----------------- HES POSTING ----------------- 
Roger Sandilands should have agreed with Pat on the classical theory of 
value rather than dispute it.  This is what Adam Smith says in the Wealth 
of Nations (Bk 1, ch. 9) on the determination of rent: 
 
"Rent ... enters into the composition of the price of commodities in a 
different way from wages and profit.  High or low wages and profit, are the 
causes of high or low price; high or low rent is the effect of it. It is 
because high or low wages and profit must be paid, in order to bring a 
particular commodity to market, that its price is high or low. But it is 
because its price is high or low; a great deal more, or very little more, 
or no more, than what is sufficient to pay those wages and profit, that it 
affords a high rent, or a low rent, or no rent at all." 
 
So rent is price determined, not price determining in Adam Smith's value 
theory.  Ricardian rent theory is not in conflict with this view, either.  
It is because the price of 'corn' increases that it is worth working the 
less fertile land, thereby creating the surplus (rent) on  
fertile land. 
 
On the original question, "What is something worth?" clearly the 
subjectivity of value (utility) or worth to individuals must be taken into 
account.  This is why Sam's reference to opportunity cost, which is also 
subjective, is helpful. 
 
James Ahiakpor 
 
------------ FOOTER TO HES POSTING ------------ 
For information, send the message "info HES" to [log in to unmask]