The voters have decided that cjcusack is right!
Vote on the post to say if you agree or disagree.
Related Posts
Also about Money & Economics
+39People actually do rely on others on happiness to an extent. amirite?
Also about Money & Economics
+135I hate when people watch anime in Japanese even though they don't understand it, amirite?
Not how that works
Why not?
Except for the government - they burn other people's money while making themselves rich.
Not if you burn someone else's money.
True, i should've specified your own money. My bad
False
Jeff just burned $100! We are all .0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000001 cents richer!
Why
Is this why we read "Into the Wild" in school? Probably, I went to a city school.
Quantitative theory of money well applied!
So THATS what the Joker was doing...
Banks destroy bills regularly. Except they get their money back when they do it, and the government eventually prints more anyway. You are just a guy holding a pile of ashes if you do it.
When money is takin out of circulation, it makes the remaining money more valuble. Granted, the difference it makes is negligible at best, but it's still there.
No. Money has a set value that does not change in relation to how many other pieces of currency exist.
Inflation/deflation affects the price of goods not the value of the money used to purchase them.
Money's value is based on how many goods/services it can buy. With less money in circulation, the buying power rises because people have less money to spend
You're making the assumption that there is a finite amount of money (wealth) in an economy and that removal of some increases the value of the rest.
However, there is NOT a finite amount of money/wealth so losing some has no effect on the rest.
BTW, this is also why "wealth redistribution" is such a con. When someone makes more it does not, of necessity, mean that someone else now has less.
Then how do we have deflation?