4 ms·

Are you saying the switch from paper ledgers to computerized ledgers was the result of economists? If so, I'd argue that the switch is the result of convenienc

Are you saying the switch from paper ledgers to computerized ledgers was the result of economists? If so, I'd argue that the switch is the result of convenience and accuracy.

digi_owl 9y ago
No. What i am saying that anthropological findings suggests that some kind of debt tracking was the default mode of transactions within a village in ancient times, not the barter fantasy that economics cling to.
- maxerickson 9y ago
  A fun hybrid example: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rai_stones https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rai_stones Ownership of the stones was maintained by oral history rather than by possession.
  - jacobush 9y ago
    A public, distributed ledger updated in consensus by the nodes repeating and storing it? With the proof of work that you could retell the full owner history, checksummed by verse.
- MrRadar 9y ago
  I'm assuming you're referencing David Graeber? His book on this subject, Debt: The First 5000 Years, is a very good read (and very good food for thought) but as a non-expert in both anthropology and economics I'm not sure how much veracity to assign it.
- JumpCrisscross 9y ago
  > not the barter fantasy that economics cling to What’s your source for economists clinging to the barter hypothesis? Even my high school economics taught the barter hypothesis was an incorrect assumption of Adam Smith’s, and that credit is the father of modern money.
  - tomjakubowski 9y ago
    Judging by my own high school economics teacher, the textbook we used for that course, and the free "core econ" textbook that was recently published online, yours may have had unorthodox views for a high school economics teacher. "Core Econ", chapter 10.1 "Money and wealth" Money makes more exchanges possible because it’s not hard to find someone who will be happy to have your money (in exchange for something), whereas unloading a large quantity of apples could be a problem. This is why barter plays a limited role in virtually all modern economies Amusingly, they cite Graeber's Debt Ch 2, despite implying exactly the thing that chapter argued against: that barter was the primary vehicle for exchanging goods in pre-money societies.
    - JumpCrisscross 9y ago
      > yours may have had unorthodox views We read Greg Mankiw's Principles of Economics [1]. It's the Harvard undergraduate text--orthodox as they come. Saying barter plays a limited role in virtually all economies, modern and historic, is different from saying it was money's progenitor, as Adam Smith wrongly speculated. The former is true. The latter is not. TL; DR Money and banking isn't always taught in introductory economics. The "bartering noble savage" myth is not something economists cling to. [1] https://www.amazon.com/Principles-Economics-7th-Mankiws/dp/128516587X/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1506804133&sr=1-1&keywords=greg+mankiw https://www.amazon.com/Principles-Economics-7th-Mankiws/dp/1...

Are you saying the switch from paper ledgers to computerized ledgers was the result of economists? If so, I'd argue that the switch is the result of convenience and accuracy.

digi_owl 9y ago

No. What i am saying that anthropological findings suggests that some kind of debt tracking was the default mode of transactions within a village in ancient times, not the barter fantasy that economics cling to.

maxerickson 9y ago
A fun hybrid example: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rai_stones https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rai_stones Ownership of the stones was maintained by oral history rather than by possession.
- jacobush 9y ago
  A public, distributed ledger updated in consensus by the nodes repeating and storing it? With the proof of work that you could retell the full owner history, checksummed by verse.
MrRadar 9y ago
I'm assuming you're referencing David Graeber? His book on this subject, Debt: The First 5000 Years, is a very good read (and very good food for thought) but as a non-expert in both anthropology and economics I'm not sure how much veracity to assign it.
JumpCrisscross 9y ago
> not the barter fantasy that economics cling to What’s your source for economists clinging to the barter hypothesis? Even my high school economics taught the barter hypothesis was an incorrect assumption of Adam Smith’s, and that credit is the father of modern money.
- tomjakubowski 9y ago
  Judging by my own high school economics teacher, the textbook we used for that course, and the free "core econ" textbook that was recently published online, yours may have had unorthodox views for a high school economics teacher. "Core Econ", chapter 10.1 "Money and wealth" Money makes more exchanges possible because it’s not hard to find someone who will be happy to have your money (in exchange for something), whereas unloading a large quantity of apples could be a problem. This is why barter plays a limited role in virtually all modern economies Amusingly, they cite Graeber's Debt Ch 2, despite implying exactly the thing that chapter argued against: that barter was the primary vehicle for exchanging goods in pre-money societies.
  - JumpCrisscross 9y ago
    > yours may have had unorthodox views We read Greg Mankiw's Principles of Economics [1]. It's the Harvard undergraduate text--orthodox as they come. Saying barter plays a limited role in virtually all economies, modern and historic, is different from saying it was money's progenitor, as Adam Smith wrongly speculated. The former is true. The latter is not. TL; DR Money and banking isn't always taught in introductory economics. The "bartering noble savage" myth is not something economists cling to. [1] https://www.amazon.com/Principles-Economics-7th-Mankiws/dp/128516587X/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1506804133&sr=1-1&keywords=greg+mankiw https://www.amazon.com/Principles-Economics-7th-Mankiws/dp/1...