http://finance.groups.yahoo.com/group/gang8/message/11220
For my own part, my intuition is that the Metaphysical assumptions underpinning all schools of Economics simply do not reflect Reality.
So no matter how wonderful an intellectual edifice is erected upon them, if the foundations are weak, it won't stand up.
And as far as I can see, none of them do since all are based upon defining Value in one way or another, usually as Price.
In my untutored view it is only possible to proceed on the assumption that "Value" is indefinable, or definable only in relative terms.
My view of Economics is that it may be described as the "Physics of Value" (as opposed to Energy) and if we take such a Metaphysics of Value as a starting point then we might get somewhere. "Any economic unit can emit money. The serious problem is to get it accepted" Hyman Minsky
Some economists, as you say, take that and make the unwarranted jump to 'Value = Money.'
But look at it another way. IF we take Quality as the metaphysical basis of Reality and we assert 'Value is an individuals response to Quality as embedded, or reflected, in a specific object¹' AND, in order for an Actor or Agent to gain physical possession of that object they have to fork over $3 THEN the Economic Value of that object has to be at least $3 to the Valuer.
Using this, we can go further since the Economic Value of the object is $3 to the seller and worth {$3 < x >y} to the buyer. By stating '{$3 < x}' we correctly, IMNSHO, symbolize the Value of an object, expressed as Economic Value, to the buyer is a range of measuration of all possible numbers x and y can take.
Looking at the seller, there is a minimum at which the object will be sold, the asking price, and the top price of the object which is infinity! If you're selling something for $3 and someone offers $2,000 would you refuse? Neither would anybody else!
So a (more) complete equation, note the lowest buying price is zero, is:
x < sp > Infinity = 0 < bp > y
Where:
x is the lowest selling price sp is the actual selling price bp is the actual buying price y is the highest buying price
BUT!
When we take about Quality and Value we cannot make use of the '=' sign. Why? Because for the transaction to take place the seller has to Value (MOQ) the buying price more than the object and the buyer has to Value (MOQ) the object more than the selling price. Thus, it is an asymmetrical transaction -- in more ways than one.
So let's restate:
(x < sp > Infinity) > (0 < bp > y) -- Seller's Side
(x < sp > Infinity) < (0 < bp > y) -- Buyer's Side
And it is obvious my little mathematical description is unsolvable unless the variables are taken as Second-Order (minimum) AND Statistical AND Probable.
So, unless I screwed-up somewhere -- the fox is in the henhouse.
******************* ¹ So I can avoid getting into Being and Action (Verbs.) ;-)
