Nothing can have value without being an object of utility.
It is labour, then, which puts the greatest part of value upon land, without which it would scarcely be worth anything
It's just that I landed up in a terrific capitalist system. One that pays people who allocate capital extraordinarily well. Intrinsically, I'm not worth as much as somebody who invents something that could improves people's life, or health or whatever.
Value is what people are willing to pay for it.
The value of a thing is what that thing will bring. -Legal Maxim
Market value is irrelevant to intrinsic value. ... Unqualified judgment can at most claim to decide the market-value - a value that can be in inverse proportion to the intrinsic value.
You have to put a market value on what you do.
Is a currency worth anything if no one wants it? We used to buy shoes in Italy. Remember?
They wonder much to hear that gold, which in itself is so useless a thing, should be everywhere so much esteemed, that even men for whom it was made, and by whom it has its value, should yet be thought of less value than it is.
Genuine [economic] value lies in the power to sustain or enrich life
There is no real wealth but the labor of man.
We're charging what we're worth and we don't think we're worth $22.50. We take a lower cut than Pearl Jam.
There is no intrinsic worth in money but what is alterable with the times, and whether a guinea goes for twenty pounds or for a shilling, it is the labor of the poor and not the high and low value that is set on gold or silver, which all the comforts of life must arise from.
Money is always transitively valued. More money is supposedly always better than less money.
The fisherman could perhaps be bought for less than the fish.
We think, "If I have more money, I am more valuable. If I make more money, I am more valuable." It's all sort of wound up with this problem that humans have with their failure.
If WikiLeaks were a for-profit company, determining its real value would be a nearly impossible task.
Excessively precise economic analysis can lead to assessing everything in terms of its easily measurable melt value - the value that thieves get from stealing copper wiring from isolated houses, that vandals got from tearing down Greek temples for the lead joints holding the marble blocks together, that shortsighted timber companies get from liquidating their forests. The standard to insist on is live value. What is something worth when it's working?
What good is the Moon? You can't buy it or sell it.
It is what you can do with your money that matters because money has no value in itself.
Businessmen, they drink my wine, plowmen dig my earth. None of them along the line know what any of it is worth.
Valuation is what people are willing to pay.
Of all the creative work produced by humans anywhere, a tiny fraction has continuing commercial value. For that tiny fraction, the copyright is a crucially important legal device.
Who cares if companies are overvalued or not?
When everything is worth money, then money is worth nothing.
