A hard currency standard is the key to world peace

[zarus tathra]

If you insist on continuing with this inane line of non-inquiry, then I suggest you stick your fingers in an electrical socket and test out your theory that electricity is intangible.

[barbarian]

This page:
Share:

   
in·tan·gi·ble  (n-tnj-bl)
adj.
1. Incapable of being perceived by the senses.
2. Incapable of being realized or defined.
3. Incorporeal.
n.
1. Something intangible, especially an asset that cannot be perceived by the senses. Often used in the plural: intangibles such as goodwill and dedication.
2. Law Incorporeal property such as bank deposits, stocks, bonds, and promissory notes. Often used in the plural: a state tax on intangibles.


in·tan·gi·ble  (n-tnj-bl)
adj.
1. Incapable of being perceived by the senses.
2. Incapable of being realized or defined.
3. Incorporeal.
n.
1. Something intangible, especially an asset that cannot be perceived by the senses. Often used in the plural: intangibles such as goodwill and dedication.
2. Law Incorporeal property such as bank deposits, stocks, bonds, and promissory notes. Often used in the plural: a state tax on intangibles.

corporeal (k???p??r??l)
adj
1. (Theology) of the nature of the physical body; not spiritual
2. of a material nature; physical
[C17: from Latin corporeus, from corpus body]
cor?pore?ality cor?porealness n cor?poreally adv

cor·po·re·al  (kôr-pôr-l, -pr-)
adj.
1. Of, relating to, or characteristic of the body. See Synonyms at bodily.
2. Of a material nature; tangible.

[zarus tathra]

Electricity can be assigned monetary value.

Electricity and energy in general can certainly be perceived.

Etc. etc. etc.

Do you even read?

[barbarian]

Electricity can be assigned monetary value.

Electricity and energy in general can certainly be perceived.

Etc. etc. etc.

Do you even read?

IT IS STILL CONSIDERED INCORPOREAL

in·cor·po·re·al  (nkôr-pôr-l, -pr-)
adj.
1. Lacking material form or substance. See Synonyms at immaterial.
2. Law Of or relating to property or an asset that does not have value in material form, as a right or patent.

[zarus tathra]

I don't give a fuck. You can touch it, it has industrial value, and if they wanted to, someone could easily kill you with it.

[barbarian]

Yeah you think that your big hair brained scheme of some monetary system could actually work, now that it has been deflated you will take your little word smith hammer out and bend the conversation like your some type of fucking genesis, well fuck that. You don't understand basic accounting principles nor the economics at a world wide level of commerce. You have deflected what ever you felt like in past posts as we discussed this. Now you are done, good one.  :rollin:

If it makes you feel better your plan is the best solution to war since the a-bomb...

By the way I carry 2 kwh around in my pocket in case the lint doesn't cover whatever I want to by. Your system comes down to less that what we have today to measure the value of the dollar, you can call it a turd if you would like the system you describe still comes down to a paper system, which by the way the paper system we use today has been slowly degraded over time to a credit/debit society. Which you will never even get the grasp of when someone is trying to explain shit to you like I have with great patience. Now you say I can not read, what the fuck is that shit? Look, I can not help that you thought up something that just could never work, but once you get hostile with me then I will not hold back as being rude also, and be a fucking asshole too.

I don't give a fuck. You can touch it, it has industrial value, and if they wanted to, someone could easily kill you with it.

And lastly, you don't ever even insinuate that someone could kill me, you little fucking turd chomper.

[zarus tathra]

It's a paper currency with expectations. I think I said that like 3 times.

But yeah, you're right, I'm done.

[barbarian]

=D>

[leftyatbest]

Stop the violins, visualize whirled peas and hominy.  

[zarus tathra]

And lastly, you don't ever even insinuate that someone could kill me, you little fucking turd chomper.

