0 sats \ 1 reply \ @Undisciplined 9 Jan 2023
I'll offer some nuance, or maybe just nitpicks. When Hoppe and other Austrians distinguish currencies and money, part of that has to do with currencies only serving some of the roles of money, or serving the roles poorly.
The article brings up that currency isn't the main store of value for most people, they have assets. Partly, there's no issue with this as no Austrian to my knowledge has ever claimed money would be the sole form of wealth, but the fact that fiat currencies are such poor stores of value is a knock on them as monies. There is perhaps another distinction to be made here between entrepreneurial investment and savings. I think the general Austrian claim would be that people do not save in fiat currencies because they are poor, or incomplete, monies.
Fiat currencies are also imperfect as units of account, because there is no universal currency across the globe.
Both of these issues might be said to simply illustrate that there is no true money, yet. Hoppe argues that eventually one money will out compete the others and it would do so by serving as the general medium of exchange, store of value, and unit of account.
reply
10 sats \ 0 replies \ @DiracDelta OP 9 Jan 2023
I should have referenced this paper, which is not source material, but a more recent interpretation claiming that the monetary functions all arise from the good that is most saleable. https://www.cato.org/blog/three-pronged-blunder-or-what-money-what-it-isnt
I suppose the general concept is there is excessive focus on economic questions related to spot positions, as opposed to legibilizing the fact that most people are holding futures of sorts, and allowing the moneyness of their futures to harden. Money is needed because we have imperfect information, but that does not mean we can radically improve predictions about the future for the interim time without sound money being widely adopted.
Preferences for the future are actually not as subjective as one might think: a steak, a pile of bamboo sticks, or a cellphone -- which one would each individual out of 100 people choose for lunch? -- clearly desires are far more objective than one might realize with a cursory glance.
reply
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @melvincarvalho 8 Jan 2023
The forgotten fourth function of money is giving
reply
0 sats \ 5 replies \ @rothbardllc 8 Jan 2023
Here's a law of writing:
The more jargon, the less value.
Accordingly, couldn't get through your introductory paragraph.
reply
0 sats \ 4 replies \ @DiracDelta OP 9 Jan 2023
You are welcome to simply read the original source by William Jevons, Money and the Mechanism of Exchange, which is in the public domain.
https://www.econlib.org/library/YPDBooks/Jevons/jvnMME.html
Jevons is also the guy behind Jevons paradox -- "total value" is maximized by writing at the level of a 14-year-old, assisted by Hemingway app to confirm if the goal is maximizing eyeballs. What you would find to be the sufficiently jargon-free version would still be above the reading level of the median American.
reply
0 sats \ 3 replies \ @rothbardllc 9 Jan 2023
This is 'sort of' jargony bullshit.
But you do you.
reply
0 sats \ 2 replies \ @DiracDelta OP 9 Jan 2023
Ah, yes -- not to worry, the regurgitations for normies like you will be out in about 3 years by my estimates.
You wrote about gold and stocks for decades and didn't get into bitcoin until 2019? Remarkably bad at the one thing you were doing in life and it still do not cure your arrogance or lack of curiosity it seems. The intro was a long enough interruption without holding your hand to explain each term to you.
It is not mere ignorance of the extremely specific functions being described, but a disgusting lack of aesthetic inclination.
The world is built on math & physics -- the world of bullshit is built from people like you who wrote newsletters on stocks & gold for decades.
But you do you.
reply
0 sats \ 1 reply \ @rothbardllc 9 Jan 2023
You are a sad little pseudo-intellectual. You can have the last word. Good luck to you.
reply
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @DiracDelta OP 9 Jan 2023
Fuck off, you statist cuck. I had to figure this shit out because of retard grifters like you doing fake work their entire lives talking about gold and stocks. You've clearly never met many engineers. Go back to your circles of dimwit Cantillionaires who pontificate on stocks and get off the internet.
You named yourself Rothbard and don't like reading pieces on economics written in a different style than you are used to? You, dumb, mother, fucker -- that's the only pseudo-intellectualism here.🤦♂️ I never claimed to be an intellectual. 🤡🤡🤡
reply