New Social Thread

Some dude I know in a band was telling me about his 'rare shoes from Germany' and they looked like that, but yellow. Ghey. I wear boots from time to time but they're not lolternative they're fashionable.
 
Some dude I know in a band was telling me about his 'rare shoes from Germany' and they looked like that, but yellow. Ghey. I wear boots from time to time but they're not lolternative they're fashionable.

Show us some pictures.
 
some generality about money

I actually wouldn't have considered the apple switch had I not been working with their products for the last few months in tech support and they are phenomenally easier to troubleshoot and use. I have to get a computer anyway and think it'll be an excellent opportunity to try something new and expand my expertise.
 
Right, but everything we've been saying is predicated on "use" being a kind of value.

Things that are not commodities may be “useful in various ways,” but that does not make them use-values. Marx defines ‘usefulness’ pragmatically. I agree nothing is intrinsically useful in itself. The only indication that a thing is “useful” is the fact that it is actually being used by somebody. Usefulness is socially contingent; it’s a matter of ever-shifting human needs and desires. “The discovery of. . . the manifold uses of things is the work of history.” Marx offers no grounds for making a division between those uses that would be productive, natural and proper, and those that would be wasteful, artificial, and perverse.
 
zabu of nΩd;9823320 said:
Cronopio's posts only function symbolically within a system of exchange

:lol:

Yes, and they possess no intrinsic use-value...

Things that are not commodities may be “useful in various ways,” but that does not make them use-values. Marx defines ‘usefulness’ pragmatically. I agree nothing is intrinsically useful in itself. The only indication that a thing is “useful” is the fact that it is actually being used by somebody. Usefulness is socially contingent; it’s a matter of ever-shifting human needs and desires. “The discovery of. . . the manifold uses of things is the work of history.” Marx offers no grounds for making a division between those uses that would be productive, natural and proper, and those that would be wasteful, artificial, and perverse.

Okay, so you're making the division then? I mean, some might argue that oil is wasteful, artificial and perverse.