Pages:
Author

Topic: Money is an imaginary concept, but humanity is enslaved by it - page 3. (Read 17723 times)

legendary
Activity: 3514
Merit: 1280
English ⬄ Russian Translation Services
The exchange value is the speculation that you can get something of intrinscic value in exchange. So money has the exchange value, which is fully speculative. So the if's and but's above is completely rational. If I can buy food tomorrow, what if I can not buy food tomorrow, possibly I can get only something that I don't fancy. Anywy, I speculate that I can get what I want tomorrow, therefore I keep some money for tomorrow, in stead of stuffing my refrigerator with something that can degrade, or what I maybe don't fancy tomorrow. Things with intrinsic value is good, but it depends on the circumstances, maybe what is valuable today is not so tomorrow. Therefore I keep something that is not directly useful, but pure value, for tomorrow.

I don't understand what you are talking about. If you mean that money has value since it has utility in allowing an individual to choose what to buy and what not to buy, today or tomorrow, this still fails the marginal utility test (since this value is also subjective). You will have to overcome this (which you evidently shrink from, despite my insistence), otherwise we should agree that this utility is not money's "intrinsic" value. You made a claim and the proof is on you..

And I'm not choosing other names, where did you get this?

Your words are nonsensical to me.

I remain entirely in the scope of the subjective value theory, and am using its terminology and notions. If you follow it too, then you have to deal with what I say (and not in the way you actually do). If you don't, then, I'm afraid, you have to explain your theory more clearly. I don't get it...
legendary
Activity: 1512
Merit: 1005
The exchange value is the speculation that you can get something of intrinscic value in exchange. So money has the exchange value, which is fully speculative. So the if's and but's above is completely rational. If I can buy food tomorrow, what if I can not buy food tomorrow, possibly I can get only something that I don't fancy. Anywy, I speculate that I can get what I want tomorrow, therefore I keep some money for tomorrow, in stead of stuffing my refrigerator with something that can degrade, or what I maybe don't fancy tomorrow. Things with intrinsic value is good, but it depends on the circumstances, maybe what is valuable today is not so tomorrow. Therefore I keep something that is not directly useful, but pure value, for tomorrow.

I don't understand what you are talking about. If you mean that money has value since it has utility in allowing an individual to choose what to buy and what not to buy, today or tomorrow, this still fails the marginal utility test (since this value is also subjective). You will have to overcome this (which you evidently shrink from, despite my insistence), otherwise we should agree that this utility is not money's "intrinsic" value. You made a claim and the proof is on you..

And I'm not choosing other names, where did you get this?

Your words are nonsensical to me.
legendary
Activity: 3514
Merit: 1280
English ⬄ Russian Translation Services
The exchange value is the speculation that you can get something of intrinscic value in exchange. So money has the exchange value, which is fully speculative. So the if's and but's above is completely rational. If I can buy food tomorrow, what if I can not buy food tomorrow, possibly I can get only something that I don't fancy. Anywy, I speculate that I can get what I want tomorrow, therefore I keep some money for tomorrow, in stead of stuffing my refrigerator with something that can degrade, or what I maybe don't fancy tomorrow. Things with intrinsic value is good, but it depends on the circumstances, maybe what is valuable today is not so tomorrow. Therefore I keep something that is not directly useful, but pure value, for tomorrow.

I don't understand what you are talking about. If you mean that money has value since it has utility in allowing an individual to choose what to buy and what not to buy, today or tomorrow, this still fails the marginal utility test (since this value is also subjective). You will have to overcome this (which you evidently shrink from, despite my insistence), otherwise we should agree that this utility is not money's "intrinsic" value. You made a claim and the proof is on you..

And I'm not choosing other names, where did you get this?
legendary
Activity: 1512
Merit: 1005
This is not a proof (of money having value per se). Though I was hoping that you would address the issue that I raised in my post (since that would be a proof). I mean, the compliance (or lack thereof) between the notion of money having value as such and the law of diminishing marginal utility...

It is proof. Value is somebody prefering one thing over the other.

We could go on discussing the two types of value again, but this time I wanted to stress that money is value.

So you don't want to address the issue of the discrepancy that I pointed out, okay then. Would money have value to you if you could buy with it only things that you don't need (and couldn't barter with) and, consequently, couldn't that you do? I guess that it wouldn't. Therefore it is not money per se that has value but the value of things that you can buy with it, and only through these things that actually satisfy your needs money obtains its value...

And this pretty much explains the apparent contradiction between the law of diminishing marginal utility and money not conforming to it. If you still disagree, then you have to explain this non-conformance somehow

The two types of value is intrinsic value and exchange value. If you really hate the names of those two concepts, you can of course choose other names but if so i can not be bothered to follow the discussion anymore.

