Money: Fiat or Credit?

“No doubt all commodities have politics. But money and credit and the structure of finance piled on them are constituted by political power, social convention and law in a way that sneakers, smartphones and barrels of oil are not. At the apex of the modern monetary pyramid is fiat money. Called into existence and sanctioned by states, it has no “backing” other than its status as legal tender.”

CRASHED: HOW A DECADE OF FINANCIAL CRISES CHANGED THE WORLD, ADAM TOOZE (2018)

What is fiat money? Do we not live in a world of fiat money? Is it correct to say that money “has no “backing” other than its status as legal tender.”?

Fiat Money is token whose value is bestowed by virtue of state decree. It is mere pieces of paper, intrinsically worthless, that were treated a money only because a government insisted that they should be.1 It perpetuates a belief that money can just be printed by the state through the aegis of the Central Bank – in a sense creating money out of thin air. But fiat money, historically, has been a replacement of already existing commodity-based credit systems – what made a particular commodity ‘money’ was not that it functioned as currency, but that it functioned as the material in which the value of other commodities were denominated. So, states/empires, in effect, appropriated these systems by issuing standardized currencies based on some conversion rate.

To say that we live in a world of fiat money would be misleading. The modern money that we use for transactions is a state IOU, driven by a socio-political contract of the state with its citizens. It is essentially based on debt the state owes to entities that finance its borrowing. Since the state is vast payment community due to its powers of taxation and political contract, its IOUs serve as currency for domestic transactions. At the same time, state has the best IOUs because it has the best assets – the people, who produce goods and services and who pay taxes.

So, money is not fiat money but state credit money. The state being an economic beast precisely because it is a political leviathan. Hence, it is wrong to say that money has no backing other than its standing as legal tender. It looks and feels like fiat because it allows for seamless transactions, as if it is a thing. In fact, it is backed by the political legitimacy of democracy (e.g. India) or of outcomes (e.g. China).

When central banks print money (liability), they buy treasury bonds (asset) which monetizes the debt owed by the government to other banks. These banks cannot print money themselves, but they are allowed to create virtual money by making loans at fractional reserve rate established by the Fed. These are private IOUs which also can be used for transactions and whose “value solely rests on the assumption the IOU itself can serve as a socially valid means of exchange”2. This is determined by the creditworthiness of the originator of these IOUs. However, these private IOUs also get transacted in the real economy through the state credit money. This backing of the state makes it seem as if these IOUs i.e. promises to pay are, for all legal purposes, identical to payment in commodity money or in kind. This is not actually the case in the present system of state credit money.

References:

  1. Graeber, D. (2011). Debt: The First 5000 Years. Penguin
  2. “A vast machine for the provisioning of soldiers” (2016) The Real Movement. Retrieved from https://therealmovement.wordpress.com/2016/11/17/a-critical-review-of-david-graebers-debt-3/

Platform Economy: Some Thoughts and Concerns

As digital platforms become the norm of emerging business models, often defying sectoral fragmentation, they present new conceptual and practical challenges for people impacted by them. They also present concerns for government of regulation as well as for the public about privacy. As the stock markets increasingly pin all hope of a speedy recovery on these platforms, we need to think anew about these platforms.

The following is a limited list of concerns that may become relevant to our economic and social life in a few years:

  • What will platforms mean for wages and workers?
  • Just because a technology exists, to collect new and pervasive kinds of datasets, should it necessarily be deployed and made the norm?
  • Is the economic framework of competition sufficient to explain the economic trends that we seen on platforms?
  • What would competition mean when the marketplace is not some self-regulating space but a privately owned infrastructure which records every transaction to it’s own advantage?
  • In this ‘growth over profits’ model which relies heavily on predatory pricing, how do we think about anti-trust regulation – the very basis of which has been the preclusion of predatory pricing?
  • In considering mergers and acquisitions, is the economies of scale analysis sufficient in this context of strategic consolidations motivated by data accumulation?
  • What does it mean to own a device in this new environment of digital platforms? Is this ‘good as a service’?
  • How we define the ownership of intangible data when it is stored in distant servers?
  • What would reselling of digital content mean on these hyper-coordinated platforms? Can an Amazon book, once read, be sold? Can a CAT scan machine that stores data on a company-owned server be sold? What would that transfer of ownership look like?
  • Given a platform’s commercial imperatives, it has every incentive to comply with pervasive government requests for user data. The question then becomes under what framework are those requests to be assessed?
  • The code gives platforms a better deal. But does this deal make public sense?
  • Platforms encode only limited possibilities. In light of the fact that they are becoming essential economic infrastructures, who decides these possibilities?
  • Some desirable but unprofitable actions might be coded away while some other undesirable but profitable actions happen freely. Ultimately, this will depend on the architecture that the platform code designs. So, indirect regulation of human behavior – either due to government compliance or for commercial purposes is not unthinkable. Which behavior, in what instances, do we think should be regulated? Who decides?
  • While it is acknowledged that complete anonymity is impossible, how do we devise a framework to allow only judicial use of traceability and identification?
  • What would be the implications of trade treaties signed by government in the context of these platforms which store the most essential raw material, data, in distant places which can be used for diplomatic coercion?
  • How far will easy monetary policy, over-dependence on digital economy and cross-subsidization go in reviving growth?
  • Just because it has been difficult to regulate the platforms doesn’t mean that is how it should be. And how should it be – is an important question that should be openly debated. We need to be wary of the demands to keep these technologies out of political considerations because they will inevitably affect politics.

Some Readings:

  1. Platform Capitalism. Nick Srnicek. Polity Press. 2017.
  2. Code and Other Laws of Cyberspace : Version 2.0. Lawrence Lessig. Basic Books, NY. 2006.