Never meant to say you did. My point was that your idea that, just because something is a POS, it should have no value is in line with communist economic thinking.
Not funny at all. It's value isn't in it's quality. It's value is in the demand for its historical provenance. People aren't buying them for their precision craftsmanship; they're buying them to own a piece of history from a dark time in humanity when the light of liberty had been extinguished in Europe, and America was doing all it could to supply those left willing to fight with anything that would help them. The value of a Liberator pistol is the cautionary tale the object's history tells-not in it's production and/or material costs.
It's not unlike when I bought a CMP 1911 for $1080. People here, and at the range, berated me for wasting money on a junky, clunky, wore out pistol. They "schooled" me on what a fool I was not to buy "insert name of their preferred modern 1911 here" pistol. I've probably only fired a single box of ammo through it. I didn't buy it to shoot it. (And I doubt anyone is buying Liberators to shoot them, either.)
You and I obviously perceive value differently-especially when it comes to items with historical provenance. That's the beauty of the free market. We can have different perceptions of value. If more people agreed with you, then Liberator pistols would be like twenty bucks, but apparently enough people find value in them to support a significantly higher value.
Communism is an economic system, and, as I stated earlier, your thoughts on the Liberator are in line with Communist economic theory. I'm not saying your a Communist-far from it. I'm just drawing lines and connecting dots to illustrate a point in a discussion.
To reiterate and clarify. Your thoughts are that, because the Liberator is a POS, requiring little in production or material costs, it should be of lesser value than something requiring more production and material costs. That is essentially the Communist way of setting market values.