• hperrin@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    edit-2
    1 day ago

    Sure, but just because someone will pay $1,000 for Taylor Swift’s shit doesn’t mean it’s valuable.

    This is a simplistic view of value, and basically provides no useful information about anything. There are a lot of people you can trick into paying more for an item than it’s worth, but that doesn’t increase the value of that item.

          • hperrin@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            edit-2
            1 day ago

            I would say based on consensus. That’s how we determine it in real life (stocks, real estate, market values). If there’s one person in the world who would pay $1,000 for Swift’s shit, then that person just doesn’t know the value of it, because most people wouldn’t pay anything for it. I’d imagine most people would pay not to have it.

            If I trick you into paying money for something by telling you it’s super valuable, I’m ripping you off, I’m not increasing the value of the item.

            • Flying Squid@lemmy.worldOP
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              5
              ·
              1 day ago

              The consensus of who? Everyone? Because how does society determine the value of, for example, an MRI machine when most people have no idea what it could be worth?

              The whole concept of the game show The Price is Right is that most people don’t know how much anything costs.

              • hperrin@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                1 day ago

                The consensus of the market. Prospective buyers. People can still buy things that are overvalued, but when the market is exerting pressure on you to lower its price, you know it’s overvalued.

                • Flying Squid@lemmy.worldOP
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  4
                  ·
                  1 day ago

                  The market? Weird, because I’ve seen a lot of complaints that things like houses are priced too high to be affordable. And yet by your metric, their value is the correct one because the market has decided so. Is that really what you think?

                  • hperrin@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    1 day ago

                    That may be a case of something being overvalued. That can especially happen when there is artificially limited supply.

    • luciferofastora@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      2 days ago

      Depends on your metric of value. If someone will pay $1,000 for it, it’s worth at least that much to them.

      • hperrin@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        2 days ago

        If I walk into a store and pay them $1,000 for a Snickers bar, I’m not a savvy investor, and that Snickers bar isn’t worth $1,000.