You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: The Democrats Seem To Be Operating From A One Issue Plan.
People thought that being paid for voting on content would never be a thing, yet here we are.
There is a possibility that Bernie really would have ended up being a terrible president. But I think that the odds of him not being as questionable as either Trump or Hilary would have been fairly good.
Regarding money and finances, they are man made concepts, so it can take manmade power to shift the importance of those around in the favor of many.
He wouldn't have been as bad as Hillary. He wouldn't have been as good as Trump.
Trump actually understands economics and reality.
Bernie lives in fantasy land and make believe and fails to actually pay attention to history. His ideas he was pushing have lead to the ruination of every country they have been implemented in. EVERY SINGLE ONE.
Those places all seem GREAT for a short period of time until their stupid policies drain any money they saved.
"Socialism is great until you run out of other people's money"
Many people in Venezuela can tell you how stupid Bernie is.
Well, for today I will just take your word for it because I am not as deep into the topic as I could be.
With that being said, I think we can agree on saying that the focus of this discussion being on how presidents handle the topic of "money" can be taken as a hint that finances are too much of an factor when it comes to politics.
I don't find that healthy.
Well money is a tool. It is there for a universal mechanism of exchange. The truth about tools is they can all be used for good or bad purposes. You can build things with a hammer, but you can also bash someone in the head with a hammer.
Words are a tool. We can use them for good, or bad purposes. We are tool users. We certainly are not innocent and often can be quite malevolent towards other people.
Essentially money is pretty much the primary thing about which governments focus on, or things related to it somehow.
It is sad.
Yet ultimately we'd need to get away from the need for government and instead go to crowdsourcing or something like that before we could remove what you stated.
Even in socialist and "communist" countries it still revolves around money or property.
I would usually agree with you on the "tool" part, but I feel like money has become something more, especially over the recent years.
We could start an argument about how some of the "less civilized" tribes that still exist here and there can get by by themselves just famously without money or currency. But we cling too much to our so called civilization with all it's percs and problems that people have a hard time considering that.
And I have too. I'm a man of the civilized world myself after all.
Sure they exchange sheep for eggs, or whatever. Do this work for me and pay me with chicken, etc.
This is easy to do. Yet it is not easy to handle larger value items this way. Currency AKA money is a UNIVERSAL exchange. It is a tool. It is a tool that enables a person to carry something to exchange for something else without needing to carry say 1000 chicken for a house, or whatever is agreed to.
There has never been anything we have invented that does what currency can.
Until we come up with something else then it will exist, and it needs to exist.
As to tribal exchange mechanisms. They work on the small scale, they do not scale well.
Some universal currency tends to be created as civilizations scale, because they are the logical method to handle what they handle. Whether shells, stones, coins, paper currency, credit cards, crypto. It is all something that is easy to move, easy to exchange, and can represent much larger items.
I think that this may be my problem with finances and money. All we ever do is look at the world thinking about profit and exchange. Because it has been like that for a very long time and has been focused on even harder during the last couple decades. And I think that this focus is bad for the evolution we could have in other areas.
Of course, this is highly hypothetical and biased.
Exchange doesn't have to involve profit. Really it is no different at the outset than not having currency.
If I exchange/trade you a goat for 10 chickens and I happen to know someone that will give me a goat for 8 chickens somewhere then I can make a 2 chicken profit without money being involved at all.
That concept is not created by money/currency. Money and currency just make it a lot easier. Yet they make exchanges/trades of ALL kinds easier and a person does not have to be profit driven. That is a personal voluntary choice.
And as to that 2 chicken profit. I still have to move the chickens and goats from place to place. So that is an exchange for my TIME. It may turn out that when the amount of time it takes me is determined that it isn't really that good of a deal at all. I could have been perhaps using my time in some better way.
So what if there was no exchange in the first place? Or if there was no need for exchange? I agree with you that money/currency existing in order to make exchanging/trading simpler is a good thing. it is absolutely reasonable. But it exchanging shouldn't be the be all end all.
The true issue is that as a tool, currency is VERY easy to use.
Anyone can use it.
Greed is a human nature thing.
Scamming people is a human nature thing.
Those bad things exist inside of people, not inside of the tool.
Currency makes all exchange easier. Thus, the bad sides of human nature can be expressed easier as well.
Like I said ALL tools can be used for good or bad purposes.
The true things you don't like occur inside the minds of people. Currency doesn't have a mind, or the ability to act except when a human uses it.