On the nature of money

Exchanging something for something is barter.

Money is a contract, the promise of paying value with value, a number representing debt, effort, usefulness, good and services , wealth, created to buy and destroyed when the debt is paid off. Therefore money is voluntarily accepted if the issuer is trustworthy and able to redeem the money for valuable good and services. Money is transferable debt that the issuer is obligated to pay off to whoever owns it when is returned.

Barter is exchanging good and services for good and services, value for value, usefulness for usefulness. Therefore buying with gold is barter. Barter is not based on trust as the exchange is finalised in one transaction, as opposed to money that is based on trust because the seller gets a useless number on the promise of getting usefulness when returning the money to the issuer or creator of the debt.

What is the advantages of money over barter or gold standard for that matter? Because money is transferable debt, a promise of giving value for value, it is not costly to store, and enormous wealth can be saved without the need of space, just keeping track of a number indicating value and a name of who has to redeem the debt. A commodity can be stolen, and when gold was used as a means of exchange enormous wealth could be lost by stealing little amounts of the mineral, but money can not be stolen if the debt has assigned a legitimate owner that is updated when is transferred.

Who can or should issue money? anyone who needs money to buy could issue money without authorisation by the government because money is transferable debt, promise, number indicating value and could exist stored memorised in the mind. The debt would be only accepted if the money is issued by a trustworthy or with good reputation producer of good and services.

What happens if the central bank was the only issuer of money lending out at an interest? The interest can not be paid back simply because the money to do so does not exist. If the central bank lent out 100 dollars at 5% interest to a local bank 105 dollars would have to be returned, but because the central bank is the only issuer and there is only 100 dollars in circulation more money would be needed to be borrowed to pay the interest, but the new money borrowed would have interests and so on so forth.

Why people have to borrow money and pay interests and don’t issue their own money when needed? Because if the money was issued by someone untrustworthy it would not be accepted as payment, and the interest accounts for the risk of not getting paid back and the cost of opportunity (what could have been done with the money if it wasn’t lent out)

In a society were everybody was trustworthy good and services could be exchanged updating money accounts in a notebook, or even memorising in the mind, a number representing value and who created the debt. Money would be issued backed up by good and services and borrowed when the borrower is capable of paying off the debt in the future. Prosperous societies are honest because don’t have the costs associated with guaranteeing there are no thefts.

What if money was not transferable? The economy would be stagnated because the exchange of good and services would only take place between two parties who would offer each other what they need. The baker would only buy from the fishmonger if the fishmonger want bread.

Wealth is the value of good and services that brings wellbeing, happiness. For different people the same good or service has different value, therefore wealth can be created or destroyed allocating the production where is more or less wanted or needed. If a footballer had a basketball and a basketball player had a football wealth would be created exchanging the balls, increasing the utility. Capitalism produces what society most value, indicated by the price, allocating production where is most wanted, most is paid for it, maximising wellbeing or happiness for the same effort. Miners maximise wealth by digging out the most valuable mineral for the same effort. A student maximise wealth studying the subjects to become the best paid professional for the same effort.

To understand cryptocurrencies are worthless regardless of how much people pay for them imagine that you pay good and services for cryptocurrencies and afterwards a virus kills everybody except you and the issuer. Do you understand you are left with a number? On the other hand if you had exchanged your good and services for money you could redeem it for the issuer’s good and services and the debt would be paid off. If instead of money you had received fiat money the issuer in this instance would be considered the borrower that would have the obligation to return the fiat money to the central bank therefore give you good and services for it. Cryptocurrencies market is going to crash when my theory on money is known. My advice is to sell and with your influence make the crash happen. Many people would cry.

