Why does the Human race use curency?
- Thread starter Kiyotaki
- Start date
Recommended Videos
It simply wont work because of our system of government. It could work if it was more like the military where everyone had to work & all the necessities were provided with luxuries awarded on basis of merit.
These necessities, luxuries & services are produced from the work everyone does. Any able bodies moochers who wont lift a finger can be locked up or exiled.
This method would also ensure technological advancement as money & profits dont exist to hinder it, nor would there be drugs & organised crime. With a little refining it could work.
These necessities, luxuries & services are produced from the work everyone does. Any able bodies moochers who wont lift a finger can be locked up or exiled.
This method would also ensure technological advancement as money & profits dont exist to hinder it, nor would there be drugs & organised crime. With a little refining it could work.
So we don't have to deal with the strain of dragging our daughters, pigs and shinier rocks around.
Has anyone here ever played Diablo II?
Well here's a short story, back in Classic Diablo II people had a hard time trading because there was no definite currency and it was hard to tell what something was worth. Eventually Diablo II got a currency, thanks to hackers. What was it? SOJS! or The Stone of Jordan which is a pretty badass unique ring. Within no time the trade channel were flodded with shouts of what people were either offering for SOJS or wanted for SOJS.
Even when the expansion came out SOJS remained at least for a while, it wasn't uncommon to see posts offering 40x SOJ (max you can hold in the window) for .08 Shako or Windforce.
Eventually Blizzard decided to combat this Uber Diablo which would spawn if specific requirements were met and enough SOJS were sold.
Afterwards people just mass duped High Runes and used those as currency.
Currency usually just makes it easier to get what you want.
Also i'd like to add that these items are also very convenient because they only take up 1 item slot, similar to our currency taking up little (change) to no place (debit, credit)
Well here's a short story, back in Classic Diablo II people had a hard time trading because there was no definite currency and it was hard to tell what something was worth. Eventually Diablo II got a currency, thanks to hackers. What was it? SOJS! or The Stone of Jordan which is a pretty badass unique ring. Within no time the trade channel were flodded with shouts of what people were either offering for SOJS or wanted for SOJS.
Even when the expansion came out SOJS remained at least for a while, it wasn't uncommon to see posts offering 40x SOJ (max you can hold in the window) for .08 Shako or Windforce.
Eventually Blizzard decided to combat this Uber Diablo which would spawn if specific requirements were met and enough SOJS were sold.
Afterwards people just mass duped High Runes and used those as currency.
Currency usually just makes it easier to get what you want.
Also i'd like to add that these items are also very convenient because they only take up 1 item slot, similar to our currency taking up little (change) to no place (debit, credit)
Those charity workers would want some huge compensation, no-one would do anything beneficial and you would have an arguement with every single person you want to trade with over the worth of rvrything.
People won't do things if they don't get a return on it. Tribes used to hand out jobs, e.g. hunting, setting up shelters, scaling fish. You would do your part, because everyone would be doing their part to support each other. Trading inevitably came into this. Currency was introduced to limit bargaining, and put a more finite value on everything. It allows the wealthy to consolidate their riches. Being paid in money is more efficient, than being paid in goods. You can use it to get what you require. People need rewards to work. They work, and can look after themselves because of it. Why not use currency? Going as far back as tribes was currency and payment to some extent. Any other system would not work.
Well my personal view is that the whole thing is to do with class divisions. It is a tool used by the oppressing class (Bourgeois) to allocated all property to its self through the manipulation of the the oppressed working class (Proletariat). basicly we have so that the rich can remain rich.
Jesus, ever since the internet every two bit free-thinker thinks he's a philosopher. I've pondered this many times over: It wouldn't work. there wouldn't be enough supply for everyone, the resources would wither, if we did make rules most people wouldn't follow them on the account of being people. Humans (even for all our advancements) are very stupid creatures so this couldn't work, at least in this society, when huge reform comes along we might see some advancements toward a money-less society.
