Have you Ever been Swept Off Your Feet?

In both cases – whether the bubble was inflated with positive or negative energy – the participants in the bubble are being swept away further and further away from actual physical reality and start to see everything either ‘extremely negatively’ or ‘extremely positively’ – neither experience is grounded in reality – because the physical is neither positive or negative – it just is what it is.

And Then You Crash – Meconomics

In this little series, we’ve been investigating the phenomenon of inflation, how we in our daily lives participate in ‘inflating our reality’ and so, how we are on a personal level participating in the same principles/dynamics that we see playing out on a bigger scale when it comes to inflation, speculative bubbles and financial market crashes.

Welcoming New Life with Living Income Guaranteed

Comfort, security and nurturing are all things we wish are present when a baby comes into this world. Yet, these conditions are not a reality for many babies, as parents themselves like these things in their lives. In Pietermaritzburg, the capital of KwaZulu Natal province in South Africa, 3 to 5 babies are…

Humanity Washed Ashore

This was an excerpt of just one of the stories about the boy. Over the last few days, dozens have been written and published on various major news sites. What is more striking than the content of the posts, is the comments that are left on these articles. What is humanity’s response to such images, to such news?

Voting Fun – What does it Feel Like to Have a Say?

Now – before such increased direct political participation is a reality – let’s do a little test to see what it feels like. So – here are some mock-questions where you’re asked to give your input. Imagine that this relates to your direct reality (eg. your town) – and your answer has a weight that influences the outcome of the decision. Of course, in reality…

Showing posts with label functions. Show all posts
Showing posts with label functions. Show all posts

02 May 2013

Day 219: Equality and Human Rights

While Maite will be walking the Justice point as a blog-series, I will be walking the point of Equality at the same time within a series of blog-posts.

We’ll be investigating and walking the various dimensions from which people interpret the word Equality, and practically walk the process of establishing a definition and perspective on Equality which we can practically apply and live by within this world.

Some of the points will be looking at are:
  • The ‘natural inequality of human beings’
  • Equality as a Moral Ideal
  • Equality of Opportunity vs Equality of Outcome
  • Economic Equality
  • Justifications for Inequality
  • The ‘Problems of Equality’

Within walking and exploring these points we want to show how our current definition and understanding of Equality is contradictory and inadequate (and sometimes even plain preposterous) – and debunk some of the most common arguments that justify human inequality.

Where does this ‘Natural Inequality’ Story come from?

When we go way back in history, there is account of claims of natural human inequality as far back as the Classical Period. Both Plato and Artistotle stated that humans were naturally unequal, as well as being unequal in the functions or tasks that they perform (which is mostly what the claim of ‘inequality’ is founded on).

Since then, when people reflect on the concept of Equality, it is mostly done from the starting point of what characteristics we as human exhibit, and what functions we perform. From there, a connection is drawn that since we are different, we must be unequal. Note that within such a statement, an implicit assumption is made that equality and sameness is somehow closely related, especially in terms of “empirical” characteristics.

When we look at Equality and the relationship of Humans to the concept of Equality, in terms of what we ‘derive’ our Equality from, we are in essence making a value judgment. Back in the day, it is obvious within how Equality was viewed, that a value judgment was made which regarded one’s characteristics which would define one’s function in society as ‘important’, and used that variable as the baseline from which each one’s Equality was ‘measured’. Philosophers like Plato placed much value into ‘reason’ and ‘wisdom’ which enabled the philosopher to determine what is ‘good’ and ‘virtuous’, and were supposedly the ‘only ones who knew reality’. Within doing so, a distinction was made between ‘the people’ and ‘the philosophers’ which regarded philosophers as ‘more than’ a “normal” person, because their reasoning and insight were inadequate and incomplete. In modern times, this idea still sticks but can be translated into a more capitalistic notion where “those who are smart, ambitious and industrious are ‘more than’ those who aren’t”. Plato’s and Aristotle’s statements on Human Equality were never really questioned, and to this day – the same reasoning is still being applied to justify unequal treatment of Human Beings, and any other Life Form for that matter.


A statement was made that because ‘we exhibit differences, we must be unequal’ – and everyone just went with it.

Within the next blog we’ll be questioning this statement and explore where our Equality comes from, if it does not lie within the capacities we exhibit – then what or where do we derive our Equality from?

Stay tuned!
Enhanced by Zemanta

14 August 2012

Day 67: The Functions of Money

Money as a Medium of Exchange

In a barter economy, one can only trade goods for other goods. If you want/require something like for instances clothes, and you only have wheat yourself which you cultivate, you need to find someone who can supply you with clothes and at the same time demands wheat.
For a trade to take place, a double coincidence of wants needs to be in place. Trading goods for goods can be limiting as one might have to first trade wheat with someone who has carrots, trade the carrots with someone else for spinach, and then go back to the person with the clothes because spinach is something he/she's willing to trade for clothes.

This type of inefficiency led people in even early primitive communities to come up with some form of money (for instance obsidian) to facilitate the exchange of goods. The advantage of a monetary economy is that the requirement of the double coincidence of wants falls away. As long as the wheat farmer can find someone who wants to buy his wheat, he can buy clothes with the money received for the wheat.
Money then serves as an intermediary to facilitate the process of exchange, making it more efficient.

Money from this perspective is anything that is generally accepted as payment for goods or services or that is accepted in settlement of debt.

What makes money "special" is that it is accepted as payment because people believe that it will be accepted as payment by other people. In England in the 12th century for instance, they came up with 'tally sticks' as a medium of exchange, which was basically a piece /stick of wood with notches in it. The use and exchange of money is thus completely dependent on its acceptance and belief of people as it being 'money' and it being 'valid'/'valuable' -- and so is completely based upon agreement.

Money does not have to be 'backed up' by anything such as gold or silver -- as again gold and silver are simply materials which we've decided to give value -- but that doesn't make them valuable in fact. Backing up money with 'gold' or 'silver' is then simply 'backing up money with another form of money' and does not make the money more 'real' / 'valuable' / 'better'.

Money as a Unit of Account

A unit of account is an agreed measure for expressing the prices of goods and services. In a money economy the prices of goods and services are expressed in monetary terms and so money also functions as a unit of account. The accounting function of money is secondary to that of the function as a medium of exchange.

Also note that money can lose its usefulness as a unit of account when going through a period of inflation, as when prices increase but your income/savings stay the same = you get less for the same amount of money.

Money as a Store of Value

Money also functions as a store of value. The most common form of holding wealth is money, as it is something which you can easily exchange for something else at any point in time.

There are other forms of storing value, such as property, stocks, shares etc. Of all the different forms of stores of value, money is the most 'liquid' one (since its easily exchangeable).

Holding / storing wealth in the form of money over long periods overtime also has very definitive disadvantages. Overtime, inflation progresses and your money will slowly but surely lose some of its value overtime (and will diminish a lot in periods of hyperinflation). In short, during inflation your money does not retain its value.
 n the long run, one is better off storing one's wealth in the form of property, Art, precious metals, etc. As prices increases, the prices of your Art pieces will also increase, and so will retain its value better than money in its simple form.

Money's function as a store of value also implies that it can be used as a standard of deferred payment. This practically means that money also works as the measure of value for future payments.