04-14-2021, 12:28 AM
(04-13-2021, 09:37 PM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote:(04-13-2021, 08:13 PM)pbrower2a Wrote: OK. Ed owns a restaurant, and Jack is a barber. The exchange-value of a steak dinner at Ed's restaurant is about the same as the value of a haircut by Jack. Exchanging a steak dinner for a haircut might not be practical at the moment. Money is simply a surrogate. Jack may not be hungry when Ed wants a haircut, and Ed might not want to serve Jack a steak dinner in a barbershop.
Also Jack may get hungry more often than Ed needs a haircut? Having something that represents the exchange value is convenient. Among other things, it allows specialization.
The most obvious. People generally prefer cash to in-kind payments. Also -- Jack could be a vegetarian, or he might prefer an add-on to his meal such as a beer or a pie. Ed might be bald due to his chemotherapy.
Money is easy to standardize for rational exchanges in a free market. This has nothing to do with capitalism or socialism.
The ideal subject of totalitarian rule is not the convinced Nazi or the dedicated Communist but instead the people for whom the distinction between fact and fiction, true and false, no longer exists -- Hannah Arendt.