Money

[Abramul]

Late Night Final, by Eric Frank Russell, presents a post-emigration society in which:

They have no medium of exchange. They barter goods for goods without any regard for the relative value of either. They work when they feel like it. If they don't feel like it, they don't work. Yet, in spite of this, they work most of the time.

[hoots7]

WoW this discussion can get real deep, real quick I will try to do my part in keeping it light & easy to follow.

 

I’m thinking to myself: What would it take to have a world without money?

First like you say anything can be used as currency (money) so how do you prevent anyone from ever thinking of it? It is just such a natural thing; I have 2 oranges, you have 2 apples, we trade each other, now we both have 1 of each.

Since you can’t prevent people from thinking of currency you can’t answer your questions.

I guess the only way you could eliminate the use (not the thought) of currency for a time is if you had a big powerful guy who controlled everything & he was the only one that gave people things.

This of course is not realistic, it’s a big planet & people would just move to another area or gang up on him.

 

Now what would have happened if we did not start using non-consumable items as currency and start the practice of accounting (keeping records).

 

1. What do you think the world would look like if the above statement was true?

I think people would be less stressed, maybe less productive also but less stressed (if they had the basics for a couple of days down the road they would be happy).

 

2. Do you think value of something would exist?

Yes, bigger food would be worth more than smaller & non-perishable like nuts would be worth more than they are today.

 

3. Do you think the world would be a better place?

Yes, for most (but not the Bill Gates & Donald Trump).

 

4. Show your work. (Just kidding)

I say yes because without accounting practices things would be less clear & have a tendency to kind of balance out more according to need. Accounting allows us to record with amazing precession who barrowed what on what date, what % of interest they agreed to & so on.

I think of my own family, I don’t keep strict records of whom barrowed what & so forth, I see a need & I fill it, they pay me back when they can.

FYI, I don’t hate Accountants, I have 2 good friends that are accountants.

 

P.S. It’s the love of money (mammon) not the money it’s self.

[hoots7]

It's plain and simple, people demand value for their services and do not wish to be cheated (the inherit greed of people makes them want the 'better' deal, but that's a different topic)

If money (aka "currency") was taken out of the equations, we would still be in primitive status of "I am stronger, I take what I want and you are weaker, you will serve me or die"

 

You nailed it xenxander, have a kudo!

[Jumonji]

Money is the foundation of civilization, for without it we would always live in the present. Only money lets us work now for what we will need in the future. Without money, whatever value came from our work would rust and rot before it was fully used.

 

Money is trust. Money means that I can give you something now and you give me something inherently worthless, like a slip of paper, so that in the future I can give that paper to someone else for something I need then. Without trusting that worthless paper, I would never give up anything that is useful now for something that hasn't even been created yet.

 

Without money we would be animals, living strictly for what we can touch and see right in front of us, with no ability to work now for any future benefit. Sure, some primitive societies can exist that way. But they never went to the moon, and they will die when the sun burns out. The rest of us will have children living amonst the stars.

 

-Jumonji

[Sativarg]

"Hey what if no one ever had thought of money, and no one ever would? What would this world look like?"

• No one ever thought of money and no one ever did.
  

1. What do you think the world would look like if the above statement was true?

2. Do you think value of something would exist?

3. Do you think the world would be a better place?

 

I think trade would still exist but every culture would have its own ways if determining value. ^[2] It would be harder for people to agree on value but perhaps in the best case wise rulers would judge disputes and in the worst case brute force would rule. I guess I am saying that no one absolute system would exist for determining what an object or a persons time is worth.

It would be very hard to store some things of value and to accumulate value as wealth because most things deteriorate. The things that do not deteriorate like gold, diamonds and gem stones might have little value. Gold makes a poor tool and you cant eat it. Perhaps each region would value things according to their usefulness.

