Why do we focus solely on this one aspect of life?

  • SlopppyEngineer@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 months ago

    Barter was never a thing in daily life. No anthropogist found evidence for that. Trust based systems were used, but those don’t work well when they population increases and interaction with strangers happens more. That’s where currency takes over.

    Why currency is the most important thing right now? Because currency at the moment is status and many people seek a high status on society.

  • morphballganon@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 months ago

    People want purpose. Most people are too inept to grasp greater purposes, so rewarding them with ornate paper slips keeps them placated.

        • Daft_ish@lemmy.worldOP
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          4 months ago

          So how do reconcile most others peoples answers knowing what you know? Money is needed to enhance the exchange of goods and services but, as you said, also is used as a tool for controlling prople.

  • eran_morad@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 months ago

    It lubricates economic activity (not a lewd joke). It makes it easier to exchange shit, which leads to a more robust economy. Would you rather barter?

    • snooggums@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 months ago

      Sometimes I would rather barter because the additional effort would make things more important instead of all the mass produced crap that is ruining the world. A robust wconomy tends to mean an excess of stuff we don’t need.

      But it wouldn’t reeally work out that way, just wishful thinking.

  • satanmat@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 months ago

    Because that philosophy has won over the most people.

    I didn’t say it was the best. You may or may not believe that living in a yurt foraging mushrooms might be the best life; but “western “ civilization has deemed capitalism to be the way.

    Under capitalism people need money to use for the things they want that they cannot make themselves.

    A wise man once said “Money can’t buy me Love” —but it certainly improves your bargaining position

    • FaceDeer@fedia.io
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 months ago

      I should note that currency and capitalism are not the same thing. Pretty much every existing economic system has currency of some form, it’s just a way of tracking the relative values of various things so that people can make agreements about who gets what.

  • canadaduane@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    4 months ago

    Here’s my take:

    1. We’re built for about 150 relationships max (Dunbar number), and yet we benefit from cooperation above that threshold. Rather than make it so we have to have a personal relationship with everyone who could possibly benefit us, we accepted a ramped down version of relationship we call “transactions”. This is a very weak replacement for a relationship, but it is a sort of “micro-relationship” in that for a brief moment two people who don’t know each other can kind of care about each other during an exchange. Through specialization, we can do something well that doesn’t just benefit the handful of friends and neighbors we have, but tens of thousands and possibly millions of people via transactions (e.g. a factory, starting an Amazon business, etc.)

    2. There is a process called “commensuration” in the social sciences, where people start to make one thing commensurate with another, even in wildly different domains. For example, to understand the value of a forest and to convey its importance to decision makers we might say “this forest is worth $100 billion”. It’s kind of weird to do this (how do leaves and trees and anthills and beetles equal imaginary humoney?) But slowly, over time, we have made many things commensurate to dollars at various scales. (I don’t think this is a good thing, but it does have benefits). In short, more and more things that were part of an implicit economy of relationships (e.g. can the neighbor girl babysit tonight?) have entered the explicit domain of the monetary economy (e.g. sittercity).

    .

    IMO, in order to participate in the huge value generated by this monetary economy, people sometimes lose the forest for the trees (so to speak) and forget what really matters (e.g. excellence of character, deep relationships, new experiences, etc.) because it seems like we might be able to put off those things until “after” we square away this whole money thing first. But maybe “after” never comes–and the hollow life of a consumer capitalist drains the inner ecological diversity of a soulful life.

    • TokenBoomer@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 months ago

      This kind of thoughtful introspection is the only reason to get out of bed in the morning. That, and dogs. Dogs are wonderful.

  • IonAddis@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 months ago

    Because it’s very difficult to get things you need to live solely through barter. Many trades are very niche, and an economy that uses money allows those trades to continue being viable parts of society.

    Like, think of plumbing. If everything goes well, you don’t need a plumber. But when you do…you really need it. Now imagine being the plumber who wants some bread and eggs but the farmer has no problems currently that needs the plumber’s skills. Plumber can’t eat, leaves profession, there’s now no plumber when the pipes do break.

    Obviously, the next thought here might be, “Well, why doesn’t the plumber say if they get eggs and bread now, they’ll come and fix your toilet later if needed?” But that sort of re-invents credit, right? “I’ll trade 3 future plumbing problems for 3 boxes of eggs now.” If you have that, why not money?

