|
|
|
|
|
|
by pram
1879 days ago
|
|
|
Money isn't a natural phenomenon. You say it's unnatural for a central bank or government to intervene, but it's their currency. Its existence is inherently political, and serves an interest or policy goal. Be it capital accumulation to boomers or whatever else. They can also pick losers, if they really wanted. Look at Lehman Brothers. The dollar, and its associated monetary policy, isn't something that has been perverted by evil external forces. I'm arguing the 'status quo' because thats how it was intentionally designed and thats how it intentionally works. Not wasting my time describing some fanciful alternative perfect system |
|
|
Asset trading is about as natural to human civilization as you can get. Having a socially accepted intermediary asset is not much beyond that. Simply saying its not a "natural phenomenon" is not a mathematical or scientific self-validating statement. It's just a statement.
> it's their currency.
Yes, and literally anyone can create a currency out of thin air. Other people will use it if they decide to assign it value.
> Its existence is inherently political
No, It's existence is civilizational. It technologically fulfills the ability to have high transaction rates of an increasing population that other assets can not satisfy. the ability to transact more easily and more quickly is what determines the bounds of the potential of an economy. So, of course, all major civilizations have utilized this technological tool for political means. As a way to increase and concentrate power through economics.
This is fundamentally different from intermediary assets being constructed initially as a political tool. Money is technology. It is not politics. Like literally any other technology it can be used politically.
> isn't something that has been perverted by evil external forces
I am not sure what insanity you are trying to project onto me, but I never even came close to implying anything along these lines. You should attempt to avoid fallacious arguments a little harder.
> some fanciful alternative perfect system
You mean like your supposedly perfectly controlled and singular monetary systems with artificial inflation hoses? Have you seen the economy?
If this is your dream economic system then why not live in China with even more inflation and more centralization? Or maybe you already do. Genuine question, nonetheless.