JUrriaan asked in [OPE-L:1230]:
> Would you rule out
> posters, video's, labels, etc. from the universe of commodities ?
A thought-provoking question. My tentative answer is that there are
certain products which may serve a dual function.
E.g. consider a "New York Yankees" hat. On the one hand. the hat is
advertising. On the other hand, it is a hat. So is it a commodity? My
answer is -- yes. Why? Well, if you took the name "New York Yankees" off
(in other words, if you removed the advertising), it would still have a
use-value, an exchange-value, and a value.
What about the labour spent lettering the hat with the name "New York
Yankees"? Hmmm. Another interesting question. There might be many (e.g.
"Boston Red Soc" and 'New York Mets" fans) who might think that the
advertising printed on the hat *decreased* its use-value and
>From a national income accounting perspective, I think that posters and
videos are better treated as if they were intermediate goods. Why? The
firms that produce internally or purchase on the market place these
advertising products increase the price of the final product that they
sell in order to re-capture the expenditure on advertising.
In solidarity, Jerry
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Feb 27 2000 - 15:27:09 EST