Ok so here is why I think dickblast's data about prices and value showing a 95% coorelation is nonsense. So first of all he uses goverment data which is usually very aggregated already this a problem if you want to actually prove a coorelation between price and value -->

this coorelation must apply universally. So you must disaggregated data. Another reason for this is, is aggregated data can cause spurious coorelation... As we can see individually there is no coorelation but once we add up data all of a sudden there is a coorelation -->

Another problem is that he doesn't account for industry size, hence the whole coorelation could just be the bigger the industry, the bigger the sum price..which doesn't really say anything at. Now is this a problem for marx? No cockshott says that volume 1 is the true volume -->

of capital and 3 is to be ignored because he is true findings are in volume 1.. Now thats not the case marx says from the very beginning in chapter 3 that if price were to ever meet value it would seem like an accident. He says in a footnote in chapter 5 that prices don't -->

with accordance to value. He says this directly in a footnote in chapter 9. So tl;dr cockshott is not marxist, and not right about anything.