3 ms·

I agree about the money not equaling wealth, but please explain the part about the overhead of money not being worth while. Money has value because we can rece

I agree about the money not equaling wealth, but please explain the part about the overhead of money not being worth while. Money has value because we can receive it in return for value we've created (a sort of universal value system), and transform it into another form of value or wealth. I don't see how it could ever get to the point where it's not worth having a universal medium of wealth. If it did get to that point, we'd have to resort to bartering. The only alternative is to have EVERYTHING be free - not just information products, but physical products, like cars, houses, and services. And if communist countries are any clue, this isn't the best way to do things.

yters 19y ago
This definitely can't happen with material objects. I'd say things are different in the information realm, though. The faster, more fine grained, and more dynamic a system is, the less money makes sense, since the cost of managing the money comes closer to the value of the money being managed.
- davidw 19y ago
  "Micropayments don't work", in other words, "because of high transaction costs".
- dkokelley 19y ago
  It seems like this logic is self-defeating. How can the cost of managing money remain the same if all other electronic products and services are going down?