Economics As If People Really Mattered

Week One -Introduction

Mechanics Institute Limerick

9 May 2013

Week One – Introduction

Week Two – What is Money? – (Future of Money, Chapter One)

Week Three – The Privatisation of Money – (Future of Money, Chapter Two)

Week Four – Financialisation and Debt – (Future of Money, Chapter Three)

Week Five – Credit and Capitalism – (Future of Money, Chapter Four)

Breviari d’Amour (Breviary of Love)

by

Matfré Ermengau of Bézier

c.1288CE

Franciscan friar

Money is a complex phenomenon whose economic functioning relies on social trust and public authority.

Money is a complex phenomenon whose economic functioning relies on social trust and public authority.

The exposure of the reliance of the private financial sector on the state has brought the financial system into full view and opens it up for analysis. The opportunity must be taken to challenge the private control of finance and ask whether such an important aspect of human society should be owned by, and serve, the interests of capitalism.

Money is a complex phenomenon whose economic functioning relies on social trust and public authority.

The exposure of the reliance of the private financial sector on the state has brought the financial system into full view and opens it up for analysis. The opportunity must be taken to challenge the private control of finance and ask whether such an important aspect of human society should be owned by, and serve, the interests of capitalism.

The money system needs to be reclaimed from the profit-driven market economy and socially administered for the benefit of society as a whole as a public resource.

Money is a complex phenomenon whose economic functioning relies on social trust and public authority.

The exposure of the reliance of the private financial sector on the state has brought the financial system into full view and opens it up for analysis. The opportunity must be taken to challenge the private control of finance and ask whether such an important aspect of human society should be owned by, and serve, the interests of capitalism.

The money system needs to be reclaimed from the profit-driven market economy and socially administered for the benefit of society as a whole as a public resource.

The capitalist market is not created to meet needs, it is created to make profits. [We need „better‟ capitalism etc]

Money is more helpfully seen not as a „thing‟ but as a

social form.

Money is more helpfully seen not as a „thing‟ but as a

social form.

„Sound money‟ is a product of society, not of nature.

Money is more helpfully seen not as a „thing‟ but as a

social form.

„Sound money‟ is a product of society, not of nature.

When we say people trust in money we mean that they

are trusting in the organisations, society and authorities

that create and circulate it, other people, traders, the

banks and the state.

Money is more helpfully seen not as a „thing‟ but as a

social form.

„Sound money‟ is a product of society, not of nature.

When we say people trust in money we mean that they

are trusting in the organisations, society and authorities

that create and circulate it, other people, traders, the

banks and the state.

Money, whatever its form, is a social construction, not a

natural form.

Money is more helpfully seen not as a „thing‟ but as a

social form.

„Sound money‟ is a product of society, not of nature.

When we say people trust in money we mean that they

are trusting in the organisations, society and authorities

that create and circulate it, other people, traders, the

banks and the state.

Money, whatever its form, is a social construction, not a

natural form.

It has not inherent value but it has vast social and

political power. (p.11)

Capitalism is first and foremost a historical social system.

Capitalism is first and foremost a historical social system.

What distinguishes the historical social system we are calling historical capitalism is that in this historical system capital came to be used (invested) in a very special way. It came to be used with the primary objective or intent of self-expansion.

Capitalism is first and foremost a historical social system.

What distinguishes the historical social system we are calling historical capitalism is that in this historical system capital came to be used (invested) in a very special way. It came to be used with the primary objective or intent of self-expansion.

It was this relentless and curiously self-regarding goal of the holder of capital, the accumulation of still more capital, and the relations this holder of capital had therefore to establish with other persons in order to achieve this goal, which we denominate as capitalism.

Capitalism is first and foremost a historical social system.

What distinguishes the historical social system we are calling historical capitalism is that in this historical system capital came to be used (invested) in a very special way. It came to be used with the primary objective or intent of self-expansion.

It was this relentless and curiously self-regarding goal of the holder of capital, the accumulation of still more capital, and the relations this holder of capital had therefore to establish with other persons in order to achieve this goal, which we denominate as capitalism.

Historical capitalism involved therefore the widespread commodifaction of processes – not merely exchange processes, but production processes, distribution processes, and investment processes – that had previously been conducted other than via a „market.‟

Capitalism is first and foremost a historical social system.

What distinguishes the historical social system we are calling historical capitalism is that in this historical system capital came to be used (invested) in a very special way. It came to be used with the primary objective or intent of self-expansion.

It was this relentless and curiously self-regarding goal of the holder of capital, the accumulation of still more capital, and the relations this holder of capital had therefore to establish with other persons in order to achieve this goal, which we denominate as capitalism.

