- Capitalism and Alternatives -

thanks

In Reply to: Why we distinguish exchange from other uses posted by Samuel Day Fassbinder on November 04, 1999 at 18:57:41:

: SDF: That's called EXCHANGE. The point in distinguishing exchange from other uses is to show that exchanges can produce calculations. It's also to understand exchange as an activity worth studying in itself, as exchange is in fact the primary activity of capitalist economics. That's why they are called stock exchanges, and not stock uses. Your use of the term "use-value" in regards to financial speculation can only be interpreted as trying to confound the distinction between "use-value" and "exchange-value".

So any 'use' claimed for an object/service for which the user only desires to achieve an exchange value at the end of it 'should' really be called an exchange value, or at least should not be called 'use value' as this pertains only to the final 'end-use' or non-exchange use.

Put simply

Buying a chair in order to sell it is not to have a use for it
Buying a chair in order to sit on it is to have a use for it.

I would still contend that 'intending to sell chairs' is having a use for them (because sitting is not the only use chairs are put to, if one bought one merely to have in the room - but not to sell that may qualify as 'use value' which makes the term infinitely open)

I appreciate the distinction which you are drawing however. I can see how you see it now. Thanks.

Follow Ups:

None.