The price represents the value of good and services or economic produce, how much money is paid for it, and is established according to the usefulness, cost to produce it, and quantity in the equilibrium of offer and demand when what is offered coincides with what is demanded, so there is no surplus because the price is too high, product not sold because there is no demand for it, or shortage because the price is too low, the demand exceeds the produce on sale. Being the usefulness of commodities the same the higher the cost to produce it the higher would be the price so the benefit for the seller is according to the investment. If the price was the same producers would make the commodity that brings more profit, for being cheaper to produce, bringing the price down until all commodities have equal benefit for equal investment. If a football is cheaper to make than a rugby ball and both have the same usefulness, meaning people are willing to pay the same for both items, the price of the football would be cheaper because if the price was the same the profit for making the football would be higher therefore investors would rather make footballs dropping the price to the point where making footballs or rugbyballs bring equal profit. Basically the price indicates what the society want to be made, what value more, what is willing to pay for more. Like ‘I want you to make for me what i would pay you more for, benefitting us both the most’. How much quantity to produce? The free market would produce the good and services most needed, that bring most profit because are most valued and are paid most for them, bringing the prices down until the point where all commodities made bring the same profit according to the investment. Of what is most valued the market make more, therefore when coal as a means of energy decreased in value some coal mines had to close to keep the producers gaining the same profit. The same principle applies to employees, workers are paid more where are more valued, more needed because bring more usefulness, so if society stop valuing farmers as much and need more IT workers the salary of IT workers would go up and the salary of farmers would go down so the farmers are incentivised to do IT to the point where farmers and IT workers earn the same according with the skills that bring to the market (that would be equivalent of the cost of making a commodity for producers). To determine the price the buyer takes into consideration the usefulness and the producer the cost, so eventually what is asked is “is it useful enough for the price i pay? or is it profitable enough for the cost i pay? Investors would invest money where is most profitable, bringing prices down as the production increases to the point where all investments are equally profitable. What is more profitable, making luxury cars or growing vegetables? If making cars were more profitable investors would invest increasing the offer bringing the price and benefit down to the point where both industries bring the same profit. The profit or price indicates what society want to be produced because is more valuable. Society would produce what is more valued increasing the offer bringing prices down until the point where all that is made is equally profitable. The free market removes the unwanted, rewarding efficiency, good conditions, etc. If an employer mistreat the employees the employees would demand more money for the same job for being the conditions poorer, making the production more costly, and unnecessary costs tend to remove the producer from the market as customers buy at the best price. Capitalism is wisdom.

Price is driven by offer and demand, offer is driven by profit and demand by utility. Buyers ask ‘how much utility brings at this price?’ and sellers ask ‘how much profit brings at this price’? and the price is established in the coincidence of offer and demand so there is neither surplus nor shortage but the amount on sale is the amount that is wanted to be bought. What drives offer and demand is what it is get for what it is given. The more that the buyer gets the less that the seller gets for their money and viceversa, and the price of purchase would benefit both, otherwise the exchange would not take place. The cheaper a product the more amount or people would be willing to buy it but on the other hand the less amount or people would be willing to sell it. Profit is dependent on cost, so knowledge or efficiency whether by improving technology or techniques reduces costs, that would increase profit , that would lure investment, that would drive prices down, that would lure demand, that would drive prices up to a new equilibrium where offer meets demand. Utility is dependent on quantity and decreases as quantity increases, according to the law of marginal diminishing utility. The first mango is more satisfying than the second even if both taste the same.

It is said wrongly that something is as valuable as people are willing to pay for it. Price is what you pay and value what you get. Cryptocurrencies are valueless because regardless of how much money people are willing to pay for a number it would still be a number that the issuer has no obligation to redeem for good and services. Humanity think that gold is valuable because is scarce but the truth is in a survival situation nobody would exchange gold for useful things like food, clothes, housing etc. Value is usefulness that brings wellbeing. Value is not scarcity and fortunes are paid for works of art because are unique for status, distinction, not because are particularly rewarding psychologically.

Wealth is wellbeing, good and services, what a society has that bring utility or happiness. Wealth is currently measured by gdp gross domestic product although is wealthier in terms of happiness a society with less gdp that is not belligerent and don’t spend on military than other that, being everything else the same, use resources on defence because is under threat, because the peaceful society has more idle time to enjoy life, and has the same utility without having to work for the military expenses.

Economics is money in money out, like a game where whoever puts money, numbers, debt, in circulation has to remove them to clear the debt. The more money is issued the more valuable good and services has to be produced to clear the debt. The more is received the more has to be given. How much is produced by the seller is according to how much the buyer wants to buy, that is according to how much the buyer produces and give in return, because the buyer is seller and the seller is buyer, because to receive you have to give at the same price and different value, otherwise the exchange would not take place.

