On Sep 21, 2018, at 20:02, Christopher Havel <[email protected]> wrote: > […]
Interesting economic scenario. I think it works best when the arbiter of the exchange rate for goods is impartial. Otherwise the exchange rate would be influenced by biases. > if I've got my math right (sorry, I'm severely math-challenged -- to the > level of > having some sort of otherwise-unnamed "math fluency disorder" that I was > labeled with in grade school... the gist is that I understand the > *concepts* on actually something of a slightly advanced level, but I can't > manage the actual *exercises*, real-world or textbook, without a > half-decent calculator). In this case, the arithmetic associated with your example seems to work out fine. Maybe you've outgrown the "math fluency disorder"? In my recollection it seems boys' brains mature later and I know there can be significant individual variation in the timing. > Alternatively, in a less-regulated society, we'd haggle for a while and > figure out for ourselves what eggs and cheese should be worth -- although > that somewhat sidesteps the need for standardized units altogether. This avoids the bias of a government official--exchanging that for the biases of each potential customer. > Of course, that one guy who only has stuff that absolutely nobody wants, kinda > gets into a bit of trouble in a barter economy... the conceptual system is > not without its flaws. But, hey, that's true of everything out there, so... > I dunno. /shrug That guy goes bankrupt if he doesn't adapt to the market demand in capitalism. Sincerely, Richard _______________________________________________ arm-netbook mailing list [email protected] http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook Send large attachments to [email protected]
