c0resonance
Rookie
- Sep 17, 2012
- 22
- 3
- 1
- Thread starter
- #21
The 3% was the productivity gains vs. specie of that period. The most famous case of productivity outstripping demand satiation is Moore's law. Computing costs decline by 41% per year but demand does not increase by 70% per year (the reciprocal, 1/0.59)Start with a wage, deal with money creation in the financial system and how fast money turns over. But the instability of the money system due to an impedance of about 3% was known in the 1930s. The problem area is that productivity gains in new technologies cause the supply curve to parallel the demand curve and economists don't know what to do about that.
im not trying to invent a system. im asking how the one we have works.
in the case of a wage, how would i know how much to ask for? how are the value of commodities defined?
i would need to know the "costs of living" before i could ask for how much wage i needed.
3% impedance? from what?
in physics it would be due to electromagnetic induction. what is the mechanism in economics?
i would need an example of the the concept you illustrated about supply curve and demand curves. is this relevant to my questions?
how is it that productivity gains = loss in value of money? it seems as though things should just get cheaper to buy as they get cheaper to manufacture.
i still dont understand how the value of money, or any other commodity is defined.... seems like an important first step before we cant talk about incline or decline of said value.
Last edited: