Are the two concepts mutually exclusive?
Book Money and Market in the Economy of All Times
Interesting question. Of course almost every country has evolved to use fiat money after having used representative earlier. And most have prospered and moved on without a hitch. All money is ultimately "Monopoly money" (both rep and fiat) because its acceptance is how the game is played. Either type will fail if mismanaged and either type will succeed if the supply is controlled and everybody still wants to "play."
Not sure exactly what you're looking for here, Liviu. I see you've been at this a while and probably have addressed this yourself. Just looking for conversation or do you have a paper you're working on?
Hi, Peter, very nice to meet You! But I equally greet your College of South Florida and this because I once had the honour and large pleasure to be around there, more precisely in the ‚University of South Florida’ at Tampa. So, tell me, are you in Tampa, Florida, and do you work around ? Or, may-be your College is elsewhere ? Anyway, I was there just in 1993 and there’s already plenty of time since that episode of my life and career.
Then, let us get to my point here and once more I appreciate your interest in the topic of money – that is equally number one of my research. The interesting (I say) point in this question is a little complex. Basically, economics is nearly entirely made of theories, as much as exact sciences (e.g. physics and other natural sciences) are about entirely made of demonstrated postulates.
Then, on the one hand when we say ‚money’ we rather say the ‚quantitative theory’ and this is (in my view, as well as in others’ views) one of the greatest economic theories. And there is to equally mention that ‚great’, versus the other theories means that great theories are the ones that resist in time and reach numerous and important scholar supporters. Or, the quantitative theory is old enough and succeeded to have numerous contributors, some of them of JM Keynes’ size.
But on the other hand, I say, despite its impressive size the quantity theory fails from number one qualifying for money. Why ? Due to its bias for what we called here the ‚fiat money’ concept, namely against its opposite ‚representsative money’ one. The whole knowlege of money isn’t unitary, but representative nad fiat money drag, each of the two, different other concepts and thinkings after.
This is why, fiat, versus representative money is entitled to be the number one theory about money, despite not being the one developing on maths and as genuine as the quantitative theory I here attach my last contribution for details, but you also may access my RG project on money and my book ‚Money and Market...’
Have my best regards and do know that I miss Florida enough.
Liviu
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Filing