If workers stopped fighting for higher wages, as the bosses and their stooges want, they would sink. So you are right, but you still need to look at the written material, or just choose another answer

As far as it goes, you're right. New machinery wouldn't be a bad thing at all if workers could somehow fight for and win a reduction in their hours with no reduction in pay. That was a standard demand of the Congress of Industrial Organizations well into the 1950s. Look at the written material, or just choose another answer

This is true, as far as it goes. Workers invented the "escalator clause," or cost-of-living-adjustments (COLA) to fight off the ravages of inflation. It worked pretty well from World War II until the 1970s, when the bosses started their all-out attack on worker rights. Please Look at the written material, or just choose another answer

YOU'RE RIGHT! All of the above tend to drive wages down, and the only thing driving them up is the battles of the workers! Please skip to the next question.

A commodity could be made under conditions of slavery or serfdom, and they were. Just not as many. Please look at the written material, or just choose another answer

YOU'RE RIGHT! If it's for sale, it's a commodity. If a person just made it for his/her own use, it still has use value but not exchange value, and it isn't a commodity. Please skip to the next question

"Usefulness" only has to do with use value. If you sewed a shirt for yourself and wore it, it wouldn't be a commodity. If you sewed a shirt and sold it, it's a commodity. Please look at the written material, or just choose another answer

If a savage made an arrowhead and used it himself, it wouldn't be a commodity. Commodities are for selling. Please look at the written material, or just choose another answer

Use value doesn't come under consideration. In economics we're after exchange value. Please look at the written material, or just choose another answer

This is a snag for most people who have studied traditional economics. The capitalists and the teachers they hire want us to think that value magically appears in the marketplace. Consequently, anything might equal to anything else under the right market conditions. We know that it isn't true, but they keep on teaching it. Value may be realized in the market, but not caused by the market. Please look at the written material, or just choose another answer

YOU'RE RIGHT! Commodities take their value from the labor in them. We say "socially necessary" because not all labor is equal. A scientist trained for 20 years, working on the appropriate task, would generally be a lot more valuable than a high school student. The value of his labor would be more, and its cost (wage) would be more, too. Please skip to the next question.

There's more than one trick in this answer. A commodity might be said to consist of the new labor in it plus the old, congealed labor, that was in the raw materials and machinery used, but "costs" are not identical to "values." Please look at the written material, or just choose another answer

YOU'RE RIGHT! Supply and demand may make prices fluctuate, but not value. Please skip to the next question

In conventional economics, demand raises value. But in reality it only raises price, and only within limitations. Please look at the written material, or just choose another answer

Supply might depress price, but not value. Please look at the written material, or just choose another answer

Conventional economists like to graph this point where "supply" and "demand" intersect on a graph. They claim that value has been magically set, but it isn't. Please look at the written material, or just choose another answer

This is the same as the last question. Value is not set by markets! Please look at the written material, or just choose another answer

This is the same as the last question. Value is not set by markets! Please look at the written material, or just choose another answer

This is the same as the last question. Value is not set by markets! Please look at the written material, or just choose another answer

YOU'RE RIGHT AGAIN! Think of the labor used in finding and processing gold, and you will see that it has a lot of value. It achieved its value the same way that other commodities did. Please skip to the next question.

YOU'RE RIGHT AGAIN! It seems simple once you get it, but it's a big hang up for lots of people, especially those who have had a semester or two of conventional economics. Please skip to the next question.

Good union fights can certainly change the price of labor (wages) but not its value. Please look at the written material, or just choose another answer

The bosses like it when we compete, especially if we're willing to take lower wages. But the market does not set value. Please look at the written material, or just choose another answer

If you picked this answer, you might want to go to the section on materialism versus idealism. Please look at the written material, or just choose another answer

Heaven help us if our boss' opinion sets our value! The section on materialism versus idealism showed that there is a reality separate from our opinions. Please look at the written material, or just choose another answer

We might like to think of a capitalist as "adding value" to raw materials, and lots of bookkeeping practices do it that way, but that's not where they make their money. Please look at the written material, or just choose another answer

The capitalist does indeed use machinery to replace workers. He does it because he has to, or be beaten out by the other capitalists. But that's not how he makes his money. Please look at the written material, or just choose another answer

YOU'RE RIGHT! It's not worded the way Marx might have put it, but the boss still makes his money from the free, surplus, labor that he collects from his employees. Please skip to the next question.

A capitalist may indeed be able to swindle his friends, but we're studying macro economics here, not individuals. If all of the capitalists were swindling one another, then where would any values come from? The sum of all the swindling would have to add up to zero! Please look at the written material, or just choose another answer

It's true that he competes better with other capitalists. However, that's not all that happens. Please look at the written material, or just choose another answer

With every round of layoffs, the capitalist improves his position against the workers. So, yes, he does push downward on wages. But that's not all. Please look at the written material, or just choose another answer

This is an interesting answer. New machinery may mean more gross profits. But that's not all that happens. Please look at the written material, or just choose another answer

Even though new machinery may increase gross profits, the increased investment causes the rate of profit tends downward. There's a world of importance in this as capitalism staggers from crisis to crisis. In Capital, Marx proceeds from this idea to even more astounding truths about the nature of capitalism.Of course, it's not the only thing that happens. Please look at the written material, or just choose another answer

YOU'RE RIGHT! All of these things happen as the boss invests in new machinery. Thanks for going through this little educational module. It's a good way to start a serious study of economics. Your feedback is really important.