Panda

Thoughts........mods Give It 24 Hours..........

46 posts in this topic

Went to church today, and no, I am agnostic, I went just to see what "believers" get......I feel as though I am not right nor wrong, but willing not to "dismiss"..........

Anyway, got talking to a retired gent, clever guy, post 70, treats the church as a retreat, socialising, but is well read, well I get that feeling...........................He went on, one of his statements, any thoughts?

"Money/Cash reward is a reflection of human effort, and any artefact/asset value is a reflection of the amount of human effort willing to gain that artefact/asset, through the cash reward. Where the cash reward is not great enough to gain the artefact/asset, then the same artefact/asset will not hold its value, because at the end of the day the debtor must pay the creditor, and where demand falls, then the credit created will destruct, as the debt required to accumulate the artefact/asset will fall, as the effort is seen as too much with little gain..........................

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It took a quiet chat with a septuagenarian to get you in touch with the obvious?

Perhaps you need more sermons than you realise.

Its this very point that is the source of my reasoning that we are heading for the mother of all deflation. Yes they can print a lot of money but they can't make it fly (give it "velocity").

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It took a quiet chat with a septuagenarian to get you in touch with the obvious?

Perhaps you need more sermons than you realise.

Its this very point that is the source of my reasoning that we are heading for the mother of all deflation. Yes they can print a lot of money but they can't make it fly (give it "velocity").

One who is between the age of 70 and 79, inclusive.................I always knew this, but sometimes need re-confirming, we are in the minority.......I quite enjoyed church, i must be getting old. or feeling quite ill.................But yes, deflation, in what ever termonology you want to nail it.......aye..............

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Went to church today

Sounds better to be there on a Monday - you're less likely to run into the Church at a church if you avoid Sunday.

FYI: I'm a non-practising Christian, confirmed as Anglican... though, for many years, I've been opposed to most/all prescribed doctrine. I'm fascinated by religion and religious thought... I feel the questions that religion should address, distinct from those for science, surround purpose and relevance. In this context, I think religious thought is directly connected to our economic and monetary problems, and that considering religious ideas is most likely to yield worthwhile insights.

I've had mixed experiences with those who actively practice religion... ranging from impressively calm, objective, confident, capable and open philosophers... to raving nut-jobs spouting gibberish I strongly suspect they consider a social weapon to dominate others. I actively look for people who are willing to try to explain/justify a(ny) specific stance... but such people are especially rare, in my experience.

Having read about Islamic ideas (though I'd love to discuss these with someone of this persuasion) my interest in both Christian and Jewish attitudes to money and risk have greatly increased. Guidance about how to conceptualise money, in my view/experience, in the most part, is conspicuously absent from Christian teaching. Your church experience suggests a view of money that is somewhat socialist/working-class... I don't feel that considering money a reflection of human effort is appropriate or accurate from an empirical perspective. I think the idea that money could correlate with effort stands in stark opposition to Capitalism.

Edited by A.steve

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The model he described does not include speculation, which is a shortcut that eventually becomes a short circuit when too many people try to use it.

We now have an entire class of people who view working as a mugs game- no, I don't mean the feckless underclass, but the barnacle like encrustation of the financial system made up of the speculators and gamblers who are now so numerous and entrenched that their collective weight is dragging the ship under.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't feel that considering money a reflection of human effort is appropriate or accurate from an empirical perspective. I think the idea that money could correlate with effort stands in stark opposition to Capitalism.

And where the problem stems, and why we work longer and harder for less and less....................and money shufflers make more and more out of thin air while they devalue the majority's working reward efforts..................it will not end pretty, nothing has any value other than the human effort to perform a physical task which rewards another through alieviating their need to perform that effort or give up the specific energy.................

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The model he described does not include speculation, which is a shortcut that eventually becomes a short circuit when too many people try to use it.

We now have an entire class of people who view working as a mugs game- no, I don't mean the feckless underclass, but the barnacle like encrustation of the financial system made up of the speculators and gamblers who are now so numerous and entrenched that their collective weight is dragging the ship under.

Theres nowt wrong with speculation and gambling - if it's your own money you are using.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Went to church today, and no, I am agnostic, I went just to see what "believers" get......I feel as though I am not right nor wrong, but willing not to "dismiss"..........

Anyway, got talking to a retired gent, clever guy, post 70, treats the church as a retreat, socialising, but is well read, well I get that feeling...........................He went on, one of his statements, any thoughts?

"Money/Cash reward is a reflection of human effort, and any artefact/asset value is a reflection of the amount of human effort willing to gain that artefact/asset, through the cash reward. Where the cash reward is not great enough to gain the artefact/asset, then the same artefact/asset will not hold its value, because at the end of the day the debtor must pay the creditor, and where demand falls, then the credit created will destruct, as the debt required to accumulate the artefact/asset will fall, as the effort is seen as too much with little gain..........................

