For a long time, an idea that seems intuitive, almost common sense, took hold: that things are worth the work they do. If something cost hours, effort and sacrifice, then it should be worth more. And if someone doesn't receive all that value, then there's exploitation. The problem is that reality doesn't work that way.
It is enough to look at any market to see that the value is not in the effort, but in the decision of the person who buys. A garment may have required days of work and yet no one would be interested in it. Instead, something simple to produce can become valuable if there are people willing to pay for it. It is not work that defines value, but rather the importance that each one attaches to what they receive
.
This completely changes the way we understand the economy. Work doesn't create value by itself. What it does is respond to a value that already exists in people's minds. First someone wants something, then someone who organizes the resources to produce it appears. The order is exactly the opposite of what is often taught.
When this point is lost sight of, misdiagnoses appear. One begins to think that the employer earns because he takes something away from the worker, when in reality his profit depends on knowing what to produce, how to do it and for whom. It is not the one who exploits the most who exploits the most, but the one who best interprets what others value. You can hire the same people, use the same supplies, and still get completely different results depending on your decisions
.
A simple example shows this clearly. Two products may require the same effort to manufacture, but one sells and the other doesn't. The work is identical, but the economic result is the opposite. So where is the difference? In choice, in anticipation, in the ability to understand what people want. That is the origin of the profit.
This also explains why income changes when preferences change. If something ceases to be in demand, everything around it loses value: jobs, investments, land. Not because someone worked less, but because there was no longer interest. The economy is not driven by hours worked, but by individual decisions that change all the time
.
For years, economic policy was built in Argentina ignoring this basic fact. An attempt was made to set salaries, prices and conditions as if value were something objective, measurable from a desk. The result was what we know: distortions, informality and a system where producing often ceases to be profitable
.
In this context, the change in approach promoted by the government of Javier Milei is no small. Beyond the conjunctural discussions, there is a basic idea that begins to order the system: to let prices reflect real decisions and not political impositions. When distortions are eliminated, what appears is information. And that information is what makes it possible to coordinate millions of decisions without the need for coercion
.
This does not imply a perfect world or an absence of tension. It involves something more basic: recognizing how exchanges actually work. No one forces another to buy or sell under normal conditions. Every transaction happens because both parties believe they are winning. This logic, which seems simple, is what underpins the entire economic framework
.
When replaced by the idea that someone is being exploited by definition, it opens the door to intervening, regulating and correcting something that isn't broken. And that's where the problems start. By trying to force results, the incentives that make production possible are destroyed
.
Understanding that value is subjective is not a theoretical detail. It's accepting that the economy doesn't revolve around effort, but about freedom to choose. And that when that freedom is respected, the system not only works better, but it also limits the power of those who intend to decide for others
.
