Avatar
Гоце
1aeefb944c4e8828ddf034bc305e35217043aea515b10bf54b1e96c21ce45700

V and U both used to represent the /U/ sound.

The pointed form ⟨v⟩ was written at the beginning of a word, while a rounded form ⟨u⟩ was used in the middle or end.

In old English W used to be written as two Vs.. so VV which later became one letter, and since V was still U the name.

And yes.. I am fun at parties 😅

Replying to Avatar walker

Want to understand how inflation impacts your purchasing power?

Let's look at The New Yorker, which publishes the price of each copy right on the front of the magazine.

1925: 15 cents

2024: $8.99

What the heck happened to make The New Yorker so much more expensive?

It's important to understand that technology is naturally DEFLATIONARY.

Everything should be getting cheaper over time, including The New Yorker.

Think about it: printing, writing, & editing technology has improved tremendously since 1925.

So, why is the magazine more expensive now?

From 1925 to 1971, The New Yorker increased in price from 15 cents to 50 cents, an increase of 233.33%.

That's pretty dramatic, but not THAT bad...

But from 1971 to 2024, price increased from 50 cents to $8.99, an increase of 1698%.

So, WTF happened in 1971?

In 1971, Richard Nixon "temporarily" suspended the convertibility of dollars to gold, ending the Gold Standard.

This meant that the Federal Reserve could now print dollars out of thin air without restriction.

Increasing the money supply by creating new money out of thin air is literally "inflation."

"Prices rising" is the result of inflation.

When more monetary units are created, the purchasing power of the monetary units that already exist decreases.

When the government/central bank prints money out of thin air, they are STEALING your purchasing power.

Here's The New Yorker over a few decades:

1971: $0.50

1980: $1.00

1990: $1.75

2000: $3.00

The magazine did not become more valuable, our MONEY became LESS valuable.

https://m.primal.net/KEpn.webp

https://m.primal.net/KEpo.webp

https://m.primal.net/KEpr.webp

https://m.primal.net/KEps.webp

By looking at this example of The New Yorker, which cost 15 cents in 1925 and costs $8.99 today, we see that the U.S. dollar has lost approximately 98.33% of its purchasing power in less than 100 years.

This is what happens when you print money out of thin air...

When money is controlled by the State, you are powerless to stop the destruction of your purchasing power.

Technology should be making everything LESS expensive over time, but even something as simple as a magazine gets more and more expensive over time.

So, what can you do to protect yourself from the government/central bank printing money out of thin air and destroying your purchasing power?

Study #Bitcoin with nostr:npub10qrssqjsydd38j8mv7h27dq0ynpns3djgu88mhr7cr2qcqrgyezspkxqj8

There will only ever be 21 million bitcoin and no government or central bank can print more.

Publishing/printing technology is just one small part of it. What matters is content quality. You need to find and pay high quality educated and tallented writers.

In today's economy you can't pay them the salary from 100 years ago.

So the point is valid, money are loosing value, it's just that technology can't offset quality writing. Ai is not there yet either.

Replying to Avatar dr.fred

World population growth doesn't look like slowing down any time soon though.

/277px-Human_population_since_1800.png

It's a delicate dance. Sometimes, going against other opinions brings society forward, in a good way, and other times degrades it.

There is no rule I guess.

Actually you are right. It doesn't have to be science-fiction-matrix like in the movie.

It's a matrix of invented norms and identities. We are all just human.

No nation has existed since the beginning of time. Neither jews, nor arabs, russians, greeks, macedonians, muslims, christians nor any other religion or nation.

It's all a human invented matrix that somehow historically evolved, but we should get out of it, if we want to stop killing ourselves. That's at least how I'm looking at it.

Then your statement is false: It is not the first year with humans saying bugs are the food now.

Only that was my point 🤓