3 ms·
I'm with you on physical value being a bad concept, but I still have to push back a bit >Money doesn't really have physical value, only speculative (you want i
by igorkraw 5y ago
I'm with you on physical value being a bad concept, but I still have to push back a bit
>Money doesn't really have physical value, only speculative (you want it because you trust that someone else will want it in the future).
And because you need it to pay your taxes in it
>Shares in public companies don't really have physical value unless you own enough to change the management. Sure you 'own' that fraction of the company and their assets, but the managers of the company don't ever have to pay you out any of it. Almost all the value of a share for most people is in its speculative value.
Nowadays the price depends mainly on that yes, but dividends are a thing, and legally (which is the only thing that matters in finance anyway since private property is also only legally a thing) you own that slice of the company and its assets. The price and the value are different
>Art generally doesn't really have physical value, the value is almost entirely in the story that goes with any specific piece. This isn't just true of modern art, being part of the story of the Mona Lisa is much more important than the aesthetic experience of looking at it (they let plebs do that for free!).
And in the tax avoidance schemes it enables
>Education certainly isn't something with physical value. Sometimes it has utility value for what you can do with it, but more often it's just something that people want you to have because it distinguishes you from people who don't have it.
Now we are getting more interesting, what's the difference between physical value and utility value? What's the difference between social value (it will make me desireable) or personal value (it will make me happy) and "physical" value?
>Insurance doesn't have physical value, it's more the value of feeling safe, which is a meme.
Only if you don't understand probabilities and risk management. Also, good luck buying a house without life insurance
Things have value because we need them (inelastic part of the supply-demand curve), things have a price because we want them (elastic part of the supply-demand curve).
- 0xbeefbeefbeef 5y agoIs requiring life insurance something that is common for buying a house? As someone who just bought a house I was never asked if I have life insurance.
- ptha 5y agoI'm from Ireland, and it was required for me to get a mortgage in order to buy an apartment. It's basically mortgage protection insurance - This is a particular type of life assurance taken out for the term of the mortgage and designed to pay it off on the death of the borrower or joint borrower https://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/housing/owning_a_home/buying_a_home/mortgage_protection.html#le8d6e https://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/housing/owning_a_home/...
- kybernetikos 5y ago> since private property is also only legally a thing This is a particularly interesting thing to point out in this context - property ownership is a meme itself. > Things have value because we need them (inelastic part of the supply-demand curve), things have a price because we want them (elastic part of the supply-demand curve). Incidentally while it's an interesting distinction, I don't agree with your comment on need/value want/price. I value lots of things I don't need. Humans are creatures that value things, things that are valued are valuable. > Only if you don't understand probabilities and risk management. Yeah, you're probably right on that. I could maybe try to claim that probabilities and risk management are memes themselves...
- shard 5y ago> Incidentally while it's an interesting distinction, I don't agree with your comment on need/value want/price. I value lots of things I don't need. Humans are creatures that value things, things that are valued are valuable. It sounds like there is a disagreement on definition of "need". Perhaps yours is closer to "will physically die if not present", and the parent poster's is "somewhere on Maslow's hierarchy of needs".
- igorkraw 5y agoYes, I was including emotional, subjective needs in there. I think GP and I mean the same thing
- igorkraw 5y agoLike I said to the child comment, I think we are aligned on value, I included subjective and emotional needs on this. I do think this distinction makes sense because the more something has value for you, the less elastic your personal price-demand curve becomes. And certain things we all have a demand-floor. And that's kind of the difference between price and value right? Value is the thing that's stays valuable and desirable even if it's not priced and can't be exchanged