Hacker News Reader

Comment by ahomescu1 | Hacker News Reader

Money is both a "unit of account" and "medium of exchange". You can certainly have both of those without government. In some societies, people used seashells, salt, gold coins, or many other things as money. Bitcoin certainly counts as a "non-government money".

Since money is used as a medium of exchange, it's essentially a placeholder for your labor (when you receive it from your employer/customers as payment) or value provided to others. It is arguable whether society has as much right over an individual's labor as he/she does, I think they don't (while society may have a contribution, it might be significantly below 50%).

One last and minor thing we'll have to disagree on: I don't think government equals society. An individual can be a part of society without being part of government, and I also believe government sometimes represents its own interests at the expense of society.

View on HN

OK let's clarify some basics. You cannot have either unit of account of medium of exchange without a government. Tell me one time in history that has happened. The government is fundamental to any economic system at all.

I know that in an abstract imaginary world you may think something else but that's all it is: imaginary. In the real world, no society = no money = no economics = no government.

Anything that is valuable, fungible and divisible could be used as money (you could even use barrels of oil). For examples, see [1]. Again, a great contemporary example is Bitcoin (not sure why you're ignoring that, it's a great example of money that exists in spite of government, not because of it).

Perhaps what you're referring to is legal tender, which indeed requires a government to exist. However, not all money is legal tender (for example, euros are not legal tender in the US, afaik).

1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commodity_money

Bitcoin exists in a system that is supported by the state. Money requires the state. You're thinking in very limited terms. Think broadly: in a society which does not have security guaranteed by the state, there will be no economic systems.

Historically, states and credit-based money came first. THEN came the unit of account and medium of exchange money that you are talking about.

Going back to the original point, can you go to a deserted island and make "money"? No. You need society. You need government. You need an economic system. The money is only partially "yours".

> Historically, states and credit-based money came first. THEN came the unit of account and medium of exchange money that you are talking about.

Actually, the Wikipedia page on "fiat money" (if that's what you're referring to) says: "Fiat money originated in 11th century China" [1]. There were many commodity currencies before that.

> Going back to the original point, can you go to a deserted island and make "money"? No. You need society. You need government. You need an economic system. The money is only partially "yours".

That's if there is only one person on that island. If more people live on the island, they might start trading services and use some some improvised currency, e.g., coconuts or seashells. In this case, you have a society and money, but not necessarily a government.

1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fiat_money#History

> Actually, the Wikipedia page on "fiat money" (if that's what you're referring to) says: "Fiat money originated in 11th century China" [1].

I'm referring to ledgers of credit. They originated in Mesopotamia, thousands of years ago. Check out the book "Debt" by David Graeber.

> That's if there is only one person on that island. If more people live on the island, they might start trading services and use some some improvised currency, e.g., coconuts or seashells. In this case, you have a society and money, but not necessarily a government.

See, that's completely untrue. What is actually going to happen is that multiple people on that society are going to bludgeon each other to death once there are enough people to constitute a society.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com