The social licence of money

One of the things I read a fair bit about is a set of arguments along the lines that governments will never run out of money as “they can just print more money”. 

The official counter argument to that gets in to the notion that physical money is a token of certain numeric value (i.e., a $5 note, a 20 cent coin, etc), which goes back to the days when it used to be an actual physical lump of metal literally worth the numeric value given to it (a pound came from the actual one pound weight of silver coins), which fairly quickly became a piece of metal stamped with images whereby the image gave surety that it would be accepted as having a certain numeric value, and that eventually became our systems of printed paper and polymer money and assorted smaller coins. 

Direct exchange has largely disappeared, although it is used informally - to the disquiet of governments, which wish to be able to tax all activities and exchanges with an ascribed numeric value. 

The point I consider everyone is missing is that the worth, as opposed to the numeric value, of money is subject to a social licence. 

When “the public” loses confidence in the worth of money, we can get runs on and collapses of banks, collapses  of  markets, and rampant (hyper) inflation. 

As the daughter of a bank manager, I realised this fairly early in life - and found it frustrating to my leftist meanings.

However, what I have realised as I grew up is: 

• the perceived or accepted worth in the social licence of money is being egregiously warped, distorted and biased by the ultra-wealthy elites - the 1% of the 1% -  and their sock puppets - especially those in the economic field.
  

This means that people who accept, for instance, that particular shares are worth X, or that rents/profits as a percentage must be Y, or that certain actions that harm society are justifiable, are mindlessly feeding that viral infection of the elites into the social licence of money, whereas they should be challenging those notions/pronouncements and taking a broader perspective - the sort of perspective that recognises the worth of unpaid work, the social value of direct exchanges (i.e., barter), Pay It Forward, volunteerism, and the need for governments to spend money on social needs and to be Keynesian. 

THIS is one of the battlefields where we can seek control of our world again, and is an area that many people can take part in - e.g., don’t seek more than 10% return, don’t charge as much as you can for things you are selling - just what is ethical, and ignore the elite’s much loved law of supply and demand - i.e., don’t increase prices  beyond what is reasonable just because it is in increased demand under current circumstance. 

Research the anti-corporate thinking that led to the original Star Trek series being set in a world that didn’t  have money. Be wary of economic analyses of the type that, for instance consider the numeric costs of a UBI without commensurate considerate of the social benefits (worth) - especially with regard to mental health. 

The economic systems we have now are largely oligarchical: they have no resemblance to what Adam  Smith was writing about, and they have a power that comes from inculcated unquestioning obedience. 

They are being enabled by many of the pronouncements of officialdom in economics: challenge those - or at least don’t accept them without question or thought.

But denying the social licence aspects of the worth of money - especially by focusing on numeric value - will not help us change that. We have to acknowledge and understand that, and work with it. - and we have to feed in to debates, so that it is not only the elites who have a voice. 

PS - controlled economies of the type in the old USSR do NOT work, and are an even worse solution.

Possible flaws 

Where I can, I will try to highlight possible flaws / issues you should consider:

• there may be flawed logical arguments in the above: to find out more about such flaws and thinking generally, I recommend Brendan  Myers’ free online course “Clear and Present Thinking”; 
  
• I could be wrong - so keep your thinking caps on, and make up your own minds for yourself.
  

 

If you appreciated this post, please consider promoting it - there are some links below.

Vote Yes for the Voice in Australia.  

Finally, remember: we need to be more human being rather than human doing.