Comment: No worries.

(See in situ)

In reply to comment: I apologize... (see in situ)

No worries.

"The real problem is the words and terms used to describe the concepts are inadequate and need to be innovated and replaced."

I agree, things can get confusing when two people use the same word meaning different things.

Just like when Austrian economists refer to inflation and deflation meaning one thing, and Neoclassical economists refer to these same words meaning something else.

That's why I always added Monetary or Price as a prefix to Inflation or Deflation.

When I hear the term intrinsic value, I think intrinsic theory of value.

"I think this is the root of confusion. Maybe the solution is to strongly separate the terms "value" and "usefulness" but I'm not sure that can be carried to the "street" because the homeys tend to use the word "value" or "valuable" to mean usefulness as often as they use it to mean commanding a good price. :p"

I definitely agree.

I guess a better term for intrinsic value meaning usefulness would be, inherent attributes or intrinsic properties.

The conflict here is the word value is being used in two different ways, one to describe utility and the other to describe characteristics.

While the characteristics of a good are intrinsic to it, and can influence how people value the good, the value of the good itself is subjectively created in the mind of the good's consumer, taking the good's objective properties into account.

Check out the Laissez-Faire Journal at

"The State is a gang of thieves writ large." - Murray Rothbard