4 ms·

That's a common fallacy. Hoarding, saving, preparing for the future is one of most fundamental human needs and the bedrock for a functioning economy and society

by Geee 4y ago

That's a common fallacy. Hoarding, saving, preparing for the future is one of most fundamental human needs and the bedrock for a functioning economy and society. There's no fundamental economic principle which would indicate that an inflationary money would do any good to a society. It destroys savings, which is opposite of what is good for an individual and a society. Also, because you mentioned colonialism, read this to understand how colonialism and slave trade was enabled by inflation (counterfeit money): https://breedlove22.medium.com/masters-and-slaves-of-money-255ecc93404f https://breedlove22.medium.com/masters-and-slaves-of-money-2...

lolc 4y ago
Money isn't wealth. What you can get for it is. Hoarding casino chips does not prepare you for the future. It just makes the people running the casino richer with goods you traded for the chips. Oh you say, I can trade the chips with other people. Also the chips are numbered and we have an agreement to never accept a casino chip numbered over 1 trillion. Then we pay the casino one chip every time we trade. So the casino always has some chips to trade. The casino always wins. You're even paying their horrendous electricity bill.
- Geee 4y ago
  Money allows optionality - instead of hoarding food and fuel, you can hoard money and buy the things you need in the future. If you know for sure that you need food and fuel, and hoard them in advance, they will rot and evaporate by the time you need them. Inflationary money is like rotting food, instead of canned food. It makes no sense at all to store your wealth in rotting and evaporating things.
  - lolc 4y ago
    How do you know people will want to trade fuel for casino chips in the future?
    - Geee 4y ago
      Well, you don't really know, but you can make certain assumptions. Money is like a social network with network effects, which means that people want to hoard casino chips which are most popular, and thus they also want to accept them in trade and reject everything else. This keeps them in the most popular economic network, and also keeps the casino chips valuable. However, if there's something wrong in the casino chips itself (like inflation), people start to switch to a better version of casino chips, and they can assume that everyone switches, sooner or later, to the best alternative available, with least issues and largest network. Network effects will keep the new casino chips valuable as long as there's no better alternative.
      - lolc 4y ago
        Network effects go to a certain point yes. Then having people who hoarded chips is a detriment to the network. Because after that, people with actual resources like food or fuel will just invent their own chips to trade.
        Geee 4y ago
        It won't get to that point, because no one wants to hoard too much. Hoarding chips endlessly is pointless. It's basically just a riskless buffer for future spending or investing. People will either spend or invest all extra chips. Rich people would own all the factories that produce food and fuel. They wouldn't sit on a pile of chips. If someone is endlessly hoarding chips, it means that they are producing more than they are consuming. This would be positive for the economic network, but negative for the individual (because they are working more than needed). If someone has a lot of chips, but isn't producing anything, they'll eventually lose their chips, because they have to spend them to stay alive.
        lolc 4y ago
        Well fine. But now you're contradicting what you said two comments up: > instead of hoarding food and fuel, you can hoard money and buy the things you need in the future. Again, how do you know people won't just start trading with other chips? That will devalue the hoarded chips. The argument started with paper thalers being a poor store of value. Casino chips were pitched as an alternative. And now here we are. Turns out the chips too are a poor store of value. Both can be true at the same time.

by Geee 4y ago

lolc 4y ago

Money isn't wealth. What you can get for it is. Hoarding casino chips does not prepare you for the future. It just makes the people running the casino richer with goods you traded for the chips. Oh you say, I can trade the chips with other people. Also the chips are numbered and we have an agreement to never accept a casino chip numbered over 1 trillion. Then we pay the casino one chip every time we trade. So the casino always has some chips to trade. The casino always wins. You're even paying their horrendous electricity bill.

Geee 4y ago
Money allows optionality - instead of hoarding food and fuel, you can hoard money and buy the things you need in the future. If you know for sure that you need food and fuel, and hoard them in advance, they will rot and evaporate by the time you need them. Inflationary money is like rotting food, instead of canned food. It makes no sense at all to store your wealth in rotting and evaporating things.
- lolc 4y ago
  How do you know people will want to trade fuel for casino chips in the future?
  - Geee 4y ago
    Well, you don't really know, but you can make certain assumptions. Money is like a social network with network effects, which means that people want to hoard casino chips which are most popular, and thus they also want to accept them in trade and reject everything else. This keeps them in the most popular economic network, and also keeps the casino chips valuable. However, if there's something wrong in the casino chips itself (like inflation), people start to switch to a better version of casino chips, and they can assume that everyone switches, sooner or later, to the best alternative available, with least issues and largest network. Network effects will keep the new casino chips valuable as long as there's no better alternative.
    - lolc 4y ago
      Network effects go to a certain point yes. Then having people who hoarded chips is a detriment to the network. Because after that, people with actual resources like food or fuel will just invent their own chips to trade.
      - Geee 4y ago
        It won't get to that point, because no one wants to hoard too much. Hoarding chips endlessly is pointless. It's basically just a riskless buffer for future spending or investing. People will either spend or invest all extra chips. Rich people would own all the factories that produce food and fuel. They wouldn't sit on a pile of chips. If someone is endlessly hoarding chips, it means that they are producing more than they are consuming. This would be positive for the economic network, but negative for the individual (because they are working more than needed). If someone has a lot of chips, but isn't producing anything, they'll eventually lose their chips, because they have to spend them to stay alive.
        lolc 4y ago
        Well fine. But now you're contradicting what you said two comments up: > instead of hoarding food and fuel, you can hoard money and buy the things you need in the future. Again, how do you know people won't just start trading with other chips? That will devalue the hoarded chips. The argument started with paper thalers being a poor store of value. Casino chips were pitched as an alternative. And now here we are. Turns out the chips too are a poor store of value. Both can be true at the same time.