The intrinsic value is what you are after when you go to a shop and buy something. You need shoes, they sell shoes, and you go and buy a pair. No magic there.

The exchange value is the speculation that you can get something of intrinscic value in exchange. So money has the exchange value, which is fully speculative. So the if's and but's above is completely rational. If I can buy food tomorrow, what if I can not buy food tomorrow, possibly I can get only something that I don't fancy. Anywy, I speculate that I can get what I want tomorrow, therefore I keep some money for tomorrow, in stead of stuffing my refrigerator with something that can degrade, or what I maybe don't fancy tomorrow. Things with intrinsic value is good, but it depends on the circumstances, maybe what is valuable today is not so tomorrow. Therefore I keep something that is not directly useful, but pure value, for tomorrow.

legendary
Activity: 3514
Merit: 1280
English ⬄ Russian Translation Services
This is not a proof (of money having value per se). Though I was hoping that you would address the issue that I raised in my post (since that would be a proof). I mean, the compliance (or lack thereof) between the notion of money having value as such and the law of diminishing marginal utility...

It is proof. Value is somebody prefering one thing over the other.

We could go on discussing the two types of value again, but this time I wanted to stress that money is value.

So you don't want to address the issue of the discrepancy that I pointed out, okay then. Would money have value to you if you could buy with it only things that you don't need (and couldn't barter with) and, consequently, couldn't that you do? I guess that it wouldn't. Therefore it is not money per se that has value but the value of things that you can buy with it, and only through these things that actually satisfy your needs money obtains its value...

And this pretty much explains the apparent contradiction between the law of diminishing marginal utility and money not conforming to it. If you still disagree, then you have to explain this non-conformance somehow
legendary
Activity: 1512
Merit: 1005
Money is pure value.


Yes money is a pure value, but it is for now. So later after bitcoin have affected they surely money will slowly replace by bitcoin then it will affect all world to use this kind of payment. Just wait for that time to booming then all people will be affected where the new era is coming

There is a common misconception that money is not value, because it can not be eaten etc. But, all value is one individual's preference for one thing over another, which includes money. Therefore, money is value just like other things.

I agree that value is subjective, means utility and can be compared on the basis of an individual's preference of one thing over another. But I don't agree that money can be judged that simple. One of the fundamentals of the subjective value theory that you make reference to here is the notion of diminishing marginal utility. Money apparently doesn't conform to this notion, which can be explained only by the fact that money doesn't possess value per se. It is just an intermediary for things that can be bought with it...

False again. Money is value, the proof is that some person at some point prefers the money to the thing. This happens every time someone sells something or a service. In a money economy, it in fact happens every time a trade is done, so it is exactly as common as a non-money transfer. A trade is normally a good or service one way, and money the other way.

This is not a proof (of money having value per se). Though I was hoping that you would address the issue that I raised in my post (since that would be a proof). I mean, the compliance (or lack thereof) between the notion of money having value as such and the law of diminishing marginal utility...

It is proof. Value is somebody prefering one thing over the other.

We could go on discussing the two types of value again, but this time I wanted to stress that money is value.
legendary
Activity: 3514
Merit: 1280
English ⬄ Russian Translation Services
Money is pure value.


Yes money is a pure value, but it is for now. So later after bitcoin have affected they surely money will slowly replace by bitcoin then it will affect all world to use this kind of payment. Just wait for that time to booming then all people will be affected where the new era is coming

There is a common misconception that money is not value, because it can not be eaten etc. But, all value is one individual's preference for one thing over another, which includes money. Therefore, money is value just like other things.

I agree that value is subjective, means utility and can be compared on the basis of an individual's preference of one thing over another. But I don't agree that money can be judged that simple. One of the fundamentals of the subjective value theory that you make reference to here is the notion of diminishing marginal utility. Money apparently doesn't conform to this notion, which can be explained only by the fact that money doesn't possess value per se. It is just an intermediary for things that can be bought with it...

False again. Money is value, the proof is that some person at some point prefers the money to the thing. This happens every time someone sells something or a service. In a money economy, it in fact happens every time a trade is done, so it is exactly as common as a non-money transfer. A trade is normally a good or service one way, and money the other way.

This is not a proof (of money having value per se). Though I was hoping that you would address the issue that I raised in my post (since that would be a proof). I mean, the compliance (or lack thereof) between the notion of money having value as such and the law of diminishing marginal utility...
legendary
Activity: 1512
Merit: 1005
Money is pure value.


