Adam Smith makes a fatal mistake he can never find which thing demand and supply were based which brings us to the most important question why do we consider a commodity more valuable than others? Marx argued that it is human labour which determines the real value of the commodity for ex: M.F Hussain's painting is more valuable than drinking water because we know that human labour is more in making paintings than providing a natural resource 'water' and that too when water is more important for Life in comparison to any painting. If Adam Smith is right then water should be more costly than painting because its demand is always high in comparison to paintings but he gets wrong here. In a way according to marx, we exchange human labour in an economy so rewards should be given to people who do the actual labour according to the division of labour(who is more skilled than one another) this is the real meritocracy. Don't know who is right or wrong here but I guess Marx had put a more accurate point of view. That is why private property is considered bad by Marx because he argued that as landlords will increase the money will accumulate in their hands and by logic they earn this money without doing any human Labour (renting a home is a game of risk not of labour ) isn't it go against the concept of merit which capitalism praise so much. But overall very well writing article and loved it.
Adam Smith makes a fatal mistake he can never find which thing demand and supply were based which brings us to the most important question why do we consider a commodity more valuable than others? Marx argued that it is human labour which determines the real value of the commodity for ex: M.F Hussain's painting is more valuable than drinking water because we know that human labour is more in making paintings than providing a natural resource 'water' and that too when water is more important for Life in comparison to any painting. If Adam Smith is right then water should be more costly than painting because its demand is always high in comparison to paintings but he gets wrong here. In a way according to marx, we exchange human labour in an economy so rewards should be given to people who do the actual labour according to the division of labour(who is more skilled than one another) this is the real meritocracy. Don't know who is right or wrong here but I guess Marx had put a more accurate point of view. That is why private property is considered bad by Marx because he argued that as landlords will increase the money will accumulate in their hands and by logic they earn this money without doing any human Labour (renting a home is a game of risk not of labour ) isn't it go against the concept of merit which capitalism praise so much. But overall very well writing article and loved it.