 

This is a great topic that deserves a great answer and I'm just not sure I have one. There are so many variables to consider. I have recently become aware of the view that the current money system is based on credit sold to the world by a few mega banks. ^[3]If I understand this view and if it is valid, then I must say that money in its present form is a tool of evil intent. And the result of this system of selling interest may well mean world wide slavery.

In short I have no pat answer. ^[1]I just have more questions. Sorry. :blush:

[Jumonji]

I understand the desire to debate materialism and money is a good scapegoat, er, proxy for that. But money is not materialism.

 

If you remove money and leave materialism (i.e., the desire to accumulate property) then money will be reinvented as soon as you turn around. Money is just a more efficient way to barter because you don't have to carry your trade goods around with you. Can you imagine trying to optian a car if there were no money? You'd have to store 10 years worth of your corn crop and then haul it to the car dealer... not bloody likely.

 

What I think people here really want to debate is materialism - the abilit yto accumulate "things" that is only really possible (beyond a few trinkets) with the acceptance of money. (Not the existance of money, but it's acceptance amongst the population as something of value.) Besides the practical matter of saving your crops to buy a car, there is also the increase in efficiency that comes from specialization of labor which creates surplus wealth that can be accumulated in the first place.

 

If you live in a primitive society, everyone pretty much does everything for themselves. Trade is minimal, so everyone has to create their own clothes, food, shelter, etc. But with the ability to "horde" the results of your great crop in the form of money, you can spend all your energy in learning how to grow better and better crops and just buy your clothes from someone else. The "someone else" can spend all their energy on learning how to make better clothes...etc. Such is how civilization is born.

 

It's so easy to think "things were better" before "fill in your favorite scapegoat." But the truth is, people can subvert anything to evil if they choose. Money is a necessary component of our advancement as a space-going species, despite the face that it tempts people into excess behavior. It's not the money that makes people want things, it's the fact that people want things that leads them to create money.

[Sativarg]

Yea I wish I had said that. :thanks:

 

But I stlll say some thing stinks about the current state of capitalism.

[Jumonji]

...But I stlll say some thing stinks about the current state of capitalism.

 

I know what you mean. Too much capitalism is nearly as bad as not enough. The ideal of capitalism is that it encourages competition so that the best ideas win. But if taken to an extreme - the winners will use their initial success to force the competiters out of the game in the later rounds.

 

That's why America has a "regulated" capitalism. The idea is to allow people to succeed, but then don't allow them to use that success to block others from succeeding as well. It's a very, very fine line - and we don't have it right yet - but a great ideal to strive for anyway.

 

-Jumonji

[xenxander]

...But I stlll say some thing stinks about the current state of capitalism.

 

That's why America has a "regulated" capitalism. The idea is to allow people to succeed, but then don't allow them to use that success to block others from succeeding as well. It's a very, very fine line - and we don't have it right yet - but a great ideal to strive for anyway.

 

-Jumonji

 

Nope it's not perfect. Like when Microsoft told IBM (way back in the day), if you wish to distribute our hardware, you 'cannot' sell it with Netscape - it must have I.E. (which microsoft stole - it was spyglass browser originally)<~~ which I had on my ol' IBM ^_^

 

countless others do the same - corporations run capitalism. The american dream is to make a million dollars (for the common joe, anyway), but it's very rarely seen. This leads full circle back to the two faces of capitalism. Then one can blame money for it all and then announce "Money is evil - look what it has done to us!".

 

But those who are smart enough, know better. The main problem is there aren't enough smart people to balance the stupid people - scales are always inadvertently tipped to favor the uneducated masses which suits large corporations just fine - gives them a massive, and cheap to employ, labor pool.

 

This is a little off topic now, perhaps we should open a thread about "is capitalism evil?". But we'd have the same two faces - good and evil, and end up saying: "No, but those who manipulate it are." (inherit greed of people).

 

P.S:

Thanks for Kudos! ^_^

[NewtC]

So far the best replies I have heard. And I know that no won thought of money, but it had to start some were, right? Plus, xenxander, your point is completely valid. It was the most straight-forward one yet. :thanks: everyone!