Yes money is a pure value, but it is for now. So later after bitcoin have affected they surely money will slowly replace by bitcoin then it will affect all world to use this kind of payment. Just wait for that time to booming then all people will be affected where the new era is coming

There is a common misconception that money is not value, because it can not be eaten etc. But, all value is one individual's preference for one thing over another, which includes money. Therefore, money is value just like other things.

I agree that value is subjective, means utility and can be compared on the basis of an individual's preference of one thing over another. But I don't agree that money can be judged that simple. One of the fundamentals of the subjective value theory that you make reference to here is the notion of diminishing marginal utility. Money apparently doesn't conform to this notion, which can be explained only by the fact that money doesn't possess value per se. It is just an intermediary for things that can be bought with it...

False again. Money is value, the proof is that some person at some point prefers the money to the thing. This happens every time someone sells something or a service. In a money economy, it in fact happens every time a trade is done, so it is exactly as common as a non-money transfer. A trade is normally a good or service one way, and money the other way.
legendary
Activity: 3514
Merit: 1280
English ⬄ Russian Translation Services
Money is pure value.


Yes money is a pure value, but it is for now. So later after bitcoin have affected they surely money will slowly replace by bitcoin then it will affect all world to use this kind of payment. Just wait for that time to booming then all people will be affected where the new era is coming

There is a common misconception that money is not value, because it can not be eaten etc. But, all value is one individual's preference for one thing over another, which includes money. Therefore, money is value just like other things.

I agree that value is subjective, means utility and can be compared on the basis of an individual's preference of one thing over another. But I don't agree that money can be judged that simple. One of the fundamentals of the subjective value theory that you make reference to here is the notion of diminishing marginal utility. Money apparently doesn't conform to this notion, which can be explained only by the assumption that money doesn't possess value per se. It is just an intermediary for (or, rather, into) things that can be bought with it...
legendary
Activity: 1512
Merit: 1005
Money is pure value.


Yes money is a pure value, but it is for now. So later after bitcoin have affected they surely money will slowly replace by bitcoin then it will affect all world to use this kind of payment. Just wait for that time to booming then all people will be affected where the new era is coming

There is a common misconception that money is not value, because it can not be eaten etc. But, all value is one individual's preference for one thing over another, which includes money. Therefore, money is value just like other things.
legendary
Activity: 1834
Merit: 1008
Money is pure value.


Yes money is a pure value, but it is for now. So later after bitcoin have affected they surely money will slowly replace by bitcoin then it will affect all world to use this kind of payment. Just wait for that time to booming then all people will be affected where the new era is coming
legendary
Activity: 1512
Merit: 1005
Money is pure value.
rif
member
Activity: 118
Merit: 102
It's time to move on trade relations.
sr. member
Activity: 364
Merit: 252
I pay 6-7%  comission on everything I buy, that is 3-4% to Mastercard, 2% to the bank and another 1% sometimes the merchant to validate the transaction, so sometimes it can be even 10% (+ 25% VAT of course as the government likes to steal too).

You, as the cardholder, pay Mastercard a commission when you make a purchase?

Is that normal in your country?

In North America, I haven't heard of a credit card that charges the cardholder unless they have a running balance - but that is an interest charge rather than a commission.  The vendor pays the commission here.

People often pay an annual fee. It all depends on which bank you go through. With my MasterCard, there is no annual fee, but when I was younger and building my credit, I couldn't qualify for a MasterCard without the fee.

Yeah that's true.  The basic credit cards usually have no fee.  The cards with higher rewards and protection usually do have a fee, but the bank waives the fee if you maintain a minimum balance.

I think my card is otherwise $99/year.  I'd have a very different view on it if I was incurring fees.  As it stands, I pay no fees and receive 1% cash back on all purchases.
full member
Activity: 210
Merit: 100
I pay 6-7%  comission on everything I buy, that is 3-4% to Mastercard, 2% to the bank and another 1% sometimes the merchant to validate the transaction, so sometimes it can be even 10% (+ 25% VAT of course as the government likes to steal too).

You, as the cardholder, pay Mastercard a commission when you make a purchase?

Is that normal in your country?

In North America, I haven't heard of a credit card that charges the cardholder unless they have a running balance - but that is an interest charge rather than a commission.  The vendor pays the commission here.

People often pay an annual fee. It all depends on which bank you go through. With my MasterCard, there is no annual fee, but when I was younger and building my credit, I couldn't qualify for a MasterCard without the fee.
legendary
Activity: 3514
Merit: 1280
English ⬄ Russian Translation Services

Now you live in some hole, so that you care not to say where exactly, but this in no case prevents you from making sweeping allegations, which, as it turns out, are not pertinent to the rest of the world? Good for you...

