I view your example of different doctors similarly to "efficient machines" which I said this doesn't deal with well.
silly results ... elevator
Indeed! However, you're looking to disprove it by coming up with comical definitions instead of looking for useful and insightful definitions, this is the opposite of productive (mathematical) reasoning. It's akin to throwing away a hammer because it's bad at turning screws. Sure, some communists would probably argue this steak is worth more because you burned 20 barrels of crude to cook it, but that's obviously just waste. The actual energy used to do the thing - that's a more useful lens. In context, you'd recursively consider all the energy used to get through the bureaucratic and credentialing requirements, to be better than others vying for spots etc. and those failed people who invested but didn't make the cut, the energy they invested is also included in the end (otherwise the supply of physicians would be higher and the price lower etc.) It's more useful to search for situations and problems where this tool is useful, leads to insights etc. so you can take it out of your toolbox for them. I find it helpful for macroeconomics and valuing commodity companies, as a measure of competitive of advantage etc.
Quite a few EToVs have been proposed. My main lens of seeing things is biophysical economics which takes a lot from EToV ideas (read this book review for an introduction) leading me to work with commodities.
How does your energy theory of value deal with high value and low energy services
The obvious solution is: The energy was spent training the physician before the service was rendered. You can do accounting directly with industrial inputs. The matching principle recognizes expenses when the revenue they generate, is earned. The physician simply charges for past energy investment (along with profit from carrying uncertainty/risk, temporary or structural distortions preventing rapid reskilling etc.) Depending on the framework e.g. strict GAAP, the physician exercised pricing power leveraging intellectual assets capitalized (years ago, when studying) blabla scheduled amortization.
How does it deal with more efficient machines?
Not very well, but the same book review describes related ideas about capital efficiency, relative yield etc.
Attention/throughput of energy expenditure is also important, which @crushedoranges alludes to with "capital being the infrastructure of which energy flows" but in Marx' framework, you could replace "labor" with anything including capital and rewrite my above paragraph simply talking about the capital costs of having supported and trained the doctor. Modern economics/finance struggles under Cobb-Douglas where everything is money to enable simpler math (but we can't always/directly transmute gold into oil and transmuting oil into food often takes time...) Cobb-Douglas is a production function used to handle input substitution (increasing capital reduces labor etc.) If the elasticity of substitution (conversion cost) is 0, you can't transmute. Leontief functions have fixed proportions, where you require 60 food and 20 gold to train a soldier; in ideal situations, the free market(place) does allow conversion, with further transaction costs. Normal economics has a closed loop (and helicopter money style hetereodox economists just see a... slide), but my school points out entropy via EROI etc. Nothing has a conversion cost of 0, non-substitutibility is just an impossibly high cost for instant conversion.
The US massproduces and exports the very ills which put Western Civilization on its deathbed. Many in the US may tend the embers, but far from all and not from a position of strength.
Much of my friend circle are Iranian, largely still enthusiastic but they've stopped posting "thank you Trump" every day. (I am mindfucked by their pro-Shah and pro-Israeli posts, which came out of left field after knowing them for ages.) But they don't discuss.
veqq
5d ago
Sour product's more important now because while the gulf makes up 20% of overall production, its refineries were producing half of exported "specialty" products. American fracking mostly produces on the lighter end too (besides gassing out).
pricing the effects of this war correctly
Not even close. PTRRY, NTR, PXS, EKO etc. will thrive in this new suicidal macro while China will grow and control the light cone. But US oil producers face a huge threat: Trump banning exports and crashing domestic prices. But you're a bit late, after so much movement the risk:reward's much lower.
The growth in passive investing already removed price discovery to a large extent, but everyone sold their vol away (options became popular) pinning the indexes. As everything unwinds, the indexes will experience radical price discovery again.
I wrote multiple times that I don't or it doesn't work. I literally started with:
I also wrote:
How is that not clear? Why do you think I'm proposing the opposite of what I write?
Yes. You obviously don't value a car at $20 million USD because someone got scammed or overpaid on purpose to create a hypothetical. It's value not price. It's just changing units.
More options
Context Copy link