Can someone explain why the GSR is where it is right now?

[The Crow]

By that measure then, a large hole drilled in a punkrocker's ear has intrinsic value. Is that really the road we want to be on (no disrespect meant to any punkrockers out there)?
.

Except that the hole is in a specific ear and not transferable. I think having intrinsic value would imply that the value can be transferred from one person to another, with minimal loss of value in the process.

 

[BeHereNow]

Random blog entry I just stumbled upon while trying to find more info on intrinsic value:

How "Intrinsic Value" is Derived from Ego and Sex

...Intrinsic value means, in simple terms, "real value." For example paper dollars do not have intrinsic value. It is only the goods and services you can purchase with said paper that does have "real value." However, gold does have intrinsic value because the gold itself is valuable.

Or is it?

...We always assume gold and silver are valuable unto themselves, which made them the "ultimate" form of currency. But if you look throughout history, especially in places where there was no gold or silver, you'll find other "substitute currencies" popped up. Salt, shells, etc. Even today in prisons cigarettes manifest themselves as the default currency. In other words, the value of a currency isn't its "intrinsicness," but rather the physical qualities it has that makes it the ideal tool of exchange.

This results in a debate and is the essence of the debate Stefan Molyneux was having with Schiff - does a currency even need to have intrinsic value or just really good traits that makes it a superior currency.

Schiff argued that currencies like bitcoin and the dollar are not backed up by anything, which makes gold superior. But this then brings us back to whether or not gold actually has intrinsic value. However Schiff pointed out several times something that made me realize gold (and silver) do indeed have intrinsic value. Namely, gold can be used for ornamentation.

Now when I say, "ornamentation" that is the polite was of saying, "sex and ego." For while, yes, humans have always sought gold and silver, you have to ask why would they do so? What is in it for men to grab a hunk of metal that has not the function of iron or the usefulness of bronze?

You can get laid.

Gold was (and still is) nothing more than peacock-feather currency. It was a way to demonstrate you had wealth and power. With gold you could either directly purchase sex (either prostitution, supporting a concubine, or a wife...or 6) or at least demonstrate you were wealthy and powerful by adoring yourself or your house with it. Thus, gold, and by default, intrinsic value does not derive it's worth from something like "scarcity" (though it does need to be scarce) as much as it does play and ego.

If you don't believe me, think about a world without women.

What would happen to the price of silver, gold, and diamonds? Yes they have some industrial uses, and their scarcity and malleability would make them a decent currency, but they would not be trading anywhere near what they are today if there were no women to woo.

Therefore, we need to realize that functional currencies do not necessarily have to have intrinsic value. Gold and silver have adequate enough characteristics on their own that make them great currencies, just as bitcoin, shells, cigarettes and salt. But if you want something to have genuine "intrinsic value," something that goes beyond currency-functionality, then it needs to either stoke your ego or get you some play.

The rest are all truly fiat currencies or commodities.

http://captaincapitalism.blogspot.com.au/2014/02/how-intrinsic-value-is-derived-from-ego.html

Yes, interesting, but a lot of bunk.
CZ has all of the "ornamentation" qualities of diamonds. Base metals can imitate gold and silver VERY well (plating, if nothing else - but there are other imitations).
How do they work for, wooing? Not well.
it is much more than ornamentation - it is perceived value.
In the right society glass beads or peacock feathers will do much better.
In some societies it is the men who adorn themselves and women take notice.

Interesting blog, but flawed.

In all societies it is the "good provider" who does well with those they want to attract.
Big muscles or a big checkbook, it just depends.
Side of beef, or pinch of salt, just depends.
Young, muscular, side of beef, crock of salt, vault of fiat, wall of gold, loyal followers, all attained and kept by brains not brawn, now that's a winner.
She can have whoever and whatever she wants.

If I have a truckload of gold, that is incapable of being converted to fiat, or bartered for other useful goods (food and such), it may as well be dog feces.
That is the true intrinsic value of gold.
It only has value if others believe it does, and will part with their useful treasures in exchange.

Intrinsic value will dissolve, melt, disappear, show its true colors, in the right setting.
Imagination.

 

[BeHereNow]

By that measure then, a large hole drilled in a punkrocker's ear has intrinsic value. Is that really the road we want to be on (no disrespect meant to any punkrockers out there)?
.

Except that the hole is in a specific ear and not transferable. I think having intrinsic value would imply that the value can be transferred from one person to another, with minimal loss of value in the process.

Early fiat - about 5000 years ago or so - was marks on a clay tablet, probably representing baskets of grain.
The value of your labor, or what it produced, was converted to tally marks and exchanged for what others produced.
Very easy to transfer goose eggs, venison, firewood, flint, anything, with the aid of those clay tablets that became fiat.

