After a discussion of how coinage became debased over the years (a pound sterling did once weigh a pound of a certain grade of silver), Adam Smith starts defining the word “value.”
The word VALUE, it is to be observed, has two different meanings, and sometimes expresses the utility of some particular object, and sometimes the power of purchasing other goods which the possession of that object conveys. The one may be called “value in use;” the other, “value in exchange.” The things which have the greatest value in use have frequently little or no value in exchange; and on the contrary, those which have the greatest value in exchange have frequently little or no value in use. Nothing is more useful than water: but it will purchase scarce any thing; scarce anything can be had in exchange for it. A diamond, on the contrary, has scarce any value in use; but a very great quantity of other goods may frequently be had in exchange for it.
“Of the Origin and Use of Money,” Chapter IV of Wealth of Nations, pp. 31-32
How does this quote from Adam Smith shed light on making restoration into a mainstream economic activity, instead of something that is paid for by governments? I think making that move would require elevating the value of use above the value of exchange.
