3 ms·

That was a lot of rambling and tangents that don't relate to what I assume was the central point: If we keep automating and laying off people, eventually there

by howeyc 13y ago

That was a lot of rambling and tangents that don't relate to what I assume was the central point: If we keep automating and laying off people, eventually there wont be enough people with money (jobs to get money) in order to purchase goods made by machines. The proposed solution seems to be: Alter the structure of the system such that the government creates debt and distributes money as income to the people, this way even the jobless can buy products made by automation. Some other things in there: * Comparison of Catholics and Protestants (particularly related to guilt) * Prices of goods should not rise. * Making mistakes is okay. * Money and credit is bookkeeping.

dredmorbius 13y ago
It helps tremendously to know that in some languages, the words for "debt" and "guilt" are the same (in German, the word is "Schulden", as in "entshuldigung" meaning "excuse me"). If you're familiar with the Lord's Prayer, you should know that there are two forms of it in English: the Catholic ("forgive us our debts") and the protestant ("forgive us our trespasses"). Where again, the meanings of "debt" and "guilt" or "offense" are entwined. Money-as-abstraction then has significance: money isn't true wealth, it's the representation of wealth, and that representation can be modified. Hence such confusions as "governments have to balance their budgets" -- not necessarily true as a governments can vary the value of money, either through inflation (fiat) or devaluation (specie). What the goldbugs fail to recognize is that when governments find themselves with debts they cannot repay (denominated in currencies under their control), they'll devalue those currencies. Regardless of the underlying standard. Look to the Roman denarius (covered by Joseph Tainter in Collapse) or the devaluations of British currency (detailed at length, as he does everything, in Adam Smith's Wealth of Nations). If you're interested in more of Soddy's work, his Role of Money is available online (I've skimmed it briefly, haven't read it): https://archive.org/details/roleofmoney032861mbp https://archive.org/details/roleofmoney032861mbp

by howeyc 13y ago

dredmorbius 13y ago

It helps tremendously to know that in some languages, the words for "debt" and "guilt" are the same (in German, the word is "Schulden", as in "entshuldigung" meaning "excuse me"). If you're familiar with the Lord's Prayer, you should know that there are two forms of it in English: the Catholic ("forgive us our debts") and the protestant ("forgive us our trespasses"). Where again, the meanings of "debt" and "guilt" or "offense" are entwined. Money-as-abstraction then has significance: money isn't true wealth, it's the representation of wealth, and that representation can be modified. Hence such confusions as "governments have to balance their budgets" -- not necessarily true as a governments can vary the value of money, either through inflation (fiat) or devaluation (specie). What the goldbugs fail to recognize is that when governments find themselves with debts they cannot repay (denominated in currencies under their control), they'll devalue those currencies. Regardless of the underlying standard. Look to the Roman denarius (covered by Joseph Tainter in Collapse) or the devaluations of British currency (detailed at length, as he does everything, in Adam Smith's Wealth of Nations). If you're interested in more of Soddy's work, his Role of Money is available online (I've skimmed it briefly, haven't read it): https://archive.org/details/roleofmoney032861mbp https://archive.org/details/roleofmoney032861mbp