    So basically, money is very useful. It can be traded for many things you otherwise wouldn’t be able to get if you were only able to offer as barter a specific item that might be rejected by the other person you want to barter with. Money is a “universal” trade good, and it’s also easy to store (you don’t have to have lots of physical room to store your Universal Trade Good).

    The BEHAVIOR of people surrounding this very useful thing can absolutely be suspect, depending on the person (greedy sociopaths hoarding wealth)–but that’s a human thing, not because money is innately a bad thing. It’s a social problem, not a technology problem. You could totally have a greedy hoarder storing up a non-money trade item too…see people and toilet paper/sanitizer during Covid.

  • HeyThisIsntTheYMCA@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 months ago

    You can either barter or you can have currency. Currency is the means through which the economy functions. You need something abstract to indicate value. That’s currency.

  • credo@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 months ago

    The first question has been answered already a few different ways. As to the sub-question:

    Why do we focus solely on this one aspect of life?

    It’s because we as a society lost track of other aspects of life, e.g. relationships for the sake of relationships- which if we question our basic humanity, we also need. Instead we focus on materialistic requirements, both for basic survival but also for status, security, and comfort. I would argue that second aspect (status) is an indirect (and inefficient/ineffective) means to accomplish the forgotten parts of life (relationships).

  • fossphi@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 months ago

    Maybe it’s not as essential as one is led to believe. The book Debt by David Graeber deals with the very question you asked. I highly recommend you check it out.

    I can’t really summarise it well since I haven’t finished it myself, so maybe peruse the Wikipedia entry. But the first couple of chapters try to answer your question

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Debt:_The_First_5000_Years

  • InternetCitizen2@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    4 months ago

    There is also a meta discussion here on liquidity (how easy it is to exchange something). People want currency because it is easy to exchange. Your landlord might be okay with getting paid in a mix of gallons of milk and some cuts of beef, but most will not. Trading for “non currency value” is not uncommon. You might get paid with stocks depending on your work. If you buy a car you might trade in your old one.

  • Nougat@fedia.io
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 months ago

    Every exchange between people requires an exchange of value. If we both agree on a common “thing” as a representation of value, we can be more accurate and flexible in our transactions.

  • neidu2@feddit.nl
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 months ago

    Because they represent a resource, concrete or abstract. Currency is easily exchanged, either for other currencies, or for goods and services. This allows for a lot more opportunities than hauling around a swarm of sheep for bartering at the car dealership.

    • Sethayy@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 months ago

      On one end carrying sheep would be annoying, but so is a credit score; arguably both are sources of noise distracting humanity from actually improving at all

      • neidu2@feddit.nl
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        4 months ago

        Credit scores aren’t a direct result of currency. Credit scores are the result of lending and credit, which is possible without currency.

        Example: “I could give you this car if you promised to bring me schwiftyfive thousand sheep over five years, but according to my records you’re only good for schiftytwo sheep. Sorry pal. Here, first borrow this chicken, and give me an egg every day for a few years to prove that you’re the kind of guy/gal/ghoul who honors debts, and we can discuss the matter again.”

      • xmunk@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        4 months ago

        We had currency without credit scores for about three thousand years prior to the first credit score agency (1841 from what I found). Having credit score agencies is just a modern problem and their prevalence in the past fifty years is a demonstration of how shitty our capitalist system has gotten.

  • Scrof@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    4 months ago

    Currency is an energy equivalent in human society. I’d say our current ridiculously exploitable system with greedy for profit banks, rampant credits, tax havens, exchange rates manipulation, dividends and stock market micro trading leaves a lot to be desired, yet it is still incredibly convenient and relatively stable even with all the major crashes. Beats barter that’s for sure.

    We are focused on it because life itself is based on burning energy to sustain itself. Any plant would be happy to get more nutrients and sunlight like every animal would gorge itself to get some of that fat on their bones. It doesn’t matter that it’s sometimes to the detriment too - it’s just wired that way in the DNA, because scarcity is way more common than abundance and if this balance crumbles then it’s just a matter of time before abundance turns to even more scarcity due to overgrowth/desertification/overpopulation.