No, the concept of banks came later but even before the Greeks they already had metal coins that in themselves were worth nothing, but they were backed by city states, so for about all of what is called history money has existed in one way or another and there has always been a central power that backs it. Whether it was the Chinese, Alexander the Great, the Romans etc. I am not saying I am for or against it I just don't see how you can change this system for something better, and that is what I am looking for.
Come on! Tribes and people have been trading metals and baubles and other trinkets for all human history without a centralized authority. Where are you getting that idea from? Those places didn't have the Internet. They didn't have the SWIFT payment system. There was no digital age. Control as you are suggesting was not possible and did not exist. Period. People traded on their own.
When the Vikings raided you and took your silver and gold, they needed the Holy Roman Emperor to make what they stole valuable? No, it was valuable in and of itself. /sigh
No, I think you don't understand what I am saying or you are not trying to, you are talking about tribes I am talking about a country with a population of over 330 million. Look anarchism, libertarianism communism do exist together and in a successful manner in certain Kibbutz in Israel but only because their population is limited to about 100 settlers,, if that population were to go up they would implode, which is why they limit the number of members. But anyway I guess you have made your points I tried to make mine, maybe we can agree on something some other time.
In the imperial period, there was great state control over trade in order to guarantee supply (the annona system) and even a state merchant fleet, replacing the system during the Republic of paying subsidies (vecturae) to encourage private shipowners. There was a specific official in charge of the grain supply (the praefectus annonae) who regulated the various shipowner associations (collegia navicularii). The state taxed the movement of goods between provinces and also controlled many local markets (nundinae) - often held once a week - as the establishment of a market by a large land-owner had to be approved by the Senate or emperor. (This is talking about Rome)
Yeah, you're talking about an authoritarian empire, and I'm not talking about empires. I'm talking about individuals knowing what was valuable or not without some official telling them it was. The reason the Romans attempted to control everything was of course to get their cut...their taxes. Like other centralized systems, they did what they did to STEAL from people and consolidate wealth into a few hands from the many hands. You promote such a system, ehh? I don't.
This is another thing, how would you know I promote that system? I am just asking how you are going to implement your system, and I'm still not sure you answered that.
Why does there have to be a system? I produce a good you want. You produce a good I want. We trade for goods, or you take silver, gold, or crypto in exchange for my goods. It's that simple. There is no control system. We simply trade. Exchanges of goods and things we deem valuable are passed between two people voluntarily. Both people walk away happy with the transaction.
People don't need an outside control system to have an economy. A blockchain perhaps to maintain records and prevent double charging and other problems of long distance commerce? Sure, that's a system we have and that helps people instead of robbing them. A banking system in comparison? No thanks.
Tyrants? They didn't need central banks or fiat currency though to trade. They traded goods for other goods, goods for precious metals, etc.
No, the concept of banks came later but even before the Greeks they already had metal coins that in themselves were worth nothing, but they were backed by city states, so for about all of what is called history money has existed in one way or another and there has always been a central power that backs it. Whether it was the Chinese, Alexander the Great, the Romans etc. I am not saying I am for or against it I just don't see how you can change this system for something better, and that is what I am looking for.
Come on! Tribes and people have been trading metals and baubles and other trinkets for all human history without a centralized authority. Where are you getting that idea from? Those places didn't have the Internet. They didn't have the SWIFT payment system. There was no digital age. Control as you are suggesting was not possible and did not exist. Period. People traded on their own.
When the Vikings raided you and took your silver and gold, they needed the Holy Roman Emperor to make what they stole valuable? No, it was valuable in and of itself. /sigh
No, I think you don't understand what I am saying or you are not trying to, you are talking about tribes I am talking about a country with a population of over 330 million. Look anarchism, libertarianism communism do exist together and in a successful manner in certain Kibbutz in Israel but only because their population is limited to about 100 settlers,, if that population were to go up they would implode, which is why they limit the number of members. But anyway I guess you have made your points I tried to make mine, maybe we can agree on something some other time.
Merchants didn't have to get permission from governments back then to do trade either.
In the imperial period, there was great state control over trade in order to guarantee supply (the annona system) and even a state merchant fleet, replacing the system during the Republic of paying subsidies (vecturae) to encourage private shipowners. There was a specific official in charge of the grain supply (the praefectus annonae) who regulated the various shipowner associations (collegia navicularii). The state taxed the movement of goods between provinces and also controlled many local markets (nundinae) - often held once a week - as the establishment of a market by a large land-owner had to be approved by the Senate or emperor. (This is talking about Rome)
Yeah, you're talking about an authoritarian empire, and I'm not talking about empires. I'm talking about individuals knowing what was valuable or not without some official telling them it was. The reason the Romans attempted to control everything was of course to get their cut...their taxes. Like other centralized systems, they did what they did to STEAL from people and consolidate wealth into a few hands from the many hands. You promote such a system, ehh? I don't.
This is another thing, how would you know I promote that system? I am just asking how you are going to implement your system, and I'm still not sure you answered that.
Why does there have to be a system? I produce a good you want. You produce a good I want. We trade for goods, or you take silver, gold, or crypto in exchange for my goods. It's that simple. There is no control system. We simply trade. Exchanges of goods and things we deem valuable are passed between two people voluntarily. Both people walk away happy with the transaction.
People don't need an outside control system to have an economy. A blockchain perhaps to maintain records and prevent double charging and other problems of long distance commerce? Sure, that's a system we have and that helps people instead of robbing them. A banking system in comparison? No thanks.