Historical capitalism involved therefore the widespread commodifaction of processes – not merely exchange processes, but production processes, distribution processes, and investment processes – that had previously been conducted other than via a „market.‟

And in the course of seeking to accumulate more and more capital, capitalists have sought to commodify more and more of these social processes in all spheres of economic life.

-

“Marx, for example, emphasizes that all of these forms of capital – merchants‟ capital, money capital and rent on land – had an historical existence which stretches back well before the advent of industrial capital in the modern sense.

“Marx, for example, emphasizes that all of these forms of capital – merchants‟ capital, money capital and rent on land – had an historical existence which stretches back well before the advent of industrial capital in the modern sense.

We therefore have to consider an historical process of transformation in which these separate and independently powerful forms of capital became integrated

into a purely capitalist mode of production.

“Marx, for example, emphasizes that all of these forms of capital – merchants‟ capital, money capital and rent on land – had an historical existence which stretches back well before the advent of industrial capital in the modern sense.

We therefore have to consider an historical process of transformation in which these separate and independently powerful forms of capital became integrated

into a purely capitalist mode of production.

These different forms of capital had to be rendered subservient to a circulation

process dominated by the production of surplus value by wage labour.

“Marx, for example, emphasizes that all of these forms of capital – merchants‟ capital, money capital and rent on land – had an historical existence which stretches back well before the advent of industrial capital in the modern sense.

We therefore have to consider an historical process of transformation in which these separate and independently powerful forms of capital became integrated

into a purely capitalist mode of production.

These different forms of capital had to be rendered subservient to a circulation

process dominated by the production of surplus value by wage labour.

The form and manner of this historical process must therefore be a focus of attention.”

David Harvey, Limits to Capital (London: Verso, 2006), 73.

The purpose of capitalism is self-expansion – capital begets capital – and it does so by monetizing

social value and human labour. This is a circuit of transformation.

The purpose of capitalism is self-expansion – capital begets capital – and it does so by monetizing

social value and human labour. This is a circuit of transformation.

“Historical capitalism involved therefore the widespread commodification of processes – not

merely exchange processes, but production processes, distribution processes, and investment

processes – that had previously been conducted other than via a „market‟. And, in the course of

seeking to accumulate more and more capital, capitalists have sought to commodify more and

more of these social processes in all spheres of economic life.”

Immanuel Wallerstein, Historical Capitalism (London: Verso, 2011), 15.

- Money systems as represented in rents, taxes and waged labour have been imposed on people who have been from subsistence communities and who have been forced off the land.

- Money systems as represented in rents, taxes and waged labour have been imposed on people who have been from subsistence communities and who have been forced off the land.

- As economies became monetised, peasant populations were forced to sell their labour as lands were enclosed and privatised, and often mortgaged.

- Money systems as represented in rents, taxes and waged labour have been imposed on people who have been from subsistence communities and who have been forced off the land.

- As economies became monetised, peasant populations were forced to sell their labour as lands were enclosed and privatised, and often mortgaged.

- For those without land, joining the money economy meant obtaining sustenance through waged labour – the circulation and use of coin from the early middle ages enabled rich landowners to extract more flexible wealth from their feudal populations. (P.19)

- Rather than extracting produce or labour, they began to demand money from their peasant populations.

- Rather than extracting produce or labour, they began to demands money from their peasant populations.

- Money systems also enabled the emergence of finance capital which enabled exploitation and the extraction of profit. (P.19)

- Money can be an instrument of speculation and a tool of empire.

- While conventional economics and much of marxist theory sees money as being a reflection of the „real economy‟ of production and exchange, social analyses of money see it as being a phenomenon that has its own political dynamics.

- Money cannot be neutral; it is the most powerful of the social technologies. (P.22)

The argument of this book is that as money is such a critical force in the circulation of goods and services and therefore provisioning, it is vital to question how money is issued and circulated, owned and controlled. From this perspective money is more than just a reflection of value in the „real‟ economy. (p.22)

The so-called „real economy‟ – (the economy of capitalist production and exchange) – is in reality an economy determined by capitalism and by patriarchy. Outside its boundaries lie the natural world and the un-monetised labour and needs of women, children and the poor, as well as non-monetised subsistence economies.

The argument of this book is that as money is such a critical force in the circulation of goods and services and therefore provisioning, it is vital to question how money is issued and circulated, owned and controlled. From this perspective money is more than just a reflection of value in the „real‟ economy. (p.22)

The so-called „real economy‟ – (the economy of capitalist production and exchange) – is in reality an economy determined by capitalism and by patriarchy. Outside its boundaries lie the natural world and the un-monetised labour and needs of women, children and the poor, as well as non-monetised subsistence economies.

It is not a neutral „economic‟ choice to give something a monetary value, it is in essence a social and political choice that dominant groups and classes have imposed. (p.23)