Neocon, yes, I remember reading that thread. *I assume you let go2net keep these archives for you. What technique do you use to recall them?* As I vaguely recall it all, we had much agreement, until I was over my head.
Per your post's example: We can rewrite the 1st transaction as 2 corn = 1 ham. But lets rewrite it as, 2 corn + x corn = 1 ham + y ham. In your 1st example, x=0=y. In your second example, x= -1, y=0. Beef might get a z coefficient. For a standard to exist, there would be an enormous equation where all the coefficients were fixed. Unfortunately, even were that to happen, market conditions would shift, so that a new equation would be the standard. Any assumptions about a real, or timeless, standard are on unstable ground.
Currency, of whatever form, substitutes for fractional coefficients [including 3/2], like coin change, and, as you say, is also time-shift barter. Time-shifting creates opportunities, or problems, to barter on a new 'standard' equation, in that x moves to x'. Thus time becomes a commodity, 'stored' in the chit. [ A definition of real wealth, or wealth, will be useful soon, I expect. I would use any subset of things having a coefficient. Adding human ability to make wealth would seem to fit here somewhere, though with a broader definition. I get ahead of myself; correct me if you think better.]
What is unique about coefficient variables, uniquely within the economic equation is not
*that cross-type transactions are allowed, that is the economic system,
*or that fractional variables allow a more precise, efficient, numerous barter,
*or that the symbols of the variables can themselves be a commodity, representing time,
*or that a standard equation is theoretically possible,
**but that the ability to abstract real, economic transactions becomes possible. Life activity becomes manipulatable. |
