The « money as value » was limited by the supply of precious metal…. The “money as debt” is really a massive fraud … Can the “MONEY AS LINK ” only be real ?? Tokens or complementary currencies are valuable options at the local level, but they don’t have an intrinsic value.
In History, what were the options for a Kingdom without an enough supply of silver to mint coins??? In fact, a single option : THE WAR. The collapse of the Greco Bactrian Kingdom is a very good example of this craziness. Can we write an alternate history of financial exchanges ?? I THINK SO . The land is the main ASSET …. A wealthy land was more precious than diamonds or gold. Knowledges and transportations are the two major pillars of a sustainable nation.
An unlimited growth in a limited land is not realistic !!!! Security and mitigation should be the bases of a sustainable economy. So, a good currency is a valuable medium of exchanges, with only a serious guarantee. Instead to use swords to conquest Silver or Gold (expensive and painful adventures), it was
more useful to ATTRACT the precious
assets and the skills , by organizing large
common projects. The assets could
guarantee the unit of account used to pay the workers.
Slavery as labor force was massive in the past centuries, so it's not correct to create a connection between money and individual property (don't forget the barter). From my part, i think people should be motivated by assets, not by money.
Money as precious metal has limited the quality of human relationships during centuries, when the world became smaller ... During the last 500 years, the globalisation could be different based on security, sustainability and mitigation. Ironically, a massive paper money supply, out of nothing, has created a better context for scientific and technical innovations at the international level.
A nation, a community, a society, a family, has a common value !!! A money is not a different social object.
No comments:
Post a Comment