All "meaning-making" products/services are evolving relationships between people that are on average 1/3 harvesting existing mutual credit, 1/3 instant gratification, 1/3 creating mutual debt through promise.
It's like people pay to overcome barrier potentials and get entangled
Conversation
There's something like a Coasean economics of pricelessness here. Any time you spend money in a meaning economy, you're paying to either start a relationship, continue a relationship, or end a relationship. Hello money, we-meet-again money, and goodbye/fuck-off money.
Replying to
Reference here is to my old post Economics of Pricelessness.
1
2
Also, older post, Bargaining with Your Right Brain
1
3
I'm fascinated by how people weave financial relationships and human relationships. People like Graeber (Debt) seem to see the former as fundamentally a contaminant of the latter, with "illegible credit" that's really just entangled lives as the gold standard (heh!) of relating.
1
2
There is something to that position. Money injected into a relationship without thought is 10x more likely to screw it up than strengthen or deepen it. But it's possible. Arguably, a good marriage is in fact Exhibit A of the possibility.
1
4
Blockchains are kinda the other extreme of money in some sense. Possibility of completely decoupling financial and human relationships. Though I can't think of examples. Just seems possible. Money in/value out without either individual humans or "branded" orgs as counterparty.
1
4
