Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Quaksna]

If I simplified things a lot, the problem with society is that there's absolutely no goodwill. No one wants to help unworldly, everyone's like: "You wanna something, you have to do something." Okay, that's justice. But... There's hardly any justice in the society!

I think money is extremely stupid concept, or at least I feel it so. What is it? It's a piece of metal or paper, absolutely useless. Like, practically. What can you do with money? Not everyone's dabbling metalcrafter like Urist. Then why is there? Why one of the mightiest things in this world is something without use? When it's power relies only and only on will of those around you, who for some reason back this concept. It's like if only reason for money was to fill, appease this greedy desire of mankind, that nothing is for free.

We should help each other unworldly. When we can't expect it from the others, sad it is, at least we should be better. Yeah, it's frankly horrible. I am not American, but I absolutely understand the problem. I'm glad I'm going to monastery. Can say farewell to lots of bullshits this society invented.

[Naturegirl1999]

From what I learned about the history of money, it’s not the money itself that is useful. Money is how we solved the problem of wants, let’s say I wanted a frog, and you wanted a chair, but I wanted to give my arrows. You don’t want arrows. I have to find a person who wants arrows and would give a chair for them, so that I can give the chair to you to receive the frog. Money is when we agree that certain items are worth something portable, like wishbones. If everyone agrees that an arrow is worth 1 wishbone, and a chair is worth 3 wishbones, then instead of searching for a chair, I can give you 3 wishbones for the frog. Money is supposed to be a way to get things of value, not the thing that is searched for. Though the more money you have, the more you could purchase. The problem is when only a few people have the majority of money/purchasing power, which is where we are at

[TD1]

In its original sense money did have a value in and of itself, consisting as it did of valuable metals. Viking armbands, for instance, were often made of gold. As a form of payment, they would break parts off and hand them out.

The value of hard currency was in the metal content. Debasement of a currency came when metal contents were altered so that they were less valuable. It is only later that we developed the notion of representational currency, which is what you're speaking about. One wishbone holds little intrinsic value. Accepting it as payment would be to acknowledge this and accept it while knowing that wishbones were symbolic of other, different goods.

Gold coins, on the other hand, don't need such symbolism. They are valuable.

[Lord Shonus]

If I simplified things a lot, the problem with society is that there's absolutely no goodwill. No one wants to help unworldly, everyone's like: "You wanna something, you have to do something." Okay, that's justice. But... There's hardly any justice in the society!

I think money is extremely stupid concept, or at least I feel it so. What is it? It's a piece of metal or paper, absolutely useless. Like, practically. What can you do with money? Not everyone's dabbling metalcrafter like Urist. Then why is there? Why one of the mightiest things in this world is something without use? When it's power relies only and only on will of those around you, who for some reason back this concept. It's like if only reason for money was to fill, appease this greedy desire of mankind, that nothing is for free.

We should help each other unworldly. When we can't expect it from the others, sad it is, at least we should be better. Yeah, it's frankly horrible. I am not American, but I absolutely understand the problem. I'm glad I'm going to monastery. Can say farewell to lots of bullshits this society invented.

From the most ancient times, people have worked by some form of trade. The simplest form is bartering goods (Og give Thog hunk of meat for two spear), services (Og patch Thog's hut if Thog puts new handle on Og's spear), or a mixture (Og patch hut if Thog gives Og new spear). The problem with this is twofold. First, any large-scale barter becomes unwieldy due to the volume of goods or the intensity of labor .If Thog wants Og to build him a big new hut, he has to make many spears for Og (which Og likely won't need) or otherwise perform some equivalent service - which might be difficult to find. Second, and related, barter at this level involves goods that are indivisible. - If Gurk has three cows, a bull, and one ewe, getting a ram is the obvious means to breed his flocks. Murk has a spare ram, and would like a cow. However, a cow is a much more valuable animal in multiple ways to a ram - besides giving milk and potentially meat, it is an excellent draft animal at need. Thus, Gurk won't want to trade the cow for the ram, because he would feel cheated by the deal.

