What If Money Expired?

“Money is abstract, absurd. It’s a belief system, a language, a social contract. Money is trust. But the rules aren’t fixed in stone.”

Here is an article that discusses the nature of money. Briefly it's history from barter to bucks and how it developed. Lumps of metal with a stamp on them and paper receipts given out as notes. The system of exchange developed from exchanging goods and services to a more symbolic system of exchange. This article opens by pointing to a new book about money

www.goodreads.com...

The article from which these quotes have been taken are here

www.noemamag.com...

As it evolved, money became increasingly symbolic. Early paper money acted as an IOU and could always be exchanged for metallic coins of various values. In the late 13th century, however, the Mongol emperor Kublai Khan invented paper money that was not backed by anything. It was money because the emperor said it was money. People agreed.

Building upon this brief and simple history of money as a medium of exchange it goes on to describe how what once was simply that, a more efficient medium of exchange, has developed into a medium of wealth generation and exploitation.

Today, there is about $2.34 trillion of physical U.S. currency in circulation, and as much as half of it is held abroad. That accounts for just 10% of the country’s gross domestic product (the total monetary value of all the goods and services produced). Total U.S. bank deposits are around $17 trillion. Meanwhile, total wealth in this country, including nonmonetary assets, is around $149 trillion, more than 63 times the total available cash. The gaps between these numbers are like dark matter in the universe — we don’t have a way to empirically account for it, and yet without it our understanding of the universe, or the economy, would collapse.

The article points to a philosophical theory developed over a century ago by Silvio Gesell

German entrepreneur and self-taught economist named Silvio Gesell proposed a radical reformation of the monetary system as we know it. He wanted to make money that decays over time.

MONEY THAT DECAYS OVER TIME

This idea is completely new to me, so I read the article. I found it fascinating. The manner in which this philosophy seems to counter many of the bad effects of our economic system without destroying it completely is interesting.. I could try to summarize Gesell's thinking here but I could not sum it up as well as this artlcle.

So for those who have the time or will to read, this may also interest some here.

It is just another mechanism to usher in more control and a hat tip to communism where all are equally poor and poor treated, except those that make the decisions.

Where do I start to explain this to you? Let's begin where the filthy rich people have everything except more power. Why would the filthy rich would not be hurt by decaying money?

Because they can generate it in almost endless amounts through the infrastructure they have amassed already. You don't need to buy bread when you own the land, the people working on it, the mill and the bakery.

Total U.S. bank deposits are around $17 trillion. Meanwhile, total wealth in this country, including nonmonetary assets, is around $149 trillion, more than 63 times the total available cash

Is 'quantative easing' responsible for the this? official and un official.

Just as an example Britain left the gold standard.
UK Parliamentary link explaining why Britain left the gold standard

WWI saw the end of the gold standard as governments suspended the convertibility of their currencies into gold in order to freely finance rapidly escalating military expenditure

MONEY THAT DECAYS OVER TIME

Isn't that called inflation?



I'm under the impression it's all going to be waffle to convince people that communism is a great idea.

Plenty of kids now a days already prefer using a debit card rather than carrying cash, 'because it's easier'. They don't realise that a pound isn't an amount of money. It's a weight.......

And as the money value decreases, the value of everything it purchases increases by more than that amount. Land, food, gas, etc... The rich will get richer faster because they don't really have cash, it is all in property, funds, stocks, etc... The others don't seem to matter in this situation because they just can't afford anything.

That is just run away inflation. How could anyone think differently?

I know, most people think rich people have a vault that is full or cash to swim in.

Cash is just an agreed upon medium so you don't have to work out change for a pig when you buy a loaf of bread.

a reply to: McUrnsalso

Isn't that called inflation?
I'm under the impression it's all going to be waffle to convince people that communism is a great idea.

The idea here as I grasped it is to prevent inflation by preventing cash from being hoarded. It would promote spending rather than holding on to wads of cash. The idea of spending a small amount of money to re-establish the value of a currency could be seen as a tax. So poor folk who spend their money as quickly as they earn it would not pay taxes on it but the more wealthy who do have wads of money would need to upgrade their wealth with a tax. A tax could be avoided by the wealth by spending it rather than handing onto it..