As to 'loss of value', well - who is to say what value is gained or lost?
My 'valuable' goose eggs lose value simply because geese are abundant.
I do not see that fiat reduces the relative value of any goods or services.

 

[mmissinglink]

By that measure then, a large hole drilled in a punkrocker's ear has intrinsic value. Is that really the road we want to be on (no disrespect meant to any punkrockers out there)?
.

Except that the hole is in a specific ear and not transferable. I think having intrinsic value would imply that the value can be transferred from one person to another, with minimal loss of value in the process.

I wasn't talking about that specific hole, but any and all large holes drilled in ears. The hole is reproducable (therefore transferable) with no loss whatsoever in terms of the value it provides. Again, using the argument that some silver/gold/saltbugs use that their product of choice or fetishism has intrinsic value, the hole drilled in the punkrocker's ear has intrinsic value.



.

 

[mmissinglink]

it is perceived value.

And therein is the naked truth. All value is subjective, perceived value therefore the value of salt, dog feces, gold, or silver can not be intrinsic....has to be extrinsic....you need a perceiver to attach value to it.

What was the specific value of gold 14.726108 million years ago? (that question is not meant specifically for you BeHereNow...it's meant for anyone who still believes that substances like silver, salt, and dog feces have intrinsic value). When you can answer that in a cogent, sensible, reasoned way then you will understand why salt, dog feces, and gold have no intrinsic value though they certainly have intrinsic characteristics and properties which some people very much adore and desire to posses.



.

 

[Sonic]

I guess if you want to stack something that won't lose its intrinsic value you could always stack pain pills lol

 

[BeHereNow]

I guess if you want to stack something that won't lose its intrinsic value you could always stack pain pills lol

I would like to have stacked the ones my relatives threw away - since to them they were - less than valueless.
They perceived them to be a nuisance to society.

 

[Miksture]

Loved your post Milksture, just got one question for ya. You say that gold and silver both are actually overvalued? And that it's primarily our emotional investment in it that has driven its price over the years? That's probably true, but what do you think its actual value should be? Just the bare minimum of nothing beyond their practical uses? Sort of like a commodity like oil?

I don't know, sonic. Personally, since I have been investing in it I would like its value to increase over time at a rate about 5-10% over CPI until I retire!!!

 

[The Crow]

I guess if you want to stack something that won't lose its intrinsic value you could always stack pain pills lol

Depends upon the 'pill' to which you refer - most (all?) organic (in the chemistry context of the word) substances degrade with time. Have a sniff at old, previously unopened pills of aspirin and you get a whiff of vinegar as the aspirin loses its acetyl group as acetic acid. One I found that was very vinegary was only 5 years old.

Your investment in pain pills will probably have minimal value after 50 years.

 

[The Crow]

Loved your post Milksture, just got one question for ya. You say that gold and silver both are actually overvalued? And that it's primarily our emotional investment in it that has driven its price over the years? That's probably true, but what do you think its actual value should be? Just the bare minimum of nothing beyond their practical uses? Sort of like a commodity like oil?

I don't know, sonic. Personally, since I have been investing in it I would like its value to increase over time at a rate about 5-10% over CPI until I retire!!!

Many years ago I had one of those less-than-sober discussions with a fellow about the value of gold. Couldn't convince him that under the right circumstances I could swap a litre of water for a kilo of gold. He wouldn't accept that if he were dying of thirst (and just happened to possess a kilo of gold) he would be willing to part with it for a drink of water. He thought he would still be in some kind of bargaining position and would expect change.

Now if there were competition to sell water under those circumstances, he would be partially correct, but I'd put money on it that me and the other water guy could quickly form a cartel and dis-illusion him very fast.

 

[Sonic]

I guess if you want to stack something that won't lose its intrinsic value you could always stack pain pills lol

Depends upon the 'pill' to which you refer - most (all?) organic (in the chemistry context of the word) substances degrade with time. Have a sniff at old, previously unopened pills of aspirin and you get a whiff of vinegar as the aspirin loses its acetyl group as acetic acid. One I found that was very vinegary was only 5 years old.

Your investment in pain pills will probably have minimal value after 50 years.

That's true. Just take a look at the shelf life of whatever pill in question. Alternatively, you could grow opium (and other things for that matter) which is, in a sense, infinite. Unlike pills which, in the case of a total collapse, as in things shut down, there will be a finite amount. But shelf-life of things like oxycodone will never be an issue since it will always be so highly sought after. Supply would be your only concern.

 

[The Crow]

World's oldest professions - sex & sly grog