Money/Cash reward is a reflection of human effort

That seems like a dubious start. Modern money is basically a promise. Nothing else. The human effort of a Chinese factory worker to stitch a garment probably isn't much different today compared to days when that work was done in a Lancashire factory. I don't like this 'human effort' label. There's more to it than that.

any artefact/asset value is a reflection of the amount of human effort willing to gain that artefact/asset, through the cash reward

OK. Well kind of. This assertion works fine in the absence of speculation or even bubble mania but at one point in time, tulip bulbs were valued very highly for some reason. Sometimes asset values are considerably influenced by speculation and expected future value.

because at the end of the day the debtor must pay the creditor

This is perhaps getting a bit closer to the real issue. When we buy loaves of bread or pints of milk, we generally pay the whole price immediately because we know that the loaf and milk have no speculative value. Even for big purchases for cars, where the price may be too high for a complete payment, we mostly price the car for it's practical utility; it's an asset that's virtually guaranteed to deteriorate in value.

and where demand falls, then the credit created will destruct, as the debt required to accumulate the artefact/asset will fall

I'm struggling a bit with that. I see three situations:

1) A purchase that didn't involve an interest bearing loan. In this case, there is no credit/money to destroy. Consider the case where I buy a crate of wine then drop it and smash all of the bottles. Has any credit/money been destroyed?

2) A loan that is paid off, regardless of the perceived change in value of the asset involved. In this case, there is new money created that is available for further economic activity if desired.

3) The borrower defaults. In this case, money is destroyed. It doesn't necessarily follow that the asset the borrower borrowed to buy has dropped in value.

(edited for spelling)

Edited by Quiet Guy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Having read about Islamic ideas (though I'd love to discuss these with someone of this persuasion) my interest in both Christian and Jewish attitudes to money and risk have greatly increased. Guidance about how to conceptualise money, in my view/experience, in the most part, is conspicuously absent from Christian teaching.

Fundamental christian values were most widely established and propagated during the later dark ages through to the end of the middle ages, about 1250. That period was dominated by a manorial social system in which most economic relationships were both local and debt based. Not much money circulated and people got by on debt obligations denominated in things like man hours and sheaf's of wheat. The obligations were religiously and socially sanctified. Lord and serf, priest and parishioner, knight and King. It worked for a while.

Money came on the scene in the 14th century and started to break down the social bonds of that system. Then we had Protestantism which was perverted into the moral justification for capitalism.

Looking back in time, peaks of religious/philosophical expansion and propagation operate in anti-phase with money. Rome was a money-state, then we had the dark/middle ages which was a debt/credit/religion state. Then we had another age of money.

I think the next age is likely to be once again debt/credit/social obligation based, yet mixed with new technology which will give a different flavor to this next episode.

Money periods always co-incide with population expansion. Credit economy periods co-incide with population stagnation and economic stagnation but also with increased intellectual/collective exploration that sets the stage for the next expansion period.

Let them eat bits (as in 01010100001010) , as a chinese party member said of his population recently. His vision is for the chinese to consume more information and less energy. That choice is basically the choice between materialism and religion. As to what form modern global digital religion takes, one can only guess!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And where the problem stems, and why we work longer and harder for less and less....................and money shufflers make more and more out of thin air while they devalue the majority's working reward efforts..................it will not end pretty, nothing has any value other than the human effort to perform a physical task which rewards another through alieviating their need to perform that effort or give up the specific energy.................

That's one way to define value - but it's probably best described as a political belief. Leaving aside my personal opinion about how value should be interpreted, it's clear that in the modern world it has very little correlation with work... for any meaningful definition of work.

I don't think this is a flaw arising from Capitalism - though, because capitalism is a widespread belief, any rationalisation of value must account for it. Personally, I think value is synonymous with rights... is limited by one's ability to enforce one's rights... and has nothing to do with effort or capital.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Theres nowt wrong with speculation and gambling - if it's your own money you are using.

God luv yeh Injin, my thoughts exactly.................

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think this is a flaw arising from Capitalism - l.

It's not, IMO. Its technology. Capital is increasingly synonymous with data. All our financial capital is data in the first analysis. Obviously what we make of that data socially is what that capital actually is in reality, but 10 gbit communications everywhere force us to re-evaluate that interpretation daily.

Really the question has to be whether the lights stay on or go out.

Assuming they stay on, its very difficult to pinpoint a future trajectory - its too recursive.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

3) The borrower defaults. In this case, money is destroyed. It doesn't necessarily follow that the asset the borrower borrowed to buy has dropped in value.

defaults don't destroy any money. They destroy the assets of the lender but not his liabilities.

liabilities (of the banking system and the government) are money.

therein of course lies the problem we face.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's not, IMO. Its technology. Capital is increasingly synonymous with data. All our financial capital is data in the first analysis. Obviously what we make of that data socially is what that capital actually is in reality, but 10 gbit communications everywhere force us to re-evaluate that interpretation daily.

Really the question has to be whether the lights stay on or go out.

