It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Is this how society went terribly wrong?

page: 1
6

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 4 2011 @ 06:49 PM
link   
While at lunch today, it hit me. Society started down this path of self destruction when the barter system became obsolete, i explained it to a co worker like this:

Back in the days of barter, items had value depending on the necessity of the item to the person desiring the item.

For example: I have a bag of potato chips, but i am thirsty. Yet you have a bottle of water, and you are hungry. Our needs are equal, you need food, and i have some, I need water, and you have some. We would trade and both have our needs fulfilled happily.

Now fast forward to the days of currency, items no longer only "have" value, but also "are" valued.

For example: the bag of chips i have are valued at 3 dollars, And the bottle of water you have is valued at 1 dollar. The items still have the same nutritional value to our bodies, but now have a monetary value. Say you only have 2 dollars, and i have only 1 dollar. Now if you tried to buy my chips, you would be a dollar short, but if i was to buy your bottle of water first, you would then have 3 dollars for the full potato chips price.

But wait a second? we just exchanged 4 dollars worth of goods for 3 dollars? Guess what? on top of the bottle of water i needed from you, because i had the right strategy, i now have the 3 total dollars as well. And since you're now broke, id like to offer to buy that bag of potato chips back so you can have some money for emergencies. But since you ate a couple already, I'm only going to give you 2 dollars.

Therefore, i now have a bottle of water i needed, a bag of chips i already had, and the same dollar i started with.
You now have 2 dollars, which in-of itself have no nutritional value. and i also have your water so enjoy your money and dehydration you dummy.

Make sense?

If not, tell me why? i don't cry over criticism.




posted on Oct, 4 2011 @ 07:05 PM
link   
We have no need as human beings, for money. I don't know how we have yet to accept this as a whole. Oh well.

When your cash only burns for five seconds, and it is the middle of winter, after the collapse of worldwide banking, tell me how much value that greenback has.



posted on Oct, 4 2011 @ 07:17 PM
link   
If my profession was a shoemaker all I would have to barter with would be shoes, if you were the farmer and the only one with food and already had enough shoes for yourself, I would have to barter with other people to get something that you needed in order for you to allow me to barter for food. The same goes for everyone else too, they would have to barter with other people to get something you as the farmer needed, people always need food they don't always need something else other then water.

Not everything is the equivalent to barter either, if we were both farmers and wanted to barter with each other, and I was growing some crop that took twice as long to grow to maturity as what you were bartering with, I don't think trading for equal amounts of that item would be fair, even if they had the exact same nutritional value, not that you are saying that but.

Money simplifies it, I wouldn't want to have to go barter with 5 people anytime I wanted to go get some food.



posted on Oct, 4 2011 @ 07:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by Autodidactic
If my profession was a shoemaker all I would have to barter with would be shoes, if you were the farmer and the only one with food and already had enough shoes for yourself, I would have to barter with other people to get something that you needed in order for you to allow me to barter for food. The same goes for everyone else too, they would have to barter with other people to get something you as the farmer needed, people always need food they don't always need something else other then water.

Not everything is the equivalent to barter either, if we were both farmers and wanted to barter with each other, and I was growing some crop that took twice as long to grow to maturity as what you were bartering with, I don't think trading for equal amounts of that item would be fair, even if they had the exact same nutritional value, not that you are saying that but.

Money simplifies it, I wouldn't want to have to go barter with 5 people anytime I wanted to go get some food.



Thats when your physical labor is used as something to barter. I'm a farmer, and you are a shoemaker, i have enough shoes, but i need a saddle repaired, in turn, i'll give you some food. this is a Didactic exercise . Adapt or die.


Originally posted by EvanJP
We have no need as human beings, for money. I don't know how we have yet to accept this as a whole. Oh well.

When your cash only burns for five seconds, and it is the middle of winter, after the collapse of worldwide banking, tell me how much value that greenback has.


I agree with you. and i've realized this long ago. The game truly changes once this is realized.
edit on 10/4/2011 by Deafseeingeyedog because: (no reason given)

edit on 10/4/2011 by Deafseeingeyedog because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 4 2011 @ 07:41 PM
link   
reply to post by Deafseeingeyedog
 


Actually in the days when bartering was the norm people would ask for credit. You know go into town and get supplies from the general store and leave them an IOU. That is what money is except that it is backed by the state.

The problem isn't the actual money. It is greed. That existed in the bartering system as well.



posted on Oct, 4 2011 @ 08:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by daskakik
reply to post by Deafseeingeyedog
 


Actually in the days when bartering was the norm people would ask for credit. You know go into town and get supplies from the general store and leave them an IOU. That is what money is except that it is backed by the state.

