Jump to content



Photo
- - - - -

Santorum for president?


  • Please log in to reply
112 replies to this topic

#101 TakeAStepBack

TakeAStepBack
  • VibeTribe
  • 19,028 posts

Posted 13 April 2012 - 12:35 PM

Yawn. Stupidity is no excuse.

#102 vic

vic
  • VibeTribe
  • 4,913 posts

Posted 13 April 2012 - 02:14 PM

you all know how much I like pictures and graphs, so I'll share one. Around 1900, the world population was 1.6 billion. Today, there are 7 billion people populating the planet. Posted Image How can an economy with a growing population such as this use a finite resource such as gold as money. It's impossible. It's absurd, and it is a lie to even suggest that it's possible.


i'm not gonna say 'impossible, absurd, a lie'

but it's a good question without all the sass

?

#103 vic

vic
  • VibeTribe
  • 4,913 posts

Posted 13 April 2012 - 02:17 PM

If that were true we never would have gotten passed the hunter/gatherer stage and we'd all be roaming nomads. That isn't the truth. The truth is economics is human action and social evolution to attain the highest standard of living. You can choose not to produce anything at all, but in so, you can not choose to eat, have shelter or anything else without procuring it off the labor (or energy) of someone else. Economics of today are taught, because, going right back to my original point, it is treated as a natural or hard science, when it is not. It is a social one.


we may yet end up going back to being roaming nomads

still, in the root of the words, economics is nurtured

#104 TakeAStepBack

TakeAStepBack
  • VibeTribe
  • 19,028 posts

Posted 13 April 2012 - 02:28 PM

we may yet end up going back to being roaming nomads still, in the root of the words, economics is nurtured


In the root of the words?
Definition of ECONOMICS



1: a : a social science concerned chiefly with description and analysis of the production, distribution, and consumption of goods and services
b : economic theory, principles, or practices <sound economics>

This is a natural occurrence amongst humans. It is learned only in how the system works. In its most simplistic aspect, it is people increasing their standard of livings in a complex web of labor, produciton and consumption. Whether it be primitive barter, or more advanced technological infrastructure as we see today. There is certainly a play on "nurture", in that those who are taight or learn and understand how a complex economic systems works, is better off in determining their own human actions within the system. It is, a human nature endeavor.

Nomads again? Perhaps, but doubtful.

#105 TakeAStepBack

TakeAStepBack
  • VibeTribe
  • 19,028 posts

Posted 13 April 2012 - 02:32 PM

i'm not gonna say 'impossible, absurd, a lie' but it's a good question without all the sass ?


Quantity of money is not a concern based on population. It is the "price" or value of money that counts. You can run the entire world economy on one ounce of gold. That is not to say it's a great idea (although not a terrible one) or even necessary. It is to say that the derps argument is ridiculous. If anything, the amount of money in rotation, when it far exceeds the production output and the velocity slows, is detrimental to prices. It's called monetary inflation. We see it now severely in the US dollar. Where what was once worth 1.0, is now worth >.04. Price inflation is a symptom of monetary inflation in most cases.

#106 vic

vic
  • VibeTribe
  • 4,913 posts

Posted 13 April 2012 - 03:38 PM

In the root of the words? Definition of ECONOMICS 1: a : a social science concerned chiefly with description and analysis of the production, distribution, and consumption of goods and services b : economic theory, principles, or practices This is a natural occurrence amongst humans. It is learned only in how the system works. In its most simplistic aspect, it is people increasing their standard of livings in a complex web of labor, produciton and consumption. Whether it be primitive barter, or more advanced technological infrastructure as we see today. There is certainly a play on "nurture", in that those who are taight or learn and understand how a complex economic systems works, is better off in determining their own human actions within the system. It is, a human nature endeavor. Nomads again? Perhaps, but doubtful.


not the root of the word economics, but the words nurture and nature

hunting and gathering is human nature, though most of us have strayed from that. i'm surprised you don't agree considering your stance on self-reliance

there's definitely grey areas that could be argued either way, but still, our behavior economically is a learned and passed down one

#107 vic

vic
  • VibeTribe
  • 4,913 posts

Posted 13 April 2012 - 03:39 PM

funny we're talking about this in a thread about the most primitive mind maybe ever in an election :lol:

#108 TakeAStepBack

TakeAStepBack
  • VibeTribe
  • 19,028 posts

Posted 13 April 2012 - 03:47 PM

We strayed from hunter gatherer because agriculture, leading into the more complex system of barter, is far superior to the standard of living for humans. Hunter/gatherer communities have extremely low life expectancies, child mortality rates and nutritional deficiencies. It's also less efficient in attaining larger amounts of hygenic goods, survival goods, etc....like shoes, clothing, stored foods, etc,etc... Embrace human evolution. Or go stand in the woods and figure out how quickly you'll perish at the mercy of the forest.

#109 vic

vic
  • VibeTribe
  • 4,913 posts

Posted 13 April 2012 - 06:17 PM

not saying what to embrace or not embrace, just that you're wrongly using the word nature here

#110 TakeAStepBack

TakeAStepBack
  • VibeTribe
  • 19,028 posts

Posted 13 April 2012 - 06:23 PM

No, I'm not. Human nature is what economics is all about. Human action. As Mises put it;

"Man thinks not only for the sake of thinking, but also in order to act." Thos actions translate directly into labor, production and consumption. The building blocks of economics. Human invent and discover as naturally as the ebb and flows of nature itself. Sometimes for the worse, sometimes for great achievement.

Economics is human nature.

#111 vic

vic
  • VibeTribe
  • 4,913 posts

Posted 13 April 2012 - 06:35 PM

that's just a theory and an opinion given by a method that is nurtured...economics are something society has had to adapt to, and has... i can give you that

#112 TakeAStepBack

TakeAStepBack
  • VibeTribe
  • 19,028 posts

Posted 13 April 2012 - 06:50 PM

Societies created economics, vic. It isn't something they adapted to,

#113 PeaceFrog

PeaceFrog
  • VibeTribe
  • 8,284 posts
  • LocationWhisky a Go Go

Posted 14 May 2012 - 03:56 AM

Sorry for bumping an old thread, but I had missed the last page.

I don't understand why someone would believe you can run an economy on an ounce of gold, but not a fiat currency backed by the good faith and credit of the United States Government.

The value of anything is only what the highest bidder will give you for it. Paper money is valuable because people want it, just like people want gold. Circular thinking? Yes, it is... it was a clever idea but it works.

You keep pointing to fiat currencies that have failed in the past, but the reason the currency failed was not simply because it was fiat. The money lost value because the world bankers lost confidence in the issuing government, thereby lowering its value.

Gold is considered a safe haven because it is not affiliated with any particular country and over the long term its value does increase. Population also increases, increasing demand. And this is why the value of gold increases.

If more supply comes to market, the price goes down.

there's a lot to it... more than I get the feeling you understand. It's not necessarily complicated, but it isn't all just about paper money being evil. The printing of money must be monitored and controlled, but it's been working thus far.