John Vertegaal <[email protected]> wrote: > How is "net worth" defined? > When frequencies enter the economy, to be worth something they need > returns from the already existing economy; (i.e.) debit entries made by > others that in turn require returns to have been "worth"while. > Assets=Debts; there is nothing economically (exchange-value) "net". As I > see it, the "net worth" you have in mind is meta-economic and exists in > terms of use-value only.
In standard accounting, a government's net worth = estimated market value of assets (to the government) minus estimated market value of debts. NW is not calculated in terms of use-values, though of course those are important, too. Also, NW could be calculated from other points of view, but those are not relevant here. The estimated market value of the frequencies would be the present discounted value of the net revenues expected to be received by the government in the future if they are rented to the private sector. This is likely much greater than the price of these frequencies if sold to the private sector as assets, since pressure from creditors (and their agents at the IMF and the European Central Bank), the aftermath of the recession, and the corrupt nature of the Berlusconi gang encourage the charging of "fire sale" prices. Likely, these prices are below the present discounted value of the net revenues expected to be received by the private-sector purchasers of these assets. That was my point. -- Jim Devine / "Segui il tuo corso, e lascia dir le genti." (Go your own way and let people talk.) -- Karl, paraphrasing Dante. _______________________________________________ pen-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l
