Earlier quoted context omitted.
The value of a thing is in two parts, it's use value to it's possessor and it's exchange value with others. Examples have already been posted here. My house has a use value to me because I need somewhere to live. If I lived on a small island off Antarctica it would still have great value to me but perhaps no value to anyone else. Money is a financial instrument that only has exchange value, unless you count say the u…
It's true that utility is also a factor but it's extremely limited. The house you and others have mentioned is an easy one. That whole concept of ownership is reliant on an entire system existing and enforcing those "rights". It's the threat of violence that prevents someone from showing up, "claiming" your house and kicking you out.
Enforcement is an interesting factor. Laws can guarantee rights to enable and protect free exchange, but they can also coerce behaviour as I touched on.
In more or less free markets what laws do is provide guarantees that increase trust, which has the main effect of reducing costs. You don't need to personally audit the books of a company you invest in, because the government mandates that it's done for you to a set of standards which eliminates some risks (not all, just some). You don't need to personally research if the products you buy are safe or of a basic level of quality if the government mandates standards and enforces them, and if you have a right to return goods if you find a problem with them. This makes the goods themselves a little more expensive, but the overall costs and risks (which translates into costs) to consumers are much lower.