Good that you live in a country where you can be proud tolerate the government. Where I live i`m only getting robbed 80% of my income and get nothing back in return but shitty government services, more robbery taxing and lies inspiration, and propaganda "news".

Plus you get the 4-5 year crazy ritual where everyone goes into a box and puts a stamp on a toilet paper ,in a ceremony , invoking the God of the Governments, and praying to it to make things better.

Very crazy occult ritual this democracy is.  Shocked

But you can always renounce your citizenship, I guess. Do you live in France? If so, some prominent characters have already done just that. So what are you waiting for?

No i`m not from france. And go where exactly? There is no cm^2 on earth that is not claimed by a fucking government. They even fight amongs those tiny islands in the pacific with 1-2 km^2, they are everywhere.

Some are better some are worse, but all of them want to control you and to steal your money, so there is not much alternative.

It will always be a matter of choosing between the two (actually many) evils. Indeed, it is much easier to blame a government, or aliens, or whatever rather than actually change something in your own life...
sr. member
Activity: 1148
Merit: 252
Undeads.com - P2E Runner Game

Now you live in some hole, so that you care not to say where exactly, but this in no case prevents you from making sweeping allegations, which, as it turns out, are not pertinent to the rest of the world? Good for you...

Good that you live in a country where you can be proud tolerate the government. Where I live i`m only getting robbed 80% of my income and get nothing back in return but shitty government services, more robbery taxing and lies inspiration, and propaganda "news".

Plus you get the 4-5 year crazy ritual where everyone goes into a box and puts a stamp on a toilet paper ,in a ceremony , invoking the God of the Governments, and praying to it to make things better.

Very crazy occult ritual this democracy is.  Shocked

But you can always renounce your citizenship, I guess. Do you live in France? If so, some prominent characters have already done just that. So what are you waiting for?

No i`m not from france. And go where exactly? There is no cm^2 on earth that is not claimed by a fucking government. They even fight amongs those tiny islands in the pacific with 1-2 km^2, they are everywhere.

Some are better some are worse, but all of them want to control you and to steal your money, so there is not much alternative.
legendary
Activity: 3514
Merit: 1280
English ⬄ Russian Translation Services

Now you live in some hole, so that you care not to say where exactly, but this in no case prevents you from making sweeping allegations, which, as it turns out, are not pertinent to the rest of the world? Good for you...

Good that you live in a country where you can be proud tolerate the government. Where I live i`m only getting robbed 80% of my income and get nothing back in return but shitty government services, more robbery taxing and lies inspiration, and propaganda "news".

Plus you get the 4-5 year crazy ritual where everyone goes into a box and puts a stamp on a toilet paper ,in a ceremony , invoking the God of the Governments, and praying to it to make things better.

Very crazy occult ritual this democracy is.  Shocked

But you can always renounce your citizenship, I guess. Do you live in France? If so, some prominent characters have already done just that (after their government imposed heavy taxes on the rich). So what are you waiting for?
sr. member
Activity: 1148
Merit: 252
Undeads.com - P2E Runner Game

Now you live in some hole, so that you care not to say where exactly, but this in no case prevents you from making sweeping allegations, which, as it turns out, are not pertinent to the rest of the world? Good for you...

Good that you live in a country where you can be proud tolerate the government. Where I live i`m only getting robbed 80% of my income and get nothing back in return but shitty government services, more robbery taxing and lies inspiration, and propaganda "news".

Plus you get the 4-5 year crazy ritual where everyone goes into a box and puts a stamp on a toilet paper ,in a ceremony , invoking the God of the Governments, and praying to it to make things better.

Very crazy occult ritual this democracy is.  Shocked
sr. member
Activity: 1148
Merit: 252
Undeads.com - P2E Runner Game

You're not going to get a disagreement from me on not having tax, but that world is far from the socialist one we live in.  There are some things that I don't mind contributing to, like infrastructure, transportation systems, renewable energy, etc (all of that can also be done privately).  These are things that directly or indirectly benefit pretty much everyone, and making it more efficient would help everyone.  However a lot of the other bullshit responsibilities seem to fall under the government umbrella that I don't care for, and which are extremely expensive.

Indeed, i`m only annoyed with income tax, forced-by-gun-to-your-head-or-prison type social security and health care, and commercial/adminitrative regulation such as forced-by-gun-to-your-head-or-prison type accounting in business, and playing by government daddy's rules.

Eliminate those, and they you are left with property tax, tariffs, and other excises, which if it's pluralized, not 1 shitty government service on monopoly like electricity companies government run and cause always powerouts, then it would be very close to minarchism Smiley

After that we shall see, but man the income tax and the regulations are just a bullshit tyrranical and totally useless things  Angry
Pages:
Jump to: