No. The invention of writing predates the invention of money. By a lot. If there was a barter economy, we’d have written records of it. Because we definitely have written records of the pan-Levantine gift and palace economies. And then the Babylonian monetary (but not coin-based) shekel economy.
Check the forum. I don’t have to preface my every utterance with “IMHO”.
Maybe. We have accounting records- the first use of money of account going back 7000 years or so. which oddly is the start of writing since those accounts were written down.
Accounting records – in the monetary system sense of the term accounting – dating back more than 7,000 years have been found in Mesopotamia,[7] and documents from ancient Mesopotamia show lists of expenditures, and goods received and traded and the history of accounting evidences that money of account pre-dates the use of coinage by several thousand years.
But note that line “and goods received and traded…” Which means barter.
The origins of writing are more generally attributed to the start of the pottery-phase of the Neolithic, when clay tokens were used to record specific amounts of livestock or commodities.[
So you wont accuse me of leaving stuff out- David Graeber proposes that money as a unit of account was invented when the unquantifiable obligation “I owe you one” transformed into the quantifiable notion of “I owe you one unit of something”. In this view, money emerged first as money of account and only later took the form of money of exchange.[8][9]
But that isnt fact.
There is proto writing around 35,000 BC.
Coins came in later maybe the 4th century BC about the time real writing came about.
No. That’s how gifts were tracked as well. Lots of records of “you promised me X but haven’t sent it” without mention of reciprocation. Check the Amarna letters.
Cite?
Sorry, you think “real writing” only came about in the 4th century BCE?
It was mostly the women who lived, actually. Women are simply better at surviving cold, disease and starvation.
Of the 15 members of the snowshoe party, eight of the ten men who set out died, but all five women survived.[196] A professor at the University of Washington stated that the Donner Party episode is a “case study of demographically-mediated natural selection in action”.[
The same would no doubt hold after a civilizational collapse; the survivors of issues like cold, starvation and the lack of medicine would be strongly biased towards women, not men. Being big and muscular does the opposite of help with such issues.
Agreed, and I bet that, in addition to all of that, they also have an ample supply of gold. Bartering may be the oldest form of commerce, but good old fashioned gold will also have a much increased value. You can buy a lot of loyalty and maintain a lot of power that way.
I don’t think it’s very hard to find someone to barter with when you are a member of a isolated group of a few hundred people, every one of which knows what you eat for breakfast. Barter in such a community isn’t like the equivalent of money only more inconvenient. It’s more like your neighbor knows you’re felling a tree so they show up and help you fell it and chop it up and you give them a load of wood in return. Or you pay for the iron shovel heads the blacksmith made for you with a lamb fleece.
And you better believe that everyone keeps careful track of what things are worth, and repayment. This is very basic to human societies, the balance of reciprocity. Ever get an expensive gift from someone you know, that you have no way to reciprocate? It’s quite uncomfortable. No one wants to be one down. Neither do you want to be tagged as the guy who doesn’t show up for others when they showed up for you. That’s how it works.
A friend and i used to trade cat-sitting. Then her last cat died. We still sometimes ask her to feed our cats when we are away.
A couple of weeks ago she asked me if i could water her husband’s plants when they were out of town. You can bet i jumped on the opportunity.
Yeah. That’s how a lot of it works.
I have neighbors who cut firewood on my land. I get half of it. Nobody measures it, other than by whatever vehicle it’s loaded on.
The same neighbors hunt on my property. I get a bit of venison, some of the fields mowed, and help when something needs fixing that I can’t handle myself but they can or when something just needs and extra set of hands. Nobody’s keeping precise track.
Another neighbor, some years ago, used to take care of cats and dogs when I went anywhere. I gave her produce. Then her health wouldn’t let her do it. I kept giving her produce. (Eventually she died. I miss her.)
Yet another friend took care of me when I needed a medical procedure: drove me back and forth, stayed in the house with me for a week afterwards, came up several times a week for some time after that. I haven’t found anywhere near as much to do for her. But she does that sort of thing for multiple people – it’s who she is, it’s important to her.
Another friend needed help moving an entire household, including livestock, to the next county, on short notice, and couldn’t afford to pay for it. Something like twenty people showed up with hands and vehicles and got her moved.
The neighbor who cuts firewood hired the wrong person to work on his house and wound up with an unlivable building and he, his wife, and three then four kids living in a camper. He’s rebuilt the house, to some extent on his own – but there were days when a dozen people showed up to put the new second story and roof on. Nobody’s counting the hours he got help against the hours he’s spent helping other people.
Nobody’s keeping precise track. Everybody’s putting in something; and may get it back from the same person they helped, or may get it back from somebody else altogether. Some people can put in more than others. Some people can’t put in as much as others. Most people have a pretty good idea of who’s in which category and who’s doing their best.
Some notational signs, used next to images of animals, may have appeared as early as the Upper Palaeolithic in Europe circa 35,000 BCE, and may be the earliest proto-writing: several symbols were used in combination as a way to convey seasonal behavioural information about hunted animals.[6]
I missed a decimal point. 4000BC.
But look, I think Anarcho-communism is ridiculous and impractical. And “property is theft” is just a slogan used by those who dont have property to steal property from those that do.
We are not gonna agree.
So, me citing Graeber and Mitchell’s book-length works is “stating a disputed opinion as fact”, but you’re quite happy saying (my emphasis) “There is proto writing…” when your own cite, about one paper, uses “may have” and “may be”? Some consistency in your arguments, please.
So, nowhere near the time coins were introduced, then.
why stop at the household - and not move the whole house …
or … a church …
I wish we could have. The house she had to move from suited her a lot better than the one she found to move into.
Just ran across this today: a scifi novel precisely about what the rich in their bunkers do after the apocalypse:
I doubt it. Most likely people will just ask “Why would I want gold? I can’t eat it, drink it or shoot with it.” People aren’t going to accept gold for payment, since they have no reason to think other people will accept it in exchange.
Well, then we can go back to the oldest form of economics, bartering. Eventually, however, things will slowly normalize over time, and currency will come back into play. In that event, I’m thinking gold will be the thing.
Yes, this is a point I’ve made before. Any really comprehensive plans for post-apocalypse survival have to have plans for each phase. Immediate survival for the first few minutes (or days, depending on the type of apocalypse), short term of a few days or weeks, middle term of a few months, long term of a few years, and then really long term, of indefinite survival. In the latter stages, having a pile of gold could be useful, based on the fact that it pretty much always has been useful for most of our history. It won’t help for the shorter time frames, but as long as it also doesn’t hurt*, you might as well go with it.
*One of us trying to lug a gold bar with us while bugging out before a nuclear strike would be a bad idea, it slows us down too much. But in the billionaire’s bunker scenario, you could stockpile your gold days, weeks, months, or years ahead, just on speculation. Hell, you could even make a lot of light fixtures and what not out of gold. You’d enjoy it while it was only useful as decoration, and then melt it down and make coins once you’re trying to reestablish a money-based economy.
If you’re Warren Buffett maybe. “Lugging” gold bars around is never going to be a problem for mere mortals. Gold is amazingly compact for value. Most people could carry around the equivalent of their net worth in their pocket and nobody would notice.
Money [Reichmarks] was replaced by cigarettes, and barter, in postwar West Germany, until the currency reform of 1948.
But if you’ve tied up your net worth in gold, you’re not doing the “surviving the short term” properly. It’s like the Gremlin said, “I’m advising all of our clients to invest everything they’ve got in canned food and shotguns.”
It also assumes there’s some kind of natural inherent value in the gold. Sure, it may have value in the long term for the same reason it has value now, but assuming that the buying power will somehow hold sufficiently constant over time is unwarranted.
That ‘net worth’ value may not amount to much in the new world or may be even more valuable than it is now. Holding on to it with any fixed expectation of its eventual value is itself a gamble and a major assumption. Caveat emptor and all that jazz.