Replying to anonymous

Given that there isn't going to be a response, let me counter this somewhat short-sighted statement: money is essentially a store of value for labor performed. So when someone exchanges money at a later time for goods, it may not be because of a "human right" but even so there is prior labor involved.

Now, if you want to argue against money equaling labor, one of the most dubious uses of money are the multiple levels of derived labor that are available and flourishing in the stock market. The "value" "created" can be disputed because of the very indirect nature of it.

Similarly, inflation dilutes the "store of value" to lessen its value.
70
anonymous 1y ago

I remember a story about Argentina popping up where supposedly quality was determined by how much time was spent on some job. If that story was an attempt at contradicting my statement above, then you misunderstood the statement above.

I do not state it is a direct correlation between hours worked. I said it was a store of value for labor performed. So, to clarify: the store of value does not quantify or qualify. One agreed on some money for a job. The job is done and the money transferred. The work you did once, now is "at rest" in the money to be exchanged for value of some sorts at a later date.

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

No replies yet.