Re: [AG-GOuFP] Monetary Paradigms and Liberty - Structural demand gap of money

[moneymind <moneymind AT gmx.de>]

Hallo Arne,

ja, zum Thema Zins etc. erzählt Collignon leider Stuß (auch sonst ist er 
nicht unbedingt ein Meister der Klarheit in monetary economics). Immerhin 
hat er im Kulturvergleich erkannt, daß die Vorstellung, daß "all men are 
born free and equal" nichts mit historischer und kulturvergleichender 
Empirie zu tun hat, sondern ein naturrechtliches Ideal des 18. 
Jahrhunderts darstellt, mit Wurzeln in der klass. Antike natürlich.

John R. Commons hat das auch klar erkannt - vor allem hat er ganz klar 
erkannt, daß Ökonomie sich nicht um Güter, sondern ausschließlich um 
Rechte dreht. Nur ein paar Zitate aus:

John R. Commons: Institutional Economics. Its Place in Political Economy. 
New Brunswick: Transaction Publishers 1990; New York: Macmillan 1934

/“Other sciences deal with things – economics deal with legal rights 
over things.” (400) /

Commons führt diesen Gedanken auf MacLeod 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henry_Dunning_Macleod zurück:
/
“It is not “land, houses, cattle, corn,” he goes on, but it is 
“property” in land, houses, cattle, and corn “and all other material 
things,” that economics deals with. Property is the same as property 
rights; the material things have no value for economics except as they can 
lawfully be owned and their ownership lawfully transferred. Any other kind 
of holding or transferring is embezzlement, robbery, theft. Other sciences 
deal with things – economics deal with legal rights over things.” 
(400)/

/“Most persons,” he says, “when they speak or hear of Property, 
think of some material things, such as lands, houses, cattle, money, 
etc.” But that is not the true meaning of Property. The word 
“Property, in its true and original sense, does not mean a material 
thing; but the absolute right to use and dispose of something. ... 
Property ... in its true sense means solely a Right, Interest, or 
Ownership; and, consequently, to call material goods Property is as absurd 
as to call them Right, Interest, Ownership.” (MacLeod, H.D. Economics 
for Beinners, 23, 24; cit.in John R. Commons: Institutional Economics. Its 
Place in Political Economy. New Brunswick: Transaction Publishers 1990; 
New York: Macmillan 1934, 400)./

"“/Economics, he says, deals only with exchange-values, not with 
use-values which he held were psychological. Only exchange-values can be 
measured by money. Therefore the right in corporeal property which he 
really intends, is the right, not to use the thing but is the right to 
alienate the ownership and to give a good title to the buyer.” (404-405).

Und zum Thema Kredit und Kreditgeld:

[i]“If it were asked”, said MacLeod, “what discovery has most deeply 
affected the fortune of the human race, it might probably be said with 
truth – The discovery that a Debt is a Saleable Commodity.” (John R. 
Commons: Institutional Economics. Its Place in Political Economy. New 
Brunswick: Transaction Publishers 1990; New York: Macmillan 1934, 397). /

In other words, sobald aus einer Namensforderung (spezifizierter 
Gläubiger, der nicht wechseln kann, also lediglich bilaterales 
Schuldverhältnis) eine Inhaberforderung wird (Wechsel, bill of exchange), 
sind Kreditzahlungsmittel erfunden.

Commons ist der Knüller - Keynes hat ihm mal geschrieben:
/
"There seems to be no other economist with whose general way of thinking I 
feel myself in such genuine accord."/

http://www.cairn-int.info/article-E_LECO_038_0077--keynes-and-commons.htm

Und erst seine WERTTHEORIE!!!! Absolut erste Sahne ... der Hammer! MUSSTE 
Dir anschauen!

Grüße
Wolfgang