Injin Posted September 30, 2009 Share Posted September 30, 2009 Ultimately this must be true. Recently, however, it has been possible to pretend otherwise. As I say, a temporary historical blip. a moire direct connection betwen wealth and land is now back on the cards.as for wether land has intrinsic value in and of itself, consider wich piece of land you would consider most desirable to own. Lanmd that contained no capapcity to harvest/mine resoruce from it, or land that did contain such reosurces. Land in itself is worthless without the above resources (or without being a strategic location that allows access to resources elsewhere). In the modern world, due to our advanced technolocal capacity to transfer energy from one type of commodity that is not directly useful to us (minerals) into another type of commodity that is useful to us (food, products), some people have managed to become fantastically wealthy on the back of little land owenership. Those days are fast drawing to a close. In any event, an argument about whether the land itself, or the energy/resources that the land embodies, is the fundamental thing of value, is rather moot in the end. In the end, in the absence of hydrocarbons, the two are pretty much synonymous. Lands a fiction, a chimera. It's inherently political and changes all the time. Every attempt to back currency with land is doomed to fail because it might as well be backed by harry potters exam results. Resources remain though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Steve Cook Posted September 30, 2009 Share Posted September 30, 2009 (edited) Interesting post.It triggered a memory of when I studied Biology at A-level many moons ago and we were taught Darwin's theory of evolution in terms of 'energy', in that the less energy that could be used to do something the better. And in terms of the return to be garnered historically from land is I suppose to do with the energy of the seasons. I have also read that the dollar is effectively backed by oil - because it (the major internationally tradable commodity) is denominated in dollars. Although I would also argue that energy without lebensraum, energy as backing for a currency wouldn't be particularly useful. And I would also observe that money earned by oligarchs gravitates (did you see that again?) back to the land - those mansions in Chelsea, Monaco etc.) After all what else could you do with it and be sure it isn't being siphoned off by some crooked Swiss banker? Ultimately this must be true. Recently, however, it has been possible to pretend otherwise. As I say, a temporary historical blip. a moire direct connection betwen wealth and land is now back on the cards. as for wether land has intrinsic value in and of itself, consider wich piece of land you would consider most desirable to own. Lanmd that contained no capapcity to harvest/mine resoruce from it, or land that did contain such reosurces. Land in itself is worthless without the above resources (or without being a strategic location that allows access to resources elsewhere). In the modern world, due to our advanced technolocal capacity to transfer energy from one type of commodity that is not directly useful to us (minerals) into another type of commodity that is useful to us (food, products), some people have managed to become fantastically wealthy on the back of little land owenership. Those days are fast drawing to a close. In any event, an argument about whether the land itself, or the energy/resources that the land embodies, is the fundamental thing of value, is rather moot in the end. In the end, in the absence of hydrocarbons, the two are pretty much synonymous. Edited September 30, 2009 by Steve Cook Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Steve Cook Posted September 30, 2009 Share Posted September 30, 2009 Lands a fiction, a chimera. It's inherently political and changes all the time. Every attempt to back currency with land is doomed to fail because it might as well be backed by harry potters exam results. Resources remain though. money backed by land is a proxy for money backed by resources In the end, the two can be largely viewed as functionally sysnonymous Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Injin Posted September 30, 2009 Share Posted September 30, 2009 money backed by land is a proxy for money backed by resourcesIn the end, the two can be largely viewed as functionally sysnonymous Except that the resources remain and the land can be redrawn an infinite number of ways (and will be.) Back with resources, no problem if they are naturally of a piece. Back with arbitary drawn lines that require constant political will to maintain - not quite as stable. Ask the french, the zimbabweans, the austrians, the argentines..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bonner Posted September 30, 2009 Share Posted September 30, 2009 M4 I a calculated'average'. It has been used to target inflation. As I have said elsewhere There is a better way of calculating the supply of money. Divisia M4. http://moneyterms.co.uk/divisia/ "A Divisia index (or aggregate) is a measure of money supply that, rather than simply adding up the various components of money supply, attaches a weight to each component. The justification for doing this is that not all money is held purely to make transactions with. Some types of money are clearly held primarily to use for transactions (e.g. physical cash, deposits in current accounts) while others are held primarily as a store of wealth (e.g. long term bonds). " It certainly is a leading indicator of inflation. I cant say for certain however that it is as equaly good at deflation. Interesting research? It was also named after a Frenchman, and we all know that they can be trusted dont we Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oktup Posted September 30, 2009 Share Posted September 30, 2009 And they wouldn't use ciggies because?They Don't Have Any Desire For Them Therefore in a market money is an item that people want for itself. 