Organic view of money

This page is intended to provide views on the role played by different sorts of money in the perspective of the living. What role does a currency play if we consider humanity as a global organism? Is it an organ? Does it have a transversal structural/communication/transportation/energy tansformation role?

Does it act like a protein (store and exchange of energy, structural and mechanical role)? A hormone (chemical messenger)?

Money is multifunction, this might have been its strength in early economy, and its weakness today now that the humanity has reached a high level of complexity which requires much more diversity and specialization of the "agents" that contributes in its cohesion as a global organism.

Discussion

Leonardo Wild? wrote in the IJCCR mailing list, 5 Sept 2004:

Living systems are chaordic and autopoietic ("they make themselves" and engage in "structural coupling" with the environment (See: Humberto Maturana?, The Tree of Knowledge). Their structure is basically of
functional nature, that is, each organ and part serves a specific function with its own purposes, goals, and contents. Within each organ you have a combination of vertical and horizontal structures. CC is not "in itself" supportive of living systems. CC is a tool that allows organisms –individuals, families, communities, towns, companies, governments, etc.– to engage in "acts of economy" through multiple coincidence. That is, CC is the means by which they are able to "transfer value" and, through this act of transferring cultural value (CC) for real value (goods and services), they can acquire for their survival and evolution what they themselves cannot do. This means that CC is one more element of a social structure called "Economy." It is through Economy –engaging in acts of economy– that organisms acquired what they need to support their lives.

However, we cannot say that Economy (not to be confused with economics) is all that is needed to fulfill the needs of survival and evolution. We have Health ("the chaordic co-existence of autopoietic organisms in balance with themselves and their environment") and Education ("the acquisition and comprehension of knowledge and experiences by organisms and the following transmission of these from individual to individuals and from generation through generation"). In other words, Economy without an understanding (Education) of what it means to live in balance with oneself and the environment (Health) will not lead you far.

Economists have concentrated on the study of Supply and Demand and forgotten to look at the third element in the triad: Money. That is, Economists have looked upon money as a given and a factor that is not really important to understand Market Economy. Money's velocity and mass is as far as they go, without really looking into the genesis of this tool and the ensuing antics.

When studying CC, Money –that which allows for multiple coincidence– has been looked upon as the most important factor, more or less leaving out the other two sides or, what I feel is worse, not questioning the triad: 1) Money (CC), 2) Supply, 3) Demand. In other words, a similar fallacy as the one occurring with economists is happening here, in the sense that, just as economist don't question or look deeper into Money, CC advocates don't question or look deeper into Market Economy's two sacred pillars: Supply and Demand. There are as many fallacies in the workings of these two pillars of Market Economy as there are in relation to Money-as-we-know-it.

To give but a quick example: Supply means that someone must produce. Production is carried out with a goal: make money. However, production without transport will not take the products (or services) to market. So you need transport. But transport of products will not necessarily make those products available. You need a place and a time to make them available. Once available, goods or services don't necessarily satisfy needs without a Demand, and a Demand means that you need Money to engage in an act of economy. So we wish to supply more money through CC, but we don't realize that by doing so the line that led to this point has a deep fallacy: production based on the need to earn money rather than production based on real needs of those who act as
consumers.

In other words, if you look at it organically, it is as if the lungs inject oxygen into the blood system regardless of need. The lungs, in a live organism, produce the oxygen that is needed for the organism to function properly. It doesn't under produce, it doesn't over produce. There is a constant feedback that BEGINS WITH THE NEED which gives the order to the lungs to produce.

The opposite is going on in the economic structure known as Market Economy: production comes first regardless of need of the consumer. Production happens IN THE HOPE that a need is there. Production is carried out doing, in the best of cases, a "market analysis" to see more or less what should be produce and how much.

If CCs are supposed to work in an organic way, they must follow the way organisms function. Otherwise the chain of economic fallacies will continue and we will wonder why CCs don't take off, or must engage in compromises and marketing schemes in order to make CC currencies attractive to those living in the paradigm of a Market Economy.

An evaluation of CC will have to be carried out in lieu of these two differing paradigms: Market Economy vs Real Economy.

In Real Economy the three sides aren't, as in Market Economy, 1) Money, 2) Supply, 3) Demand, but:

1.- DISTRIBUTION

• 1.1 Compensation –a) Balance between b) Value Given, c) Value Received.
• 1.2 Information –a) on Transfer of Value and b) what are the Demands in order to find out c) what must be Supplied.
• 1.3 Transport –a) which entails a Transfer of Value, b) Energy to transfer Value, c) Means of Transport.

2.- CONSUMPTION

• 2.1 Needs –which can be a) Absolute Needs, b) Real Needs, c) Substitute Needs
• 2.2 Goods –which can be a) of Objective Value, b) of Cultural Value, c) of Subjective Value.
• 2.3 Sevices –which can be a) of Objective Value, b) of Cultural Value, c) of Subjective Value.

3.- PRODUCTION

• 3.1 Work –which means a) Energy (Available, Potential and Kinetic), b) Effort (Action in Space and Time, c) Capacity (Availability, Knowledge, Experience).
• 3.2 Goods –which can be a) of Objective Value, b) of Cultural Value, c) of Subjective Value.
• 3.3 Sevices –which can be a) of Objective Value, b) of Cultural Value, c) of Subjective Value.

In short, even though there are currently 2350 Calories of grains produced in the world per each inhabitant on the planet, and even though there is enough transport capacity (Land, Air, Water) to transfer real value to those with hunger, and even though the knowledge exists (more or less) where hunger is taking its toll, MARKET ECONOMY has not been able to solve this problem because MONEY is the main goal of Production and not DISTRIBUTION.


We usually confuse Systems with Structures.

• "System" is the creation of guidelines of behavior. They are an integral part of the triad 1) Content, 2) Systems, 3) Structures.

• "Structure" is the creation of limits (boundaries) within which things and organisms can act freely.

There are three types of hierarchic structures:

• 1) Vertical hierarchic structures, which mean authoritarian, ordered but of inefficient (or non-existent) adaptation capacity, and they induce inequity and need of complicated systems in order to function.

• 2) Horizontal hierarchic structures, which are chaotic, non-functional, inducing disorder and non-communication, they do not offer much resistance to outside pressures thus they are easy for outside agents to use for their purposes.

• 3) Functional hierarchic structures, where decisions are made by consensus and function chaordically; these are easily adaptable to change yet are resistant to outside pressures; they induce equality (equity).

---