Why does Human Kind Value Computer Digits over everything else?

[Elian]

so all these years i have seen many nations become economically unstable because their digits(or paper money) on the computer is decreasing rapidly and those digits are transferred over to few richest in the country, which result many suffering,hunger,riots and sometimes wars. also if you are sick and if you don't have enough digits on your account you're going to die, if you don't have enough digits you cannot obtain higher knowledge . so my question is, are human beings really intelligent to debate over numbers instead of becoming advanced as a whole? what do you think will happen in the next 100 years?

[noteworthynerd]

Those "digits" translate to a physical currency, and for better or worse, money rules the world.

[Illisar]

so all these years i have seen many nations become economically unstable because their digits(or paper money) on the computer is decreasing rapidly and those digits are transferred over to few richest in the country, which result many suffering,hunger,riots and sometimes wars. also if you are sick and if you don't have enough digits on your account you're going to die, if you don't have enough digits you cannot obtain higher knowledge . so my question is, are human beings really intelligent to debate over numbers instead of becoming advanced as a whole? what do you think will happen in the next 100 years?

Ok, just to make sure I have you right, are you asking why countries as a whole value an economic system? As opposed to a system of ???

Money or digits help fuel countries into being able to create new things and sciences to increase the quality of life, yes there's problems that arise from it, but I wouldn't state that nothing good ever comes from the use/need of money. As opposed to a system of trade/barter for services/resources we've merely replaced what we are trading with, IE you aren't trading say your kidney for a liver transplant, or your kid for a few sacks of grain(both extremes I know.)

I'm really not grasping what you are asking? Are you wondering why we have a barter system or economical system at all and don't just give each other everything?

[Cowt]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communism

[Deleted]

so all these years i have seen many nations become economically unstable because their digits(or paper money) on the computer is decreasing rapidly and those digits are transferred over to few richest in the country, which result many suffering,hunger,riots and sometimes wars. also if you are sick and if you don't have enough digits on your account you're going to die, if you don't have enough digits you cannot obtain higher knowledge . so my question is, are human beings really intelligent to debate over numbers instead of becoming advanced as a whole? what do you think will happen in the next 100 years?

While I get your concern, this may be true to some extents in some parts of the world, but in most countries in north and west europe, you're absolutely not dependant on computer digits for either health or education.

We can probably all agree that the obsession over currency and the control it buys in todays world is apalling, however, I don't think many people see an alternative. A state regulated, receive-according-to-need and perform-according-to-ability economy? Yeah, that's been tried and it plunged large parts of the world into economic dispare more than half a century ago - ramefications that are still felt today.

Fact of the matter is, the world needs a system of bartering. If you come up with a better system than we already have, I'm sure there is a nobel prize or two in it for you.

[Lothaeryn]

Until humanity can create a system that allows for the transfer of goods and rewards services that are acceptable as a form of compensation, the economic currency system that has existed since the dawn of mankind will still be in place.

The money system is a necessary evil, not because the tiny, physically worthless peice of paper has any true value, but because any other means than money simply cannot work as a compensation, because everyone has their own preference in what is acceptable.

Say for instance, if we were using the barter system. If you wanted to buy bread, what would you trade the baker? Unless you were a farmer, you couldn't trade wheat to him, or any form of food he likes (fruits/vegetables come to mind).

In fact, even if you WERE a farmer, the baker may not want or need other types of food. maybe he wants your shovel and hoe, that you use to cultivate your soil to make crops, and you only have one of each.

Would you trade your shovel and hoe for a loaf of bread? I dont think so. Because then youd have to trade something else for a new one of those tools, which could in turn could very well be the bread you just bought.

See the problem here?

The barter system creates a situation where you may not be able to live by your means because the demands for goods are completely unpredictable, no matter what you have, if you want something, you either find a way to make it yourself, or you have to trade something valuable to you that could hinder you in the future for something that may be necessary for you to survive.

This is why the currency system exists, it is an object that is used to project a fictional value that can be used to buy other goods an individual may want, and instead of trading off your shovel, you can trade this piece of paper to get that bread from that baker.

