 |
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|
Flubber
|
|
With a view of the Rockies
Aug 2000 time: 22:21
|
|
Lets get more basic.
Money (as in cash) is a unit of exchange that allows easier exchanges of things of different value. I might barter 2 chickens for an hour of your labor. But instead I give you $20 which you use to get 1 chicken and then the other $10 for other things.
Even in a kidicious society where everyone was paid the same wage, there should be a use of money as a unit of exchange. (assuming people are permitted to freely buy things and are not merely assigned commodities)
Now time value of money. . .. you work for me today and expect $100 today. Instead I tell you I will give you the $100 next week or next year or next decade. Even assuming zero inflation, there is value to having use of that money NOW as opposed to later.
In current economies this value can be reflected in the difference in the charged rate of interest on loans and the inflation rate( the real interest rate).
even if you eliminated money, I would surmise that there is a time value of work. Labor now would be worth more than an equivalent amount of labor at a distant future time
But you know all this stuff kid, you just choose to ignore it.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Flubber
|
|
With a view of the Rockies
Aug 2000 time: 22:21
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Kidicious
I was refering to a post that I did not read. Not yours. |
How exactly do you refer to something you do not read?
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Shogun Gunner

|
 |
Potomac Falls, Virginia
Oct 2000 time: 00:21
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Kidicious
It's not at all. It's all very simple. Does money create money? Does borrowing money or buying stock create anything. Of course not. |
In Economics the perception is as strong, or even stronger, than the reality. Its speculation. If you are asking if "money creates money", well of course not.
However, I think you are oversimplying this topic. The action of one economic agent has an effect on the marketplace. In this case, investment made by one agent, allows another agent to obtain the captial (at a price) and create economic activity (start a business, whatever). After some time, the first economic agent get his captial back and a profit. From his perspective, if he were a real simpleton, he would declare, "By golly, my money just made me more money!"
This fluidity of capital allows economic activity to occur where it otherwise would not.
Now, there is a debate between the "zero sum game crowd" and "perpetual growth crew" but that's for another thread....
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Kidicious
|
 |
Diety of Kidiverse
Mar 2003 time: 21:21
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Shogun Gunner
In Economics the perception is as strong, or even stronger, than the reality. Its speculation. If you are asking if "money creates money", well of course not.
However, I think you are oversimplying this topic. The action of one economic agent has an effect on the marketplace. In this case, investment made by one agent, allows another agent to obtain the captial (at a price) and create economic activity (start a business, whatever). After some time, the first economic agent get his captial back and a profit. From his perspective, if he were a real simpleton, he would declare, "By golly, my money just made me more money!"
This fluidity of capital allows economic activity to occur where it otherwise would not.
Now, there is a debate between the "zero sum game crowd" and "perpetual growth crew" but that's for another thread.... |
But it's not just the money holder's perspective. It's the perspective of a society that justifies capitalism.
If work creates all value, as we have agreed, and money is compensated (for whatever, if anything, that it does), then you have to have a justification for that. The concept of the time value of money serves as that justification, and as I have said, it's nothing but smoke and mirrors.
edit: because it completely ignores the fact that the only value created was created by those who produced the goods and services consumed or those who will produce those goods and services in the future.
Last edited by Kidicious on 07-10-2004 at 02:04
|
|
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|
Flubber
|
|
With a view of the Rockies
Aug 2000 time: 22:21
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Shogun Gunner
I don't see how you can get around the points that Flubber, myself and others have made in this thread.
|
He doesn't try to get around my posts . .. he simply ignores inconvenient realities. I've lost count of the number of directly on point posts that he fails to address.
Once you get to know kid you will understand. he posts variations on the same theme (capital is valueless. rent is an unfair tax or interest should be illegal) from time to time. I still find it fun to chime in from time to time
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Kidicious
|
 |
Diety of Kidiverse
Mar 2003 time: 21:21
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Shogun Gunner
I have not agreed that labor is the only input to price (or value). Labor is a signficiant, large input to value/cost. However, I have maintained that speculation and lending assets/capital for a fee also contribute to value/cost.
|
Flip-flopper. I specifically asked you if charging you an interest rate created value, and you said "of course not"
quote:
I think the real question is what I semi-seriously posed before which is whether the economic system is a zero-sum game (for every winner there is a loser) or if there is growth (the economic pie grows over time).
|
I'm not arguing that it's a zero sum game. Just the opposite of course. The sum is greater than the parts. Everyone knows that I believe this.
quote:
I don't see how you can get around the points that Flubber, myself and others have made in this thread. Since I don't know you very well, I'm assuming this is a bit of "tongue in cheek". 
|
I ignore Flubber. Isn't that obvious? He's quite annoying.
quote:
I'm not against communists, but really, how many threads have there been just at Poly about the failures in communism. You might not like capitalism, but it's an established economic system that works. Your tenet that "money doesn't make money" flies in the face of most economic theory. Who knows, maybe everyone else is wrong and you are right -- you could be the next John Maynard Keynes! |
You're flip-flopping again.
This isn't really about communism. In fact the first person to call the concept of the time value of money magic was Keynes, and he was no communist.
|
|
|  |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:21. Apolyton Time is 00:21. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|