Reflection

“Money makes the world go round.” This popular saying, while portraying society as a whole in a rather negative manner, is undeniably true. Evidence of this is seen in our everyday lives, from mowing the neighbours’ lawn for 5 bucks to liquidating a multimillion international company. Money is in everything we do, directly or indirectly. However, some people are too busy chasing after money that they forget to live life.

Money is the life force of all of society. In every aspect, money determines the value of good, services, and even people’s lives. As we breathe air to function, society relies on finances to function. And if society, the unity of humanity, relies on money, than the leaders of society want to limit and control it to withhold their power over humanity. They do this by limiting what can be bought and sold, while also controlling how much different things cost. These limitations allow our leaders to control our money and, through that, our value and influence to society.

We are all aware of the facts – that materiality is unsustainable; that consumption is overwhelming; that economic gain is all pervasive. Yet we favour ignorance. Time has caught up with us and the self-interested ideals that once held our society together are no longer durable. This has produced a gap, but nothing palpable to replace it with. Hence individuals like you and I must resort to other avenues of fulfilment.

The primitive monetary instruments had a profoundly dynamic assistant nature, had no inborn quality. Their operation did not suggest the utilization of any particular item, but rather just the reference to a theoretical money related unit. Regardless of the possibility that the unique money related unit were symbolized by a given particular stock, this stock never took an interest in the operations, since what was implied was to make a conceptual reference to its worth, and not to trade different merchandise for it. Hence, currency was not, subsequently, created by a flash of brilliance, but rather originated from a need, and its development has reflected, at every time, the readiness of man to orchestrate its currency features to the reality of its economy. Perhaps even more importantly, invention of currency was the mother step in a new monetary system that has led to the birth of electronic banking and credit cards. To infer, pretty much as human advancement from viciousness to development has relied on upon the invention of currency, future advancement will rely on another definition and utilization of

Market society has faded the lines of the borders by putting a price on things such as reproduction, right to pollute, and elections. Right now, the use of markets are tacit because of the high inventory on everything. As a result of this, life for those with less money has become difficult while those with money don’t see the fault in the gap of income as money is able to purchase everything.

Ross then talks about the codification of money and markets. Money has been our primary physical entity of currency, but in the past half century the modern financial system has designed a series of conveniences that have allowed people to move away from physical cash. Today citizens have Atm machines, credit cards, debit cards that allowed people to bypass the bank teller to access cash. Although this may be true, it made public's money unsafe and vulnerable to hackers and credit frauds.

A small clip from the movie Network provides a glimpse of a currency-dependent society in America when CCA chairman Arthur Jensen explains to Mr. Beale through means of effective persuasion the importance of currency. In the novel Ordinary People, a simple family that appears to be perfect and complete on the surface, divides after the death of their son. Both texts reflect the desire to rely on money and the materials of the world - and as a result replacing love, family and morality.

In this essay, I am going to investigate, provide evidence and analyse this exact issue using my own economic awareness and the data I found while researching this matter.

Lydians became the first Western Culture to use a form of currency to set values of goods. Since then, countries around the world have been using “money”, a more recently coined term, to create values in society. Money has not only become the most valued item in the world, but has also become the main motive for the working class. An inanimate object has created a world wide need causing countries to go into immaculate amounts of debt and turning third world countries to dirt. Although having the privilege of owning such a unique source, money, benefits the citizens greatly, the corruption that currency brings outweighs the positive aspects.

Discuss the seeming failure of communism and other forms of socialism and the apparent triumph of capitalism in the 1990s, as well as considering capitalism’s possible benefits and debits in the early twenty-first century.

Menger (1892) argues that money didn’t originate because of government introduction, but instead that it emerged organically because the market required it. This is a direct contrast to Goodhart’s (1998) view that money was given authority by government and without this, trade would revert to barter, which aligns with Yermack’s (2013) conclusion that the privately generated Bitcoin is not a currency.

As a result of money being developed as a practical means to exchange goods, the question of what is money is still relevant for scientific analysis. What is it really? Is it a social construct that has no intrinsic meaning? Is a dollar bill money? Is it a representation for value, or it is valuable intrinsically? Who decides the worth? What do we mean when we speak of money? The answers to these questions are not fully understood in our analysis of the current literature. Our goal is to explore this general theme and explain why it is a difficult questions. The method of achieving this goal will be to look at what money is definitely not, as well as some of the properties that money must include. This will reveal a perspective on money

Orthodox and Heterodox economics both examine what money is. However, their views are different and, historically, many controversies have existed around money; especially after the global financial crisis. Orthodox economists view money as a medium of exchange that replaced barter. They also view money as a store value; a derivative from the medium of exchange. Heterodox economics support that money is a social unit of account, where credits and debts are measured. They agree that money is a store of value, but because one’s wealth is another one’s debt. With these views in mind their “origin” stories are told to help understand the function of money from these two different perspectives.

Discussion of the Concept of a Cashless Society and the Assertion that We Will Become One

The recent cashless policy of the Central Bank of Nigeria CBN has generated mixed reactions, controversies and public debates over the citizens’ preparedness and relevance of the policy. For1 instance, public argument on the one hand is that banking services in Nigeria are faced with low penetration, financial exclusion and poor infrastructure. Notwithstanding, the CBN has made it known that there is no going back on the policy because of the enormous challenges and cost associated with the cash based system, Clearly, according to the CBN governor, the policy is aimed at reducing the cost of cash management which was estimated at N114.5 billion in 2009 and