If you don’t have money it doesn’t mean you are poor, it means nobody owe you anything, because money is debt. You can’t buy because you didn’t sell. Wealth is what you actually have, good and services. That is why wars regardless of gdp decrease wealth, destroying and using resources to destroy.

The issuer of money would sell to the highest price possible to clear as much debt as possible allocating the resources where are most wanted, most are paid for them. “If you sell cheaper to someone else i would buy from him what i could have bought from you more expensive benefitting both of us the most.”

The more money is in circulation the more wealthier or more capacity of production has a society as money represents wealth, but is not wealth. If money was a commodity the exchange of good and services would be barter, giving something valuable for something valuable.

Inflation is the general increase in prices due to the increase in demand in relation with the offer. Simply put people are willing to pay more for what they were willing to pay less. Inflation is the increase of prices indicating that the producers have to make more good and services, because are more demanded, therefore more profitable, decreasing the price to the point of a new equilibrium where the profit is proportional to the investment. Inflation is an increase in price because an increase of the demand not followed by an increase in the supply meaning at the price on sale there is not enough supply for all the buyers willing to buy, therefore the price increases to allocate the resources where are most valued. “If you don’t sell it to me i would buy it from whom you sold it to cheaper at a higher price and you would lose a profit”. The increase in demand could be due to an increase in the money supply meaning effectively that the price is lower because money lose acquisitive power so the market readjust self increasing the price, indicating that putting numbers in circulation, or printing money, do not alter wealth or stimulate the economy, but only changes prices. The price indicates value, what society want, in a free market the more valuable is a commodity the more is produced reducing the value to equal the value of all the other commodities. The more we have of something the less we value or want it, the second piece of cake is less appetising than the first, by the law of diminishing marginal utility. Because value indicates what society want the cheaper is something the more is wanted or valued and the more expensive the less.

Deflation is the general decrease in prices due to the decrease in demand in relation with the offer. The society buy less therefore the prices indicate that the producers have to make less. Deflation is the decrease of prices indicating that the producers have to make less good and services, because are less demanded, therefore less profitable, increasing the price to the point of a new equilibrium where the profit is proportional to the investment.

Capitalism self-regulate in equilibrium, equality , what is given is equal to what is received, in agreement, collaboration, victimless, giving to receive at the same price and different value, otherwise the exchange would not take place, allocating resources where are most needed because are paid for most, benefitting seller and buyer the most. If the issuer of money issues money that can not redeem for good and services, not fulfilling the promise of paying off the debt, effectively stealing, he becomes untrustworthy and the money issued becomes valueless. If not enough money is issued the prices would go down and debtors would lose out as a unit of money would increase purchasing power incentivising the creation of more money til the point where the prices are stable and there is not inflation or deflation.

El valor de un bien o servicio es su utilidad, el bienestar que proporciona. El valor del oro es su utilidad intrínseca en joyería o manufactura y no tiene ninguna utilidad metido dentro de una caja fuerte. El precio indica el valor que es aceptado como pago. Cuanto mayor es el coste de producción mayor es el precio y cuanto más cantidad hay menor, y el precio se establece en la coincidencia de la oferta y demanda donde lo ofertado es igual a lo demandado. Comprar para vender no añade valor al bien por lo tanto si se paga más por lo mismo es porque el dinero tiene menos valor, menos poder adquisitivo, por haber mayor cantidad. Si se paga más ahora que en el pasado por el oro es porque el dinero tiene menos valor porque hay más en circulación. Gobiernos inflacionistas imprimen dinero depreciando su valor. ¿Cual es valor de las criptomonedas? El valor de un número, porque las criptomonedas no son redimibles por nada y el emisor de bitcoins está recibiendo bienes a cambio de nada. The gold and cryptocurrencies markets are going to crash.

Inflation decreases the value of money because there is more in circulation being the same production to bid for. In the following piece of news the writer didn’t understand that. “The lira shed 44% of its value against the dollar last year, and fell another 5% on Monday before recovering to trade flat. The drop in the lira has made the price of inflation-fuelling imports more expensive, ranging from energy to many of the raw materials Turkey’s manufacturers turn into exports.” https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-59857420 The drop in value of a currency because there is more of it does not make more expensive or costly imports precisely because if the currency buy less, has less purchasing power, is because there is more of it.

Wealth is created producing and exchanging good and services the utility is increased as the value of what is received is greater for the buyer than for the seller, and the value of what is given is lesser for the seller than the buyer, otherwise the exchange wouldn’t take place, and money is a number, a means to exchange and indicates the value or price in relation to all the other prices, how much is received for what is given according to the offer and demand. Altering the money in circulation only the prices are altered, the wealth keeps being the same.

cryptocurrencies are not money, because are not redeemable for good and services therefore are valueless if not accepted as payment. People are paying money for useless numbers. Once my theory on money is known the crash will occur.

Fiat money is not redeemable for good and services therefore is not money, but works as money because of the trust society put in the government, that issue and lend out the money that would have to be returned, therefore in order to return the money borrowed the borrower would have to sell valuable good and services. If the government buy with the money issued effectively is taxing, decreasing the purchasing power of money creating inflation. What is the difference between the government issuing money to pay for good and services or collecting money from taxpayers ? In both cases the purchasing power is reduced, in one case because there is more money in circulation for the same good and services and in the other because the money is redistributed, from the citizens to the government that spend it. In one case inflation is created and in the other not. The problem of issuing money that has not to be returned to be destroyed, as would be the case if the society were taxed by the government issuing and spending money is that is valueless if not accepted as payment since there is no any obligation to be accepted.

The purpose of investing is to create good and services, value, paying for the means of production to create wealth, a profit according to the nature of the investment, risk, etc. For example buying a ladder to pick up apples higher in the tree increasing the apples collected, therefore the benefit.

Technology reduces the cost of production, creating more wealth for the same investment, effort, money. The technology increases the benefit of the producer as is cheaper to make, luring other investors to increase production that decreases prices and profit to a new equilibrium. Basically with technology advancements the same product is cheaper to produce and to buy, and the cheaper the more is bought because brings more value for the same money, but the producer does not get wealthier because still gets the same profit as before for the investment, because the price is lower as the production increases.

Paying money for money is buying debt with debt and in the exchange neither buyer not seller gain anything as the purchasing power is not altered. If for argument’s sake 1 dollar buys 2 euros means 1 dollar can buy the same as 2 euros can, otherwise the price of exchange would change so neither the buyer nor the seller lose or gain in the transaction.

Capitalism, free market, offer what you want and communism what others, who arrogantly know better, think you should want.

Usefulness is the intrinsic value of something and does not change. A mango tastes the same regardless of price. Value is how much is wanted something and changes according to the price and how much usefulness, utility or wellbeing brings. The first mango tastes better than the second, following the law of diminishing marginal utility. A mango is more valued by a chef than a fishmonger and would pay more for it. Humanity is foolishly paying for gold fortunes because is scarce. We pay for usefulness, wellbeing, happiness. The cheaper the more valuable or wanted is something because requires less money or effort, work to buy it, the more expensive the less valuable is. The more usefulness the more is paid and the less useful the cheaper.

Da fastidio la gente que no trabaja bien. Mentirosos que no dan satisfacción

Economic derivatives minimise risk and although don’t create good or services create value, otherwise the contract wouldn’t take place. Likewise publicity, that don’t create good and services, create value allocating resources where are most wanted. A maker may not know of the existence of a machine that would increase productivity and publicity put in contact seller and potential buyer. Betting companies create wealth or value as entertainment reallocating resources from the loser to the winner, but fundamentally nothing is created and resources are used to offer the service.

All the money in circulation is debt, good and services that have to change hands. Therefore the wealthier is a society, the more good and services are produced, the more money is put in circulation to exchange them. If humanity counted how much money was issued by central banks and how much money is in circulation, and how much was borrowed by local banks would all figures match?