The problem isn't the actual money. It is greed. That existed in the bartering system as well.



yes you are correct for a recent time period. and i believe that greed, not just monetary, but resource greed is what collapsed previous civilizations.

The time period i'm talking about would be possibly thousands of years ago, in the days of tribes and nomads.



posted on Oct, 4 2011 @ 09:00 PM
link   
reply to post by Deafseeingeyedog
 

Old world texts and stories are full of stories of greed and backstabbing long before there was money. You propose that in some remote past bartering was a hedge against this but I don't think it was.

Tribes and nomads also worked with credit (gave their word and shook on it). Someone asks a neighbor if he sells him a goat for his daughters wedding and he will give him 10 sacks of rice when he harvests the crops from his field. The guy with the goat gives him that line of credit.

If the guy that owed didn't pay up it could cost him dearly. Knowing this if he had any intention of defaulting he knew that he would have to do away with his creditor. Money would not change the outcome one way or the other.

Those who lived in a fixed area would be restrained of these kind of actions by their honor and standing in the community. Nomads would not have this which is why gypsies and wonderers were not to be trusted.



posted on Oct, 4 2011 @ 10:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by daskakik
reply to post by Deafseeingeyedog
 

Old world texts and stories are full of stories of greed and backstabbing long before there was money. You propose that in some remote past bartering was a hedge against this but I don't think it was.

Tribes and nomads also worked with credit (gave their word and shook on it). Someone asks a neighbor if he sells him a goat for his daughters wedding and he will give him 10 sacks of rice when he harvests the crops from his field. The guy with the goat gives him that line of credit.

If the guy that owed didn't pay up it could cost him dearly. Knowing this if he had any intention of defaulting he knew that he would have to do away with his creditor. Money would not change the outcome one way or the other.

Those who lived in a fixed area would be restrained of these kind of actions by their honor and standing in the community. Nomads would not have this which is why gypsies and wonderers were not to be trusted.



First off, i never proposed bartering was a cure all for a human fault.

second off, you state tribes and nomads worked with "lines of credit", then at the end of your post contradict yourself and say nomads did not have "lines of credit" and were likened to gypsies and wanderers, which one is it?

third off,


"Someone asks a neighbor if he sells him a goat for his daughters wedding and he will give him 10 sacks of rice when he harvests the crops from his field"


makes no coherent sense, and sounds like you are grasping for an example in order to form an opposing idea

fourth, even if the barter has long reaching terms, its still a barter, and yes the barter system can be abused.

fifth, the whole point of this thread is the contrast between a barter, and a currency exchange, a currency exchange with set rules and guidelines can be manipulated in many more ways than a barter can. you just have to be clever.
edit on 10/4/2011 by Deafseeingeyedog because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 5 2011 @ 12:20 AM
link   
reply to post by Deafseeingeyedog
 


I thought the point of the thread was to point out that money was societies big mistake. It wasn't. Men have been messing up long before currency came along.

The goat example is just that an example of how people could be uncivilized even when there is no money involved.

Just because gypsies and wonderers were not generally trusted doesn't mean that they never partook of the bartering system. Just that people would tend to not be as trusting.

Any exchange can be manipulated. I think currency makes it more difficult because there is a reference point. I can place a dollar value on my labor and you can choose to honor it and pay me what I am asking for my goods and when you come back later with something to sell you will tie the amount of work that went into making, rearing or growing whatever you are selling to that currency and what you feel your time is worth.

The real problem is when people are left without the power to negotiate like company stores, forced housing and monopolies.



posted on Oct, 5 2011 @ 12:27 AM
link   
Money simplifies trade.
But money has to be trusted.

The problem is, to me, that we do not value the most simple, basic things.

A hot bath and a good hot meal are wonderful things.
So why do football players make so much and the everyday cook make so little?

Once my toilet stopped up before a party. It was nasty. I mean, 3 hours before a party. The plumber that came out was more valuable to me than any NFL star ever.

Why can China value their money however the heck they want? Valuation, that is the problem.
edit on 5-10-2011 by hadriana because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 5 2011 @ 03:41 AM
link   
I think society went wrong when it invented and started believing in humanism. Since then things have gone drastically wrong for our race.



posted on Oct, 5 2011 @ 03:55 AM
link   
Currency is not a recent invention, it existed since the dawn of civilisation. I cannot imagine functional modern economy based on barter.


edit on 5/10/11 by Maslo because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 5 2011 @ 04:12 AM
link   
reply to post by 547000
 


Dont confuse true humanism with modern pseudohumanism and forced multiculturalism.



posted on Oct, 5 2011 @ 04:23 AM
link   
reply to post by Maslo
 


I'm thinking of the French Revolution and the philosophies that are derived from humanism like marxism.



new topics

top topics



 
6

log in

join