Wealth is not cash, just as the map is not the territory or as the impressionst put it "This is not a pipe" on a painting of a pipe.
Wealth is accumulated work, knowlage and wisdom.
Knowlage in letting us make a tin opener and work in not having to make a new tin opener every time you need one.
Wisdom would indicate that you make a good tin opener so that you always have one.
So this idea that we should make disposable items you can see as just wastefull. Endlessly making rubbish ones is slavery.
It is by this route that we see one way in which we can do less and have a better quality of life.
It is clues like this that let on we have become subjects of the economic system. ie Instead of it working for us , we are working for it.
We do not exist to support the economic system, it is there to support us.
Its our creation, we can do whatever we want with it.
Its our world we can organise it any way we want. Given that we can decide how to to things, what shall we do?
So we are now asking quite philosophical questions about how we live our lives.
About what is a good life? What kind of life is a good life? How can we go about getting it?
We need Food, water, clothes, houseing, saftey, and entertainment.
Who will do this work?
All of us. If we all give two days a week of our time, combined with
Well if we make those things really well, we wont have keep doing it again and again. That way we add to our collective wealth. Each old barn and old house, each wheel, each ball bearing, each curtain rail, cup, knife and fork that you dont have to buy new is collected wealth and as such something to be valued and use, and it is something you dont have to make again for a very long time. Once you get thiese basics out of the way we can start getting on with having high quality lives.
I suspect that once the essentials of life are catered for then we wont want to do a lot of the sort of work that is presently destroying the planet.
Maybe it's true that we wont have cars and TVs and goodness knows what else, but you what? If the option is to have cars and TVs and Barbie and Big Macs and a planet thats imploding or worse,, I would prefer a happy life on a healthy planet without TV and cars.
Oh yes and before I forget Quantitave Easing Is COUNTERFITING.
By reducing the value of the money in your pocket the get the cash to pay the sodding banks. Who are in large part,responsible for the mess we are in.
Imagen; The wealth of the nation is one mellon. the mellon is divided into 100 bits. Your part of the mellon is 2 bits it is 2% of the mellon. Quantitave easing is dividing that mellon into 200 parts. now the mellon has 200 equal parts and you still have 2 parts. The only problem is that those parts are now only worth 1% of the mellon. Your wealth is 50% less.
The Government uses the difference to pay the banks. Odd considering thiese are the flagships of free enterprize and believe in and promote the free market system. A system that is supposed to destroy those unfit to survive, in a survival of the fittest way. A system that would have destroyed them if our governments hadn't stepped in and stopped them going bust by committing everyones actual work. A step which cost us years worth of our real lives to pay them back.
Money As Debt. Look at this series of movies.
It is not just some wacky conspiricy theory, each fact is there for all to look up.
This is nicked from someone else's web site, its a bit of a rant but I will edit it some day.
------He knows nothing about the origins of the accumulated assets or the funding behind the ultra-consumption. http://www.lewrockwell.com/decoster/decoster138.html
How is wealth destroyed and where does wealth come from? October 11, 2008
Posted by Andy Roberts in : economics, theory , trackback
Where did the wealth destroyed on Stock Markets come from?
If 20 percent of the value of world stock markets can be wiped out in one week, as has just happened, then where does that wealth actually disappear to? Is it buried in a big hole somewhere, scuttled at sea or sent on a rocket into outer space? Apparently not, but if money can simply disappear from world markets how can we make any sense of the concept of value in finance. How is it measured and where did it come from in the first place?
Theories of value
In the first post of this series I asked “where does money come from” and gave a brief history of the origins of money in the form of precious metal coins used to facilitate the process of trade from simple barter to the exchange of goods of different values. Without exactly defining where money comes from I hinted at the idea that monetary value is realted to the total amount of work or labour which is tied up in bringing the goods to market. That’s a theory which is known as the labour theory of value and is not always widely accepted, probably due to association with a certain Karl Marx who took that theory, which was already known by cpaitalist economists, and developed it a bit further with his concept of “socially necessary labour time”.
Money grows on trees
People who don’t subscribe to the labour theory of value believe that money comes from being rewarded for taking risks, that value is determined entirely by the balance between supply and demand, and that substantial sums of money can somehow just “grow”. They say that money doesn’t grow on trees, but that’s not too dissimilar to the idea that interest just accumulates on investments because money begets more money. In reality, investments such as stocks and bank deposits typically pass through a number of hands but end up being used to buy goods not for consumption but for increased or more efficient production. Investment of capital buys machine tools, land, property and other wherewithal to employing labour in order to create goods or services for the market which can be sold at a profit. The important point here is that the capital doesn’t generate a single penny of orginal value until the employment of labour has happened. To be profitable, the output from this process of applying labour to previously accumulated capital must be of actual use to a buying market, and must be produced with a total number of labour hours which is competitive with alternative setups, such as differently tooled machine shops employing labour under different terms and conditions. That’s pretty much all that’s meant by the “socially necessary labour time” formulation really, to counter the idea that simply getting enough people to work hard for the the most minimal wages will necessarily creaste wealth.
Wealth Ceated by Labour
All wealth is created in the first place by labour, and that is the real answer to the question answer “where does money come from”. It comes from work that has been done by somebody, that has been abstracted and turned into a type of commodity itself, which can then change hands and accumulate, which can be exchanged for special kinds of products, Which can then be deployed in the employment of further labour. Capital is an accumulation of the results of previous rounds of expended labour, or “dead labour” as is sometimes expressed. The capital exchanged on world money markets then represents a further abstraction as speculators buy and sell options to receive the fruits of other people’s labour in the future, that hasn’t even been expended yet, and place bets on the likelihood of prices rising and falling.
Destruction of Wealth in a Slump
In a serious recession, when stock markets crash, and seemingly abstract wealth is destroyed, this is not just a accountancy game played out with pieces of paper or rather electronic transfers. It does actually play out into the very real destruction of productive capacity as enterprises go under or cut back and the very concrete machinery, buildings, expertise and systems are abandoned due to lack of a buying market that can afford their products at a profitable price. All of that overcapicity which has been built up out of the relentless requirement to reinvest and expand will be scrapped, levelled, and laid waste at the greatest of human cost until enough real capital has been wiped out for the accumulation cycle to begin all over again. In the current circumstances the effects are particularly catastrophic because the downturn had been temporarily postponed for a couple of decades or so through the use of massively expanded credit, which could distort the outward shape of the cycle for a short while, but never the underlying forces at work in any free market system based on the private ownership of capital.