Being everything else the same a country with no gold is wealthier than a country with gold that protects the mineral inside a vault. Being everything else the same imagine a country with a baker, a fishmonger and a singer with no gold and another with a baker, a fishmonger and a guard to protect gold inside a vault. Which one lives better? Which one is wealthier? The country with no gold is wealthier because the baker and fishmonger get entertained by the singer for their money but the country with gold have to work to pay the guard to protect a mineral that offers no wellbeing or wealth because is useless inside a vault. Do you understand? The gold becomes wealth when is used, sparing the cost of protection. Because gold is increasingly more expensive to dig out as there is less underground and is increasingly cheaper to buy as there is more on offer overground there would be a point when nobody would be mining the mineral. The last country to sell the gold in reserves is the foolest. Who do you bet would be? My bet is a communist country.

Why is better capitalism than communism?A planned economy or communism is incompetent simply because the government, or nobody else for that matter, know what are the society’s needs, what do you want. The prices in a free market indicate what and how much society, by buying, want to be produced. What society buy is what is needed to be produced and the higher the profit for the seller the more would eventually be produced, so more is produced of what is more valued, making it affordable.

Capitalism, the free market or voluntary exchange of good and services, rewards results, customer satisfaction, the ultimate objective of economics (the study of the production and allocation of scarce resources to meet society’s needs to an optimum). Communism rewards complying with bureaucracy, filling up forms, following procedures, obeying the command.

Cryptocurrencies are a useless number but money is transferable debt, a number and a name.

Good money drives out bad. Money redeemable for good and services services, or real money, drives out of the market fiat money, let alone cryptocurrencies, as people would keep or save the money that is worth the value that is promised to be given for it and get rid of or buy with the money that is valueless in case that is not accepted as payment. People would not accept bad money if there is good money.

Labor is a service offered to an employer and in economical terms is like a good. The employer ask “How much value do i get for the salary i pay?” and the employee “How much effort do i do for the salary i get?”. Salary is the equivalent of price. Effort is the equivalent of the cost of making the good. Effort would be for instance how many years of education would be required to learn the trade. Value would be the equivalent of the utility or wellbeing that a good brings. The same way when the price of a good or service increases the demand decreases when the minimum salary rises above the free market equilibrium of offer and demand less labor is hired and unemployment rises.

Scarcity brings prices up although the intrinsic value or usefulness remains the same. The more of something the more affordable becomes as the price goes down. What makes the price of gold so expensive is humanity is paying for scarcity instead of value, for its properties, and the price is kept artificially high as the mineral is protected inside a vault.

For an innocent kid what is more useful, a toy or gold? Which one would he pay more for? The kid would not need to ask which one is more scarce, he is wise and pays for utility, he doesn’t buy to sell or speculate. He would ask “can i get the toy somewhere else cheaper?” Capitalism is wisdom and producers make more of what is paid more for, is more wanted, making affordable what is useful.

From a vault of the Bank of England’s gold reserves a journalist ask “It’s incredible to look at, but it doesn’t do anything, why it is so valuable?” and the executive director of the Bank of England answer “Partly because it’s rare, it is a limited supply, you can’t keep making it, the gold here is a store of value, it is globally recognised, people want gold so it creates a market, in itself it doesn’t change value as much as for example currencies, this is more durable than investing in chocolate or something like that” (https://youtu.be/yLLcGmvW8WA)

Why wasn’t mention in the answer that gold is valuable for its utility? Because humanity pay foolishly for scarcity, distinction. Good and services are valuable or wanted because are useful so gold is valuable for its useful properties in jewellery and manufacturing. Scarcity makes something valuable pricey as the free market allocates resources where are most wanted or paid for, and abundance makes the price affordable. Everything that is useful and scarce is a store of value as is sellable.

Capitalism is not competition, but cooperation between investors and workers to make what society need. The free market is wisdom and discard what is not wanted, inefficiency, wastefulness, uselessness and else, like impossibility possible miracle God that discard liars who hurt self. Investors follow the money and buyers follow the investors that make good and services affordable to a point of equilibrium where each unit of money invested in making any good or service generates the same profit maximising utility as more is produced of what is more useful, people are willing to pay more for.

There is not such a thing as investing in gold. Buying to sell gold is speculating because no value is added, therefore is gambling, expecting that in the future the commodity would be more wanted than it is at the time of purchase, because people value more jewellery. Investing is spending money to create value, good and services, that in the uncertain future would be sold for a profit if buyers need what is produced.

Monopolies like competitive companies would try to maximise profit therefore would produce as long as marginal revenue is higher than marginal cost. The more quantity is produced the lower would be the price. Considering that cost to produce are the same for monopolies and competitive companies, monopolies would stabilise a price and quantity of production that is exactly the same as competitive companies. If several competitive farmers sell potatoes the total quantity of potatoes and price to maximise profit would be the same as if only one monopolistic farmer would sell. So even if a merger of companies creates a monopoly if they reduce costs would be beneficial as customers would buy cheaper as the quantity would be higher.

Are the wages of workers dependent on productivity due to capital, so for doing the same job the salary would be higher in a developed country with more capital? The more productive is a worker due to capital the higher is the salary and the least productive due to the capital employed the lower is the salary? is higher the salary for same effort if the productivity is increased due to capital? If the employer provides a worker with a machine that increases productivity would the salary increase? If a worker press a button on a machine periodically and the machine is improved increasing productivity would the salary increase in a free market? The cost to produce would be reduced that would increase profits that would attract investors that would increase production and decrease price, therefore workers would have more purchasing power since with the same salary could buy more.

A currency is money by an issuer. Different issuers create different currencies, that can have the same standard, purchasing power, or not. If 1 dollar bought 1 euro both currencies would have the same standard, that would be what is redeemable or bought for the money. Capitalism rewards honesty as only money from reliable or trustworthy issuers would be accepted and dishonesty pays the price of borrowing money from honest issuers with interests, the higher the untrustworthiness the higher the cost.

Gold is not money, because is not debt, although the gold standard is, because is transferable debt, based on the trust the receiver of the money put on the issuer that the gold that is promised would be given when demanded. Because physical gold was handed in to the bank in order for the bank to hand out money the gold standard is reliable in fulfilling the promise as the gold already exists inside the vault.

Ahorrar es no gastar ahora para gastar después porque el dinero es para gastarlo. Ahorrar es no producir ahora para producir después. Cuando se pone el dinero ahorrado en circulación gastándose se incrementa la demanda que crea inflación, a la que el mercado libre reacciona incrementando la producción.

Una de las ventajas del dinero sobre el trueque es que los bienes y servicios se producen y obtienen cuando se necesitan. Si un panadero compra de un pescadero el pescadero podría poder querer vender su pescado sin necesitar el pan en el momento del intercambio. El oro fue utilizado por la humanidad como si fuese dinero en el trueque porque es duradero, el problema es que el oro es raro y su valor intrínseco o utilidad no corresponde con el valor de lo que se obtiene por él, por lo que al final se paga por su escasez en vez de su utilidad.

Good money drives out bad not only means that redeemable debt removes from the market all other forms of so called ‘money’ like cryptocurrencies and fiat money, but that the more trustworthy currency, from trustworthy issuers, is saved and the less trustworthy is spent and returned to the issuer to be destroyed. If money is issued by a new small business and by a solid big company people would save the currency most likely to be redeemed for good and services on demand and would spend the most risky.

Cryptocurrencies and gold are like a hot potatoe, the owner has what is believed to be money that can turn into a mineral not particularly beautiful or a number when humanity get to know what is money as good money drives out bad.

Humanity have been malfunctioning without money because there is not honesty, trust, love, peace, honour, truth. Neighbour didn’t trust neighbour and didn’t accept the promise of future payment so to exchange goods and services value was demanded for value bartering, and gold is a commodity ideal as a substitute for money, because being rare not much weight or volume had to be carried around to buy much wealth, being divisible can be used as a unit to accurately measure wealth, and being durable the seller can store or save the gold for future use.

Money is free. Money is a promise, a number representing value and a name that indicates who owes the debt, therefore can be created without a cost and stored memorized in the mind. A baker could buy from the Because humanity are not honest have been paying an astronomical price malfunctioning without money, mining, transporting, storing and protecting gold to use the mineral as a unit of measure of value.

Money can not be stolen if the physical form is identified as it would not be accepted, making the theft pointless. Customer’s bank accounts are a number that can not be stolen because transactions of money have an origin and a destination and balances are justified, money can not just appear or disappear.