Firstly, mankind has ALWAYS had currency. It might not have always been little pieces of metal or layers of printed plastics, but it's a lot more convenient than carrying all your stuff around to trade with.
Secondly, it makes things a lot more fair. Giving something a fixed 'value' (I use inverted commas here because value is a relative term) means you don't have to figure out if what the other party has to offer is of equal value to what you have to offer. It also means that people trade the same amount for a given item, it's not based on what stuff they have or what skills they can offer, it's just a fixed number for everyone.
Secondly, it makes things a lot more fair. Giving something a fixed 'value' (I use inverted commas here because value is a relative term) means you don't have to figure out if what the other party has to offer is of equal value to what you have to offer. It also means that people trade the same amount for a given item, it's not based on what stuff they have or what skills they can offer, it's just a fixed number for everyone.
Me and my friends had a debate about this.
In theory, society could thrive if we all volunteered to do things for free and money was a non existant entity. However, in practice, I don't think it would work as well. Here's the analogy I used:
Think about the school you go to. If all of the staff made no money and only volunteer teachers taught, what would be their motivation to keep coming back to ungrateful kids and dificult work? You might say the love of teaching or the necessity of the job is reason enough. Then I challenge you to think: if today, right now, you were told your neighborhood needed a teacher for hundreds of kids without being paid. They'd just want you to do it for the good of the school. Would you give up your valuable time? If you say no, you can do whatever you want with your days instead. Odds are you'd say no. If you say yes, than would you be willing to do it for 30 years? Probably not. Money, though its not fair, does spur people to do the dirty difficult jobs no one else would do otherwise.
Another example: Think back to the school again. You might have a cafeteria or school store there. There are likely cafeteria or store workers there who get the merchandise, place it on the shelves, keep the inventory, and collect the money. Would you be willing to do that without pay, every day, for the good of your school? Probably not. Money motivates people to take jobs that probably wouldn't be taken otherwise.
Now, think about yourself. If you had the choice to be on the internet all day, do whatever you want, play as many video games as you choose, and walk around town eating the best food availible all and every day, or to be a janitor, for the good of your town, all day every day, which would you choose? You'd likely choose the former. The result in the end is the same; you get no money, and the day is spent. However, without money, you have no reason to just do the former, even though the latter is an essential part of society.
People just lack the motivation necessary to live without currency to do the essentials of daily life.
In theory, society could thrive if we all volunteered to do things for free and money was a non existant entity. However, in practice, I don't think it would work as well. Here's the analogy I used:
Think about the school you go to. If all of the staff made no money and only volunteer teachers taught, what would be their motivation to keep coming back to ungrateful kids and dificult work? You might say the love of teaching or the necessity of the job is reason enough. Then I challenge you to think: if today, right now, you were told your neighborhood needed a teacher for hundreds of kids without being paid. They'd just want you to do it for the good of the school. Would you give up your valuable time? If you say no, you can do whatever you want with your days instead. Odds are you'd say no. If you say yes, than would you be willing to do it for 30 years? Probably not. Money, though its not fair, does spur people to do the dirty difficult jobs no one else would do otherwise.
Another example: Think back to the school again. You might have a cafeteria or school store there. There are likely cafeteria or store workers there who get the merchandise, place it on the shelves, keep the inventory, and collect the money. Would you be willing to do that without pay, every day, for the good of your school? Probably not. Money motivates people to take jobs that probably wouldn't be taken otherwise.
Now, think about yourself. If you had the choice to be on the internet all day, do whatever you want, play as many video games as you choose, and walk around town eating the best food availible all and every day, or to be a janitor, for the good of your town, all day every day, which would you choose? You'd likely choose the former. The result in the end is the same; you get no money, and the day is spent. However, without money, you have no reason to just do the former, even though the latter is an essential part of society.
People just lack the motivation necessary to live without currency to do the essentials of daily life.
