It is simply not the case that we can cheaply and easily buy things with money because it is valuable. It is, instead, the case that money is valuable because we can cheaply and easily buy things with it. One way into the tangle of understanding why it is wrong is to ask each of us why we are happy accepting money in exchange when we sell useful commodities. Hint: it's not because we are looking forward to going down to the bank, exchanging our bank notes for the little disks of gold usually decorated with pictures of bearded men on one side and allegorical female figures on the other with lettering saying things like "Fecund Augustae" or "Concordia Militum" or "Fides Exercituum" on them, taking our little disks home, and feeling happy looking at them. That's not why we accept money. We accept money because if we don't have any money we have to buy commodities with other commodities, and when we do so we are unlikely to receive the cost of production for what we sell. Have you ever tried to buy a latte at Peets with a copy of Ludwig von Mises's Money and Credit? It does not go well. The fact is that your wealth is only worth its cost of production if you are liquid--if you can wait to sell until somebody willing to pay full cost of production comes along, which is not every minute. The use-value of money is that it allows you to time your other transactions so that you can realize the full exchange value of what you sell, rather than having to sell it at a discount.But there are those people love them that Concordia militum...
Ana
Total
Total :
Jumlah Artikel
Diberdayakan oleh Blogger.
-
...if you are very, very rich. (Most mss. of this age and quality are in national or university libraries and are not for sale at any price...
-
Jeff contemplates Jefferson at Williamsburg: Poring over a 15th-century legal tract, Jefferson encountered a modern preface arguing that a ...
-
From the New York Times, news of an edition of the Bible annotated solely with C.S. Lewis quotations: The Lewis Bible, available in cloth (1...
Kamis, 12 Juli 2012
Langganan:
Posting Komentar (Atom)
Recent
Weekly
-
...if you are very, very rich. (Most mss. of this age and quality are in national or university libraries and are not for sale at any price...
-
Jeff contemplates Jefferson at Williamsburg: Poring over a 15th-century legal tract, Jefferson encountered a modern preface arguing that a ...
-
From the New York Times, news of an edition of the Bible annotated solely with C.S. Lewis quotations: The Lewis Bible, available in cloth (1...
-
Couple of weeks ago, to my great surprise, a writer named Ted Gioia wrote an article about science-fiction author Cordwainer Smith for the A...
-
The English lawsuit, Scrope v. Grosvenor has a prominent place in the history of heraldry, since a record of the case before the court of ch...
-
From The Medieval Review: Bell, Adrian R., Anne Curry, Adam Chapman, Andy King, and David Simpkin, ed. The Soldier Experience in the Fourtee...
-
I didn't know about this book until a few minutes ago, but I take a positive review by Jonathan Jarrett on such a subject pretty serio...
-
In Charny's Questions on Tournaments , there is a case proposed to Charny's audience about a knight who brings a beautiful destrier ...
-
I am indebted to the Iraqi journalists who report for McClatchy, an American news service, from Baghdad. In recent days they have been inter...
-
Carnivalesque is a monthly "carnival" which collects interesting links from blogs that discuss pre-modern history. Every other ...
0 Comment to "A witty reply to goldbugs"
Posting Komentar