I don't understand the entire concept because it is new to me but I don't see how this could end up being communism. Rather it would spur individual entrepreneurship.

a reply to: ThatDamnDuckAgain

Right, I agree. This theory however was developed over a century ago when the filthy rich weren't so ,ah, filthy. Now however it would be impossible unless the entire system crumbles and a new more egalitarian system was put in place and even that would be wishful thinking.

a reply to: BingoMcGoof

I don't see the causal connection to when this theory was "developed", I am sure someone tripping on mushroom a thousand years ago already had the idea before the guy in your OP.

That all does not eliminate the fact that it is not how money works. I don't like to see work I have done go to waste because I either did not spend it or did not spend it fast enough.

It's a terrible, terrible idea that will only benefit the rich ones and hurt everyone else. For me there is nothing fascinating about it, it's just a ridiculous idea.

Money with an expiration already exists; In the form of gift cards as a store credit; That a store may owe you... Even money put on gift cards that are not returns have expiration.

Another way it exists is the treasury amasses old currency by; Date, shape it is in etc. and burns them off and melts it down.

As for as those unaccountable or not adding up... You know the federal and state seizure pictures of mountains of bricked and stacked cash in drug busts as evidence? That falls under the DEA where what is being discussed DOT I suppose it's weird that there are two DOT's that of; Treasury and that of; Transportation...

But anygoo

There are over 50 billion currency notes of various denominations currently in circulation in the US alone.
Each one lasting from 5 to 7 years.

Now, at 1% reduction per month. They are worn out before they are worthless but loose over half their value before they are worn out.

As I have stated before, rich people only use cash for show if they have any really large amount. They will keep their money value in other things and not cash.

Where is the advantage to taxing the lower levels more when the rich just get another pile by liquidating some assets and then gets rid of it before it devalues?

a reply to: BingoMcGoof

I'd imagine people will hoard things other than money, this would probably encourage some form of hyper-capitalism where it's ideal to buy as much pointless stuff as possible because it's literally better than nothing.

 we don’t have a way to empirically account for it, and yet without it our understanding of the universe, or the economy, would collapse.

Isn't a lot of it just speculation anyways? Many things are worth what someone would theoretically pay for it. Before all the malarkey about eating communist bugs I honestly thought crypto would be the key to digitising inherent value in things which I figured has the potential to truly stabilise economic activity. Tie in a little AI and that green initiative stuff and we could actually see real accountability other than speculation.

The cheap and easy throwaway culture is the problem and I don't think money with an expiration date would fix that.

They did create a currency without requiring the original steps. Even earlier the Veterans were able to keep their jobs if they were Federal positions, and that didn't require having an expiration date, they just did what they needed to do. I don't know why we're now saying there should be a force for something else, we already went through all that.

a reply to: BingoMcGoof

I thought that’s what inflation was… Money decaying.

a reply to: BingoMcGoof

Oh ok I think I see what you’re saying.

But if you put an expiration date on money, and it was effective at getting the wealthier class to spend their money sooner, I think that would actually increase the rate of inflation.

If the wealthy class are saving their money, in stocks or bonds or bank accounts, or things like that, that delays inflation, until they spend it. But if the wealthy class spends their money as soon as they get it, inflation would happen faster.

SPAM

The first thing you must realise is the rich and the mega rich do not hoard cash money. Their wealth lies in assets with only a money fund in a bank to pay their way. Rot able cash??? I think you have not been following the news. Their aim is not ANY form of cash, durable or rot able, their aim is no cash at all. They don't want to phase cash out as phasing alludes to a gradual phasing out, they want to just stop it in one fell swoop, so everybody has to go digital. I honestly don't think that that would work as there will always be very small transactions in anonymous areas that people will use other forms of payment.

a reply to: BingoMcGoof

The Jews had a jubilee year, 49/50 th year all debt was cancelled
www.sacredcalendar.info...
Money doesn’t decay but debt is cancelled
Interesting concept
Many sold themselves into a form of slavery/servitude and on the jubilee were released

a reply to: Creaky

That strategy is the opposite of this one. It would put a cap on money decay (ie inflation).

It doesn’t seem like there is any cap these days. Looks to me like the plan is for inflation to continue until the people revolt.

a reply to: BingoMcGoof

it's obvious that something is not right with the economy, and those profiting from it will live in denial about their role in it. it's a form of Stockholm syndrome.

I know one thing, doing the same and expecting different results is the trait of fools. So either the capitalist west is foolish or oblivious to the mechanics at work that will ultimately do them in too.