The problem with currency comes from humanity's own greed, people like to feel like they can get anything they want, they like being able to hold onto their property, and when it comes to money, they feel you can never have enough. Its like an addiction, and many people will kill others just to get a small bit of this "fake" valued object.

In essence, currency has been a substitute trade system that has never been replaced, it just exists because humanity is too greedy over a fictional sense of worth to change it, because they don't like feeling less powerful.

[Wreckeded]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communism

Communism can work, the whole world just has to get on board. Make it happen.

[Deleted]

Ok, just to make sure I have you right, are you asking why countries as a whole value an economic system? As opposed to a system of ???

Yeah, let's drop currency! Let's go back to the basics of trade. You're offering me a car? I'll trade you 10 chickens for them!

[Deleted]

Those "digits" translate to a physical currency, and for better or worse, money rules the world.

For every 100 digital money only about 1-5 physical money exists (depending on what currency we're speaking of).

But yeah, fiat currencies have no intrinsic value, their value is derived from the fact that everyone else perceives them to have value. And this is mostly because of legislation that says you need to pay taxes in X currency and so on. Otherwise the marketplace would by itself come up with a medium of exchange, such as gold. Gold's intrisic value is debatable as well.

[starlord]

Cause its easier to carry around 10$ than 10 chickens. And even more easy to have a card with 10 digits, as you say.

[Lilcheeks]

Yeah, let's drop currency! Let's go back to the basics of trade. You're offering me a car? I'll trade you 10 chickens for them!

Still based on digits when it comes down to it.

Always has, always will.

[Deleted]

Communism can work, the whole world just has to get on board. Make it happen.

Unlikely... It might work on a smaller scale such as in a small village where everyone knows everyone and does everything to help each-other get by, but on a wider scale humans as a whole simply are too selfish and greedy.

[Lothaeryn]

The main problem with economies are people who exploit the system, while they gain wealth, they effectively pull money out of the economy, when people become more and more rich, they drain resources from other areas of the economy, which is what is happening for the most part in today's economy.

I wish there was a system of a "wealth cap" in place, where one can only obtain a certain amount of money within their account. Once they reach that cap, the excess money they generate is allocated to others in their local community, and the wealth slowly spreads. While this idea closely shares a pattern similar to communism, it still rely's on that person's own rate of success to affect others. the guy who makes 120,000 a year isnt going to reach the cap as fast as the guy who makes 1 million from their job.

However, with this sort of system, the problem that would emerge is a long-term inflation of prices, as people become more wealthy, the value of the currency will decrease. On top of this, it could potentially encourage laziness by a select few people, who mooch off of other peoples success because the guy next door is making so much money your getting benefit from whatever income he doesn't receive due to the cap.

Its a rough Idea I've had, but maybe with a some refinements it could work

[metaphyzxx]

Until humanity can create a system that allows for the transfer of goods and rewards services that are acceptable as a form of compensation, the economic currency system that has existed since the dawn of mankind will still be in place.

The money system is a necessary evil, not because the tiny, physically worthless peice of paper has any true value, but because any other means than money simply cannot work as a compensation, because everyone has their own preference in what is acceptable.

Say for instance, if we were using the barter system. If you wanted to buy bread, what would you trade the baker? Unless you were a farmer, you couldn't trade wheat to him, or any form of food he likes (fruits/vegetables come to mind).

In fact, even if you WERE a farmer, the baker may not want or need other types of food. maybe he wants your shovel and hoe, that you use to cultivate your soil to make crops, and you only have one of each.

Would you trade your shovel and hoe for a loaf of bread? I dont think so. Because then youd have to trade something else for a new one of those tools, which could in turn could very well be the bread you just bought.

See the problem here?

The barter system creates a situation where you may not be able to live by your means because the demands for goods are completely unpredictable, no matter what you have, if you want something, you either find a way to make it yourself, or you have to trade something valuable to you that could hinder you in the future for something that may be necessary for you to survive.

This is why the currency system exists, it is an object that is used to project a fictional value that can be used to buy other goods an individual may want, and instead of trading off your shovel, you can trade this piece of paper to get that bread from that baker.

