Comments on: Money Literacy – Part III http://permaculture.org.au/2010/01/13/money-literacy-part-iii/ Permaculture News, Commentary and Worldwide Projects. Wed, 08 Feb 2012 22:36:17 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 By: Thomas Fischbacher http://permaculture.org.au/2010/01/13/money-literacy-part-iii/#comment-40350 Thomas Fischbacher Wed, 13 Jan 2010 17:10:12 +0000 http://permaculture.org.au/?p=2342#comment-40350 Nigel, that's actually what part IV will deal with. Stay tuned. Nigel,

that’s actually what part IV will deal with. Stay tuned.

]]> By: NigelW http://permaculture.org.au/2010/01/13/money-literacy-part-iii/#comment-40333 NigelW Wed, 13 Jan 2010 10:21:41 +0000 http://permaculture.org.au/?p=2342#comment-40333 The takeover of new economies by old is of course exemplified by the possibly fanciful story of the Spaniards and their Hat. When they wanted to convert the South American population to their economy, they simply made it a law (infringement of which was punishable by terror) that the indigenous population wore a hat. The hat was manufactured by the Spanish, and of course had to be purchased with Spanish money. In a single stroke the native population was placed in a situation where to not have money would lead directly to their destruction. Conversion achieved. A very clever and simple idea. "An offer you cannot refuse." There are many modern equivalents, and your piece is a salutory reminder. Thanks. Nigel The takeover of new economies by old is of course exemplified by the possibly fanciful story of the Spaniards and their Hat.

When they wanted to convert the South American population to their economy, they simply made it a law (infringement of which was punishable by terror) that the indigenous population wore a hat. The hat was manufactured by the Spanish, and of course had to be purchased with Spanish money. In a single stroke the native population was placed in a situation where to not have money would lead directly to their destruction. Conversion achieved. A very clever and simple idea.

“An offer you cannot refuse.”

There are many modern equivalents, and your piece is a salutory reminder.

Thanks.

Nigel

]]> By: Johan http://permaculture.org.au/2010/01/13/money-literacy-part-iii/#comment-40332 Johan Wed, 13 Jan 2010 10:05:52 +0000 http://permaculture.org.au/?p=2342#comment-40332 It is very true that freedom is often misguided and applied selectively. In truly free market, money itself would be free, not subject to decree and legal tender law. Everyone is free to associate and use any form of money the wish. No one is compelled to use a particular form. Of course, a seller is also free to accept only some kind of money and not others. But the buyers are also free to buy from others. At the end of the day, the market forces of supply and demand will balance and some form of money will emerge as the favorite. If we look back in history, these are gold and silver. It would be interesting to see if civilization can come up with alternative forms of money. Ironically, such alternatives would only be possible, again, in a free market. It is very true that freedom is often misguided and applied selectively. In truly free market, money itself would be free, not subject to decree and legal tender law. Everyone is free to associate and use any form of money the wish. No one is compelled to use a particular form. Of course, a seller is also free to accept only some kind of money and not others. But the buyers are also free to buy from others. At the end of the day, the market forces of supply and demand will balance and some form of money will emerge as the favorite. If we look back in history, these are gold and silver. It would be interesting to see if civilization can come up with alternative forms of money. Ironically, such alternatives would only be possible, again, in a free market.

]]> By: JBob http://permaculture.org.au/2010/01/13/money-literacy-part-iii/#comment-40324 JBob Wed, 13 Jan 2010 05:16:19 +0000 http://permaculture.org.au/?p=2342#comment-40324 I see no need to put "freedom" in quotes. Was physical violence, the threat thereof, or fraud used against you? If no, then you were not forced, and you were free. Terms must be defined if anybody is going to make any sense. I see no need to put “freedom” in quotes. Was physical violence, the threat thereof, or fraud used against you? If no, then you were not forced, and you were free. Terms must be defined if anybody is going to make any sense.

]]>