No, that's not what was going on at all. He recommends a scientific study of how much production should be had! He's completely missed that marginal value inherently leads to markets that efficiently meet people's "needs" as measured by what actualized value (i.e. money) they're willing to pay for things.

He has tables showing how different goods and services have equal value--no supply/demand curve, no real treatment of human agency in choosing what to do (thereby messing up whole thing, save as rescued by decreasing the marginal value of what the people do, perhaps to the point where they choose to do something else), and so on.

It's just...wrong. Leaving the idealism aside, the justification is flawed, the insight inadequate for any real use...it's just wrong. This isn't where value comes from, fundamentally. Marx just didn't have the right insight.

Not even enough to avoid the bouquets-of-grass criticism (cast with enough sophistication such that there exists a use, just a very unusual one).

Quote away if I'm wrong, but I don't think I've made a mistake this time, or mischaracterized LTV at all.