About
Content
Store
Forum

Rebirth of Reason
War
People
Archives
Objectivism

Post to this threadMark all messages in this thread as readMark all messages in this thread as unread


Post 0

Friday, May 4, 2007 - 12:09amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Here's a little educational animation a friend turned me onto.  It's called "Money as Debt". 

Your usual educational video on money is quite boring.  This one is quite not so. 

I would be very interested in hearing some reactions to this.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-9050474362583451279&q=money+as+debt&hl=en


Post 1

Friday, May 4, 2007 - 5:57pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
I will agree this was much more interesting than your typical educational video- and I did learn quite a bit from it, in fact.
Gotta go to dinner now, but will post some further thoughts on it when I get back.


Post 2

Friday, May 4, 2007 - 10:09pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Of course money is debt!  For every asset, there is a liability.  For all incomes, there are expenses.  To complain about "money as debt" is to rail against "inventory as expenses." Would you also wish away "cost of sales" as a line item?

This is anti-capitalist rightwing populism.

See my post in RoR Economics about the Ideas of E. C. Riegel.


Post 3

Saturday, May 5, 2007 - 12:16amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
I will agree this was much more interesting than your typical educational video- and I did learn quite a bit from it, in fact.
Gotta go to dinner now, but will post some further thoughts on it when I get back.
I look forward to your response. 

At least you actually watched the video, unlike certain all-knowing others who could not be so "bothered" and who opted, instead, to comment soley on the basis of presumptuous prejudices.

(Edited by Jeremy M. LeRay on 5/05, 12:16am)


Post 4

Saturday, May 5, 2007 - 12:18amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Of course money is debt!  For every asset, there is a liability.  For all incomes, there are expenses.  To complain about "money as debt" is to rail against "inventory as expenses." Would you also wish away "cost of sales" as a line item?

This is anti-capitalist rightwing populism.
(psssst... try actually watching the video next time.  It's not what you presume it to be.)


Sanction: 4, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 4, No Sanction: 0
Post 5

Saturday, May 5, 2007 - 6:33amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Mr. JMLR: "(psssst... try actually watching the video next time.  It's not what you presume it to be.)"

I did try.  I watched as much as I could stand.  Just as the history of Rome was flawed in that other video, so, too, did this one, misstate the history of goldsmith banks and then conflate that with a swiping gloss past 200 years. 

Based on your challenge now, I fastforwarded to the 20:47 mark and found the same thesis restated.  The girl needs a hammer; Dad hands her a picture of a hammer.   "That only works at the bank, Dad."  Yes, it does, because money is an abstraction


===>  Edit:  Ah!  I got to the 33:00 mark and found LETS Local Exchange Trading Systems.  Now, there's an idea that works!  More would be nice... but... alas... back to the evils of banking....  Oh, well...    Jeremy, if you have any experience with this, post to the Riegel topic.  It would be greatly appreciated, at least by me.

Here is an analogy.  Imagine that it is 480 BC and we are Ionian Greeks.  You are railing against coins as money.  "Here," you say, "is a coin from Klazomenae showing a fish.  But it is not a fish.  You cannot eat the coin and you cannot even trade it for a fish because one whole fish -- which might have been worth this coin when it was struck -- now has a different price.  Why?  Because merchants in the marketplace conspire with tyrants in the assembly to pass off the fiction that silver is money.  We know that fish, cows, grapes, geese, and ther other commodities can be traded in the agora.  But unlike those things, silver coins are not really geese, grapes, etc."

What is really valuable to me is my time.  It is limited.  I went through this Bilderberger Money Conspiracy thirty years ago.  Once is enough.

Your other posts on RoR show that you are literate and intelligent, and so on this issue, your continued research will bring you closer to the truth. 

(Edited by Michael E. Marotta on 5/05, 7:45am)


Post 6

Monday, May 7, 2007 - 4:12pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Sweet!  I saw this documentary about 2 weeks ago and was thinking of posting it here.  It is very fascinating.  Once it starts posing solutions it starts breaking down.  But it's a must see in my book.

