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.
1
2
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.
Replying to
Bitcoin makes me angry because in order to sustain itself it needs to create new bitcoin to reward verification of past transactions
Like
The supply could never just hold
Also just likes to crash big here and there

