im going to restate the fundamental questions since there has been 3 pages of "run-around" now.
"let me cite my previous example in another way to illustrate "what im getting at".
i spend 1 day laboring. i am offered a choice; either the fruits of my labor, or a symbolic placeholder for said...
GOOD! back to the rational stuff then.
Economics - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Economics is the social science that analyzes the production, distribution, and consumption of goods and services. The term economics comes from the Ancient Greek...
alright lets do this another way.
assume that i accept the premise that we are better off.
if economics is an irrational system, it cannot be responsible for our being better off.
EDIT;
or at least you cannot prove that there is a causal relationship. EVEN IF they seem to correlate.
EDIT;
on...
in order to answer that question we must define the "standard". this is the problem we are faced with.
the quality of life assertion is baseless until we define our "standard".
for instance i could simply disagree that we live in "better" general terms.
define "better".
it is...
rational systems and irrational systems cannot interact.
at best, they may be able to interact, but only in completely unpredictable ways.
what use can we derive from unpredictable systems?
physics is the science of reality. if economics wants to exist IN REALITY, it must correlate with physics.
i am actually fairly well read on economic philosophy.
i am not coming here truly for the purpose of learning how these systems work, but for the purpose of illustrating how they do not...
yes although, that does not prove an intrinsic nature.
are you supposing that it is not a rational science? what is "undefined science"?
if systems do not correlate, they can not interact, money is superfluous then? are you familiar with substance dualism?
yes these are the dynamics i am...
value is not intrinsic! it is subjective!
"intrinsic or intrinsical (ɪnˈtrɪnsɪk)
— adj
1. of or relating to the essential nature of a thing; inherent "
you cannot say money is naturally worth what it is worth. thats cyclic.
the money supply cannot be inflated...
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...
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...
i dont understand your comments regarding money creation and "velocity".. is this the speed new money is created at?
i understand your comment about performance not being related to monetary reward potential. i dont think thats in question.
which question would you like restated? there...