Money is limitless. Money is a number that represents wealth, value, effort, work, goods and services, therefore is limitless, and the money in circulation tends to infinite as production increases.

Issuers of money can clear or pay off their debt exchanging other issuer’s money or currencies for their own in circulation. If a baker issued money to buy from a fishmonger and received money issued by a singer, the baker could exchange the singer’s debt for his own to pay off his debt, as long as the fishmonger trusted the singer and accepted his money.

Because the supply of money or gold does not match the production the gold standard provokes constant changes in prices at a cost, so if production increases above the supply of gold the price of goods and services decreases and viceversa.

The being the production the same the increase in money supply ‘printing money’ incentivise spending as the purchasing power of money decreases and the decrease in money supply incentives saving as the purchasing power increases.

¿Abofetearías a quien quisieras comerciar, intercambiar voluntariamente, acordar, persuadir? El capitalismo es el intercambio voluntario de bienes y servicios, por lo tanto el imperialismo, conquista, subyugación, esclavitud, control, abuso, imposición, intimidación, agresión, violencia son debidas a la arrogancia del mentiroso que cree saber lo que es mejor para uno mismo y también para los demás, el enemigo del comercio, intercambio, beneficio mutuo, bienestar, persuasión, entendimiento, conocimiento, movimiento, libertad, amor, vida. Se debe prohibir el odio y permitir el amor. El oro no es dinero, ¿porqué la humanidad muere por un mineral? El dinero es gratis y libre, porque puede ser creado para comprar y vender sin autorización porque es deuda transferible, un número, que es una unidad de medida de riqueza o precio, y un nombre, el emisor de la promesa de futuro pago dando valor por valor al mismo precio o valor de mercado y diferente utilidad para comprador y vendedor, de otro modo la transacción no se realizaría, siendo ambos beneficiados igualmente, y puede ser memorizada en la mente. “Te debo x y la deuda la puedes vender comprando. Comprador es vendedor y vendedor es comprador. Te fías de mí?” La quiebra del mercado del oro será el evento más significativo en la historia económica de la humanidad. ¿En caso de anarquismo económico, impago de dinero o no aceptación de oro como pago, con qué es preferible quedarse, con el incumplimiento de una promesa que no tiene coste de creación o destrucción o con oro excavado, transportado, moldeado, guardado, protegido para servir como intermediario en el trueque? El oro es un mineral que no satisface ninguna necesidad primordial, con múltiples substitutos en joyería y manufactura, no particularmente bonito. “Tienes manzanas, tengo plátanos, no te parecería absurdo tener que excavar oro para intercambiarlos? Basta on ponerles un precio y crear dinero para comprar para destruir vendiendo saldando la deuda transferible.” ¿Si el vendedor no acepta una promesa de futuro pago o dinero porque no se fía porqué debería aceptar la mercancía que el comprador le ofrece a cambio en el trueque? Si el comprador no es honesto para cumplir su palabra y quiere engañar también quedrá engañar ofreciendo mercancía que no vale lo que cuesta (estropeada, robada, adulterada, etc)

In the free market the profit goes to whoever creates the value. The salary is the value created by the worker and the company profit the value created by the capital or employer who pays for it. If a footballer increases his value playing better the spectators would be willing to pay more for the entertainment therefore signalling the increase in the ticket prices to avoid surplus (more spectators willing to watch the match than the capacity of the stadium) increasing the profit for the employer and at the same time signalling an increase in the salary for the footballer for the same reason of avoiding surplus (more football managers willing to hire him than his availability to play), therefore if the footballer manager wants to keep the footballer in his team he would have to increase his salary to the point where the salary equals his value. The extra revenue equals the extra cost or salary. On the other hand if the football manager buys more comfortable seats for the spectators the increase in value translates in more profit for the capitalist.

Socialists call taking without asking or giving away someone else’s money “to help others” and wanting to keep the fruits of your own effort, do what you want with your own money, “greediness”. If socialists are so keen to help why don’t they do it with their own money? Liars call capitalists liars believing their own lies to think they are better people than they really are.

%d bloggers like this: