The Gold Standard
Moderator: Moderators
-
- Invincible Overlord
- Posts: 10555
- Joined: Thu Sep 25, 2008 3:00 am
I've also been meaning to ask this, too, but how come nationalism only got invented recently?
I understand why China couldn't get onto the deal, but how come the Roman Empire or Alexander the Great didn't do this way back when? It seems like the (relatively) advantages of nationalism were just too kick ass to make us wonder how feudalism and mercantilism displaced it. Did it not just occur to them, was there just too much resentment in the empire, what?
I understand why China couldn't get onto the deal, but how come the Roman Empire or Alexander the Great didn't do this way back when? It seems like the (relatively) advantages of nationalism were just too kick ass to make us wonder how feudalism and mercantilism displaced it. Did it not just occur to them, was there just too much resentment in the empire, what?
Josh Kablack wrote:Your freedom to make rulings up on the fly is in direct conflict with my freedom to interact with an internally consistent narrative. Your freedom to run/play a game without needing to understand a complex rule system is in direct conflict with my freedom to play a character whose abilities and flaws function as I intended within that ruleset. Your freedom to add and change rules in the middle of the game is in direct conflict with my ability to understand that rules system before I decided whether or not to join your game.
In short, your entire post is dismissive of not merely my intelligence, but my agency. And I don't mean agency as a player within one of your games, I mean my agency as a person. You do not want me to be informed when I make the fundamental decisions of deciding whether to join your game or buying your rules system.
- Cielingcat
- Duke
- Posts: 1453
- Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm
Would it not have had something to do with the rather meager means of communication back in those days?
CHICKENS ARE NOT SUPPOSED TO DO COCAINE, SILKY HEN
Josh_Kablack wrote:You are not a unique and precious snowflake, you are just one more fucking asshole on the internet who presumes themselves to be better than the unwashed masses.
-
- Serious Badass
- Posts: 29894
- Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm
Empires were founded on vassalage. The idea of synthesizing an identity for people to share in your city and another city is frankly pretty strange. Until relatively recently, you either owned a foreign city or had a compact with another city. Having another city be "the same" as your city or even you family is something that required a fair grounding in social science.
-Username17
-Username17
You need more of a difference between you and someone you have dealings with further away than you and the next city over.
Traditionally, people did not roam far from their home town, and did not have larger identities as a group, except when faced with a larger, obviously foreign influence.
Even today in much of the world your neighbors and family are far more important than the nation.
Technology dilutes this, but where technology fails, you get sectarian violence as people realize there are different people right next door.
Paper money just couldn't compete with the fact that everyone is out for themselves.
-Crissa
Traditionally, people did not roam far from their home town, and did not have larger identities as a group, except when faced with a larger, obviously foreign influence.
Even today in much of the world your neighbors and family are far more important than the nation.
Technology dilutes this, but where technology fails, you get sectarian violence as people realize there are different people right next door.
Paper money just couldn't compete with the fact that everyone is out for themselves.
-Crissa
-
- Invincible Overlord
- Posts: 10555
- Joined: Thu Sep 25, 2008 3:00 am
I heard a theory once way back when that stated that improvements in morality and social science only came about when people started expanding their 'in' group and started treating less like crap the people in their 'out' group.Having another city be "the same" as your city or even you family is something that required a fair grounding in social science.
Does anyone know what facilitated this change, if this theory is true? It always seemed kind of random that in the span of one generation people decided that it's not okay to torture and kill religious minorities when in the previous one people practiced blood libel and worse all of the time and no one cared. I mean, Europe's shameful obsession with anti-semitism lasted for centuries and then not 30 or 40 years later talking bad about Jews is now the social equivalent of taking a shit on someone's children.
Josh Kablack wrote:Your freedom to make rulings up on the fly is in direct conflict with my freedom to interact with an internally consistent narrative. Your freedom to run/play a game without needing to understand a complex rule system is in direct conflict with my freedom to play a character whose abilities and flaws function as I intended within that ruleset. Your freedom to add and change rules in the middle of the game is in direct conflict with my ability to understand that rules system before I decided whether or not to join your game.
In short, your entire post is dismissive of not merely my intelligence, but my agency. And I don't mean agency as a player within one of your games, I mean my agency as a person. You do not want me to be informed when I make the fundamental decisions of deciding whether to join your game or buying your rules system.
Actually, it's just that, having the world "become smaller", the "out" group was shoved farther away; see Africa. The fact that commodities are paid in blood was just forgotten by most.Crissa wrote:The good guys won, Lago. Selling to other people became worth more than killing them.
There is evidence that this has come and gone in history as well, so it might go away again...
-Crissa
Hans Freyer, s.b.u.h. wrote:A manly, a bold tone prevails in history. He who has the grip has the booty.
Huston Smith wrote:Life gives us no view of the whole. We see only snatches here and there, (...)
brotherfrancis75 wrote:Perhaps you imagine that Ayn Rand is our friend? And the Mont Pelerin Society? No, those are but the more subtle versions of the Bolshevik Communist Revolution you imagine you reject. (...) FOX NEWS IS ALSO COMMUNIST!
LDSChristian wrote:True. I do wonder which is worse: killing so many people like Hitler did or denying Christ 3 times like Peter did.
