Jump to content

"Statism v. Anti-Statism" will it replace "left v. right"?


Ser Scot A Ellison

Recommended Posts

See also UK 2010 and New Zealand 2011, for a similar spread and variation.

That graph clearly wasn't done by a New Zealander. ACT are more authoritarian than National (essentially, the social conservative law-and-order types ousted the social liberals), and United Future doesn't stand for anything these days apart from Peter Dunne getting re-elected. Labour in 2011 ran its most overtly left-wing campaign in thirty years, while the Greens have been shifting right to appear more respectable. The Maori Party has become little more than the National Party for Maori (they voted for the GST increase), and should be to the right of Labour. Mana is for for those who seem to think brown people can't be racist.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It gets 2010 Australian election mostly right, apart from its mention of One Nation as an operational political constituency.

Politics being a matter of identities, demographics, regions, personality and the like these grid thingies aren't worth much anyway.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wait, what? No. The things you barter as exactly as valuable as ONE person (the person you trade them with) thinks they are, at the moment of the exchange.

The value of money is a much more complicated concept, and one way or another it depends on the state. The Sumerian Temple declares that 60 rations of barley equal 1 silver shekel. The city of Rome mints coins according to detailed specifications, that can be used all over the Empire. The Bank of England guarantees that a piece of paper is equal to 10 pounds of gold. The American Government issues bank notes, and legally allows banks to create money every time they give out loans. And so on.

tormund went through this thoroughly but what you are describing is fiat money.

as soon as one person trades for something, not because he wants it, but because he knows he will be able to exchange it, the item acquires a money value in addition to its commodity value. it is money, as one money become more and more accepted because of its money qualities, it often becomes recognized as the money in a region.

gold and silver have historically dominated because of their positive money like qualities.

high value to mass ratio (unlike bullets) bullets would be a terrible money because it would take so many of them to buy anything,

easily divisible into small amounts (unlike cattle)

long life (unlike foodstuffs)

coins were not initially minted by states. typically, goldsmiths minted their own coins. they didn't need to be guaranteed, they could be weighed,(and tested to ensure it was real gold, or silver, copper, etc) states later took over the minting responsibility but the gold coin was no more or less a money because of who minted it.

eventually, banks would hold the gold and issue receipt, because it could be dangerous to walk around with all of your gold. (or often, you would deposit your wheat, and receive same receipts) that note was not money, but a claim for money.

then some scoundrel realized that he could issue more receipts than he had deposits, as he wasn't likely to have to fulfill all the requests at once. this could be called inflation, or theft, but in any case, it led to states issuing money that wasn't backed up. it's called fiat money as it is issued by fiat and lasts only as long as the people believe it has value.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

All money has value only as long as it is perceived to have value. Gold and silver are no different.

Yep. It doesn't matter if you have all the gold and silver in the world, someone can refuse to take it the same way they can refuse to take a credit card. Not to mention that when somebody effectively corners the market on a product, controls a supply, or for some reason it suddenly becomes worth much more than it normally would be (i.e. the old "what would you pay for a glass of water when you're in the middle of a desert" scenario) they can say that it's worth ten times what it was yesterday, regardless of whether you're paying in dollars or gold.

There is no such thing as absolute worth. If anyone thinks that 50 pounds of gold will always be worth the same thing, I'll be happy to get them that 50 pounds and drop them in the middle of the Sahara with no other supplies just to test the theory.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

PoI,

I don't think anyone would argue the value of commodities don't fluxuate. I believe the argument is that the value of such commodities tends to be more stable than fiat currency. There are no guarantees but there are better bets. This is not to say the flexablity of fiat currency has no benefits. It is simple a weighing of the benefits of flexablity versus stability which is of more use to a given economy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How can a metal be stable as a currency when it is subject to supply and demand as much as anything else in this wide and wicked world of ours? Have you forgotten the jolly traditional pass-time of coin clipping? Or how the silver content of UK shillings (back in 1947 give or take a year or two iirc) had to be dramatically reduced because the value of metal content of the coins became greater than their face value?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

All money has value only as long as it is perceived to have value. Gold and silver are no different.

well gold and silver are no different than any other commodity money, cattle, whiskey, arrowheads. in principle. in reality, they are better moneys because they are more divisible, more transportable, each gram, is identical to another, the stock doesn't grow rapidly, etc.

they are all significantly different than a fiat currency

Gold is an investment, not a currency. It may go up and down. It may be a very good investment. But it's as much a currency as Lean Hog futures.

lean hog futures would make a perfectly good medium of exchange. the only reason hogs aren't a great money is because half a hog isn't very useful

There is no such thing as absolute worth. If anyone thinks that 50 pounds of gold will always be worth the same thing, I'll be happy to get them that 50 pounds and drop them in the middle of the Sahara with no other supplies just to test the theory.

Is anyone saying that? That's foolish. 50 lbs of gold does not have the same value right now, to everyone. every person has different value scales and they all change over time.

How can a metal be stable as a currency when it is subject to supply and demand as much as anything else in this wide and wicked world of ours? Have you forgotten the jolly traditional pass-time of coin clipping? Or how the silver content of UK shillings (back in 1947 give or take a year or two iirc) had to be dramatically reduced because the value of metal content of the coins became greater than their face value?

Fiat currencies are just as vulnerable to supply and demand. Why does the dollar fall against the yen? Because demand for dollars drops, relative to demand for yen. coin clipping wasn't as big of an issue as its made because merchants weren't stupid, they weighed coins and discounted them if they'd been clipped. true the king got a nice little bonus for the metal that he clipped but the possibilities for him to inflate were significantly less than what is possible to now.

again, gold isn't inherently a better store of long-term wealth than say, a herd of cattle. It is however, much easier to store and trade in precise amounts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And that's precisely why the concept of debt caused the development of money whether a particular type of shell or uniform pieces of metal and why they in turn gave way to paper and electronic units of exchange.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And that's why we should have a global currency. No more of this Dollar/Pound/Euro/Yen crap!

Currency union without a fiscal union isn't the best idea. See: the Euro

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And that's why we should have a global currency. No more of this Dollar/Pound/Euro/Yen crap!

a global fiat currency? without even the restraining force of an exchange market? it would be worthless within the year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Honesty is a more effective regulator than one might think. If an individual or corporation develops a reputation for dishonesty, nobody will trade with them.
Yes, and that's why Donald Trump is destitute and poor. Or all of the banks involved in the subprime issues are completely done for.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, and that's why Donald Trump is destitute and poor. Or all of the banks involved in the subprime issues are completely done for.

That's dishonesty on a different level. A bank that routinely said "nah, you can't take any money out of your savings account because we've decided to keep it for ourselves" would very quickly find itself without customers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think that you'd be surprised how dishonest Trump can be; he was once paid $3 million simply to stay away from a project because of how toxic he was. He sued people for 'defaming' him because they said he was going through bankruptcy. He sued another person for $5 billion (yes, with a B) because he had the temerity to say he was worth only $250m. He personally owes $900m - that's personal; his businesses owe 3.5b.

He's so dishonest and so completely full of shit that apparently people are dying to give him their money.

Dishonesty sadly isn't that big a deal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...