Thread: Money
View Single Post
Old 09-02-2018, 09:05 PM   #6
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: South Yorkshire
Posts: 800
Likes: 28 (23 Posts)

Originally Posted by mannybash View Post
Money is the most worthless thing on this planet.
"Worthless" than what? Worth less then.

To infer money has no "value"? This is not correct, while money is being redeemable (accepted) for goods and services.

Originally Posted by mannybash View Post
Surely we need it after all how do we survive and wouldn't it be great to have millions and buy the house of your choice? Well yes up to a point.
If everyone was given "millions" then the price of all items would only increase, where the cost is no different than how its presently being measured against such property.

Originally Posted by mannybash View Post
Even so wouldn't it be better still if the money didn't exist and we would have the freedom to do what we wanted?
You would have to present a test case in history which showed how a "moneyless" society was beneficial. So far none has ever been produced to support such a concept. 1. one that held a society together and did not turn into a free for all, of stealing each-others resources and property "freely" taken by those who are non-productive. 2. A society "without money" (while none has existed) would only revert back into a primitive state. 3. Who would do all the dangerous jobs without any incentives? 4. No advancements would be made.

If you think this through logically, rather than holding a disdain for money, there is no supporting case for such concepts helping to protect an individual or society from complete exploitation, people would plunder the resources from one area then move to another. No incentives makes for a downfall to a primitive society. The only person promoting a "moneyless" society nowadays is Michael Tellinger, he lost his home turned against money, then projected his own disdain onto his unsuspecting viewers saying "money was created by Aliens" to enslave mankind etc.; yet even animals understand the concept of money. (see the Keith Chen/monkey research).

[edit: see how the founding of the Bank of England in 1694, lead to the industrial revolution, a "moneyless" society would only revert society backwards. Its normal behavior seen how all forms of materials have been attempted to represent property, monetized in either paper units, coins, gold-silver, wood, animal skins, stones, buttons, bones, clay tablets, spices, tobacco or now digital representations etc.]

“The sole use of currency is to facilitate the great process of exchange, by superseding the necessity for barter. Nor has it any other use than what is either directly or indirectly incidental to this purpose. For were it the case in any country, that no one therein had ever occasion to exchange any property or privilege which he possessed, or any service that he could render, for something which another possessed or could render in return; or, that only such exchanges were desired as barter could readily accomplish; then, in such country, currency would manifestly be of no use, nor indeed would it have any existence.”

– Edwin Hill, "Principles of Currency: Means of Ensuring Uniformity of Value and Adequacy of Supply" (1856), page 55
Originally Posted by mannybash View Post
What do others think? Too simple? I am not so sure
So far, yes.

Last edited by aura; 10-02-2018 at 12:15 AM.
Likes: (1)
aura is offline   Reply With Quote