They are not actually that strong, but this is just my opinion and your choice indeed. Also he is known for deleting posts (his own and the replies to them) where he had been proven flat-out wrong. I guess that's why he has a high ignore score...
Focus on the message rather then the messenger. At the very least AnonyMints arguments are novel and interesting. The possibility exists that (although most of us would hate to admit it) that he is correct. I don't think you would love your messages being deleted... |
|
|
|
Unemployment figures tell us that we haven't yet even started...
Speak for yourself, when you no longer qualify as unemployed they don't count you anymore. You seem to be missing the whole thing we're talking about. It doesn't matter whether you qualify as unemployed or not, what matters here is your conscious reluctance or unwillingness to work since you are being paid with what you don't consider any longer as money. If so, you wouldn't give a damn if they counted you or not. That was the point we were discussing. Involuntary unemployment is beyond the scope of this discussion... But if you personally think dollars have already become trash, I don't mind you sending them all to me! |
|
|
|
Nope. It just means they still have confidence in the system, plain and simple. If they didn't, it would mean the money completely lost its exchange value, i.e. ceased to be money, so no more sense to work. Direct inference from your assertion ("intrinsic value of fiat relies on society maintaining confidence in its government and financial system")...
and we are not there yet? Unemployment figures tell us that we haven't yet even started... Actually, we were talking about Weimar Germany and its hyperinflation of 1922-1923 |
|
|
|
AnonyMint is the first person I have seen get ignored for posting annoyingly strong arguments in an arrogant manner. Lots of people have thin skins.
Personally I make an effort to seek out his posts.
They are not actually that strong, but this is just my opinion and your choice indeed. Also he is known for deleting posts (his own and the replies to them) where he had been proven flat-out wrong. I guess that's why he has a high ignore score... |
|
|
|
Nope. In a housing bubble new buyers are required to continually enter the market and buy new homes lest the bubble should burst, but this doesn't make it a Ponzi scheme. New debt being created continually makes it a debt bubble. The debt bubble popping may actually cause an economic collapse, but the possibility of it doesn't make a debt based fiat system a Ponzi either. You're just using the wrong term here...
I had taken this position recently, but I said "yes" upthread because I was remembering the notion (is it true?) that all fiat currencies have returned to their intrinsic value of 0 on long enough time scales. To say that all fiat currencies have returned to their intrinsic value of 0 on long enough time distance is equal to saying that all states have to die sooner or later. Historically, this is a well-grounded stance (even without making provisions for fiat currencies), but you should be very careful about the cause and effect relationship and the sequence of events... |
|
|
|
Wherever they ran, they paid and were paid with money. They didn't quit their jobs, so we have to admit they didn't lose confidence, right?
They may have no other job offer. Nope. It just means they still have confidence in the system (at least some of them), plain and simple. If they didn't, it would mean the money completely had lost its exchange value, i.e. ceased to be money, so no more sense to work. Direct inference from your assertion ("intrinsic value of fiat relies on society maintaining confidence in its government and financial system")... |
|
|
|
So you recognize that it is not confidence in money (or lack thereof) which makes the government go bankrupt, but rather the loss of confidence in the government itself which makes its currency irrelevant, right?
Agreed, but isn't that distinction as useful as splitting hairs on a frog's back. It just proves that the problem of "a debt based fiat system" is not a problem within and of itself. And the most important inference from this is that you can't call such a currency system a Ponzi scheme, for otherwise it would imply denying confidence in the government as being a real asset behind the currency. Yes, it could burst but it still would be supported at some level by something (i.e. confidence) which is not speculative in nature (see the real estate bubble example)... |
|
|
|
Do you mean seigniorage or what? I still don't get where you're going. If the loss of confidence you refer to is caused by diminishing purchasing power due to the currency inflation (but could it be caused by anything else?) then there wouldn't be such loss among police, tax collectors and other civil service employees for rather obvious reasons...
