into.

The socialist world accepted all his premises, and his conclusion as well. There was no way of refuting the impeccable logic. So how to defend socialism from this devastating attack? They tried all kinds of answers. Computers will simulate something or other, professionals will be hired to pretend they are buying and selling, trail and error will fix things, and on and on through more and more desperate grasping at straws.

Now at first glance, it seems the socialists should have no problem whatsoever. Marx believed in the Labor Theory of Value. So if you want to know your costs of production, there is a simple way to do it. Just count how many hours of labor went into it. After all, that is the true cost of things, according to Marx. So what threw all the socialists into disarray, when they had such a simple answer ready at hand?

Devil’s Advocate: Dave, you don’t mind if I present this to the Nobel Committee as my own independent research, do you? I smell fame and fortune in this elegant solution to Mises’s calculation problem.

SD: Sorry, Devil, they will laugh you off. Because the Labor Theory of Value has a little wrinkle in it that ruins everything.

DA: What do you mean?

SD: Marx realized from the start that an hour of labor from an ignorant buffoon sweeping the floor is not the same as an hour of labor from a brilliant architect designing a building. So he had to come up with an abstraction, The Socially Necessary Hour of Labor.

DA: How do you figure out how much that is?

SD: It depends on the wages they get. If the sweeper gets $5 an hour and the architect $50, the architect has put in ten times as much Socially Necessary Hours as the sweeper.

DA: But how will you figure out what wage to pay everyone under socialism? Wages are set by competition among potential employers. Under socialism, there is only one employer, the state. If you don’t like the wage they offer, you can go home and starve. Wages are thus completely arbitrary. So how will the state know that the architect is worth exactly ten times the sweeper?

And that being the case, how do they know how many Socially Necessary Hours of labor went into making something?

SD: That’s why you can kiss your Nobel prize goodbye, Devil, and that’s why the Labor Theory of Value does not solve the Calculation Problem.



  1. VladR says:

    Hello Dave,

    First of all, sorry for the off-topic, but I though I’d have a much greater chance of getting your attention by writing in your most recent thread, so I hope you don’t mind.

    I find your website lovely. Found you through one of your comments on reddit countering Bitcoin and I think you’ve done a great job dissecting it logically. You’re probably fed up with the subject by now, but this is what brought me here.

    I’ve got to say I’m one of the people that holds a couple Bitcoins and would like for it to succeed.

    So I have a couple of questions for you if you don’t mind answering. Mises’s regression theory requires for the good to have some industrious value in order to become a currency. Bitcoin does not have at the time such a value. Well, I propose a little thought experiment.

    Were Bitcoin to maintain its current value and have added, it the protocol, some digital industrious value, let’s say… if you had to use Bitcoin to send e-mail, and this was the only way to send e-mail (thought experiment, bear with me), would you say it does have the prerequisites of becoming money? According to Mises it would, unless I am missing something.

    So, since you compare AE with geometry, could I extend this and say that if Bitcoin’s industrious value was sending not e-mail, but sending money, it would have an industrious value?

    You could argue that the moment I do that I start another circular loop. But not necessarily, because I can refer to other types of money, not necessarily Bitcoin, thus avoiding another circular logic. So I’d argue then that as long as there is some other form of currency that the value can be translated to, Bitcoin has value and can respect Mises’ theory, Nowhere does it state that the form of money has to be the only one accepted in the world, so i could argue that Bitcoin can be money and respect Mises’s theory at the same time.

    Now I have another question for you, if you were to somehow improve Bitcoin and make it more like a currency, make it better, more future-proof, and you had the power to do anything you ever wanted with it, what would you do and how would you go about it? This is the beauty of Bitcoin, it can be improves, and this is why I cane here on this blog, looking for problems, for logical gaps and trying to see if I might be wrong somewhere in the way I view crypto currencies, And If I am if there is any way of making them better.

    Well, than you very much for your time.


  2. Smiling Dave says:

    I’ll write an article about this.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: