OK, so just stake out a little plot of land, plant some seeds, raise some animals, you’re set.
Except for the land. You’ll have to trade something to get that. And the seeds, you’ll need to acquire those. Oh, and farming implements don’t grow on trees. Got any livestock already? If not, you can see if somebody will hook you up or else you’ll need to work some sort of deal.
You’re now self sufficient. Ouch - drought wiped out your crops and animals? Sorry, you die.
Money can be exchanged for goods and services.
But I wanted a peanut.
From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs.
Let’s say you’re a farmer who works really hard and always produces to the utmost of your ability.
Then you go to the person in charge of distributing stuff according to need and say, “I need a new iPad.”
The person says, “You don’t NEED an iPad. The only people who need iPads are graduate students in engineering.”
So you go to the dean of the engineering school and say, “I want to be an engineer.”
The dean says, “Society doesn’t need any more engineers at this time. We need farmers. And you’re a really good farmer, so go back to work.”
Wouldn’t you really rather be paid in money and buy your own iPad?
Because Bernie Sanders lost the primary?
The factual answer to your question is that the “things” that people need and want require the labor and intellectual capital of other people. Crops don’t grow themselves. Cars don’t design and build themselves. Software doesn’t write itself. Products don’t drive themselves to the store or your doorstep.
The reason we have “money” is simply that it’s a convenient unit to exchange one good or service for another, rather than negotiate chickens to cows.
Then go find one. Just don’t come back and complain that it was rotten
Well yes, of course.
I was throwing the kid a bone to see where he went with it. So far the answer is: nowhere. After the OP he hasn’t been visibly back.
Although “difficulty” isn’t a valid measure of worth. Either all people are socially equal and so their work is socially equal, or all work is valued in dollars and so people’s worth is valued in dollars. Degree of difficulty is nowhere in it.
Okay, I’m skipping over what I’m sure were a lot of sarcastic answers.
The answer of why we use money is because we need things and it takes effort to produce these things. People are not normally going to put effort into producing something and then give it away. This means you can’t expect to be given the things you need for free.
We end up with a system where you put effort into producing some things and other people put effort into producing other things and then we exchange the things we have produced.
Money is a thing we developed which makes the system of exchange work better.
The short answer is that if people didn’t pay for things, the things wouldn’t exist.
Now I’m joining in the general sarcasm.
I’ve never needed the services of a neurosurgeon. But I’ve often needed the services of a fast food worker. I feel I’m probably typical in this.
The law of supply and demand seems to suggest that fast food workers should be getting paid more than neurosurgeons.
Are you suggesting that humans have been farmers “for the vast majority of the time that our species has existed on Earth”? Did you miss the part where I said “hunter-gatherers”? Because every single thing you said applies only to farmers, and not to hunter-gatherers, which is what we used to be. Humans have been on Earth for about 200,000 years and we were hunter-gatherers pretty much exclusively for the first 90% of that time. Even after the so-called Agricultural Revolution started, hunter-gatherers continued to outnumber farmers for thousands of years. As recent as 500 years ago, a sizable chunk of the Human race was still living as hunter-gatherers and hadn’t yet embraced agriculture.
Modern civilization requires money. Humans don’t require modern civilization. The fact that we had neither for thousands and thousands of years proves this.
Except that there’s a huge supply of fast food workers and very few neurosurgeons.
But when someone *does *need a neurosurgeon, that impact is enormous.
Nobody has died from not getting a Whopper when they wanted one, but an un-removed brain tumor can kill you.
I have once needed the services of a neurosurgeon, and for me it was very important that he treat my trigeminal neuralgia. So, for me and others in a similar situation, the demand for the services was very high.
In my state, there are probably millions of people who could work serving fast food, and very few trained and experienced neurosurgeons. So the supply of fast-food workers is very high, but the supply of neurosurgeons is very low.
That means that the law of supply and demand ensures that neurosurgeons are paid a lot more per hour than fast-food workers.
You’ve only considered the law of demand. The demand for fast food workers is indeed higher than the demand for neurosurgeons.
What is the supply of each?
At that: if I can’t find someone to grill a burger for a low price, I can grill a burger for myself. I’ve grilled up burgers for my wife, and for my kid; there’s nothing to it. Sure, sometimes I’ll pay a guy a pittance to do it – but I’m basically one shrug away from personally getting that job done in a matter of minutes.
Neurosurgery? Yeah, all I can do is press some money into that guy’s hands.
If America lost 3,000 fast food workers, the economic impact would barely be felt.
If America lost 3,000 neurosurgeons, it would be an immediate, severe, healthcare crisis.
Well, there you go. It seems there are a great many fast food workers (or potential fast food workers) in the world, but relatively few neurosurgeons (or potential neurosurgeons.)
So although the aggregate demand for neurosurgery is relatively tiny compared to the demand for Big Macs, the demand for neurosurgery compare to the supply of neurosurgeons is quite large. Hence, getting someone to poke around in your brain in a reasonably competent manner costs many times the price of a Big Mac.
Is an hour of student worth as much as an hour of teacher?
The student’s worth is potential; the teacher’s is actual. That’s why teachers get paid and students don’t.
Actually, students do get paid in some cases, but if you have a class of N, the teacher is doing N amount of work as much as each student in the same amount of time.