-
OK. Go to a shop. Try and buy something with money. If they give you the thing in return for the money, then the currency is evidently working as intended as a universal medium of exchange.
Isn't that money rather then fiat currency though, money has been around for bloody ages longer than fiat. I took the convince me it works comment as money has become so massively unequally distributed that it's obviously not working for everyone.
snottyotter-
Money in the non-fiat-currency sense is just ad-hoc credit or debt, though.
At least, according to some book I read.Anyway, worriers about the immaterial nature of fiat currencies seem unlikely to be much happier with everyone continually issuing their own currencies in the form of tabs, tally sticks and reputation.
-
I took the convince me it works comment as money has become so massively unequally distributed that it's obviously not working for everyone.
I missed your post as I wrote my reply on the same point.
I see 3 problems:
1) Unequal distribution, particularly where originally created via colonial activities etc and to some degree still maintained.
2) Depletion/destruction of natural resources to convert to money/currency/value/whatever.
3) It's a trust/confidence based system. Believe it'll be fine forever and it'll be fine forever.(Edit: spooky we both used buying crisps as an example).
-
Isn't that money rather then fiat currency though, money has been around for bloody ages longer than fiat
To an extent, yes. But when money was made of gold, silver and copper and had an intrinsic value (i.e. the value of the materials it was made from) it wasn't a fiat currency so it sort of made sense. A fiat currency has no intrinsic value, and so the only reason the cash in my wallet or the electronic figures in my bank account have any value is due to the collective self-delusion inherent in a fiat currency. Despite the fact that it is inherently worthless, it still works as a universal medium of exchange.
I took the convince me it works comment as money has become so massively unequally distributed that it's obviously not working for everyone.
Certainly not what I meant it to mean. The point I was making is that a fiat currency works despite the fact that 'money', as a concept, is in fact worthless. If everyone stopped believing that money is valuable, the whole thing would fall apart. It only works because we all agree it works, and because it practice it does work. The distribution of wealth isn't dependent upon whether you have a currency with an inherent value, a currency linked to something with value (such as a gold standard currency), or a fiat currency. That's a function of the prevailing political and economic system. You can have massive disparities in wealth in any economic system, regardless of whether it uses a fiat currency. Feudal medieval states were hardly fair, meritocratic or just but they managed that just fine without a fiat currency.
useless
rhb
Brommers
OK. Go to a shop. Try and buy something with money. If they give you the thing in return for the money, then the currency is evidently working as intended as a universal medium of exchange.
Indeed. But saying that a given system isn't perfect isn't a particularly productive use of bandwidth unless you have a genuine alternative. Besides, your comment that 'the path our leaders are dragging us down isn't a good one imo', while I'd agree with it entirely, does seem to be conflating the use of a fiat currency with political policies on the economy generally.