Is currency the biggest con in the world? You're told something has value so it does, but what value does it truly have? It has no set value, so it cannot be truly defined. It will constantly fluctuate, so it'll be worth less or more.
People will kill for money, sell out their fellow human beings for money, slave away their days for it so they can buy useless things they really don't need to either appease themselves or others whose opinions should not matter.
It's not even the kikes that are to blame for this since currency was around for a long time. I'm not rich, but at the same time I'm not poor but I have my own garden, know people that I can trade labour to for meat or vegetables or really anything foodage wise. Barter systems still kind of exist where I live (in a rural area where most people already own their land/have farms/etc) and no one minds doing a helpful thing for a neighbour and receiving honey or meat or vegetables or what-have-you. No money involved. I don't even live in some weird hippie commune either.
What a strange thing money is. What do you think?
Are you 12?
>>907348
No.
>>907343
It's backed in violence, instead of gold. You have to pay your taxes in money or aggressive means will be taken against you. This goes for all of the other laws regarding money, as well. The money is good because the people with military power say it's good.
>>907343
What if I want/need something to barter with someone, but I have nothing they want? If I need whatever it is, and I'm desperate, force is an attractive alternative. It's just a simple tool of exchange. People need to stop being so edgy on money.
Or go read Atlas Shrugged's money speech. There's a lot of upper class dick sucking in that book, but Francisco D'anconia's money speech is pretty baller.
>>907351
Alright then I'll bite. Barter only work in small agricultural communities, where the primary goods available food, labor, and artisanal goods, once you have larger more robust trade systems, barter breaks down due to inefficiency and differences in values.
As an example. Farmer Tom want to go down to the town and buy 4 horses from Horse Breeder John. The only good Farmer Tom has access too is lettuce from his farm, however Horse Breeder John doesn't value lettuce highly as he's already traded 2 horses to Farmer Moe for all the lettuce he could ever want. Farmer Tom doesn't have any other goods that John would want, and at this point John either is unwilling to take Tom's lettuce, or wants so much lettuce that's it's not economically feasible to trade that much, either because it would ruin Tom economically due to not having enough goods to trade for other products or because the amount is so high he's have a hard time getting to market. Now how do we solve this problem? Well Tom could trade his labor, but John might not need additional labor, or it might make it so that Tom doesn't have enough time to both work for John and tend his farm. He could try bartering with others for goods John actually values, and this is where inefficiency sets in, as the value of Tom's lettuce fluctuates with each trader and he has to do extra leg work to do all this trading.
This is where currency comes in.
>>907343
USD has value. It does not have innate value.
It's value is based on the united states economy, millitary power, and Law of the united states which is backed by governing forces.
You could say that the value of the dollar is artificial, but it is not worthless.
>>907431
Currency provides a single object of uniform value that all traders can use in exchange of their labor or goods, and it's usually small so that large amounts of it can be traded easily. It also prevents people from having to run around trying to trade this good for that good so that they can get the goods they actually need, instead Tom can now sell his lettuce on the common market, get a packet of currency for it, and then trade that currency to John for his horses, and John is free to further spend that currency on whatever he needs, rather that being stuck with whatever goods those who need horses are willing to trade with him. Over all currency exchange is just a much more efficient system.
Yes the value of currency does fluctuate, but so does the value of any other good or service, since demand and supply are never constant and currency, technically being another trade good, is subject to the same laws, the difference being that currency's value is consistent from trader to trade based on it's overall value.
Take a fucking Economics course. Money is vital in a few key ways -
Means of exchange, self explanatory
Unit of account - You don't think of your labour being worth 2 chickens an hour, or a chicken being worth 3 and a half bushels of corn. Having currency simplifies accounting for value.
Store of value - You can't store labour hours for future spending, and stuff like carrots or apples rot after a while. Money doesn't rot - you can store it for future use much more easily.
>>907434
continued
As for people killing and slaving for currency, that's not different from other goods either, people will kill for food or a man's nice clothes, the difference with currency is that it's not the end goal but a means to get what the thief actually wants, and people will slave for money for the same reason a farmer tends his farm all day. Money provides the means for the worker to gain access to the good he needs to live, just as the farmers lands provide him with his livelihood.
I think you are misattributing the common faults of man, greed, avarice, deceit, etc., to money, though money is not the root of these feelings. Men have always lusted after the possessions of other men or dreamed of greener pastures long before currency ever came into the picture.
>>907431
Barter still works perfectly fine and the whole scenario you laid out was pointless.
The main difference between bartering with a currency standard and with it is; while bartering when a currency is already widely used the value of the bartering item is first converted to it's value in currency. Virtually every bartering item already has it's fiat equivalent. If there was no currency in place the value of something would be harder to determine.
![mike_maloney[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/VwM7ubK.jpg "mike_maloney[1].jpg")
Mike Maloney is here to educate you inbred fucks:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DyV0OfU3-FU
>>907435
And also, money definitely has fucking value, especially if you're talking about USD. Sure, it may not be intrinsic, but I know that a $1 bill can buy me a candy bar or an apple or a bag of chips at a vending machine, and it will for the foreseeable future. That's pretty set value. Inflation/deflation are unfortunate side effects, but if you live in a nation with a solid central bank [spoiler]i.e. USA[/spoiler] there really isn't much to worry about.
>>907447
This can change quickly as it did in the 70's and 80's when dollar inflation was above 10% for several years.
>>907449
But the bills still have a set value if it changes. If you got rid of money tomorrow how would you determine the value of things? How many snickers bars or pairs of shoes do I need to trade for a gallon of gas? What it my job doesn't produce any consumable goods, such as an office clerk or computer tech, what are you suppose to trade? Barter just doesn't work well in complex economies.
It's a placeholder for goods and services so that we don't have to muck around with the nightmare of a barter system in the modern world.
>>907435
this. Hedonists need money
>>907464
You don't need to use barter, just not a currency system back by nothing which government can dilute either on purpose or by accident. A dollar backed by gold with an open accounting system or something like Bitcoin (with improvements over current issues on the block chain) where supply is controlled by computer algorithms, not crusty academics who are shit at running real economies.
Money has three functions: currency, account, and store of value. Each relies on the other, but is also independent of the other. This is not a trivial statement, in that the cold mathematics of economics does not function with dimensions that are not orthagonal to each other. Hence, “money” remains the great undefined.
Faith in sovereign power, and in the currency that it issues, is not a god like faith, but, instead, an agreement of three things: the government has a mandate to pursue certain ends, that it can accomplish those ends within the boundary of acceptable means, and that those who are governed can understand the relationship between allowed ends and acceptable means. The disintegration of anyone of these pillars creates a crisis, and their ebb and flow changes the shape and value of a monetary system.
Usually people do not question money, however, there are many, not uncommon, circumstances when they do. One of these is when facing a catastrophic moment, and the question is asked “what happens if everything goes wrong?” The answer to that question will determine the behavior. There can, for example, be hyperinflation, or a run on the banks. There can also be deflation, as people refuse to spend at all. There can be devaluation, or shortage, as people move to other currencies, or hoard commodities they fear will be in short supply.
