Reddit Reddit reviews Debt - Updated and Expanded: The First 5,000 Years

We found 14 Reddit comments about Debt - Updated and Expanded: The First 5,000 Years. Here are the top ones, ranked by their Reddit score.

Business & Money
Books
Economics
Economic History
Debt - Updated and Expanded: The First 5,000 Years
Debt Updated and Expanded The First 5 000 Years
Check price on Amazon

14 Reddit comments about Debt - Updated and Expanded: The First 5,000 Years:

u/[deleted] · 15 pointsr/collapse

I recommend reading his book "The Democracy Project" and "Debt: The First 5000 Years"

Paraphrased from "The Democracy Project":

There is conventional wisdom I think we should challenge:

  • The nature of money and debt (global debt jubilee?);

  • The assumption that work is necessarily good. There is plenty of work being done we'd all probably be better off without, and workaholics are not necessarily better human beings. And this is true even if we don't take into account ecological concerns;

  • Submitting oneself to labor discipline - supervision, control, even the self-control of the ambitious self-employed - does not make one a better person. What actually is virtuous labor about? Labor is virtuous if it helps others. Technological development should be directed less toward creating ever more consumer products and ever more disciplined labor, and more toward eliminating those forms of labor entirely;

  • The amount of bureaucracy (mostly corporate, financial, and educational);

  • Communism. All societies are communistic at base, and capitalism is best viewed as a bad way of organizing communism.

    Here's another bit I like:

    > Normally, when one challenges the conventional wisdom - that the current economic and political system is the only possible one - the first reaction you are likely to get is a demand for a detailed architectural blueprint of how an alternative system would work, down to the nature of its financial instruments, energy supplies, and policies of sewer maintenance. Next, one is likely to be asked for a detailed program of how this system will be brought into existence. Historically, this is ridiculous. When has social change ever happened according to someone's blueprint? It's not as if a small circle of visionaries in Renaissance Florence conceived of something they called "capitalism," figured out the details of how the stock exchange and factories would someday work, and then put in place a program to bring their visions into reality. In fact, the idea is so absurd we might well ask ourselves how it ever occurred to us to imagine this is how change happens to begin.

    > Myself, I am less interested in deciding what sort of economic system we should have in a free society than in creating the means by which people can make such decisions for themselves.
u/pokoleo · 10 pointsr/uwaterloo

UW robbed me of my love for reading for fun.

A ~year after graduating, I was recommended Look Who's Back, which is a funny book about Hitler waking up in 2011, with no recollection on what happened.

It turned into a movie, and is a good/short read.

After that, I read:

u/jseego · 6 pointsr/AskHistory

You might be really interested in this book. It covers a lot on this topic.

u/PRbox · 2 pointsr/ChapoTrapHouse

Thanks for the recommendation. I've got a lot of "left-leaning" books (well, some of them) on my list now that all sound interesting, and Debt is definitely a high priority because people keep recommending it.

Have you read any of his other work? Bullshit Jobs sounds really interesting but a couple reviews said the original article he wrote on the topic pretty much sums the book up in a much lower word count.

A few of the books on my to-read list in case anyone sees this and is interested:

u/satanic_hamster · 2 pointsr/CapitalismVSocialism

> Well what I learned is you can't be bothered to even use industry specific language which would require your audience (me) to research and perhaps lead to greater understanding of your point. Instead you disclose your teaching position as if it were some sort of merit badge a child would display on their sash. Destroy the argument with your expertise level information and force the rest of us to catch up or why even bother creating a discussion for people to engage you with. If you want experts to rip apart your economic argument then head to r/Economics and engage with your peers, but you aren't, you're here talking down to us plebs.

You guys are the kings at missing the point...

> Yes because they bartered for what they needed which is a perfectly acceptable form of capital to Capitalist.

This is historically false. Read David Graeber's book on debt. We never had a barter system, even going back thousands of years. All the evidence accumulated that we do have, indicates that the earliest societies were gift societies. Where the perceived authorities of the community would keep a tally and ledger on who owed who what, and who did favors for whom. All forms of individual exchange we're conducted through this medium.

> Alienation? The laborer charged for their labor, they did not do it out of the kindness of their hearts. As for the social antagonism of capital is mighty rich hearing it from someone who displays their social status in a condescending fashion.

Are you a dumb ass? I'm talking about the actual phenomenon Marx described. Not some generic expression of what those two words alone indicate. Actually take the time to read about the social antagonisms of capitalism.

> As for Marx, I don't agree with him.

Clearly, as you don't even understand him.

> This is the definition I've grown to prefer but it is not perfect nor have I ripped it apart in debates as most of those who disagree simply refuse to acknowledge the base premise. That being, a State's power is based on force up to and including death for the smallest of infractions.

