Time Value of Money

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by JohnT


He does? The second post was actually the first time I remember DanS participating in your threads, and a quick review shows that he didn't participate in either of the Profit/Unfair Tax threads, nor the Cap. vs. Com threads between you, Skywalker, and Veloceryx (sp).

It's not the first time. He's spammed in a couple.

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by David Floyd


I wasn't aware that you had really responded to any of them - rather, you ignore most of them.

Although it is rather hard to refute the absolute ****ING obvious, isn't it?

If it's obvious to you that a percepion can create something, then you believe in magic. How many times whould I tell you that perception doesn't create things.

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by JohnT
Let's try a different tack, because I'm bored and have nothing else to do...

Note that the phrase is the Time Value of Money (TVM), which applies to a very real dilemma for every single one of us, and that is the problem of the Time Value of Life, easily demonstrated by the following equation:

TVL = (Eternity - 70years)

Out of the entire existence of the Universe, I get only 70 years, meaning that if you want to borrow my money, earned from my labors, for any significant portion of my very precious time on this celestial plane, you are going to have to make it worth my while.

Capice?

That's nice John. I'm not going to argue against that even if I don't believe it, but you haven't argued that your money has created any value. The return you get for your money is only a premium for holding less liquid investments, it isn't a compensation for creating value. If I buy a bond, I get a return on it whether the issuer created any value or not.

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Flip McWho
Dude, the arguments are repeatitive because you refuse to acknowledge the point. The only real way to refute your claim is through the arguments we have presented. Hence the repeatition.

It isn't my duty to acknowledge your point, only to present a counter argument, which I have. It's your duty to counter my argument, with arguments that haven't been made yet.

[JohnT]

Originally posted by Kidicious


That's nice John. I'm not going to argue against that even if I don't believe it, but you haven't argued that your money has created any value. The return you get for your money is only a premium for holding less liquid investments, it isn't a compensation for creating value. If I buy a bond, I get a return on it whether the issuer created any value or not.

No, the return I get is based upon the time that I was without my funds, time that I will never get back regardless of the interest rate.

In short, it's not the money that is valuable, it's time.

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by JohnT


No, the return I get is based upon the time that I was without my funds, time that I will never get back regardless of the interest rate.

In short, it's not the money that is valuable, it's time.

Only because you have found someone to agree to pay rent. If you would have never have found someone to pay you rent, and you would have never spent you money you would not only not get a return, but your money (ie work) would never be worth anything. Money is just a store of value in the sense that it will one day be used for exchange.

Saving money doesn't do anything at all to produce goods and services. True, it needs to be put in the financial system and we need investors to invest in more or less liquid assets, but that doesn't create value. When you loan your money hopefully the borrower will hire someone to work for that money, but whatever part of that loan that is not used to hire people to work does not create value. Either way the person who did the original work for the money only created value in the amount of the work that he or she has done.

[Flip McWho]

Ok it is based on perception. If you class that as magic then it is based on magic. Un/fortunately everyone subscribes to this "magic" and as such this system works. If you have one person who decides this system is based on magic therefore I can ignore it, well the system will ignore the person and continue on its merry way with the person changing back. It's just the way.

[MichaeltheGreat]

Originally posted by DanS


Another DanS Certified Fvcked Up Thread.

Hey, hasn't it been at least six months since you and I agreed on anything?

[MichaeltheGreat]

Originally posted by Kidicious


Only because you have found someone to agree to pay rent. If you would have never have found someone to pay you rent, and you would have never spent you money you would not only not get a return, but your money (ie work) would never be worth anything. Money is just a store of value in the sense that it will one day be used for exchange.

Saving money doesn't do anything at all to produce goods and services. True, it needs to be put in the financial system and we need investors to invest in more or less liquid assets, but that doesn't create value. When you loan your money hopefully the borrower will hire someone to work for that money, but whatever part of that loan that is not used to hire people to work does not create value. Either way the person who did the original work for the money only created value in the amount of the work that he or she has done.

This whole argument is just a regurgitation of your drivel that only labor creates values, and that one has been refuted time and again.

Apparently, in the Kidiverse, gold and horse**** have the same intrinsic value.

[JohnT]

I'm still interested in seeing if Kid thinks there is a value to time, the ultimate limited resource, one that we burn through at the rate of 1 second for every... second.

[David Floyd]

If it's obvious to you that a percepion can create something, then you believe in magic. How many times whould I tell you that perception doesn't create things.

Look, perception doesn't create any physical object. The physical object already exists. The problem is that the object does not become valuable until perception comes into play. Let's take a REAL simple example. If there is only one computer produced per year, that computer is going to be more valuable than it would be in a year in which 1 million computers are produced. In your dreamworld, the computer might be sold for the same amount both times, but that's not how it works. In real life, desired items are more valuable during shortages, and as such their value goes up.

You seem to think that the act of production automatically creates value (even though you contradict yourself). You actually have it sorta backwords - perceptions of value are what drive production.

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by JohnT
I'm still interested in seeing if Kid thinks there is a value to time, the ultimate limited resource, one that we burn through at the rate of 1 second for every... second.

Not in the context that you present. As time goes by more value is created, but it's not money that creates that value.

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Flip McWho
Ok it is based on perception. If you class that as magic then it is based on magic. Un/fortunately everyone subscribes to this "magic" and as such this system works. If you have one person who decides this system is based on magic therefore I can ignore it, well the system will ignore the person and continue on its merry way with the person changing back. It's just the way.

Ah, but I'm not the only one.

[Flip McWho]

Ah, but I'm not the only one.

Ok your not the only one. But are you gonna try to change it or are you accepting it, nay fueling it by working within this system? Also, I'm sure some people believe like you do (hell I pretty much, well not in the rest just that post that your quoting ) but the system works and they realise this and am willing to operate within it.

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by David Floyd


Look, perception doesn't create any physical object. The physical object already exists. The problem is that the object does not become valuable until perception comes into play. Let's take a REAL simple example. If there is only one computer produced per year, that computer is going to be more valuable than it would be in a year in which 1 million computers are produced. In your dreamworld, the computer might be sold for the same amount both times, but that's not how it works. In real life, desired items are more valuable during shortages, and as such their value goes up.

True, the value of the one computer would be more because of the law of diminishing utility. What's false is that the price equals the value. It doesn't in either case, simply because the price includes all kinds of fees that are not payments for creating that good. Interest on money is one of those fees.

You seem to think that the act of production automatically creates value (even though you contradict yourself). You actually have it sorta backwords - perceptions of value are what drive production.

No I don't. I've said that I don't several times in this thread. This is what I'm talking about.