Define "Dollar"

[roo_ster]

MR:

I think your quoted writer is missing out on a few things.

Money is an idea and an agreement and a convenience.  Gold, paper currency, sea shells, livestock, whatever can all serve as tokens if agreed upon.

...even our largest bank, Comerica (namesake for the Detroit Tigers newish stadium) is leaving for Texas.

Somebody don't forget to turn off the lights.

Sorry for the thread hijack.....Back to your normal conversations.....

Well, Dallas is used to losing the big corporate fish.  It is nice to land one every once in a while. What did y'all do to make them want to leave?  They have been in Detroit for a furred omnivore's age.

[Guest]

MR:

I think your quoted writer is missing out on a few things.

Money is an idea and an agreement and a convenience.  Gold, paper currency, sea shells, livestock, whatever can all serve as tokens if agreed upon.

 Well, no one agreed to fiat curency; it was decreed. But I guess we shall see how this works out. Remember, this new condition (no commodity backing for the dollar) is only about 35 years old.

Price's main point is that when someone accepts US dollars for goods or services, no actual payment has yet been made (they have not received any corresponding goods or services).

[The Rabbi]

That would imply that all contracts are invalid since there is no consideration.
Lotsa luck with that half-baked theory.

[Headless Thompson Gunner]

a dollar - a unit of collective illusion

Given that the concepts of trade and money depend upon perceptions of value, "collective illusion" is an oxymoron.  If the perception truly is collective, then it isn't an illusion.  If a dollar is collectively believed to be worth XYZ, then it ain't an illusion, it's a fact.  That dollar is worth XYZ. 

When it comes to trade, perceptions are reality.  This is something the fiat-phobes don't readily grasp.  My FRNs have intrinsic value, by virtue of the fact that some 300 million Americans (plus a few billion foreigners) say they do.  There are darned few places in the world where I wouldn't be able to trade my FRNs for something valuable.

[CAnnoneer]

When it comes to trade, perceptions are reality.  This is something the fiat-phobes don't readily grasp. 

People that believe so get a dose of cold objective reality on a periodic basis. Good luck with your wallpaper.

[roo_ster]

I have some buddies who play ongong, interactive games online.  I don't do PC games, myself, but they brought to my attention somehting that blew my socks off:
The bogus, virtual, exists-only-in-cyberspace-game currency in some of these online games is fungible in the real world.  Not only that, it is is more convertable than many meat-world currencies, since the means of exchange is completely open, voluntary, and not controlled by a central authority.

They are examples of a bunch of folks getting together and deciding that some currency is worth somehting and than acting on that idea/agreement.

I think that is probably the purest example of a currency that is nothing but an agreement between free individuals to accept it.  No gov't, no gold, just folks.

[Headless Thompson Gunner]

When it comes to trade, perceptions are reality.  This is something the fiat-phobes don't readily grasp.

People that believe so get a dose of cold objective reality on a periodic basis. Good luck with your wallpaper.

And you feel that a gold standard or a pile of shiny baubles will save you from the uncertainties of the future?  Markets are social beasts, they rise and fall on collective perceptions, on crowd mentality, on fear and greed and panic.  Public perceptions frequently eviscerate your "cold objective reality", whatever that is.

If you choose to rely on gold, be aware that gold's value is just as dependent upon perceptions as anything else.  Unless you have an electronics factory in your back pocket, gold has zero utility value.  Gold, like FRNs, are worth only what someone else will trade for them.  FRNs may not have a utility value either, but at least serve as currency, backed by the perceptions and self-interests of a bazillion different people. 

[Matthew Carberry]

Human beings, well some of them, have intrinsic value both in the short term for organs and such and in the long term as machines.

We should use them for money.

[Guest]

Human beings, well some of them, have intrinsic value both in the short term for organs and such and in the long term as machines.

We should use them for money.

 They do not store well.

[The Rabbi]

High maintenance and a depreciation rate like a new Caddy.

[Matthew Carberry]

 

[Cosmoline]

Are we back to the whole gold/silver standard nonsense again? 

[K Frame]

It's a concept.

If you buy into the concept, it has value.

If you don't, well, you're screwed because most other people buy into the concept.

[CAnnoneer]

The bogus, virtual, exists-only-in-cyberspace-game currency in some of these online games is fungible in the real world.  Not only that, it is is more convertable than many meat-world currencies, since the means of exchange is completely open, voluntary, and not controlled by a central authority.

Sounds like World of Warcraft to me.

To be able to sell significant amounts of "gold" on ebay etc., people have to play the game a lot to "farm" it. Apparently, the game was initially balanced for a large fun factor, so getting gold and good items was no problem. However, the emerging market of conversion among "gold", "magical items", and dollars made some hardcore gamer wankers protest to Blizzard about the "farming" methods. That's no surprise since 100g could be sold for about $8, which is still a lot of money in China. In addition, hackers would try to generate their own items and sell them for dollars.

So, Blizzard became .gov and cracked down on "farming" and item exchange practices to prevent this "abuse", making the game a lot less fun for the average legal user, compromising software stability, instituting spyware and continuous monitoring, and also banning about 30,000 accounts per month on the basis of use of illegal items. So, if somebody sells you or gives you an item within the game, which happens to be flagged as counterfeit, you are automatically banned no matter if you even knew about it, thereby destroying many months of leveling on the experience treadmill. You can't protest, because customer service is overwhelmed with millions of users.

If the above sounds interesting to you as a curiosity, be sure to visit Amazon and read some customer feedback on the game. There are some amazing stories.

[Guest]

Are we back to the whole gold/silver standard nonsense again? 

 I only intended to have people try to define the dollar. Gold and silver bear no direct relationship to the dollar.

 Now, we also have "concept", "token", "collective illusion", "specie" and "wallpaper". 

 Guess it isn't that easy to define the dollar.

[K Frame]

Homer Simpson: Ah-ha!  [looks, then says remorsefully] Oh, twenty dollars...I wanted a peanut!"

Homer's Brain: Twenty dollars can buy many peanuts!

Homer: "Explain how."

Homer's Brain: Money can be exchanged for good and services.

[Headless Thompson Gunner]

Are we back to the whole gold/silver standard nonsense again? 

 I only intended to have people try to define the dollar. Gold and silver bear no direct relationship to the dollar.

 Now, we also have "concept", "token", "collective illusion", "specie" and "wallpaper". 

 Guess it isn't that easy to define the dollar.

It'd become a lot easier to define if you'd quit selectively ignoring the best definitions people have offered here.  "Currency of the United States" is a sensible, simple, and accurate way to define the dollar, yet you keep ignoring that definition in favor of stupidities like "collective illusion" and "token."

It's only as difficult as you make it.  So quit making it difficult. 

[K Frame]

Here's a definition that I think Mercedes would like, Headless...

"The American Dollar - symbol of opression in the world today, used in the unequitable exchange for tangible goods, such as oil, as a means of supporting America's vast hunger for resources at the expense of the poor, huddled masses both in the United States and around the globe. Also used to bribe oppressive governments that have vassaled themselves to America's corrupt leadership..."

and so forth and so on...

[Gewehr98]

Re: "WarCrack"...

I have two adult stepsons who are very much involved in that whole WarCrack virtual game gold thing.  That's all they do, from the time they get home from work until they head back to work in the morning.  Sleep is an option, lord forgive them if they fall asleep at work. On weekends, it's just like the old Dungeons & Dragons thing, they see little daylight from Friday night until Monday morning.

So yeah, people are earning lots of gameplay points (or faux virtual gold, as it were).  That's not so hard to believe, considering the hours spent online.  In essence, they have no life, and no initiative with which to get a life. They're perfectly content with their online quest as a substitution for interaction with real people out on the street. With any luck, I *might* get them out of my house and into society on their own two feet by the time they're 30 or so.  (The eldest being 27 right now) 

Mike, +1000 on your MR-aligned definition of dollar.  Power to the man!

[Cosmoline]

CAnnoneer, I've heard about that, and similar cyber economies that have developed.  I'm betting someone gets a prize in economics for studying how that all happened.  Anytime you bring people together, in real life or not, they seem to follow the same economic patterns.  Whether or not the goods, services, or money are "real" really doesn't mean squat.  If they are seen as valuable, they are valuable.  Gold is no more real than a dollar.  Or to put it another way, sufficient amounts of cyber gold is as real as a dollar. 

[Guest]

Are we back to the whole gold/silver standard nonsense again? 

 I only intended to have people try to define the dollar. Gold and silver bear no direct relationship to the dollar.

 Now, we also have "concept", "token", "collective illusion", "specie" and "wallpaper". 

 Guess it isn't that easy to define the dollar.

It'd become a lot easier to define if you'd quit selectively ignoring the best definitions people have offered here.  "Currency of the United States"...

I don't see that quote anywhere but I did quote Rabbi's "unit" where he said "unit of currency in the U.S." in my first wrap-up. If you want, I can edit it to include the rest.

 Anyone that is satisfied with "currency of the United States" is free to exit the discussion. To me, the "dollar" still seems somewhat imaginary...an "IOU-nothing" as someone once put it.

[K Frame]

"To me, the "dollar" still seems somewhat imaginary"

Fair enough. You're now free to exit the discussion.

[Gewehr98]

If it's so imaginary...

Anyone that is satisfied with "currency of the United States" is free to exit the discussion. To me, the "dollar" still seems somewhat imaginary...an "IOU-nothing" as someone once put it.

Then how do they do things on the Lazy-H Ranch in East Texas?  Lots of expensive toys there, last I looked. Are you trading chickens and eggs for tractors, diesel fuel, electricity, and groceries?  You surely cannot be using those imaginary dollars.   

[Guest]

"To me, the "dollar" still seems somewhat imaginary"

Fair enough. You're now free to exit the discussion.

 Why are you such a disagreeable person?

[Guest]

If it's so imaginary...

Anyone that is satisfied with "currency of the United States" is free to exit the discussion. To me, the "dollar" still seems somewhat imaginary...an "IOU-nothing" as someone once put it.

Then how do they do things on the Lazy-H Ranch in East Texas?  Lots of expensive toys there, last I looked. Are you trading chickens and eggs for tractors, diesel fuel, electricity, and groceries?  You surely cannot be using those imaginary dollars.   

 Of course I'm using them for purchases. I also use them to save and invest. That's why I worry about their future.

 Actually, another reason I started this thread is that I just purchased the ARRL 2006-7 Repeater Directory (ham radio) to replace the 1997 one I had and noticed that the new one was several dollars more for the same darned thing. Guess there's a few more "dollars" now than there were in '97.