Skip to main content
7 events
when toggle format what by license comment
Aug 7 at 3:39 answer added AshaKantaSharma timeline score: -3
Jul 31, 2013 at 20:33 comment added John What I meant by there not being an objective value is that prices are not determined with reference to some objective value. Saying life has value is a different sort of value than what economists mean usually. If you wanted to sell me water, then the subjective value is very important. If I am in the city, I may not pay more than 1 dollar for a bottle. If I am in the desert and low on supplies but have lots of money, I might pay 500 dollars. What matters is the expected amount of subjective value an additional unit will give me (aka marginal utility).
Jul 31, 2013 at 19:28 comment added wfaulk That's honestly a better answer than most I've heard. It at least bears its own weight. I would argue against the notion that nothing has objective value. At some point, certain objects help prevent you from dying. Unless life has no value. Which I suppose is almost a reasonable tenet for pure economic study, except for the fact that life is a requirement for subjective value assessment.
Jul 31, 2013 at 16:12 comment added John According to economics, there is no such thing as "real inherent value", aka objective value. There is, however, subjective value, which is why we care about the value of a company being what someone else will pay for it. In your example, people will want to buy XCo because they think its stock price will go up.
Jul 31, 2013 at 15:39 review First posts
Jul 31, 2013 at 16:27
Jul 31, 2013 at 15:21 comment added wfaulk I will readily admit that this is an Economics 101 type question, but I have never heard a reasonable explanation. Also, apologies if this is off-topic.
Jul 31, 2013 at 15:21 history asked wfaulk CC BY-SA 3.0