Assuming they stay on, its very difficult to pinpoint a future trajectory - its too recursive.

It's completely impossible to model the market, that's why we need the market in the first place.

The platonists and their neo-republic need to ****** off trying to square communisms circle* and the natural empiricism of trading has to return.

*Basically all communist experiments failed due to no price signals, the latest bunch of statist lefties think they can fix this by simply accumulating enough data and finding the right equations.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's not, IMO. Its technology. Capital is increasingly synonymous with data. All our financial capital is data in the first analysis. Obviously what we make of that data socially is what that capital actually is in reality, but 10 gbit communications everywhere force us to re-evaluate that interpretation daily.

Really the question has to be whether the lights stay on or go out.

Assuming they stay on, its very difficult to pinpoint a future trajectory - its too recursive.

There's quite a bit of that I disagree with.

First: data is not, has never been, and can never be valuable... Information can be valuable, but only if it is relevant. High bandwidth connectivity enhances our ability to exchange information... but this is a double-edged sword, in more ways than one. One problem is that information is destroyed once successfully conveyed - rather like transferring charge eliminates potential difference with electricity. Another problem is that relevant information is a weapon to establish or undermine a right... and technology doesn't care which. Yet another problem is that ever higher bandwidth links promote data transmissions that are ever less information rich.. and, eventually (maybe this has already happened) increased bandwidth simply results in less value, on average, in each communication.

Edited by A.steve

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Theres nowt wrong with speculation and gambling - if it's your own money you are using.

Good point- I just use the term 'speculators' these days as a term of abuse, but it does have a legitimate role to play if those getting the rewards are the one's running the risks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Went to church today, and no, I am agnostic, I went just to see what "believers" get......I feel as though I am not right nor wrong, but willing not to "dismiss"..........

Anyway, got talking to a retired gent, clever guy, post 70, treats the church as a retreat, socialising, but is well read, well I get that feeling...........................He went on, one of his statements, any thoughts?

"Money/Cash reward is a reflection of human effort, and any artefact/asset value is a reflection of the amount of human effort willing to gain that artefact/asset, through the cash reward. Where the cash reward is not great enough to gain the artefact/asset, then the same artefact/asset will not hold its value, because at the end of the day the debtor must pay the creditor, and where demand falls, then the credit created will destruct, as the debt required to accumulate the artefact/asset will fall, as the effort is seen as too much with little gain..........................

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Labor_theory_of_value

?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

... I think the idea that money could correlate with effort stands in stark opposition to Capitalism...

..this does not stand up to the issue of the 'Protestant work ethic' ..and when migrated across the Atlantic to the new world of North America...the very foundation of the United States and it's Capitalism was built on the back of the Puritan and Presbyterian spirit... :rolleyes:

Edited by South Lorne

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

About 5 years ago, I started going to church on a Sunday. I did this for about a year and I only stopped going when the some of the prayers started taking pro political party leanings (Lib Dem). That then put me off.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Money/Cash reward is a reflection of human effort, and any artefact/asset value is a reflection of the amount of human effort willing to gain that artefact/asset, through the cash reward. Where the cash reward is not great enough to gain the artefact/asset, then the same artefact/asset will not hold its value, because at the end of the day the debtor must pay the creditor, and where demand falls, then the credit created will destruct, as the debt required to accumulate the artefact/asset will fall, as the effort is seen as too much with little gain..........................

This is the position of classical economics. It was overturned by Carl Menger in the late 1870's, the first of the Austrian economists. He proved that value does not exist outside the human mind: http://mises.org/daily/1349

Your friend has his finger on the pulse of developments in economic theory I see.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

defaults don't destroy any money. They destroy the assets of the lender but not his liabilities.

liabilities (of the banking system and the government) are money.

therein of course lies the problem we face.

Woops. Yes, agreed a default will only impact the lender's assets (loan book.) Your correction makes me wonder just when is money destroyed? Apart from extreme cases like burning cash or a currency failure, I can't see an obvious answer.

Any ideas anyone?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Woops. Yes, agreed a default will only impact the lender's assets (loan book.) Your correction makes me wonder just when is money destroyed? Apart from extreme cases like burning cash or a currency failure, I can't see an obvious answer.

Any ideas anyone?

Depends on the type of money.

Fiat money is entirely at the whim of the state that issues it. They can write it off any time they like as long as they retain the power to murder anyone who disagrees with impunity.

A free market money can change at any time at all if the majority of people in the market stop desiring the item that is money. (In a free market money is the most commonly desired item out of all the things traded - i.e. ciggies, beer, gold etc)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why are so may people/individuals on this thread keep writing/ posting with too many forward slashes/ stroke duel meanings.?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We now have an entire class of people who view working as a mugs game-

...and they'd be right.

If you're an uneducated couple, late teens and no hope, you'd be mad not to knock out a kid every three years and let everyone else pay. Obviously the girl doesn't name the father(s) but they'll do alright.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now