"Which exist" isn't an argument. All values without exception are subjective. I can only guess you're conflating value in terms of utility/price/opportunity cost with valueS like A, 17 degrees, 168cm. Context is different person to person, moment to moment. Their context isn't a statement about objective reality. "Measurable best interest" completely bypasses what I posted. No one has perfect knowledge, and value judgments can only be viewed relative to the actor making them. Which again, varies person to person, moment to moment. Which is why I explained that the only "perfectly rational" actor is God. It's an omniscient being that sees the universe as absolute determinism. So the notion that you, a human actor with imperfect knowledge and frankly, no "skin in the game" (you are neither offering or accepting these contracts) can come up with objectively "correct" values is demonstrably incorrect. And I have now twice laid out the logical case for why this is so. No matter how you try to come at it, there are no objective value judgments. I think you may be thinking of value comparisons based on arbitrary metrics like comparing the height of two players, or points per game of two players. But as you mentioned about context, the context is different for two players, always. "Any measure without context is meaningless". The only context that matters in a market exchange for the purpose of analyzing that exchange are that of the two parties involved. If Josh thinks he got a great deal, he did. If the Pistons think they got a great deal, they did. If they feel differently 4 years from now, that's ex post analysis. But at the moment of the exchange, both parties agreed because they thought the deal made them better off. They would not have signed the deal otherwise. This sentence doesn't make sense to me. How can YOU know what he is worth? What is your valuation WORTH if you're not willing to pay him what he is WORTH? I can go to a store and argue a $100 item is worth $5 but the store owner won't agree. Our values don't form a price. Likewise, I can go to a store and say "That $5 item is really worth $100" but the only way that means something more than conjecture, is if I actually would pay $100 for it. Then it is a price (all prices are past prices). If you're referencing the labor theory of value, that's been roundly refuted by marginalism. I have no idea what you're trying to say here. All value is subjective. That statement is so completely non-controversial, I am actually shocked we're debating it in 2013. Prices are formed at the moment of exchange. Your "estimates" are going to be arbitrary because they are not based on the real decision making of human beings, but rather some abstracted statistical analysis. The only "perfect market outcome" happens when two parties agree upon a price in exchange without coercion.