You're right, electricity is intangible and nobody could ever kill you with it. You're like Thor or something. If someone walked up to you with a live cable and touched it to your neck, you would be fine. Electricity wouldn't go from the point of contact, through your heart, and into the ground, stopping your vital functions for good, because you can't touch or perceive electricity. Because electricity is intangible.

[barbarian]

I will wait for this system with both eyes open, unless I get tired of waiting for something that would or will not happen then I may just take a nap :finga: .

Good luck with your idea...  :rollin:

And for your information you little word smith, electricity is immaterial which falls under the definition of intangible.

[Hakurei Reimu]

The energy/power system would be based on joulebucks and wattbucks and energy shares.

Joulebucks would be based on energy. You get a database entry like a bank account and you'd be able to claim a certain amount of energy based on how many joulebucks you have, how much energy is lost getting it to your plug, the level of grid use, and probably some other factors which will probably be much smaller. Obviously, since I don't have real plans yet, the details have to be worked out.

As they say, the devil is in the details. It is precisely because you haven't worked out these details, and every time you try you have come up wanting, is the reason why we call your "system" bullshit. It's not a system or even a plan. It's just a notion. To suppose that one simple change, like basing your currency on the joule or watt or whatever, will solve the complex economic problems facing us right now is manifestly ludicrous, and is a symptom of magical thinking.

Maybe I'll have joulebucks degrade over time, like negative interest on Swiss bank accounts. Exponential increases in dollar assets can only really be supported by inflation and imperialism,

Or investing, dumbass.

Your negative interest will discourage saving, and encourage the rapid transformation of your currency into goods as soon as possible, which is exactly the problem with hyperinflation.

a currency that is difficult to inflate would find great difficulty maintaining compound interest.

Inflation is not a function of the currency in isolation, or even of currency at all. It is a function of treating money as a commodity in and of itself — which it is. Inflation and deflation comes from balancing money and its pros and cons against all the other commodities and their pros and cons. Thus, talking about "a currency that is difficult to inflate" just shows you don't know what the fuck you're talking about.

And it's hard to take seriously any talk of "a currency that is difficult to inflate" when it experiences negative interest. A given store of your currency would become less valuable over time because of that negative interest, and thus make that store less valuable a commodity over time, which is exactly what happens in inflation, and will be treated the same way as an inflating currency.

This system wouldn't make any pretenses about being able to sustain something that's unsustainable.

You have not shown that a fiat currency is any more unsustainable than a based system like your joulebucks, or that an economy is unsustainable in principle, except by way of the heat death of the universe.

[zarus tathra]

I've rethought things a bit and I think that until a detailed, mathematical model can be created, the best we can do is to peg the USD to the retail price of energy, i.e. control the supply of currency so that the mean nominal price of energy never rises above a certain point. A full-on energy credit system would require much bigger minds than ours. I don't think people will find it too objectionable to insist that energy prices stay below a fixed nominal value, and no government could do this and run the printing press at the same time.

[Hakurei Reimu]

I don't think people will find it too objectionable to insist that energy prices stay below a fixed nominal value, and no government could do this and run the printing press at the same time.

You never explained this statement to anyone's satisfaction.

[zarus tathra]

If the government is expected to constrain the supply of money in such a way that energy prices never rise above a certain point, then that's a hard control on inflation right there. It also more or less fulfills my original purpose, which is to precisely measure inflation so that it becomes difficult for the feds to paper over their mistakes. It's better than a gold standard, because you can delay and delay and delay the return of somebody's gold and lie about your reserves all you want, but if there isn't enough electricity to justify the money supply/level of economic activity, then everybody will know once they get the next electricity bill. The supply of electricity and the efficiency of usage are also much better indicators of productivity and industrial capacity than the gold supply.

And actually, if the money supply were pegged to the energy supply, there'd be a LOT less fluctuation of nominal prices. The money supply would contract by like 30% instead of expanding by like 500%. The "sacrifices" Carter asked for would be quantified.

If you'll notice, the "boom" and "bust" periods correspond perfectly to rises and falls in the "real" price of energy. Food for thought.