Hyperinflation is never caused by inflation. It is caused by the government being wrecked by revolution and/or Communism and the people losing all confidence in the government. In Zimbabwe, the blacks revolted against the white land owners. That caused a crisis of confidence. So you recognize that it is not confidence in money (or lack thereof) which makes the government go bankrupt, but rather the loss of confidence in the government itself which makes its currency irrelevant, right? |
|
|
|
They can run by actually running upon receiving salary to the bread store at the corner to dump their currency before it depreciates. I had a photo of them doing exactly that in Wiemar Germany.
Wherever they ran, they paid and were paid with money. They didn't quit their jobs, so we have to admit they didn't lose confidence, right? Internet is full of such photos, even with people using packs of banknotes as fuel... |
|
|
|
There is only the subjective value of an individual and the objective value of the market place.
I can say I don't value water, but the market can never say mankind doesn't value water. When you say intrinsic value you really mean objective market value.
Yes, and this subjective value is called marginal utility, whereas the objective value of the market place is called price (not necessary in money terms). Let's start at last using correct and strict terms? |
|
|
|
There is no such thing as intrinsic value. The theory of intrinsic value states that the value is derived from the item, and there is no such thing as labor value.. Value never comes from the item no matter what it is. Value is always a product of our consciousness. Value comes from our minds it is just a concept.
We have already agreed on this just two pages earlier... Did you read them? |
|
|
|
Facing of widespread dumping of the currency, hyperinflates to continue to fund its mercenaries, ahem I mean police, tax collectors, and other "useful" bureaucrats. It is a futile attempt to maintain control over the loss of confidence.
Do you mean seigniorage or what? I still don't get where you're going. If the loss of confidence you refer to is caused by diminishing purchasing power due to the currency inflation (but could it be caused by anything else?) then there wouldn't be such loss among police, tax collectors and other civil service employees for rather obvious reasons... Weimar Germany didn't plunge into anarchy, neither did Yugoslavia nor Zimbabwe for the same reasons... |
|
|
|
On these 2 points at least I agree with AnonyMint. Will they want to squash it? Will they be able to? Will they find a way to use it or live with it? Nobody has that answer.
Government pays salary to its employees. They can run from the currency only if they leave civil service. If they do leave, there is no public staff, then there is no government, no state, right? The confidence being referred to is not confidence in the money as such but rather it is confidence in the state and its government... |
|
|
|
In short, fiat hinges on confidence. This is why the government will always squash any competition which would threaten confidence.
I never claimed anything to the contrary... |
|
|
|
Incorrect. The government can't enforce taxes if the people and the bond investors are running from the currency, because the government can't pay the police, tax collectors, etc.. The government hyperinflates attempting to do so.
I didn't quite get what you meant by "the government hyperinflates attempting to do so". To do what? |
|
|
|
"This article needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed"There were many economic theories throughout history of human thought. The prevailing theory and most researched one in economics nowadays is the subjective theory of value where the notion of "intrinsic value" has no meaning...
|
|
|
|
I said its intrinsic value is 0, the value only exists because of the confidence the people have in the government retaining control and yes the ability to tax.
Do you argue that the intrinsic value of fiat is not 0?
There is no such notion as "intrinsic value" in economics (there is some in finance but it has very specific scope of usage and surely it is not what you meant by it). I would prefer that you use correct well-established terms... |
|
|
|
Correct unless the all confidence in the currency is lost, the government can't sell bonds, and the value of the currency plummets to its intrinsic value of 0, e.g. Wiemar (Communist) Germany, Zimbabwe
TLDR. As I said before as long as government accepts taxes paid in the currency it will retain some value above zero... |
|
|
|
True- after a housing bubble bursts you still have the houses. Most stocks the same.
The fiat debt though isn't really an asset. It's value is based on that the government will back it- forcefully if it has to.
Yes, you still have the houses which are now less expensive. The same holds true for a debt currency, you still have the currency which has depreciated. And as long as you can pay taxes with it would retain some "intrinsic value" (as AnonyMint would incorrectly say), so it can still be considered as an "asset"... |
|
|
|
There was another guys doing this renaming thing i remember. But to be true milli and micro is by far the best names.
My stance is different because there are many things out there to which milli and micro are applicable. We need some proper name, something like Satoshi, but bigger in scale indeed... |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