One of its criticisms is against the gold standard as reliable currency.  But with a simple scale, measuring cup, and water small transfers could be made full proof (as far as my limited chemistry knowledge and sources suggest).  A calculator would help too.

Another criticism of the gold standard is that those with no gold would be penniless, while those with collections would be millionaires.  But this is short sighted.  If people become more aware of the problem  it is at least tampered.

One of the solutions proposed is an alternative money where the standard dollar would represent one hour of labor.  I figure if this was used far beyond the big collapse, we'd only be in for yet another.  I love this idea of alternative money, though.  There are some interesting ideas out there.  Though I'd wager most are socialist bent.

Mr. Marotta,

I looked up both the money conspiracy mentioned as well as the economist on wikipedia with no luck.  Mind giving some links so I can get the gist of the two?


Post 7

Thursday, May 17, 2007 - 3:57pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
One of the solutions proposed is an alternative money where the standard dollar would represent one hour of labor.

One hour of who's labor?   Would we each be issued different currency, but paid the same number of standard dollars for our standard 40 hour work weeks?

This had to have come from UCal Berkely.  Is there such a thing as a standard hour of labor?    I wish.

HIJACK ALERT, WITH SIDE OF STRAWMAN----

A few years ago, I was watching a talk by Dr. Laura Tyson on CSpan, given at UCalBerkley.  It was notable for her admission "nothing we did."    But, it was also notable for the complaint of one of the local Berkloids after her talk, who complained that the ratio of income of the top quintile in America to the bottom quintile in America was "8.9:1"

I was stunned.

Imagine if it was still pre-standard dollar days, and incomes were permitted to vary at all in America.  Let's assume that the distribution of incomes was perfectly uniform between $0/yr (ie, my nonworking 14 yr old son), and MAXINCOME.    I'll even allow MAXINCOME as a throwaway concept to the HueyLong inspired Berkloids still out there bobbing adrift in Hegels wreckage.   We can make it any value that the emperor wanabee Berkloids think is 'fair.'

By 'distribution was perfectly uniform', I mean, incomes varied, but the same number of people make $0/yr as make $1/yr as make .... $MAXINCOME$/yr.  A perfectly 'flat' distribution.   Not a Gaussian curve, and not even just 'white noise' random, but perfectly flat and uniform.

What would the ratio of income be of the top quintile to the bottom quintile?   Exactly 9.0:1

This is easy enough to imagine: the bottom 20% would on average be earning 10% of MAXINCOME, and the top 20% would on average be earning 90% of MAXINCOME.    The number that the Berkloid was whining about was less regressive than even this perfectly flat distribution.  (!)

When I asked some lefty friends what was wrong with this analysis, they feigned ignorance of the math, but told me that it relied on an 'imperfect/non-optimum distribution of incomes.'   (?????)   I guess that one is in the back of some lefty holy scripture somewhere.   "Sociologists believe that the optimum distribution of incomes in Society is ...."

What?  One in which the ratio of the bottom quintile to the top quintile is a 'fair' 1:1?

To achieve that, or even approach that, it is necessary to enforce INCOME=CONSTANT=AWI across the board.    The lefty redistributive war is with the Tyranny of Magnitude.

Which is why the 'standard dollar would represent on hour of labor' reminded me of this.   

But hey, wait a minute... the top 10% 'gets' 19 times what the bottom 10% 'gets' in my unfair distribution...the top 1% 'gets' 199 times what the bottom 1% 'get' in my unfair distribution...
 
These are fun facts that the Berkloids can use to easily flamboozle the mathematically illiterate.
 
I think this could be the Berkloids latest remarketing campaign.    While they are selling it, I am going to wonder out loud: try to name one thing that any living human being has ever done while acting as a member of or on behalf of a quintile?  We don't even pile onto quintile trains once a year to be counted.   We should at least get T-Shirts.   Nada.
 
I've been asking this question for maybe ten years, it remains unanswered.  Just one thing will satisfy me, so that I can understand why I pay taxes to a federal gov't who funds a Census bureau to track "quintile" statistics.

regards,
Fred
 
 






Post to this thread


User ID Password or create a free account.