Absolutely. Most people can't afford Lamborghini. Roughly ~3 billion people on this planet live at, or below poverty. To them owning a Toyota is more valuable because it allows them to survive in their livelihoods. Generally, the less you have of something desirable the more valuable it becomes. For the starving child, the biscuit is more valuable than the full course lunch meal for the rich kid, because the biscuit is all he has.

One starving child does not determine the global value of biscuits.

"Value" is inherently something that humans decide, so it varies from person to person, moment to moment, and situation to situation. To me the idea that there exists a single globally correct value for biscuits is absurd.

Thank you. That was the point I was trying to illustrate.

One lonely biscuit will not provide value for a global problem of starving children

Owning a Lamborghini would bankrupt most people, which is highly undesirable. Therefore the Toyota is better.

> Therefore the Toyota is better.

I didn't say Lamborghini were better, just that they are more valuable.

Are you saying a Toyota is more valuable?

I would like to buy a Lamborghini from you.

I don't own a Lamborghini, which is why a Toyota - a car that I could afford - is more valuable to me. Even if I could afford a Lamborghini, I'd not drive it because I'd be afraid I'll crash it, and it doesn't carry all the cargo I need to drive - again that makes a Toyota more valuable to me.

Your inability to afford a Lamborghini or fear of crashing it doesn't make it less valuable.

I get what you're saying. I don't drive, nor do I want, a Lamborghini, but that fact does not reduce its value.

Only if you are defining value exclusively as its sticker price.

However even if we limit it to monetary aspects, defining value is still not as cut and dry because it could easily also be argued that the value of the Toyota is far greater than the Lamborghini due to ongoing costs of ownership and total service life.

Value is not usually defined as sticker price in most cases outside of luxury items to begin with. Much more commonly value refers to a non-specific calculus between the price of an item and it’s utility value.

How can we directly compare the utility value of hauling cargo versus turning the heads of the people we drive past?

Which would you pay more $ to keep?

A Lamborghini can be exchanged for a Toyota plus some extra change. I don't think you will find many people to do the opposite exchange.

Value != Price, so yes a Toyota may be more valuable than a Lamborghini.

A Lamborghini is (in general) objectively _pricier_ than a Toyota. The "value" of a car has more dimensions than simply its associated market price.

All of this is orthogonal to the original issue of $10 being more popular than $100, therefore more valuable.

Well, Toyota (the company) certainly is.