The United Colors of Cryptocurrency

[ad_2][ad_1]<div _ngcontent-c14 = "" innerhtml = "

I am a person who is always intrigued by how things are marketed.& Nbsp;It occurred to me after holding a lecture at the University of Cyprus that there was a currency also in hotel names that related to other non-national cities, towns or historical figures.& Nbsp;As I turned to Nicosia, I noticed hotels with names like Cleopatra Hotel, Europa Plaza Hotel, Xanthis Inn, Central Park Residence, and so on. Then I started thinking about it and many hotels around the world maintain a currency in their reference to "elsewhere", as if being a hotel were not luxury enough in itself.& Nbsp;And it struck me that somehow, in a bizarre way, such names would attract people only for the news. You can stay in Hotel Venezia in Rome, in Venice check in Hotel Tokio, in Tokyo you sleep a night at the New York Hotel, and in the New York book in Hotel Wales. This form of referentiality to something outside of the product has made me rethink how capitalism works by which the value of the exchange of goods assumes its own value, as if it were its own currency.

Marx defines the value as a social process of job objectification for which, in the market, work is indirectly represented as the "exchange value" of goods. This exchange value assumes "independence" in money, the form of canonical value. Money becomes the necessary& Nbsp; condition for the exchange of goods and their production. In other words, the work value theory (LTV), a central concept of Marx Capital (1867) argues that the value of a commodity can be measured by the average number of hours of labor required to produce a specific commodity. Marx argues that this theory explains the value of all goods, including the merchandise of wage labor. And Marx's theory of money links the role of money as a universal means of exchange with the exchange values ​​of other commodities, which includes the value of the ability to work for oneself, the workforce.

Until 1971, the classic theory of money by Marx and Ricardo easily adapted to the financial systems of the entire planet, because the banknotes were only symbols of gold. But since the end of the gold standard in 1971, a new system came into play.& Nbsp;I turned to Paul Cockshott, an economist and honorary researcher at the University of Glasgow, for further answers to my questions. Cockshott explains how, since 1971, dollar bills or euros hold any value from the end of the gold standard:

The best explanation is given by economists like Wray and Knapp, who have advanced the theory of the state of money. This is not initially expressed in terms of work, but can be converted into a description in terms of work.& Nbsp;Their request is that the euro circles because the European law states that all tax debts in the euro area must be regulated in euros.& Nbsp;This concept is most clearly highlighted in the work of one of those schools Matther Forestater who asks how the British were able to strengthen the circulation of their colonial currencies in their African empire. Show that they did so by imposing taxes that had to be made in the colonial currency and not in the traditional hunts used as money. This forced the peasants to sell crops to the English merchants for these coins to get the coins for the tax. They designate something that only the state can release as the only thing they will accept for tax debts.

Cockshott goes on to say that in this way money is established through "the process of state appropriation of labor surplus" by discussing how Wray and Forstatters see the transition from initial feudalism that charges Corv & eacute; is (exact forced labor instead of taxes)& Nbsp; to a system that transfers taxes to work in taxes in state currency, forcing the monetization of the entire economy. In his writing, co-author of David Zachariah, "Conservation laws, financial entropy and Eurozone crisis"The contemporary extrapolation of the old monetary systems is explained through the Euro:

The empire or state imposes the circulation of its symbolic currency by obliging the producers to pay the taxes in cash. Since producers must "render to Caesar", they are forced to sell their products to Caesar's employees. The state creates money tokens with which it pays its employees. State employees voluntarily work for the state in exchange for these tokens knowing that these tokens will allow them to command the work of others in turn. The state thus breaks down the self-sufficient or barter economies of the countryside and strengthens the spread of the exchange of goods.

What is interesting in this understanding of currency is that work is what fundamentally supports the currency today. Work is a real "thing", if you want, where the names of the hotels are just glittered. How does capital come from the symbolic thrill of an empty product, of the new when there is nothing tangible – neither the gold standard nor the work – to support it?

Here is where I go back to my theory of "being there" where the cryptocurrency market has had to rely almost entirely on its brand and its presentation so credible that today these new money products are billed under the aegis of the & # 39; national identity or are still trapped in the first millennial cloud or in a version of a nomenclature and-something. While the symbolic strength of the dot.com names of blockchain companies, mining service providers and trading platforms (eg CloudHashing, BTC-e, etoro) is quite powerful, we should not underestimate the way the bitcoin can be sold under the remains of national identity, like Bitcoin Suisse, Coin of Mexico and the e-Crown.& Nbsp;Also Bilbao has recently announced its plans for a blockchain system, and French tobacconists have been selling bitcoins via KeplerK since January 1st. Still, while more and more common people think of jumping on what some call "ponzi scheme"And what many others claim blockchain is a"to play".& Nbsp; However, most people question the ethics of the blockchain from the way it was hosted online, the excessive dependence on servers & nbsp; and the harmful effects on the environment, to its potential links to criminal activities. In seeing the rise of the blockchain amid growing skepticism of these raw materials, I must ask myself whether the new tendency to use nationalist names on the latest blockchain offerings is not part of a larger scheme to make these suspicions less suspicious. while framing them – even if counterintuitively as "safer."

The bitcoin for many is still a matter of believing or not regardless of the fa-ccedil; which refers to a new era of credibility or the more traditionalist approach of long-standing symbolism linked to the durability of the nation-state.& Nbsp;In the end, the liquidity of this digital currency could end up meeting the dreams of its investors or revealing the lie that many claim it is. But,& Nbsp;like George of "Seinfeld" he tells Jerry: "It's not a lie if you believe it".

