I had a conversation with a guy that was adament that gold was the only thing that has true monitary value. I think that he is wrong. For example: If you are starving and had the choice between food and gold wouldn't food have more value to you? Isn't it true that monitary value is baised on what people are willing to exchange rather then just gold.
I would like to hear what YOU think.
2006-09-28 08:38:47 · 4 answers · asked by Today is the Day 4 in Business & Finance ➔ Other - Business & Finance
He is wrong, global currency is no longer backed by gold. It is now a just commodity like silver, platinum, copper, oil, and frozen concentrated orange juice.
Anything that someone is willing to give you hard currency (convertible currency, eg. USD, JPY, EUR, GBP, CHF, etc.) in exchange for has monetary value. Its value is equal to what you can sell it for.
2006-09-28 08:48:18 · answer #1 · answered by 006 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋
There is a market view, and then there is a subjective view. One can argue that "diamonds" have very little value, except for the monopolistic power of De Beers which controls the market. There is no such monopoly on gold or silver, and those metals may be viewed as having a truer intrinsic value. That still refers to the market value, however, which, as everyone knows is driven by supply and demand.
2006-09-28 15:44:23 · answer #2 · answered by curious1223 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
If you have a period of stability, you can have peace and trade (i.e. exchange of goods).
This sets up a market and its rules are simple.
Buy a commodity from one place at X & move it to another & sell for Y (where X+transport
The value of anything is an illusion - often sustained by greed & monopoly.
You are right - to a thirsty man, water is the greatest prize.
2006-09-28 15:50:13 · answer #3 · answered by echo c 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
no. Diamonds can be used for jewelry and construction.
2006-09-28 15:46:22 · answer #4 · answered by ~mary~ 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