3 ms·

work in 2027 is more valuable? so instead of just buying a coffe, you should pay it NOW and tell the seller you will back in 2027 to get it. They will love it!

• Nokinside 9y ago
  They would love it. Anyone would love it. Especially if doing the work includes using technology. Buying your computer, phone or car now and getting it 10 years from now would be ideal for the seller.
  • swfsql 9y ago
    I got confused by your previous claim. This doesn't "hurt the economy". Yes, 2027 tends to be more productive than 2017, but this requires an increase of investment, that implies savings. Holding money allows others to use their money to invest, so you actually facilitate productivity to increase. This is "in general", since you allow more good and services to be available to be consumed by others. edit: this animation explains this coordination between savers and investors: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YaxIPPMR3fI https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YaxIPPMR3fI
    • deleted 9y ago
      [deleted]
    • Nokinside 9y ago
      >Holding money allows others to use their money to invest, That's not holding money in this context. Hoarding money is keeping cash in your house or bitcoin in your purse. The money is separated from the economy. Holding money normally means keeping it in the bank account or in cash like instruments. That's fine. Bank loans it to others who use it. You receive interest for contributing capital.
      • swfsql 9y ago
        Right, it's not exactly the same kind of "holding". But in this case also (burying the money), the economy (a free one) is not hurt. To get a view of it: what if I have chests full of gold, then before dying I take tons of them, burn and bury so no one else ever put their hands on it? Nobody is hurt. Nobody is getting less food than they would, nobody is getting less anything than they would, because even if I bury the money I have, I didn't bury any other of the goods and services that are available in the economy in any time. Because money is just a resources "coordinator's" power. If I burn mine, I'm just letting go of that power and letting someone else do it instead. Sure, saying I had all that money not stealing or anything of the sort implies ppl I'm involved with (in/directly) are so much better that I "was allowed to coordinate more"/"received a lot of money". But still, in the end, the economy is not hurt.