Money is not a medium of exchange; it is not money at all; it is merely a numeraire, an ethereal and undetermined unit of accounting of that vague and indefinable character which the fancy of some economists and the errors of many laymen mistakenly have attributed to money. The face value is simply an unitization of the numeraire. The interposition of these numerical expressions between seller and buyer does not affect the essence of the sales; it is neutral with regard to the people's economic activities.
If we were to use the inexpedient terminology employed in many contemporary economic writings, we would have to say: Money is necessarily a "dynamic factor" of the human need to trade with outers.
“No exchange can exist without a common measure and no common measure without equality. Thus all society has as its first law some conventional equality, whether of men or things. Conventional equality among things prompted the invention of money, for money is only a term of comparison for the value of things of different kinds; and in this sense money is the true bond of society.” – Jean-Jacques Rousseau.
Money is not created by humanity, money is not a creature of law, money is the spontaneous result, or equilibrium value, within all exchanges. Money is born from the need to trade, without trade, money cannot exist, and human reciprocity dominates societies (Aristotle’s nomisma). Money does require a tangible or static form for its existence, as money is a numeraire[1] or the thing that things are priced in. Currency is the result of instantiating money as tangible commodity form, for the purpose of intermediating the transfer of value, and to achieve an unconditional exchange, via a payment. All currency based payments can fail, precisely because currency contains an important moment of ethical deliberation in acceptance as payment. The role of currency is to improve reciprocity across society.
If the currency was a foundational institution, it must always be insufficient, likely imperfect, and possibly tragic.
Money prices all exchanges, a currency payment unconditionally settles, a currency intermediated exchange.
A coin with intrinsic value is also often taken to be pertinent to judgments about moral justice (whether having to do with moral rights or moral desert), insofar as it is good that justice is done and bad that justice is denied, in ways that appear intimately tied to intrinsic value. A coin restores humans as the focus of all finance as Money cannot be scarce, as it originates and terminates with people based trade, hence money cannot exist as debt.
[1] Numeraire is an economic term of French origin, which acts as a benchmark in comparing the value of similar products or financial instruments. In essence, the numeraire acts as a standard of value within an exchange.
In simple terms, we can say:
Supply and demand for apples determines the market value of apples;
Supply and demand for bananas determines the market value of bananas;
The price of apples, in banana terms, is the determined by the ratio of the two market values (the market value of apples divided by the market value of bananas);
Therefore, the price of apples, in banana terms, is determined by both supply and demand for apples and supply and demand for bananas;
The equilibrium price represents the subjective exchange value in Money. Price is a relative measure of market exchange value: a price measures the market exchange value of a primary good in terms of the market exchange value of a measurement good.
It is clear that money itself is an invariant, and hence cannot effect the exchange value of any goods or services (either the supply or demand for apples or bananas) within an exchange, money must be neutral to be money.
Thus money must exist exclusively as a numeraire, the means to measure. but never influence exchange value or market price.
Within a currency-based transaction, we exchange one good (the primary good) for currency (the absolute or standard of measurement good within a currency area). The price of the primary good, in currency terms, is a function of both supply and demand for the primary good and supply and demand for currency (the measurement good) as shown in the second figure. Currency hence via a standard unit of money measurement allows all commodity trades to be measured on a equal basis inside a currency area.
While it is not explicitly illustrated above, we can also say that the price of bananas, in apple terms, is determined by the ratio of the two market values (the market value of bananas divided by the market value of apples) and consequently by both supply and demand for apples and supply and demand for bananas. The result is Money as a numeraire, at work, within a trade.
Hence in the example to the left, the horizontal equilibrium P(AB) between the apples and banana supply vs demand curves is “money” or exchange value. In this barter case it is ‘ephemeral money’, which has no standardized ‘unit of account’ and does not act as a medium of exchange and is never instantiated as a payment currency. We can hence understand that as there exists no currency area, the monetary unit is bounded by this barter exchange instance, and affords no common units to redeem in a future exchange. Barter based exchanges hence extinguish the monetary value at the point finality of the exchange itself. The exchange achieves finality via the physical exchange of two goods or assets.
If the objective exchange-value of a good is its power to command a certain quantity of other goods in exchange, its money price is this actual quantity of other goods. It follows that the concepts of price and objective exchange-value are by no means identical. ‘But it is, nevertheless, true that both obey the same laws. For when the Law of Price declares that a good actually commands a particular price, and explains why it does so, it of course implies that the good is able to command this price, and explains why it is able to do so. The Law of Price comprehends the Law of Exchange-Value. Marx believed that an understanding of exchange-value was necessary to explain fluctuations in money price as shown in the figure Price(apples/Bananas) = V(A)/V(B).
One cannot deny the existence of trade or the realty of barter, hence monies exitance is bound exclusively to trade or exchange of goods and services between humans.
When we understand what money is, we need to also consider what is-not money. As money must exist solely from trade, all forms of money which are not bound to a trade cannot exist as money. An example of well known form of non-money is commercial banks "ledger deposits". No form of ledger or book entry system can be money or currency, and cannot defer payments across space and time. If any form of non-money, detached from trade and exists solely via a 'book entry or ledger system', exists solely as a Debt Financial Instrument. All financial instruments are not assets, and exist based upon the a prior formation of a legally binding contract between two parties, which mutually agree, to use the financial instrument.
The test for all forms of non-money, is simple, does it exist outside of a trade exchange or exist without a mandatory book entry. The answers identify when you have found non-money's existence. A simple payment test is based upon the understanding all account based leger payments require a mandatory authentication of the 'identity' of the account holder, before any payments can be initiated, this need for 'identity' data underpins the mass surveillance of all payments by the state, all privacy has been removed from cash based payments. All currency based payments, require zero identification or other privacy data to be presented, to initiate a currency based payment. Only the Unbanked are free form surveillance via the banking payments system.
Non-money circulates within a fiat currency area, via the hoax of 'parity' with Central Banksters Debt based banknotes and Treasury Asset based coins, without such conflations between such disparate forms of money, non-money would self deprecate and cease to circulate. This is essentially what "Legal Tender" tells everyone today..
The understanding of non-money is perhaps more important than the understanding of Money itself.
Bank deposits are convertible to an equal quantity of the corresponding central bank issued irredeemable fiat currency, in order to circulate as a fincial instrument. If the bank defaults on its obligations, the deposits, it issues cease to circulate and deposit holders receive a claim on bank’s illiquid (fractional reserve) assets, there is no claim upon any central banks fiat-currency, the hoax is to pretend there is a claim via convertibility.
The vast majority of money in circulation within all currency areas, is created by private entities called banks. They create money from nothing and 'deposit' it into their customers bank account, the amount of money in circulation has just increased. The only limit to the amount of money a bank can crate is the availability of a customer wanting to borrow at the interest rate charged, and likely to be able to repay it. There is no need for any central bank reserves, customer deposits or bank capital to back the money creation process. The only requirement is to keep ~ 3% of the deposits in central bank reserves, and hence this is the sole limitation on the creation of bank loans, which is the limitation of interbank transfers of the deposited money. An individual bank can’t create money in this way, only the banking system as a whole can. That’s because the bank that initiates the loan can’t be sure that all the loan money spent comes back to it as deposits. Some of it will, but most may go to other banks customer's accounts.
Hence while anyone can technically create money from their economic production, they key is to get it excepted by a community as a means to defer payment...