I would argue that banking is a number in a ledger but money and banking are not the same thing.
Comment on Is there a theoretical limit to profit?
Leate_Wonceslace@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 weeks ago
Technically, money is just a number on a ledger. Practically, there’s a finite amount of wealth in the solar system, much less on earth, significantly less accessible to humans and only a slim amount can be taken from the working class before people start starving. We already have little enough that the population is going to start contracting.
workerONE@lemmy.world 4 weeks ago
Leate_Wonceslace@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 weeks ago
I’m making a distinction between money as a system of abstracting wealth and what wealth practically means. You’re making a highly disputable philosophical argument about the ontological nature of money instead of engaging with the germaine ideas. Simply put: I don’t consider a physical representation of money in-and-of-itself; I consider the bill to be a part of a grand fragmented ledger. Furthermore, bitcoin is literally a public ledger for which there is no physical exchange of any representation of money. As a final example, the Yap isles famously have a monetary system that has physical Incarnations but no physical exchange among the people of the isles. It’s literally just a public ledger that exists in the minds of those who use it.
murmelade@lemmy.ml 4 weeks ago
So the limit is when everyone is dead and can’t purchase anything.
Leate_Wonceslace@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 weeks ago
Well I’d say it’s when the proletariat revolts, destroying the machine of exploitation, at which gathering further profit is impossible.
murmelade@lemmy.ml 4 weeks ago
✊