Friday, September 22, 2006
M-M'
spheres of exchange. there are four of them:
M-M'
M-C-M'
C-M-C' and
C-C',
where C represents 'commodity' and M represents 'money'.
the most basic form of exchange, is the C-C' sphere, which is really just barter trading. one cow for three pigs, assuming one cow has the same
exchange value of three pigs. however, one cow and three pigs have different
use values, because you can get milk, leather and beef from one, and pork, ham and toothbrushes from the other. their physical properties are different.
as you progress from one sphere of exchange to another, you are almost progressing up the social hierarchy of money. barter trade seems primitive, and the M-M' sphere is now the new trend of the season, where you trade money for more money e.g. through stocks and bonds and what have you. M-M'.
although the M-M' sphere dominates all the other categories, it really is the least productive sphere of all, imo. no commodity is produced as a result, and the money is not used for the purpose for which it was created, that is, to mediate the exchange of commodities. money shouldn't be an end in itself, for you can do nothing with it except maybe fold origami, if it lost its mediation property. consumption, the satisfaction of needs, should be the goal of these exchanges. otherwise, we end up being money hoarding, mercenary creatures who enjoy the smell of money and nothing more.
to me, the M-M' sphere is made-up, created. we could live without it, because we need to satisfy our needs, as achieved in the C-M-C sphere but not in the M-M' or M-C-M' (which is really just an extension of the former) spheres. this is why, or this was why, the finance field is not for me. because i do not believe in it. i could never articulate it, but i found my answers from Marx.
Labels: a-musing
12:26 PM
