2 ms·

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, you

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...