| Name: | Description: | Size: | Format: | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 634.61 KB | Adobe PDF |
Authors
Advisor(s)
Abstract(s)
A interrupção do debate sobre a natureza do valor no pensamento económico causou um
efeito letárgico, teórico e político. O presente trabalho contrapõe as teorias do valortrabalho e valor-subjetivo, de onde se percebe que o conceito de riqueza é tão importante
para o conceito de valor quanto este o é para os demais fundamentos da teoria económica.
Quando o valor deixou de ser entendido como fonte da riqueza, e passou a ser interpretado
como o valor que o consumidor atribui a satisfação de suas necessidades, a consequência
teórica lógica foi a equivalência entre preço e valor, pois não se pode avaliar (julgamento
qualitativo) sem que os preços (quantitativos) sejam o ponto de referência.
O antagonismo das teses sobre é explicada pela metodologia económica; onde os clássicos
partem de um ponto de vista da produção social, enquanto os marginalistas partem do
consumo individual.
Ao assumir o valor económico como fonte da riqueza, consegue-se perceber, indiretamente,
que valor, no sentido económico, não é igual ao preço, pois a apropriação da produção social
tem diferentes formas: rendimento (income) e renda (rent). Assim como os economistas
clássicos perceberam que as classes hereditárias se apropriavam da produção apenas pela
posse da propriedade fundiária, o atual contexto de financiarização da economia global
evidencia como o setor financeiro se apropria da criação de valor.
Por fim, embora a criação de valor esteja atrelada ao capital industrial – conforme ambas
as teses –, a análise, do ponto de vista sistémico, sugere que o valor económico depende de
uma totalidade institucional que cria e preserva as condições de manutenção da riqueza
social, da qual ele é a fonte.
The interruption of the debate about the nature of the value in economic thinking caused a lethargic effect, both theoretical and political. The present paper contrast the Labor theory of value and the Subjective-Value Theory, from where it is noticeable that the concept of wealth is as important to the value concept as it is for the other fundamentals of economics theory. When the value was no longer seen as a source of wealth, it started to be interpreted as the assigned value to satisfy the consumers’ needs. The consequence to the theoretical logic was the equivalence between price and value, as it is not possible to evaluate that (qualitative judgment) without the prices (quantitative) being a reference. The antagonism of the thesis is explained by the economic methodology, in which Classical economics starts from the social production point of view, while the marginalist approach focuses on individual consumption. By assuming the economic value as a source of wealth, it becomes noticeable, indirectly, that value, in the economic sense, it is not equal to price, for the social production appropriation has different ways: income and rent. As the classical economists realized that the heritage classes appropriate themselves of the production just for the possession of land ownership, the current context of the financialization of the global economy evidences how the financial sector appropriates the creation of value. At last, although the creation of value is connected to industrial capital - according to both thesis - From the systemic point of view, the analysis suggests that the economic value relies on the institutional totality that creates and preserves the conditions for the maintenance of social wealth, of which is a source. At last, although the creation of value is connected to industrial capital - according to both thesis - From the systemic point of view, the analysis suggests that the economic value relies on the institutional totality that creates and preserves the conditions for the maintenance of social wealth, which is a source.
The interruption of the debate about the nature of the value in economic thinking caused a lethargic effect, both theoretical and political. The present paper contrast the Labor theory of value and the Subjective-Value Theory, from where it is noticeable that the concept of wealth is as important to the value concept as it is for the other fundamentals of economics theory. When the value was no longer seen as a source of wealth, it started to be interpreted as the assigned value to satisfy the consumers’ needs. The consequence to the theoretical logic was the equivalence between price and value, as it is not possible to evaluate that (qualitative judgment) without the prices (quantitative) being a reference. The antagonism of the thesis is explained by the economic methodology, in which Classical economics starts from the social production point of view, while the marginalist approach focuses on individual consumption. By assuming the economic value as a source of wealth, it becomes noticeable, indirectly, that value, in the economic sense, it is not equal to price, for the social production appropriation has different ways: income and rent. As the classical economists realized that the heritage classes appropriate themselves of the production just for the possession of land ownership, the current context of the financialization of the global economy evidences how the financial sector appropriates the creation of value. At last, although the creation of value is connected to industrial capital - according to both thesis - From the systemic point of view, the analysis suggests that the economic value relies on the institutional totality that creates and preserves the conditions for the maintenance of social wealth, of which is a source. At last, although the creation of value is connected to industrial capital - according to both thesis - From the systemic point of view, the analysis suggests that the economic value relies on the institutional totality that creates and preserves the conditions for the maintenance of social wealth, which is a source.
Description
Keywords
Fundamentos Metodologia Riqueza Trabalho Utilidade Valor