/biz/ - Business & Finance

>>20557535
Oeconomics
> NOT SCIENCE OR MATHEMATICS

>>20557535
All money that is easily divisible and distributable is good money.

However, money is not really the problem. It's the institutions in which it inhabits that is the problem.

Sadly, these institutions are not able to be made "rational", because rational would mean good for some, worse for others. Moreover, as people are very different in terms of financial intelligence, decisions regarding such, do also differ greatly. When you combine this bias of distribution alongside a high correlation between wealth and power, you also create a system where centralized money can only exist "fairly" when there's only one centralization. But as no one wants to give up their land and culture to unite, it leaves us with two choices:

A money that is centralized by a rational single entity (AI for instance)

Or a completely decentralized money, where darwinistic features will prevail.

You cannot have money be in the hands of entities that derive utility from it, if you do not want darwinism to dictate the distribution.

https://archive.org/details/stephen-goodson-a-history-of-central-banking-and-the-enslavement-of-mankind.org/page/47/mode/2up

>>20557535
>>20557536
>>20557537
>>20557538
tl;dr picrel

>>20557535
Perfectly good money is not something desirable because of Gresham's Law. "Bad money drives out good money from the market".

If a currency is too valuable and destined to mantain its value forever, people will never spend it.

>>20557538
It's a strange fate that most today worship usury as if there were no other way while in the past for time immemorial, the world over, people knew its nature and hated it. Indian, Semitic, and Chinese religions specifically warn against it. Aristocrats the world over were barred from handling money for fear of it.

>>20557539
I am not advocating for or against a decentralized/centralized economy.

I am just stating what I believe to be the truth regarding money.

It needs to be completely decentralized, but you'll have to live with the implications of darwinism due to difference in cognitive ability and knowledge

OR

You completely centralize money alongside a unified world, to make the distribution of wealth artificially flow towards what is believed to the unified world is most beneficial.

Already been done, bitcoin

>>20557543
And it doesn't work as money precisely because of Gresham's Law. Nobody is buying apartments or groceries with bitcoin anymore. It's basically a commodity, not money.

>>20557535
>Objectively speaking, some monies are better than others.
Wrong. No matter your trips.
ALL money is based on faith and trust

>>20557540
>If a currency is too valuable and destined to mantain its value forever, people will never spend it.
Then it's not good money retard

>>20557546
That's the point.
"Good money" such as gold as defined by the keeping of its value over time, is not actually that good for the purpose of money.

You are arguing semantics.

>>20557547
Gold not good for money? It was the primary money for most of humanity for most of history. There are only two ways it fails: when the coinage is debased by government and when a new, very large supply of gold is dumped onto the market. Otherwise it is extremely stable.

>>20557548
>It was the primary money for most of humanity for most of history.
Yes, back when there was a depression or a banking panic every 5 years. Why do you think the gold standard ended?

>>20557548
The problem is gold, and every other "thing", is not inherently valuable. It's only value is what we place on it. Just because something is rare and shiny doesn't mean it has inherent value. if the global society collapses and we're back to cave man times who the fuck will care what the price of gold is? The only things of value will be skills and knowledge and the tools and materials to build them.

>>20557545
>faith and trust
He is correct. Jesus is the best currency. Right, bros?

>>20557535
It would probably be some kind of block chain/AI hybrid that algorithmically adjusts interest rates based on economic inputs. It would not have a finite supply like gold or crypto, but it would also not be controlled by the whims of a banking elite with an agenda. It could also be programmed to prevent the pitfalls of capitalism where money concentrates in fewer and fewer hands by implementing mechanisms that break the positive feedback loops that allow this to happen.

the romans debased their gold based currency and destroyed themselves.

>>20557535
>Fiat better than gold
Austrian economists right now...

>>20557535
Imo, never have a currency based on gold. In both times it's been done on a large scale the entity in charge ended up stealing the money. The romans did it, then the USA did it. Fuck gold based currency. Leave it as a commodity.

>>>/biz/

>>20557540
If you look at history of gold price in USA during gold standard you will see that inflation was around 1%, which is perfect for all purposes. Also, people not spending money is a good thing, it means they will make better decisions(better investments) in their lives. Spending rage might give a short term boost to economy but it leads to crisis both in individual and large scale.

>>20557555
Governments stealing gold from people is not problem of a gold, but problem of having government that is too powerful. That's why I'm libertarian, because I don't want to have government that can arbitrarily decide to take my property.

>>20557535
It was not gold that led to mercantilism, it's people's wrong understanding of long term effects of mercantilism. Having a gold standard and free market policies are not mutually exclusive.

>>20557557
Why is deflation seen as so bad anyway? There should be minimal practical difference assuming most money gets invested; deflation only discourages poor investments with the return value below the deflation level.

>>20557560
Small deflation is not bad per se, but nowadays all major economies are so fragile and interdependent that even slightest deflation can cause a huge fkn crisis. Politicians, for obvious reasons, don't want to endure this short term pain to get on a healthy track and they prefer to label deflation as bad and kick the can further down the road.

>>20557560
Some of it stems from misunderstanding the great depression, but that's a long story.

But the Bank for International Settlements did an historical study a couple of years back and found that general price deflation was at worst, harmless, and, at best, even even beneficial. The real danger, they found, was asset-price deflation (e.g. stocks, house prices, etc.), particularly when said assets were bought with, or backed by, bank credit.

Elastic supply based on demand and math? you might wanna look up AMPL friend. That's exactly what you're describing.

>>20557562
“Beneficial” in what sense and for whom? Economists have bad habit of defining benefit within a narrow range while ignoring the side effects of what they propose

p.s. miss alice has an extraordinary ass and asshole, muy bueno

>>20557560
Deflation is the reward for technological innovation but retarded politicians and the debt laden economies are too retarded to understand that

Nature always wins in the end

>>20557535
the answer is amplefortg desu

>>20557539
The answer to all his questions is the dogs of House Hlaluu. By Azura, I tell you that the fingernail of a faithful Indoril is worth more than a thousand Hlaluu.

>>20557540
>If a currency is too valuable and destined to mantain its value forever, people will never spend it.
This is ABSOLUTE NONSENSE
Dollars are highly deflationary in relation to certain types of products due to advances in technology. Just look at Moor's law for computing. Dollar value consitently rises relative to computers, cell phones, tvs and all sorts of other products. Guess what, people still spend dollars to buy these products.
Stop listening to scam artists posing as economists who have brainwashed the world into believing that the money you earn must lose value. It's fucking insane and retarded.

>>20557539
The French?

>>20558941
Dollars are fiat retard. They lose value over time.
Bitcoin would be an example of a deflationary currency.

>>20559105
The absolute state of /biz/
Value is relative and it can be relative to many things simultaneously. Dollars tend to lose value relative to most things (i.e. they're generally inflationary), but the effect of advancements in technology is highly deflationary (eg the dollar gains more value than it loses relative to a given amount of computing power).
The point being that people still buy computers even though they know they could get a better computer for the same price later.

>>20559292
You are a retard.

The definition is much simple.
Printed = Fiat (potentially infinite supply)

The fact that you are railing against Gresham's Law and "economists" while typing stuff you have no clue about is ironic. Gresham's Law was written in relation to coinage and its debasement, not fiat currency like dollars.

wait a minute, where did this thread come from and why was it moved here lmao

>>20557562
this is the last post before it got moved

>>20558949
kek, thought the same

>>20559562
Having googled Gresham's Law, I don't disagree with it. The comment I responded to didn't accurately describe it though.
My point stands though: the argument that people don't spend money that isn't inflationary is nonsense.