State's don't force themselves upon you. Opt out, by your own logic.

> Our interactions are voluntary, you can choose not to purchase our goods and buy them from a competitor.

Perfect. Leave the country.

> Because I can fire them and hire a competitor. Once again the State does not allow that.

Yeah it does. Leave.

> Actually I hate tolls but tolls are optional. You want the fastest route that saves you $10 in fuel? Then pay the $5 toll. Rather not? Then don't. You're not a hostage that has no choice.

Perfect. You have no problem with taxation then.

u/dexhandle · 1 pointr/GreenParty

Others have already answer this question directly, so I'll just add that debt forgiveness has been going on as long as human civilization. For a longer view on debt, highly recommend David Graeber's Debt: the First 5,000 Years.

u/bukvich · 1 pointr/occult

At the origin of money we have "a relation of representation" of death as an invisible world, before and beyond life - a representation that is the product of the symbolic function proper to the human species and which envisages birth as an original debt incurred by all men, a debt owing to the cosmic powers from which humanity emerged.
Payment of this debt, which can however never be settled on earth - because its full reimbursement is out of reach - takes the form of sacrifices which, by replenishing the credit of the living, make it possible to prolong life and even in certain cases to achieve eternity by joining the Gods.


Debt - Updated and Expanded: The First 5,000 Years By David Graeber

u/Gigaftp · 1 pointr/newzealand

> Money is a technology. And just like every technology it can be made obsolete.

Depends on the technology really. Wheels have been around for bloody ages and still aren't obsolete.

> To allocate resources, direct effort, divide and rule, sure it's useful - especially to the few in a central controlling authority.

> There are some alternatives though.

I used to think community currencies (including time based) were a good idea. But I started learning about the history of money. Two books I recommend are Debt: The First 5000 Years and Money: The Unauthorised Biography

As a form of money time based currencies would most likely have the same flaws as a currency backed by precious metals. Money is more than just a "thing" that you trade for goods and services, unlike what the introduction to economics text books propose it isn't really just a commodity created as a means of exchange. If you think about money as a network of credit exchange that reflects the confidence of the people participating in the economy (rather than as a commodity) the current fiat system makes a lot more sense. Money is basically an IOU, but the important thing with money is that a third party will also accept that IOU as payment for debts some one else owns. If you are really interested read those books (I would start with Money: An Unauthorised Biography first since Debt is about 500 pages)

> Money could be way more powerful and useful to everyone, not just those in control of it.

I agree. That's why I think it would be a good idea to keep money as it is, but have the government create the money (and not the banks).

u/bhiliyam · 1 pointr/india

Have you guys read this book?


http://www.amazon.com/Debt-Updated-Expanded-First-Years/dp/1612194192

It basically outlines the history of the concept of debt. It totally blew my mind and first made me understand what money is.

u/WaPo_F5_oclock · 1 pointr/worldnews

> Inflation encourages riskier investing to beat inflation and encourages taking on debt rather than savings.

No. Inflation encourages investing, period. Debt is good, in a general sense. Debt and credit allow people to create value that they otherwise couldn't create, which leads to growth. I recommend you to read Debt: The First 5000 years.

> Savings is what allows investment and leads to economic prosperity.

No. Savings is not what leads to prosperity. Credit, rule of law, free enterprise and political stability are what lead to prosperity. Without debt and credit, the economy would collapse.

> Deflation is not the big scary monster they want you to think it is.

Yes it is. Deflation kills economies just like hyper-inflation. As production slows down to accommodate the lower demand, companies reduce their workforce, increasing unemployment. These unemployed individuals may have a hard time finding new work during a recession and will likely deplete their savings to make ends meet, eventually defaulting on various debt obligations such as mortgages, car loans, student loans and credit cards.

The accumulating bad debts ripple through the economy up to the financial sector that must write them off as losses. As banks' balance sheets become shakier, depositors seek to withdraw their funds as cash in case the bank fails.

A bank run may ensue, whereby too many deposits are redeemed, and the bank can no longer meet its own obligations. Financial institutions begin to collapse, removing much-needed liquidity from the system and also reducing the supply of credit to those seeking new loans.

Just Google Deflation is bad.

> Just look at the USA and world economy now, there is massive debt everywhere, bubbles everywhere. We even have a new housing bubble in many places.

The debt has to do with budgetary policies rather than with inflation, the Fed, fractional reserve banking, or fiat. We could solve our debt problems by spending less or taxing more, simply. Bitcoin is the biggest bubble out there.

u/gedankenexperimenter · 1 pointr/Cortex

A random selection of non-fiction recommendations for /u/MindOfMetalAndWheels: