Cavegirl Posted March 20, 2012 Share Posted March 20, 2012 There was still value based trade even though there wasn't money, but there was... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manorialism My bold and underline... Lol...that highlights the fact that societies can exist without coinage...wasn't your argument to do with the fact societies couldn't possibly exist without money? You fight your own arguments, you obviously don't need me to point these things out Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spooky3 Posted March 20, 2012 Share Posted March 20, 2012 Lol...that highlights the fact that societies can exist without coinage...wasn't your argument to do with the fact societies couldn't possibly exist without money? You fight your own arguments, you obviously don't need me to point these things out No, never did, I see trade as the same as coinage, an incentive, possibly even the initialiser to hoarding behaviour. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cavegirl Posted March 20, 2012 Share Posted March 20, 2012 See here: So the debate is about how and what it would be like without a monetary system, as said earlier, it can't work. Manorialism was characterized by the vesting of legal and economic power in a Lord of the Manor, supported economically from his own direct landholding in a manor (sometimes called a fief), and from the obligatory contributions of a legally subject part of the peasant population under the jurisdiction of himself and his manorial court. These obligations could be payable in several ways, in labor (the French term corvée is conventionally applied), in kind, or, on rare occasions, in coin. Your own choice of quotes indicates that an essentially non-monetary system can and has worked in the not too distant past. I can offer you plenty more examples if you'd like? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dosxuk Posted March 20, 2012 Share Posted March 20, 2012 Is a cheque a form of coinage? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spooky3 Posted March 20, 2012 Share Posted March 20, 2012 See here: Your own choice of quotes indicates that an essentially non-monetary system can and has worked in the not too distant past. I can offer you plenty more examples if you'd like? I believe you are purposefully missing the point, come out the and touch the big shiny black object (ref 2001, the book) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spooky3 Posted March 20, 2012 Share Posted March 20, 2012 Is a cheque a form of coinage? It's definitely a marker of wealth... http://www.thefreedictionary.com/money Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spooky3 Posted March 20, 2012 Share Posted March 20, 2012 Surely the bad must exist for the good to become of it and most will live somewhere in the middle of the cycle of the big wheel Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cavegirl Posted March 20, 2012 Share Posted March 20, 2012 Why is this listed as a problem? Cyclical consumption promotes addictive patterns of behaviour and does not lead to happiness, rather to status anxiety and, in extreme cases, depression. See here: http://www.jstor.org/discover/10.2307/2117508?uid=3738032&uid=2129&uid=2&uid=70&uid=4&sid=47698781860217 I don't think the description is very good. The design and manufacturing could be state of the art without conflicting with planned obsolescence. [*] You're right it wasn't the best description. Planned obsolescence is a significant problem however, because it wastes resources and generates excess rubbish that must be dealt with. It only really benefits the producer. There's nothing to say that when the item is upgraded it can't be sold onto to a market with lower expectations or purchasing power. Planned failure is more pernicious, but competition between companies should help to reduce that (you buy a car with a reputation for reliability, not for high maintenance costs). It's funny that you use the car as an example of reliability here because it was the car manufacturers that started planning obsolescence into their products first: Emerging from the 1920’s slugfest between Henry Ford and Chevrolet’s Alfred Sloan, “planned obsolescence” manifested itself as the “annual model change.” Its success in America’s flagship industry set the manufacturing standard still operating today—with disastrous environmental results. from G.Slade's 'Made to Break: Technology and Obsolescence in America' [*]Automation is a good thing, it might cause short term disruption as jobs are replaced, but in the long term everyone benefits, it's not a problem of a monetary economy. Automation brings as many problems as it does solutions particularly in a world that is suffering from resource depletion and where corporations are not forced to clean up their mess once their companies go bust or out-source. A world where you end up with scenes like this: http://www.google.co.uk/imgres?q=baku+oil+fields&num=10&hl=en&client=firefox-a&hs=lLi&rls=org.mozilla:en-GB:official&channel=np&biw=1280&bih=801&tbm=isch&tbnid=v9xUcZ56ZIkQXM:&imgrefurl=http://www.huismarseille.nl/en/collection/3&docid=-8_FLi-9W-pLtM&imgurl=http://www.huismarseille.nl/uploads/collection/9731f4497dc86f2cad9f6356c01721008dcfaaa6.jpg&w=964&h=768&ei=pa9oT--LGsry8QPGqPWGCQ&zoom=1 http://www.google.co.uk/imgres?q=large+car+scrapyard&start=104&hl=en&client=firefox-a&hs=N32&rls=org.mozilla:en-GB:official&channel=np&biw=1280&bih=801&tbm=isch&tbnid=s1FEfHGVM7S0DM:&imgrefurl=http://www.flickr.com/photos/aqualite/favorites/%3Fview%3Dlg&docid=Ua0TRG8fYBJM5M&imgurl=http://farm4.staticflickr.com/3457/4563763223_7bcaf53b2e_z.jpg&w=640&h=436&ei=NLBoT7H3GIeC8gP0lNn9CA&zoom=1&iact=rc&dur=499&sig=116433732969088314240&page=5&tbnh=144&tbnw=199&ndsp=25&ved=1t:429,r:9,s:104&tx=143&ty=75 In the short term it definately benefits the producers more than the workers it displaces though in the long term, they do tend to readjust. [*]Far more important than any ethical restraint to this is the competitive restraint. If company A is artificially limiting the production of widgets, then company B can get in there and grab some market share. The patent system and/or monopolies limit the competitive angle sometimes, but generally not for very long, look at the iPad or the iPhone for example. Designed failure is the only real problem I think you've identified there. I agree that competition provides more restraint today than any ethical consideration- but to be honest, that's the main problem because where competitive restraint doesn't exist (due to the presence of a monopoly or other similar situation), there's usually still no ethical restraint and these tend to be the situations that cause the most damage to people's lives. People committed suicide en masse at an Apple factory recently... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cavegirl Posted March 20, 2012 Share Posted March 20, 2012 I believe you are purposefully missing the point, come out the and touch the big shiny black object (ref 2001, the book) I think you've quickly run out of things to say on this thread, haven't you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spooky3 Posted March 20, 2012 Share Posted March 20, 2012 I think you've quickly run out of things to say on this thread, haven't you? So are you saying a system based on physical money is different to one based on trade, that was your debacle! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.