This is where currency and credit come in. If Thog wants to get Og to build him a hut, he can simply give Og many beads (beads were a popular form of currency in Stone Age societies, because each one took a noticeable amount of labor to make (restricting supply), and they were pretty (giving people a reason to want them)). Og can then take those beads to the guy who cuts down trees and the guy who is good at finding good stone, helping him get the materials he needs to make more tools and buildings. Likewise, Gurk can simply sell his cow for a dozen beads, then give Murk 8 beads for his spare ram, or even sell his cow to Murk for a ram and four beads. Even at this early date, the concept of credit existed. It would be entirely plausible for Murk to tell Gurk "Here is ram, Murk owe Gurk four beads" and Gurk to accept this.


Over the course centuries, this evolved into the hard currency (restricted by the rarity of the materials) of decades past and the fiat money (restricted by the strength of the economy it represents) of today.

[Naturegirl1999]

If I simplified things a lot, the problem with society is that there's absolutely no goodwill. No one wants to help unworldly, everyone's like: "You wanna something, you have to do something." Okay, that's justice. But... There's hardly any justice in the society!

I think money is extremely stupid concept, or at least I feel it so. What is it? It's a piece of metal or paper, absolutely useless. Like, practically. What can you do with money? Not everyone's dabbling metalcrafter like Urist. Then why is there? Why one of the mightiest things in this world is something without use? When it's power relies only and only on will of those around you, who for some reason back this concept. It's like if only reason for money was to fill, appease this greedy desire of mankind, that nothing is for free.

We should help each other unworldly. When we can't expect it from the others, sad it is, at least we should be better. Yeah, it's frankly horrible. I am not American, but I absolutely understand the problem. I'm glad I'm going to monastery. Can say farewell to lots of bullshits this society invented.

From the most ancient times, people have worked by some form of trade. The simplest form is bartering goods (Og give Thog hunk of meat for two spear), services (Og patch Thog's hut if Thog puts new handle on Og's spear), or a mixture (Og patch hut if Thog gives Og new spear). The problem with this is twofold. First, any large-scale barter becomes unwieldy due to the volume of goods or the intensity of labor .If Thog wants Og to build him a big new hut, he has to make many spears for Og (which Og likely won't need) or otherwise perform some equivalent service - which might be difficult to find. Second, and related, barter at this level involves goods that are indivisible. - If Gurk has three cows, a bull, and one ewe, getting a ram is the obvious means to breed his flocks. Murk has a spare ram, and would like a cow. However, a cow is a much more valuable animal in multiple ways to a ram - besides giving milk and potentially meat, it is an excellent draft animal at need. Thus, Gurk won't want to trade the cow for the ram, because he would feel cheated by the deal.

This is where currency and credit come in. If Thog wants to get Og to build him a hut, he can simply give Og many beads (beads were a popular form of currency in Stone Age societies, because each one took a noticeable amount of labor to make (restricting supply), and they were pretty (giving people a reason to want them)). Og can then take those beads to the guy who cuts down trees and the guy who is good at finding good stone, helping him get the materials he needs to make more tools and buildings. Likewise, Gurk can simply sell his cow for a dozen beads, then give Murk 8 beads for his spare ram, or even sell his cow to Murk for a ram and four beads. Even at this early date, the concept of credit existed. It would be entirely plausible for Murk to tell Gurk "Here is ram, Murk owe Gurk four beads" and Gurk to accept this.


Over the course centuries, this evolved into the hard currency (restricted by the rarity of the materials) of decades past and the fiat money (restricted by the strength of the economy it represents) of today.

Thank you. This was a good read. You explained things better than I did. How do you learn how to explain concepts? When I attempt to explain things, I tend to either boil things down too far, or place too many details. How do you determine the balance between details and simplicity without losing important parts to simplicity?

[Iduno]

In its original sense money did have a value in and of itself, consisting as it did of valuable metals. Viking armbands, for instance, were often made of gold. As a form of payment, they would break parts off and hand them out.

Being valuable for payment doesn't make it useful. It's been relatively recently in the history of gold that we started using it for it's conductive properties.

[Imic]

I didn’t mean that the American healthcare system isn’t sheer and utter madness. It is. I’m linking it to a disappointing trend in Humanity.

[Naturegirl1999]

Ah, yes, caring more about profit than health. When a healthcare system puts anything before health, it has fallen

[TD1]

In its original sense money did have a value in and of itself, consisting as it did of valuable metals. Viking armbands, for instance, were often made of gold. As a form of payment, they would break parts off and hand them out.

Being valuable for payment doesn't make it useful. It's been relatively recently in the history of gold that we started using it for it's conductive properties.

Use in decorative jewellery and the ornaments of the elite is still 'useful'.