The "out" group is also in a darker area. Africa, South America, some of the deeper reaches of asia. I don't mean darker as a bad pun for black or any other of the associated skin pigmentations with the other regions . I just mean it as in we might as well put a blindfold over our eyes to what's going on there.Bigode wrote:Actually, it's just that, having the world "become smaller", the "out" group was shoved farther away; see Africa. The fact that commodities are paid in blood was just forgotten by most.Crissa wrote:The good guys won, Lago. Selling to other people became worth more than killing them.
There is evidence that this has come and gone in history as well, so it might go away again...
-Crissa
The good guys won to a degree, yes. So did the bad guys. The good guys had to compromise with the bad guys to keep the world going.
Ancient History wrote:We were working on Street Magic, and Frank asked me if a houngan had run over my dog.
So: why is gold still traded so heavily if we are on a fiat currency now?
As far as I know it's utilitarian purposes aren't as far-reaching as the other precious/semi-precious metals.
Also can someone tell me if gold flucutuates randomly with the economic ups and downs? Or does it actually have a specific flow? I know this isn't exactly rocket science but my wife was theorizing that people hoard gold and sell it off in times of need. Is this sitll the case? It'
With a fiat currency, what's the use?
As far as I know it's utilitarian purposes aren't as far-reaching as the other precious/semi-precious metals.
Also can someone tell me if gold flucutuates randomly with the economic ups and downs? Or does it actually have a specific flow? I know this isn't exactly rocket science but my wife was theorizing that people hoard gold and sell it off in times of need. Is this sitll the case? It'
With a fiat currency, what's the use?
Ancient History wrote:We were working on Street Magic, and Frank asked me if a houngan had run over my dog.
- Absentminded_Wizard
- Duke
- Posts: 1122
- Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm
- Location: Ohio
- Contact:
People still like gold because it's shiny and makes good-looking jewelry. Therefore, gold still is traded as a commodity. Its price fluctuates due to all kinds of factors just like any other traded good.
It looks like you're making the classical error of assuming that the demand for something is based entirely on utility. That kind of thinking was discredited a century ago.
It looks like you're making the classical error of assuming that the demand for something is based entirely on utility. That kind of thinking was discredited a century ago.
- CatharzGodfoot
- King
- Posts: 5668
- Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm
- Location: North Carolina
-
- Invincible Overlord
- Posts: 10555
- Joined: Thu Sep 25, 2008 3:00 am
Gold has a lot more industrial uses now then what we had in the past.
Hell, that whole reason why they picked gold as a standard instead of, say, iron was because gold didn't have a lot of secondary uses. Even if aliens brainwashed humans into thinking that gold was worthless as jewelry, there would nowadays still be a huge demand for it.
Hell, that whole reason why they picked gold as a standard instead of, say, iron was because gold didn't have a lot of secondary uses. Even if aliens brainwashed humans into thinking that gold was worthless as jewelry, there would nowadays still be a huge demand for it.
Josh Kablack wrote:Your freedom to make rulings up on the fly is in direct conflict with my freedom to interact with an internally consistent narrative. Your freedom to run/play a game without needing to understand a complex rule system is in direct conflict with my freedom to play a character whose abilities and flaws function as I intended within that ruleset. Your freedom to add and change rules in the middle of the game is in direct conflict with my ability to understand that rules system before I decided whether or not to join your game.
In short, your entire post is dismissive of not merely my intelligence, but my agency. And I don't mean agency as a player within one of your games, I mean my agency as a person. You do not want me to be informed when I make the fundamental decisions of deciding whether to join your game or buying your rules system.
-
- Invincible Overlord
- Posts: 10555
- Joined: Thu Sep 25, 2008 3:00 am
Also, hopefully, one day, maybe, the good guys will keep winning more territory.
The fact that you actually have to hide and gloss over the fact nowadays that people are dying for your elite tennis shoes is encouraging in a twisted sort of way. So I still hold out hope one day that technology advances to the point where people don't need to die to make your elite tennis shoes and removes the socioeconomic reasons for exploiting people.
That is, if we don't simultaneously have a world food shortage, nuclear warfare, global warming, or robot singularity occur while getting there.
The fact that you actually have to hide and gloss over the fact nowadays that people are dying for your elite tennis shoes is encouraging in a twisted sort of way. So I still hold out hope one day that technology advances to the point where people don't need to die to make your elite tennis shoes and removes the socioeconomic reasons for exploiting people.
That is, if we don't simultaneously have a world food shortage, nuclear warfare, global warming, or robot singularity occur while getting there.
Josh Kablack wrote:Your freedom to make rulings up on the fly is in direct conflict with my freedom to interact with an internally consistent narrative. Your freedom to run/play a game without needing to understand a complex rule system is in direct conflict with my freedom to play a character whose abilities and flaws function as I intended within that ruleset. Your freedom to add and change rules in the middle of the game is in direct conflict with my ability to understand that rules system before I decided whether or not to join your game.
In short, your entire post is dismissive of not merely my intelligence, but my agency. And I don't mean agency as a player within one of your games, I mean my agency as a person. You do not want me to be informed when I make the fundamental decisions of deciding whether to join your game or buying your rules system.