[Xmca-l] Re: Minding my P's and Q's

[mike cole]

Harshad Dave
 Congratulations on the arrival of your son !

What particularly in the Banks prank was that the value is expected to
increase BECAUSE it was shredded . It seemed to be an interesting case for
your line of arguments.
Mike

On Mon, Oct 8, 2018 at 11:41 PM Harshad Dave <hhdave15@gmail.com> wrote:

> Mike Cole,
> with reference to your trailing mail, I just point out as follow,
>
> If you go through my article URL as follow,
>
> Article: "An Inquiry on Social Issue, Part 1"
> URL - http://armgpublishing.sumdu.edu.ua/journals/bel/issue-2/article-10/
>
> and then
>
> "An Inquiry on Social Issue, Part 2" (on Page No. 51  )
> URL- http://armgpublishing.sumdu.edu.ua/journals/bel/issue-3/article-6/
>
> Read on the page 51 at....
> “*According to a Forbes report, World of Diamonds – the makers of The
> Jane Seymour Vivid Blue Diamond Ring – are organizing a special $2 million
> dining experience for two, which includes a luxurious journey on air, land
> and sea, culminating with a dinner at Ce’ La Vi, in Singapore. The cherry
> on top? Owning The Jane Seymour Vivid Blue diamond ring as well”* [
> http://mashable.com/2016/07/12/2-mil-meal/#LtweMIgWZgqL].
>
> You will realize that it (the event of auction that you referred) is not a
> prank or it might be a prank for some people who does not care to know how
> the social system and its functioning work, but they are satisfied
> themselves with the perceptions about this social system that they bear in
> their minds.
>
> Otherwise, a society where 8 hours labour is exchanged with say average 35
> to 40 Dollars,
> and
> at the same time, in the same society,
> a painting is getting exchanged with 1.4 million dollars indicates some
> serious abnormality in the system.
>
> A wise man will surely think there is serious error in the constitution of
> this social system instead of designating it as a prank.
> People might be surprised by the exchange amount dollar 1.4 million, but
> more serious aspect is presence of people in this society that have such a
> big sum under their command to pay practically against a painting.
>
> If a man exchanges a justified average sum against a bread, one can link
> his need with bread to satisfy his hunger through the exchange.
>
> If it is a woolen coat, one might link with his need to get protection
> from cold.
>
> If it is leather shoes, a need to get protection from many odds while
> walking on ground might be linked with, but
>
> Which need gets linked with the above subject painting through an exchange
> of such a big amount?
>
> If you go through the small article on "Need" on following link you will
> realize...
> URL - https://www.academia.edu/36372183/A_Short_View_on_Need
>
> It is the need of Zone 3 only that might be linked with the above subject
> painting.
> Satisfaction of all the needs of Zone 3 in our society is founded on the
> unethical command on wealth.
> No man in this world will agree to enter exchange for a thing/good or
> commodity that might just satisfy his need/s of zone 3 only, where he holds
> thing/good commodity or money/wealth with him earned by him purely
> ethically to exchange with.
>
> As per my view the subject prank is not a prank but a blot on the face of
> our human society as far as the subject exchange is concerned.
> regards,
>
>
>
> Harshad Dave
>
>
> On Tue, Oct 9, 2018 at 6:39 AM mike cole <mcole@ucsd.edu> wrote:
>
>> Apropos of the discussion of a theory of value, the case of Banksy's art
>> prank seems interesting.
>>
>> https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/07/arts/design/banksy-artwork-painting.html
>>
>> mike
>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.ucsd.edu/pipermail/xmca-l/attachments/20181009/1ffef285/attachment.html