Relative Theory of Money Duniter
Reference value is an old economic problem at the basis of many important crisis, due essentially to “Three producers” problem misunderstanding.
The reference value consisted to impose to the actors a money whose the production was controlled by the producers of a specified property, for example the rare metals, that conferred them obviously an considerable benefit with regard to the information of the available money supply for the future, as well as its control, at the expense of other actors that didn’t have this information, and then suffered the arbitrary shortage or overproduction of that type of money for their economic exchanges.
If on the other side, and it is in majority the case, that reference value has no real utility in a pseudo-isolated economic zone, it has no other fundamental role than to quantify the exchanges, what can be very advantageously exchanged by a pure mathematical measure.
Some tenants of the reference value object that at least with that value it is difficult to cheat regarding the monetary creation, as it must be added material value. This is false as history showed that even based on the reference value, the money has undergo inflationists or deflationists pushes, has provoqued bankrupties and economic crisis by non respect of that material “proof”. It is not a question of garantee but a problem of transparency, trust, as well as ethical and equity respect, that are the fundamentals of the trust in a common money.
Also the reference value is not producible everywhere and in every time in function of it’s scarcity and exhaustion, that implies periods of monetary influx or scarcity, a phenomenon that doesn’t fullfill the temporal symmetry condition of the monetary creation toward future generations. Generation that decide to adopt a money of such nature do it at the expense of next generations, that will be imposed a money that has became rare and essentially possessed by the first entrants or their direct inheritors. It is a factor that blows away the freedom of the future humans by blocking their possibility to access to resources to produce and exchange “in the money”.
It exists quantities of direct proofs that economic values are not judged the same between successive generations.
Let’s take a precise example: in 2010, information technologies and telecommunication networks have taken a tremendous part of the globally exchanged value in the economy without common measure to what existed in 1980. But it would be an error to think we should today arbitrarily create more money betted on that value, although the value that will prevail in 2030 might be more fundamentally different after the judgment of the generation present at that moment. It would be simply like taking decision in their place, although they are for the most already among us and manifest in their way their will to transform the economy in their own point of view.
Another example taken in the past: when we see the relative value of gold, we can see without any possible doubt, for the generation of 1980, there was no doubt that metal was a big value. But in 2010, and even gold facial value had broken its historical records if compared to the total sum of the money in circulation, it weights less in the economy, while still being an exchanged value.
This doesn’t mean that this specific value cannot evolve to new relative summits, but well that it evolves in a decorrelated way from the issuance of the fiduciary money which is independent from it, at least partly. So, there is no need for a specific value to create money apart, the only one which is fundamental and universally present in space and time inside the economic zone is: human being.
Better: definition of one reference value as a forced money is a fundamental bias that denies relativity of any value that any individual has the right to judge independently of his fellow citizens.
Also it is not astonishing that from the point of view of the Relative Theory of Money that in 1971 the standard gold has been abandoned for a totally dematerialized money, of which the growth is controlled by a Central Bank and by a set of rules restraining the capacity of the private Banks to emit credits.
However, “money-debt” system, while being a step ahead from a system of reference value, stay biased by the granting of centralized credits on arbitrary volumes and values to the detriment of a large part of the present and future population.
“Ounce of gold / Monetary Supply M3 in the USA ($)” ratio evolution from 1958 to 2010.
Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *
Bitcoin Innovation in payment systems
Relative Theory of Money v2.718 – General considerations
Relative Theory of Money v2.718 – Solutions
Relative Theory of Money v2.718 – Monetary supply and Relativity
Relative Theory of Money v2.718 – The “three producers” problem
2016 Powered By Duniter.ch alias @duniter & @duniterum