Meanings
- uncountableeconomicsThe argument against the labor theory of value pointing out that mud pies that take an immense amount of labor still have little to no value.
2 more examples
Actually, it was Böhm-Bawerk, one of the prominent leaders of the Austrian school [12], who used the ‘mud pie argument‘ to attack the classical economists in general and Karl Marx in particular for using the labour theory of value. The fact that a product ‘costs‘ a certain amount of labour does not mean that it has some value.
2017, Musa Jega Ibrahim, Emerging Issues in Economics and Development, InTechOpen, page 48Firstly, as Marx asserts, for a commodity to have an exchange-value, it must first have a use-value – that is, there must be a social need for the commodity. If there was no such need, the commodity would not and could not be exchanged at all, and hence it would contain no value. The mud pie argument, then, falls flat on its face.
2019, Adam Booth, Rob Sewell, Understanding Marx’s Capital: A reader’s guide, Wellred Books, page 84
Cite this entry
mud pie argument. (n.d.). In WatkinsX Dictionary. Retrieved November 2, 2026, from https://dictionary.watkinsx.com/word/mud%20pie%20argument
“mud pie argument.” WatkinsX Dictionary, https://dictionary.watkinsx.com/word/mud%20pie%20argument. Accessed November 2, 2026.
WatkinsX Dictionary, s.v. “mud pie argument,” accessed November 2, 2026, https://dictionary.watkinsx.com/word/mud%20pie%20argument.
Source: mud pie argument on Wiktionary, CC BY-SA 4.0.