--- On Sat, 10/4/08, Zack Bass <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
From: Zack Bass <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: [LibertarianEnterprise] Re: CONGRATULATIONS, Zack!
To: LibertarianEnterprise@yahoogroups.com
Date: Saturday, October 4, 2008, 1:51 PM
Just so. Thank you.
But I think you overqualify a bit. It is not necessarily that the
"Real" value of the things was less than we expected. We do not need
to make ANY assumption about the "Real" value in order to understand
this. The only thing that matters is that some people CHANGED THEIR
MINDS about how valuable the "things" were.
(1) Maybe they decided they were worth MORE than before, and thus the
"Market Value" increased.
(1)(A) Maybe they were correct, and the "Real" value WAS greater than
thought.
(1)(B) Maybe they were mistaken, and the "Real" value was NOT greater
than thought.
(2) Maybe they decided they were worth LESS than before, and thus the
"Market Value" Decreased.
(2)(A) Maybe they were correct, and the "Real" value WAS less than
thought.
(2)(B) Maybe they were mistaken, and the "Real" value was NOT less
than thought.
In all four instances, the result is the same: Market Value changes
in response to an Internal Mental State, without any change in Wealth
- whether the Internal Mental State is delusional or realistic. This
happens regardless of whether some kind of Inflation or other process
is responsible for making the Internal Mental State inaccurate and now
the Mental State realizes its mistake (the Mistake might be the New
opinion, not the Old one; makes no difference).
===========================================Basically, it seems nomatter what
you use for currency, value is all about beliefs. So maybe our Federal
Reserve Notes (i.e. religious literature with no value but what everyone
believes they have) isn't as poisonous as a gold or silver backed currency,
since any transactions it underwrites are also based on nothing but belief in
value. There is a fly in the ointment somewhere in this, can't see it at
the moment.