The problem with currency comes from humanity's own greed, people like to feel like they can get anything they want, they like being able to hold onto their property, and when it comes to money, they feel you can never have enough. Its like an addiction, and many people will kill others just to get a small bit of this "fake" valued object.

In essence, currency has been a substitute trade system that has never been replaced, it just exists because humanity is too greedy over a fictional sense of worth to change it, because they don't like feeling less powerful.

This is the most concise and accurate explanation for the question I think is possible to be given. "Money" is meant to be a tangible representation of work and effort, put into a exchangeable form. The money itself has a socially predetermined value, but no intrinsic value to itself. The real problem comes with the valuation of the work for which money is meant to be a compensation, not the monetary system itself. That teachers are known to provide one of the most necessary of services in any advanced society, and are also pressed with ever-increasing challenges to that task, and yet are some of the lowest paid professionals is known to be appalling. That having a bachelor's degree in basket weaving often qualifies someone for the same monetary compensation as 20 years of work experience is tragic. That theoretic training in university is viewed as more valuable that hands-on apprenticeship saddens me personally... What's needed is a manner of standardizing how to value effort, education, and societal benefits of work done.

[Deleted]

The main problem with economies are people who exploit the system, while they gain wealth, they effectively pull money out of the economy, when people become more and more rich, they drain resources from other areas of the economy, which is what is happening for the most part in today's economy.

Pure humbug.

"Most economic fallacies derive from the tendency to assume that there is a fixed pie, that one party can gain only at the expense of another." -Milton Friedman

The economy isn't zero-sum.

[Felya]

Pure humbug.

"Most economic fallacies derive from the tendency to assume that there is a fixed pie, that one party can gain only at the expense of another." -Milton Friedman

The economy isn't zero-sum.

Accept success at economics involves having more of the pie than anyone else. This is achieved by simply gaining more than anyone else, but can also be reached by not gaining anything of your own, but destroying the worth of others.

---------- Post added 2011-11-29 at 05:55 PM ----------

Communism can work, the whole world just has to get on board. Make it happen.

Isn't China becoming the most powerful nation in the world? Aren't they communist? Doesn't that mean it's already working? It's not China that owes trillions of dollars to the capitalist world, but the capitalist world that is in debt to a single communist nation.

Don't get me wrong, they couldn't have gotten there without capitalist corporations reaching out for the cheapest production they could. But, if the free market dictates cheapest labor is in a communist nation, than what happens to capitalism and the free market?

[v2prwsmb45yhuq3wj23vpjk]

It's called currency. I think you mean "Why does human kind value money over everything else?"

Pure humbug.

"Most economic fallacies derive from the tendency to assume that there is a fixed pie, that one party can gain only at the expense of another." -Milton Friedman

The economy isn't zero-sum.

Just because somebody CAN gain money without hurting others does not mean that they ARE.

[Deleted]

Accept success at economics involves having more of the pie than anyone else. This is achieved by simply gaining more than anyone else, but can also be reached by not gaining anything of your own, but destroying the worth of others.

Except I'm not happy if my style of living stays like it is now and everyone elses decline. I am however happy if my living standard increases, regardless of how everyone elses does.

Just because somebody CAN gain money without hurting others does not mean that they ARE.

Sure, but I understood he meant the economy in general. The part of the economy where you gain at the expense of others is small.

[Lilcheeks]

Isn't China becoming the most powerful nation in the world? Aren't they communist? Doesn't that mean it's already working? It's not China that owes trillions of dollars to the capitalist world, but the capitalist world that is in debt to a single communist nation.

Don't get me wrong, they couldn't have gotten there without capitalist corporations reaching out for the cheapest production they could. But, if the free market dictates cheapest labor is in a communist nation, than what happens to capitalism and the free market?

http://finance.fortune.cnn.com/2011/...re-still-poor/

[Deleted]

But, if the free market dictates cheapest labor is in a communist nation, than what happens to capitalism and the free market?

We enjoy cheap goods at the expense of poor suckers who can't use the wealth we give them for their goods because they have an oppressive government that takes away the dollars we give them?