Edit: Although my main point was that representational currency such as Ng was describing (in which the item symbolises worth) came later. First, the worth of currency was directly linked to the worth of the gold/metals which it contained.

[ChairmanPoo]

I didn’t mean that the American healthcare system isn’t sheer and utter madness. It is. I’m linking it to a disappointing trend in Humanity.

How familiar are you with the way the HSE works? 🤔  while not as extreme as the US model, many people are quite exposed coverage wise, the way it stands.
 (And I mention this as someone who is fond of Ireland and doesn't rule our working for the HSE again, despite it's flaws, in the right circumstances)

[Naturegirl1999]

In its original sense money did have a value in and of itself, consisting as it did of valuable metals. Viking armbands, for instance, were often made of gold. As a form of payment, they would break parts off and hand them out.

Being valuable for payment doesn't make it useful. It's been relatively recently in the history of gold that we started using it for it's conductive properties.

Use in decorative jewellery and the ornaments of the elite is still 'useful'.

Edit: Although my main point was that representational currency such as Ng was describing (in which the item symbolises worth) came later. First, the worth of currency was directly linked to the worth of the gold/metals which it contained.

The metal is still only valuable because we think it is

[ChairmanPoo]

In its original sense money did have a value in and of itself, consisting as it did of valuable metals. Viking armbands, for instance, were often made of gold. As a form of payment, they would break parts off and hand them out.

Being valuable for payment doesn't make it useful. It's been relatively recently in the history of gold that we started using it for it's conductive properties.

Use in decorative jewellery and the ornaments of the elite is still 'useful'.

Edit: Although my main point was that representational currency such as Ng was describing (in which the item symbolises worth) came later. First, the worth of currency was directly linked to the worth of the gold/metals which it contained.

The metal is still only valuable because we think it is

Things are only valuable because we think they are.

[Naturegirl1999]

In its original sense money did have a value in and of itself, consisting as it did of valuable metals. Viking armbands, for instance, were often made of gold. As a form of payment, they would break parts off and hand them out.

Being valuable for payment doesn't make it useful. It's been relatively recently in the history of gold that we started using it for it's conductive properties.

Use in decorative jewellery and the ornaments of the elite is still 'useful'.

Edit: Although my main point was that representational currency such as Ng was describing (in which the item symbolises worth) came later. First, the worth of currency was directly linked to the worth of the gold/metals which it contained.

The metal is still only valuable because we think it is

Things are only valuable because we think they are.

This is correct. This makes value arbitrary. Humans will sometimes kill for large amounts of something with an arbitrary value.(money)

[TD1]

Yes, value is arbitrary. I don't think anyone contested that?

Let me clarify. I was highlighting a difference in the arbitrary worth which is ascribed to monetary systems.

In representative currency, the currency stands for something else which is itself only valuable by arbitrary standards. The currency's worth is arbitrary too, but only with reference to some other (also arbitrary) value. This is what you were describing with wishbones.

In older systems, the currency was gold/silver and so forth. Its value was directly linked to how much gold/silver was in the coinage. If the value of gold plummeted, so would the (arbitrary) value of the coins.

Wishbones, on the other hand, make a more stable currency. If the value of wishbones plummets, who cares? The bone stands for something else. Its arbitrary value is linked to something greater, i.e. the nation's economy.

[ChairmanPoo]

In its original sense money did have a value in and of itself, consisting as it did of valuable metals. Viking armbands, for instance, were often made of gold. As a form of payment, they would break parts off and hand them out.

Being valuable for payment doesn't make it useful. It's been relatively recently in the history of gold that we started using it for it's conductive properties.

Use in decorative jewellery and the ornaments of the elite is still 'useful'.

Edit: Although my main point was that representational currency such as Ng was describing (in which the item symbolises worth) came later. First, the worth of currency was directly linked to the worth of the gold/metals which it contained.

The metal is still only valuable because we think it is

Things are only valuable because we think they are.

This is correct. This makes value arbitrary. Humans will sometimes kill for large amounts of something with an arbitrary value.(money)

Not any more arbitrary than anything else. Things are valuable because we think they are valuable. There is no inherent physical quality making them valuable outside the scope of human activity, so by definition all value is arbitrary, be that of money, or food and water gor that matter. INSIDE the scope of human activity however, any commodity that acts as currency is useful to acquire other commodities or services.