This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||
|
Is there any reason why this article should not be merged with metal as money? Farolif ( talk) 18:33, 25 November 2011 (UTC)
Consensus appears to be that we should merge metal as money into this article. I will redirect metal as money here, and editors can merge content as they see fit. LK ( talk) 02:52, 29 November 2012 (UTC)
What about copper? Hasn't that been used as money at various times & places? (February 21, 2010)
the value of the currency derives from the market value of the commodity upon which it is based independent of its monetary role
If the value of a gold coin is the same as that of the unminted gold from which it was made (the market price of gold), then the minting of coins would occur only at a perpetual loss. As nobody would ever do such a thing, coins should not be minted & therefore should not exist. As coins do exist & minting is not a losing endeavour, the value of coins CANNOT be determined by their composition. Metallism fails to account for the evidence. Its predictions are contradicted by the evidence.
Vilhelmo ( talk) 15:43, 7 November 2013 (UTC)
@Farolif You obviously either didn't read or are unable to understand my previous comment.
I did NOT claim that minting coins is a losing endeavour. Rather, I claimed the opposite. Because the minting of coins is NOT a losing endeavour, it follows logically that the value of any coin cannot be determined by the material from which it is composed & therefore "commodity money" does NOT exist. Coins are fiat, just as all money is. Vilhelmo ( talk) 13:00, 8 November 2013 (UTC)
To say that a 1g gold coin is worth 1g gold is to say nothing. Government fiat assigns value in money not gold. As in a Gold Standard when the government sets, by fiat, the price of gold in money. What I'm saying is that if the mint pays the same market price for raw gold as they sell the finished coin for, as Metallism implies, they would operate at a loss. If a lump of gold is worth the same as a gold coin why waste the time & money minting coins at all? - by Vilhelmo. 24.36.14.161 ( talk) 09:44, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||
|
Is there any reason why this article should not be merged with metal as money? Farolif ( talk) 18:33, 25 November 2011 (UTC)
Consensus appears to be that we should merge metal as money into this article. I will redirect metal as money here, and editors can merge content as they see fit. LK ( talk) 02:52, 29 November 2012 (UTC)
What about copper? Hasn't that been used as money at various times & places? (February 21, 2010)
the value of the currency derives from the market value of the commodity upon which it is based independent of its monetary role
If the value of a gold coin is the same as that of the unminted gold from which it was made (the market price of gold), then the minting of coins would occur only at a perpetual loss. As nobody would ever do such a thing, coins should not be minted & therefore should not exist. As coins do exist & minting is not a losing endeavour, the value of coins CANNOT be determined by their composition. Metallism fails to account for the evidence. Its predictions are contradicted by the evidence.
Vilhelmo ( talk) 15:43, 7 November 2013 (UTC)
@Farolif You obviously either didn't read or are unable to understand my previous comment.
I did NOT claim that minting coins is a losing endeavour. Rather, I claimed the opposite. Because the minting of coins is NOT a losing endeavour, it follows logically that the value of any coin cannot be determined by the material from which it is composed & therefore "commodity money" does NOT exist. Coins are fiat, just as all money is. Vilhelmo ( talk) 13:00, 8 November 2013 (UTC)
To say that a 1g gold coin is worth 1g gold is to say nothing. Government fiat assigns value in money not gold. As in a Gold Standard when the government sets, by fiat, the price of gold in money. What I'm saying is that if the mint pays the same market price for raw gold as they sell the finished coin for, as Metallism implies, they would operate at a loss. If a lump of gold is worth the same as a gold coin why waste the time & money minting coins at all? - by Vilhelmo. 24.36.14.161 ( talk) 09:44, 17 December 2013 (UTC)