At this point, you might be wondering where all this stands — if at all — with the IRS. The alternative, though, is far from uncommon. In turn, satisfaction is built into the infrastructure the exchange has created and is then left to the database to proceed along the lines of good business practices. Related Posts. Sports News. Please login to comment on this post.
There are no comments yet. Specify an exact violation that this article or any content on this page have done. Not finding your content or simply looking for extra information. To provide a standard of value and serve as the means of payment — grain and silver had to be measured or weighed in standardized units.
To facilitate calculation for internal resource allocation within the large institutions, these units were based on the administrative calendar that temples created in order to allocate resources on a regular monthly basis. That in turn required replacing lunar months of varying length with standardized day months Englund Each monthly unit of grain was measured in volumetric gur units divided into 60ths, apparently for consumption as rations to the workforce twice daily during each administrative month.
Lambert describes how Babylonian accounts translated food rations into labor time for each category of labor — males, females and children. This sexagesimal system of fractional divisions enabled the large institutions to calculate the rations needed to produce textiles or bricks, build public structures or dig canals during any given period of time. Weights for silver and other metals followed suit, by dividing the mina into 60 shekels.
This silver and grain money served as the price coefficient by which the temples and palaces valued the products of their work force and the handicrafts they consigned to merchants. This standardized rate was adopted by the economy at large. But any attempt to link price changes to variations in the money supply would be anachronistic as far as Bronze Age Mesopotamia is concerned.
Support Our Sponsors
These large institutions gave monetary value to wheat, wool and other key products by accepting them in payment for taxes and fees. Monetary values had to be stable in order for producers to plan ahead and minimize the risk of disruptive shifts in prices, and hence the ability to pay debts. Official price equivalencies thus served as an adjunct to fiscal policy while avoiding instability. This ruling presumably was important for agricultural entrepreneurs and herd managers who borrowed from the well to do.
Babylonian debtors thus were saved from being harmed at harvest time when payments were due and grain prices were at their seasonal low against silver outside the large institutions. If creditors actually wanted silver, they would have to convert their grain at a low market price at harvest time when crops were plentiful.
Directory of Barter Companies Near Hudson, Florida
There was little thought of preventing prices from varying for transactions not involving the large institutions. Prices for grain rose sharply in times of crop failure, droughts or floods, as when Ur was obliged to buy grain from the upstream town of Isin at the end of the Ur III empire c. But these price shifts were the result of scarcity resulting from natural causes, not a monetary phenomenon. To maintain general economic balance in the face of arrears that constantly mounted up, new rulers proclaimed these clean slates upon taking the throne. No money was required from personal debtors although commercial debts were left in place.
The details are spelled out in greatest detail c. Grain did not drive out silver.
System of barter can create a more global environment
When entrepreneurs in the agricultural sector sought to pay official debts in grain at harvest time, this was part of a structured stable relationship. There was no creation of fiat money by Bronze Age temples and palaces to spend into the economy, and no monetary inflation. The fact that wool prices, for instance, varied in response to market conditions but nominally remained fixed by royal fiat for years shows that this standardized price referred to debt payments owed to the palace and its collectors. Rulers promised to promote prosperity by providing consumer goods such as vegetable oil and other commodities at relatively low prices — with what seems to have been an element of idealism.
These low prices were not to be achieved by reducing the money supply. See also Aristotle, Pol. Innes and added an important dimension by describing the origins of money in paying debts. This linked money to the credit process, not to a commodity as such.
According to this view, a preference for metal emerged as the most desirable medium for such trade, thanks to its ability to serve three major functions:. The Commodity or Barter Theory depicts money as emerging simply as a commodity preferred by Neolithic producers, traders and wealthy savers when bartering crops and handicrafts amongst themselves.
Who can edit:
In this origin myth bullion became the measure of value and means of payment without palace or temple oversight, thanks to the fact that individuals could save and lend out at interest. So money doubled as capital — provided by individuals, not public agencies. Differing views regarding the origins of money have different policy implications. Viewing money as a commodity chosen by individuals for their own use and saving implies that it is natural for banks to mediate money creation. Banking interests favor this scenario of how money might have originated without governments playing any role.
The political message is that they — backed by wealthy bondholders and depositors — should have monetary power to decide whether or not to fund governments, whose spending should be financed by borrowing, not by fiat money creation. The policy implication is that it is irresponsible for governments to create their own money. The long-dominant college textbook by Paul Samuelson f.
Inconvenient as barter obviously is, it represents a great step forward from a state of self-sufficiency in which every man had to be a jack-of-all-trades and master of none. Ignoring credit arrangements and excluding any reference to palaces or temples in the Near Eastern inception of monetization, Samuelson then tries to ground this speculation in ostensibly empirical evidence by turning to pseudo-anthropology:. Historically, a great variety of commodities has served at one time or another as a medium of exchange: … tobacco, leather and hides, furs, olive oil, beer or spirits, slaves or wives … huge rocks and landmarks, and cigarette butts.
The age of commodity money gives way to the age of paper money … Finally, along with the age of paper money, there is the age of bank money, or bank checking deposits. It puts credit at the end of the Barter-Money-Credit sequence, not at the beginning. By the time Samuelson wrote, the prehistory of money had become an arena in which free-market economists fought with advocates of government regulation over whether the private or public sector should be dominant, and whether governments should oversee credit and create their own money or leave it in private hands.
Neither prehistorians nor anthropologists provide supporting evidence for this Barter Theory.
Communal Currencies: The Chavista Experiment with Noncapitalist Money - Kristofer Dittmer,
As for the cuneiform record, it shows that the major initial monetary activity of most Mesopotamians was to pay taxes, fees or to buy products that palaces and temples made or imported, on credit provided or regulated by these large institutions. As far as convenience is concerned, the simplest and least costly way to conduct exchange is to circumvent direct payment in metal. Having to weigh money for retail or even larger exchanges would have maximized transaction costs. Yet when anti-government ideologues argue that commodity money and bank credit minimize transactions costs Ober f.
The Barter Theory excludes the thought that palatial credit creation and regulation served to minimize transactions costs and indeed, to preserve economic stability. For starters, any practical payment system for credit and trade requires accurate weighing and measuring. This calls for public oversight as a check on fraudulent practice. Trust cannot be left to individuals engaging in barter or credit on their own.
Crooked merchants historically have used light weights when selling goods or lending out money so as to give their customers less, and heavy weights when buying or collecting debts so as to gain an unduly large amount of silver or other commodities. See Powell for discussion.
go site Biblical denunciations of merchants using false weights and measures find their antecedents in Babylonia. Many other rulings deal with creditor abuses, which date back to the rule of Urukagina of Lagash c. Such abuses are timeless. The 7th century BC prophet Amos ff. Shall I acquit a man with dishonest scales, with a bag of false weights? Leviticus f. Deuteronomy admonishes:. Thou shalt not have two differing measures in your house — one large, one small. You must have accurate and honest weights and measures … For the Lord your God detests … anyone who deals dishonestly. Regulating weights and measures was a step far beyond primitive barter among individuals.
It needed official organization and supervision of exchange and credit.
- AV-Shuntchirurgie: Der adäquate Gefäßzugang für die Hämodialyse (German Edition).
- Foolish Gamble (Classic Romance Collection Book 1).
- Hudson (The Barter System, #2).