'New Alcatraz' is a maximum-security prison for people on death row, with no appeal. The governor and the first group of inmates (mafia types) arrive on 1 Jan. The governor is a strangely generous man so allows the prisoners some weekly 'treats' - 7 cigarettes, use of a pool table, a bit of parma ham, etc. Every prisoner also has certain duties, eg kitchen duty 3 times per week, etc. On 1 Feb, the second intake of prisoners occurs. This is a group of ultra-orthodox religious cultists. The governor expands the 'treat list' to include books, incense sticks, and prayer beads. On 1 Mar, the third group of prisoners arrives. They are all former market traders. The governor adds some further lazy stereotypes to his 'treat list', including pegs, thermal socks and dodgy CDs. On 1 Apr, the governor, who has taken a recent interest in monetary theory, acquires a stash of old board games. He decides to give each inmate a one-off gift of $1500 in Monopoly money. Discuss how 'money' would likely evolve over the period described. Give reasons for your answers. (10 marks) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Injin Posted September 30, 2009 Share Posted September 30, 2009 I'd pretty much go with this analysis Changed your mind? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Steve Cook Posted September 30, 2009 Share Posted September 30, 2009 The cigarettes - has all the features that make it easy to carry and exchange. Ham goes off. Use of pool table also devalues like airline seats. Some prisoners would value the cigs in their own right putting a floor under its value. Get too numerous, just smoke them instead (bit like gold jewellery).The other prisoners joining have to use the money already in circulation if they wish to trade. If the Monopoly money had arrived with the first set of prisoners - I think they may have used that because it is so similar to what they are used to. But it was too late. I'd pretty much go with this analysis Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Spaniard Posted September 30, 2009 Share Posted September 30, 2009 (edited) The governer then decides to charge weekly interest on the monopoly money, telling the inmates that he has merely lent it to them, not given it. He pays (in monopoly money of course) a bunch of hard cases to enforce payment. He also pays those who do the other chores in monopoly money, using both the continuously returning interest money and new monopoly money that he just prints. The governer gets the inmates to make stuff which he can sell outside the prison for real money, which he pockets ... Well, we all know how it goes from there ... Edited September 30, 2009 by The Spaniard Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Steve Cook Posted September 30, 2009 Share Posted September 30, 2009 Changed your mind? Not in the slightest. You mistake your lack of capacity to comprehend what I have previously posted for insight. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Injin Posted September 30, 2009 Share Posted September 30, 2009 The governer then decides to charge weekly interest on the monopoly money, telling the inmates that he has merely lent it to them, not given it.He pays (in monopoly money of course) a bunch of hard cases to enforce payment. He also pays those who do the other chores in monopoly money, using both the continuously returning interest money and new monopoly money that he just prints. The governer gets the inmates to make stuff which he can sell outside the prison for real money, which he pockets ... Well, we all know how it goes from there ... Yes, a monetary reform group is set up hoping to become governor. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Steve Cook Posted September 30, 2009 Share Posted September 30, 2009 (edited) The governer then decides to charge weekly interest on the monopoly money, telling the inmates that he has merely lent it to them, not given it.He pays (in monopoly money of course) a bunch of hard cases to enforce payment. He also pays those who do the other chores in monopoly money, using both the continuously returning interest money and new monopoly money that he just prints. The governer gets the inmates to make stuff which he can sell outside the prison for real money, which he pockets ... Well, we all know how it goes from there ... You've just described the behaviour of fiat-issuing central-banks Still think CB issued "money" is more "real" than institutional-lender-issued "credit", injin? Edited September 30, 2009 by Steve Cook Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Spaniard Posted September 30, 2009 Share Posted September 30, 2009 They've already got a money which forms all by itself - they don't need any help in this area. Maybe. Or maybe they are pleased to have a universal means of exchange, unit of account and store of wealth. Three very useful functions if you can have them for nowt. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Spaniard Posted September 30, 2009 Share Posted September 30, 2009 Yes, a monetary reform group is set up hoping to become governor. But all they want is to charge no interest on the monopoly money, just let it circulate freely. Is there a native American prisoner who makes a bloody nuisance of himself? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Injin Posted September 30, 2009 Share Posted September 30, 2009 But all they want is to charge no interest on the monopoly money, just let it circulate freely.Is there a native American prisoner who makes a bloody nuisance of himself? They've already got a money which forms all by itself - they don't need any help in this area. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oktup Posted September 30, 2009 Share Posted September 30, 2009 May I also point out that the religious cultists are vegeterian and non-smokers. Similarly, the mafiosi have no use for the prayer beads/incense sticks etc. However, the governor distributes a new 'entire set' of treats to each prisoner every week. Does that change anyone's answer? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Injin Posted September 30, 2009 Share Posted September 30, 2009 May I also point out that the religious cultists are vegeterian and non-smokers. Similarly, the mafiosi have no use for the prayer beads/incense sticks etc. However, the governor distributes a new 'entire set' of treats to each prisoner every week. Does that change anyone's answer? If the supply of goods changes all the time, then what money is will change all the time. it's only the most popular item from the menu of what's available at any given moment, after all. The mechanism for selection is the same though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oktup Posted September 30, 2009 Share Posted September 30, 2009 If the supply of goods changes all the time, then what money is will change all the time. it's only the most popular item from the menu of what's available at any given moment, after all.The mechanism for selection is the same though. The supply of goods doesn't change all the time - once the market traders have arrived, the 'parcel' remains fixed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Injin Posted September 30, 2009 Share Posted September 30, 2009 The supply of goods doesn't change all the time - once the market traders have arrived, the 'parcel' remains fixed. However, the governor distributes a new 'entire set' of treats to each prisoner every week. I misunderstood the above. No, nothing will change - other than you needing a new warehouse or twelve for the "prayerbead mountain" that inevitably develops. Mechanism is exactly the same. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oktup Posted September 30, 2009 Share Posted September 30, 2009 However, the governor distributes a new 'entire set' of treats to each prisoner every week. I misunderstood the above. No, nothing will change - other than you needing a new warehouse or twelve for the "prayerbead mountain" that inevitably develops. Mechanism is exactly the same. Nothing will change? - so they all keep using the cigarettes as money? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Injin Posted September 30, 2009 Share Posted September 30, 2009 Nothing will change? - so they all keep using the cigarettes as money? Maybe not, maybe they all quit and hug the lord/become vegan - the mechanism for deciding what they trade in remains the same though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oktup Posted September 30, 2009 Share Posted September 30, 2009 Maybe not, maybe they all quit and hug the lord/become vegan - the mechanism for deciding what they trade in remains the same though. I'm a bit confused now. When you say, "the mechanism for deciding what they trade in", is "what they trade in" = money? ie, "the mechanism for deciding what money is remains the same" - ? If so, could you just remind me what exactly that mechanism is, please? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Daddy Bear Posted September 30, 2009 Share Posted September 30, 2009 no matter, Merv can force the reserve balances to be lent by simply sending the BofE's rate (for commercial bank deposits) below zero. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Injin Posted September 30, 2009 Share Posted September 30, 2009 I'm a bit confused now. When you say, "the mechanism for deciding what they trade in", is "what they trade in" = money?ie, "the mechanism for deciding what money is remains the same" - ? If so, could you just remind me what exactly that mechanism is, please? Whichever the most commonly traded item is on any given day is money. Today it might be ciggies, tomorrow porn, the day after some hooch that prisoner 24b cooked up in the showers. The point is to let the process do it's thing and let the market tell you what money is, rather than mandating one form and then making everyone use it all the time. Money originally was a verb, like swimming - but it's been corrupted in thought to become a status noun, like swimmer.We call Michael Phelps a swimmer even if he's driving his car (sloppy thinking and language) and we've done something similar for money. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Injin Posted September 30, 2009 Share Posted September 30, 2009 What you are saying is if they all give up, that the fags will no longer be used as money.This may be a bit like the situation described in Debt Slave's signature. If you don't play the game, you opt out, then the demand for 'stuff' will abate. So I would say that fags would become more numerous over time (no longer destroyed) as well as losing their floor value of usage. What is left? I would suggest that initially you will see that more fags are required for any given item as the governor keeps giving them out each week and there are no more prisoners joining and expanding the prison economy. When eventually it becomes unwieldy, they may well decide upon something else. If the governor gives out enough fags, they'll become a hindrance, blocking doorways and so on..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.