Re: Putting Chartalism In Its Place?

[Harry Veeder <eo200@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

> From: Gunnar Tómasson <gunnar.tomasson@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2003 12:14:26 -0400
> To: pkt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: Putting Chartalism In Its Place?
>
> Re. the following:
>
>>> So does PRECISION OF LANGUAGE put Chartalism in its place!
>>>
>> In a word, no!  PRECISION OF LANGUAGE got lost somewhere.
>> To argue that a claim cannot be not a store of value is to argue that
>> only a physical object can be a store of value.  That would imply the
>> very expression "store of value" is meaningless.
>
> Comment:
>
> Indeed!
>
> This is what Adam Smith had to say about it in Wealth of Nations:
>
> "It would be too ridiculous to go about seriously to prove that wealth does
> not consist in money, or in gold and silver; but in what money purchases and
> is valuable only for purchasing."
>
> In other words, Smith held to be self-evident that "wealth" does not
> "consist in money" - whence it follows that "money" cannot be "store" of
> "wealth".
>
> At first glance, it may seem that Smith has it all wrong - that, surely,
> "gold and silver" are "wealth".
>
> True - but Smith is concerned with "money" QUA "money".
>
> A foundational concept for coherent monetary economics.
>
> Gunnar


Adam Smith overlooks the joy of window shopping.
The value of money is in the titillation of delaying the purchase.

Harry Veeder