">

I am a person who is always intrigued by how things are marketed. It occurred to me after holding a lecture at the University of Cyprus that there was a currency also in hotel names that related to other non-national cities, towns or historical figures. As I turned to Nicosia, I noticed hotels with names like Cleopatra Hotel, Europa Plaza Hotel, Xanthis Inn, Central Park Residence, and so on. Then I started thinking about it and many hotels around the world maintain a currency in their reference to "elsewhere", as if being a hotel were not luxury enough in itself. And it struck me that somehow, in a bizarre way, such names would attract people only for the news. You can stay in Hotel Venezia in Rome, in Venice check in Hotel Tokio, in Tokyo you sleep a night at the New York Hotel, and in the New York book in Hotel Wales. This form of referentiality to something outside of the product has made me rethink how capitalism works by which the value of the exchange of goods assumes its own value, as if it were its own currency.

Marx defines the value as a social process of job objectification for which, in the market, work is indirectly represented as the "exchange value" of goods. This exchange value assumes "independence" in money, the form of canonical value. Money becomes the necessary condition for the exchange of goods and their production. In other words, the work value theory (LTV), a central concept of Marx Capital (1867) argues that the value of a commodity can be measured by the average number of hours of labor required to produce a specific commodity. Marx argues that this theory explains the value of all goods, including the merchandise of wage labor. And Marx's theory of money links the role of money as a universal means of exchange with the exchange values ​​of other commodities, which includes the value of the ability to work for oneself, the workforce.

Until 1971, the classic theory of money by Marx and Ricardo easily adapted to the financial systems of the entire planet, because the banknotes were only symbols of gold. But since the end of the gold standard in 1971, a new system came into play. I turned to Paul Cockshott, an economist and honorary researcher at the University of Glasgow, for further answers to my questions. Cockshott explains how, since 1971, dollar bills or euros hold any value from the end of the gold standard:

The best explanation is given by economists like Wray and Knapp, who have advanced the theory of the state of money. This is not initially expressed in terms of work, but can be converted into a description in terms of work. Their request is that the euro circles because the European law states that all tax debts in the euro area must be regulated in euros. This concept is most clearly highlighted in the work of one of those schools Matther Forestater who asks how the British were able to strengthen the circulation of their colonial currencies in their African empire. Show that they did so by imposing taxes that had to be made in the colonial currency and not in the traditional hunts used as money. This forced the peasants to sell crops to the English merchants for these coins to get the coins for the tax. They designate something that only the state can release as the only thing they will accept for tax debts.

Cockshott goes on to say that in this way money is established through "the process of state appropriation of labor surplus" by discussing how Wray and Forstatters see the transition from initial feudalism that charges corvee (exact forced labor instead of taxes) to a system that transfers taxes to work in taxes in state currency, forcing the monetization of the entire economy. In his writing, co-author of David Zachariah, "Conservation laws, financial entropy and Eurozone crisis"The contemporary extrapolation of the old monetary systems is explained through the Euro:

The empire or state imposes the circulation of its symbolic currency by obliging the producers to pay the taxes in cash. Since producers must "render to Caesar", they are forced to sell their products to Caesar's employees. The state creates money tokens with which it pays its employees. State employees voluntarily work for the state in exchange for these tokens knowing that these tokens will allow them to command the work of others in turn. The state thus breaks down the self-sufficient or barter economies of the countryside and strengthens the spread of the exchange of goods.

What is interesting in this understanding of currency is that work is what fundamentally supports the currency today. Work is a real "thing", if you want, where the names of the hotels are just glittered. How does capital come from the symbolic thrill of an empty product, of the new when there is nothing tangible – neither the gold standard nor the work – to support it?

Here is where I return to my hotel "to be there" theory according to which the cryptocurrency market has had to rely almost entirely on its brand and on the presentation in such a credible way that today, these new monetary products are or billed under the umbrella. umbrella of the national identity or are still reached in the first millennial cloud or a version of a nomenclature and-something. While the symbolic strength of the dot.com names of blockchain companies, mining service providers and trading platforms (eg CloudHashing, BTC-e, etoro) is quite powerful, we should not underestimate the way the bitcoin can be sold under the remains of national identity, like Bitcoin Suisse, Coin of Mexico and the e-Crown. Also Bilbao has recently announced its plans for a blockchain system, and French tobacconists have been selling bitcoins via KeplerK since January 1st. Still, while more and more common people think of jumping on what some call "ponzi scheme"And what many others claim blockchain is a"to play". However, most people question the ethics of the blockchain from the way it was hosted online, the excessive dependence on servers and the harmful effects on the environment, its potential links to criminal activities. In seeing the rise of the blockchain amid growing skepticism of these raw materials, I have to ask myself whether the new trend of using nationalist names on the latest blockchain offers is not part of a larger plan to make these suspicions less suspicious. while framing them, even if counterintuitively, as "safer".

For many, Bitcoin is still a matter of believing or not regardless of the facade that refers to a new era of credibility or the more traditionalist approach of long-standing symbolism linked to the durability of the nation-state. In the end, the liquidity of this digital currency could end up meeting the dreams of its investors or revealing the lie that many claim it is. But, like George of "Seinfeld" he tells Jerry: "It's not a lie if you believe it".