The Value of Money

Philosophy Forums Society, Government, and Economics
41

No, in fact most places don’t, basically all countries at this point use Fiat money, in essence saying, it’s worth something because we say so…

Dollars, yes and no. Gold, yes and no.

Money existed long before the dollar*, and often was paper, though often it was receipts for gold being held in someones vault. From this comes banks and specie backed money.

Gold, would be fine to live without, in the sense of the extra price tag people place on it because it is “gold.” But, if we called the 79th element by a different name, it would still have it’s uses, and need to be in that spot… Gold has its value in part because of it’s place on the table of elements, it’s shell configuration causes it to be non-reactive and stable. This allows it to stay shiny, for a long time… To change any of those factors would require an alteration of reality, but I don’t think that is what you are talking about…

Society does function without species backed money, as is shown all over the world. Species backed money just acts as a limit on the amount of money that politicians can put out into the market… Which some think would be sweet, but it’s roughly the equivalent of playing pretend, which is roughly what fiat money is in the first place.

There is some mixed proof on this, while yes gold coins where used, they have found evidence of debt, which was only not represented by paper because of the time frame, for trade. Gold was an up step from that only because it was a representation of that dept, that could be broken up and passed around, then put back together without (much) loss… We now use paper because it is a step up, easier to carry, easier to understand, and it works in the same way.

The value projected on to gold is an illusion/delusion. Spain was destroyed by that illusion, driven out of one of the most powerful countries by it’s own misunderstanding of economics. Seeing the only value as coming from Gold (and silver) is known as Bullionism, and it’s like believing in the miasma theory of diseases, they where practiced at the same time, to the same results.

Many.

*It’s called the dollar because of the Thollar family, which was a rich family that used paper as receipts for things… The receipts would be passed around as “Thollar receipts”… The crazy ability of English speaking people slowly turned it into dollar… Which is why other countries use the name Dollar…

42

grateful for the diversion, however the value of money has much to do with the also e value exchanges which took place between what we used to visualize as the Romantic Period. And the modern.
Now we only see glimmers of it here and there in some people, or in museums. I was delighted to see that a museum here, the Getty, I believe, is having an exhibition of borrowed Turner paintings, a must see. Is art dead and buried, that we have to visualize a period in visiting representations of it? Are there not people today who still live as if the period was still meaningful and alive within their own sense of being? I would say yes to that, and there need not a confusion arose as a consequence, although. It takes a lot of,art appreciation to change the way things are looked at. To me surrealism is the most meaningful way to gap the ages, a visual stream, and a method this develops, very painful at diets, and visually excruciating, but then, one must not fear the method of this madness. Lest it becomes lost for ever. (Not the madness, but the method).I know You will disagree, however, disagreement is the bedrock of constructing reality, and really I do agree, to disagree.

43

[size=120]No. [/size]The origin of the dollar is the German Taler.

Look: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dollar#History

44

Art is as buried as God is - unfortunately.

I am afraid that most of them are “buried” too. If people do not see any sense in reproduction of themselves but merely in their own personal self-preservation (without reproduction) by misusing any other kind of life sense, thus if they are too hedonistic, too decadent, too nihilistic, then they are lost.

Yes, but art is as dead as God is - unfortunately.

I advise you against surrealism. But if it helps you personally and gives you a real sense, okay then … :wink:

I guess, you mean this in the sense of Hegel’s dialectic: thesis => antithesis => synthesis.

I hope, we are not going to derail this thread.

45

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7qIhDdST27g[/youtube]

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iFDe5kUUyT0[/youtube]

46

This thread reminds me of that classic Twilight Zone episode: imdb.com/video/imdb/vi2782635801

Think about it: What if we were able to manufacture gold such that it is indistinguishable from the real thing? Is it really all that far removed from paper money in that sense?

It would seem to be just one more consensus the human species has invented in order to facilitate the exchange of goods and services.

And then that is put into one or another ideological contraption like capitalism or socialism. No getting around political economy, is there?

47

The main point of people arguing against this OP, and I already brought it up, is that there is nothing you can back as currency on this earth that is made to exactly accommodate the number of people on this earth (it’s completely arbitrary), the abstraction to non-backed money that was controlled was a major innovation. Watch the films James posted.

48

Arminius

I think people in 20 years from now will have far more time on their hands, artists and artisans of all kinds will be much in demand. The machines of the future will be able to produce unique items as easily as standard ones. Put the two together, + that human creativity is what we have which the AI don’t have, = far greater interest in all arts.

or, why wouldn’t it go like that?

49

Art is all over the place, in advertising and buildings for two really big ones. Movies, television, the simple process of aesthetics for a set is art (we also have computer animation now)… art is very ubiquitous. Not everything is art, but artists will certainly never be out of jobs.

50

The next episode is even better. It is about trying to get a man to shut up.

51

Yes, but with money the man didn’t have. Just as here you wish folks would shut up because you don’t have the arguments to make them.

52

I have a feeling the $500,000 wouldn’t have worked on you.

But interestingly all money gains its value in that same way … worthless until someone bets on it.

53

James, I haven’t tormented you now for months. Why in the world would you want me to begin anew?

Or, sure, let’s link gold, the value of money, dasein, conflicting goods and political economy to rational metaphysics.

So, first up, how would you define gold? :laughing:

Oh, but’s take this to another thread.

54

Humans have been having enough time for it for so long. So humans will also not do it " in 20 years from now" or later. The machines or nobody will do it.

Yes, the machines (the machines!) will be able and are already able to do that.

1.) Humans have been having enough time for it for so long (see above) and have been being decadent for so long.
2.) Many (probably all possible) things came, come and will come together in that case.
.__ So the machine replaced the rest, replace the little rest, and will replace the very little rest of human arts.

I hope that we will not derail this thread. Maybe we should continue this conversation in my “machine” threads or your “Internet” thread.