With the establishment of a monetary system based on gold, we see the emergence in Europe and later in the United States, of several ways in which money was represented (with Gold being the foundational model). We have witnessed not only the emergence of “paper money” but also such tangible entities as stocks, certificates of deposit, and invoices (related to both purchases and sales). In recent years, the dollar bill has often been replaced by the credit card. We can now (humorously) say: “I must still have money because my credit card is not yet worn out!” With the emergence of bitcoins and other new monetary devices, we find other monetary models coming to prominence—complete with the struggle to justify the worth assigned to any one of these entities.
Practices: There is only one (or very few) fundamental paradigms determining the primary nature and function of some societal entity, such as money. There are several models that can be used to inform use of this entity. In the case of money, the model has evolved from the paper dollar to the credit card and Bitcoin. Given these shifts in models (but the stability of the underlying paradigm), the associated practices continue to change. In the case of money, the practices have evolved from a requirement that there is “cash in hand” to pay for any product or service, to a requirement only that one is willing to take on the risk of paying at some point in the future for a purchased product or service.
As is the case with many other practices, there are often inconsistencies in the monetary policies we espouse (individually and collectively) and the monetary practices in which we actually engage. We declare our personal commitment to conservative financial policies, but find it all too tempting to buy what we want at the expense of accumulating credit card charges. As a nation, we are full-blown hypocrites, proclaiming a commitment to balanced budgets but spending like unbridled children or those afflicted with financial insanity. Assumptions about thrift and constraint may go back to Puritan times in America; however, these assumptions are ignored when it comes to living in our long-standing consumption-oriented society (Riesman, 1950; Fromm, 1955; Galbraith, 1958).
Conclusions
Why, then, is money of value? I have offered the obvious tautological answer (because money inherently represents value). I have also offered several less obvious answers. They range from insights offered by sociologists and theologians to those offered by financial advisors and psychoanalysts.
Money is representative of value; however, the source of our values is deep and multi-dimensional. Our money might represent an ancient, ritualized distribution of commodities or a mid-21st-century exchange of newly created Bitcoins. The value of our money might be embedded in the unconscious, childhood admiration of feces (and excretion control), or in adulthood admiration of Wall Street (and its complex set of financial gears).
We accumulate money because we are afraid of losing security, losing control, or losing our sense of self. We are grandiose in our display of wealth or humble in our use of money to serve the needs of our neighbors. There is never enough money, or too much money in our wallet for our own good.
It seems that money is both many-splendored and multi-destructive. Above all, money is different and elusive. So, why is money valuable?
_____________
