Why does the Human race use curency?
- Thread starter Kiyotaki
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Well if there is no reason to work most people won't work. It might surpise you that a lot of people can quite greedy and uncharitable. Sarcasm aside this is why we use money. It is a means of exchange, a store of wealth, denotes value and deffered payment(operation of an efficient credit system). Also this would just never work have you never read Animal Farm? I give an hour before corruption sets in.
Commies round here! now where did I put my M16 of capitalism?
I.E. Well, their are always those humans who get greedy and mess the hell out of the equality chain. Thus is why this would never work.
I.E. Well, their are always those humans who get greedy and mess the hell out of the equality chain. Thus is why this would never work.
Currency (at it's basic theoretical level) is just converting property into standard trade units. Since work is your property, your work can also be converted into currency to trade with.
Cow= 4 gold bricks
Chicken=1 gold brick
Therefore in this model 1 cow = 4 chickens....no
The problem with currency comes in market manipulation (making your money worth more than it is to others for your own gain--like in outsourcing), investment (which can generate or lose more money than you actually worked for), estate (passing on money to heirs who didnt work for it, and can therefore invest/waste it), and turning everything into property.
Yeah, its a double edged sword. It serves a basic purpose in trade but is so easily used for corrupt ends that cause plenty of suffering in the end.
Cow= 4 gold bricks
Chicken=1 gold brick
Therefore in this model 1 cow = 4 chickens....no
The problem with currency comes in market manipulation (making your money worth more than it is to others for your own gain--like in outsourcing), investment (which can generate or lose more money than you actually worked for), estate (passing on money to heirs who didnt work for it, and can therefore invest/waste it), and turning everything into property.
Yeah, its a double edged sword. It serves a basic purpose in trade but is so easily used for corrupt ends that cause plenty of suffering in the end.
"That comment fills me with joy and warmth."TeeBs said:
"Wait it reminds me of the holidays, now I hate it."
"Tell me something very hurtful to my self of steam."
We should be careful not to mix up topics here. The question asked here is actually two questions.
1. How comes we use currency ?
Answer: Because it lowers several kinds of transaction-costs, as described by many others. The "chicken for playstation" - example is a good one I think.
2. What if anything was free and done by charity workers
Answer: It would be a better world. But it would only work, if everbody would contribute to the whole thing as best as he could, and if the people with superior personal resources, for example the ones who are smarter or stronger than others would not want compensation for their higher contribution-potential. And these two conditions are not likely to be fullfilled in the near future.
I hope I didn't make that many mistakes, because I am no native speaker. Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong
1. How comes we use currency ?
Answer: Because it lowers several kinds of transaction-costs, as described by many others. The "chicken for playstation" - example is a good one I think.
2. What if anything was free and done by charity workers
Answer: It would be a better world. But it would only work, if everbody would contribute to the whole thing as best as he could, and if the people with superior personal resources, for example the ones who are smarter or stronger than others would not want compensation for their higher contribution-potential. And these two conditions are not likely to be fullfilled in the near future.
I hope I didn't make that many mistakes, because I am no native speaker. Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong
To those of you who foolishly state the obvious that systems built around the economic system would not work in a non-economic system and use THAT to validate their bias against any kind of system that makes everyone rich, I say this. Schools, government, and any other institution that works AROUND the principle of money(i.e. because organizations make things CHEAPER for everyone) are on principal made to deal with human problems in the most COST-EFFICIENT way to BENEFIT the most possible. In a system where there is no money, why would you even NEED teachers? if a man can do something he or she enjoys, or needs done and has sufficient respect for(teachers are a miscellaneous job that neither produces, nor innovates society as a whole) then yes, it would work. School systems, or at the very least "Modern" free or even private school systems are built around one thing. making children the equivalent of a base-line standard of adults, in the hopes that they either do their jobs better, make something of themselves and improve society as a whole, and shorten the length of job training in the real world. does an engineer learn everything he needs to know in K-12? nope. does he even learn all of it in college? not unless he gets an internship. People learn best ON THE JOB, DOING THE JOB. If the ability to learn were free, would you need to know the intricacies of English when working with iron? not necessarily, but you could ALWAYS learn it later if needed. school as we know it, and many of its systems, were designed around the industrial revolution, at a time when most didn't think it was feasible to do so anyways.
We use currency due to the level of complexity of human society and the neccessity of division of labour within any community larger than a hamlet; currency puts everyone on a level playing field in terms of having wealth which is objectively measurable.
Simple answer: it's human nature.
To expand upon the simple answer: as long as recorded history goes back, people have always required getting something in return for things like food, products, goods, services, that kind of thing. Humanity has evolved slightly, and by that in this context I mean that a lot of people are a lot more giving, but the system of trade, especially the modern currency system, has been around so long and is so involved in everything that doing away with it is impossible now. It just simply can't happen.
To expand upon the simple answer: as long as recorded history goes back, people have always required getting something in return for things like food, products, goods, services, that kind of thing. Humanity has evolved slightly, and by that in this context I mean that a lot of people are a lot more giving, but the system of trade, especially the modern currency system, has been around so long and is so involved in everything that doing away with it is impossible now. It just simply can't happen.
There are tribes in many countries over several continents that might differ with that idea.blaqknoise said:
Frankly, western society is greed driven (others as well, but by god we popularized the hell out of it!). Nothing wrong with wealth I suppose, it's that we're encouraged to accumulate it on the backs of others (edit: at all costs or by any means necessary) that seems to have made a mess of things.
Because within one country it acts as a universally recognized and valued means to exchange goods and services?
Money has a set value to it(ish) that people can't argue with, and this is what makes purchases that much easier. If we all had to trade stuff for voluteer work or whatever goods you want, you'd have to spend ages setting up the value of one chicken against a bag of wheat, for example.
Money has a set value to it(ish) that people can't argue with, and this is what makes purchases that much easier. If we all had to trade stuff for voluteer work or whatever goods you want, you'd have to spend ages setting up the value of one chicken against a bag of wheat, for example.
I study economics as part of my course and could give a really thought-provoking answer. I can't be bothered though. Merry Christmas everyone.