3-Part Series on Economics: Introduction
Before we delve into the first essay, “What Are Goods?”, there is one question I owe you: Why am I writing this?
The following is a brief explanation and some background information about my three-part series on my theory of laissez-faire economics.
I wrote this after completing the first essay out of the three. The plan is to outline my (at this stage) hypothesis under these three titles:
2. What Is Economics?
3. What Is Money?
I may conclude that another essay is required before approaching the subject of money; but as things stand, three essays will suffice.
While the first essay is presented to you in full here, I do not know how long it will take me to write the others, and I commit to no fixed timeline on their publication dates. If all goes well, the second essay will be published some time in March. The essay on money I do not expect to complete before summer and it may even take longer than that.
Before I briefly comment about the first essay, however, we must begin with a naked question: why am I writing this?
I am not a professor of economics, nor do I have academic training in economics. I had barely read more than two economics books from start to finish, and I do not have a career in finance. My life right now revolves mainly around journalism, copywriting, music and parenting (not necessarily in that order).
One could claim that this outright disqualifies me from writing on economics. I admit to standing defenseless against this claim. You may decide to leave this page, never look back and it will be a perfectly rational decision on your part. The only thing that I have in my defense is the text itself. I will let it be the sole judge of my qualifications. If, after all, you do decide to read it, I have one request for you: read it seriously.
If you judge the arguments to be mistaken, that is your prerogative, and I will be thankful to learn where and how you think I erred. But take into account that in my inquiry into economics I have not taken any idea for granted and I have carefully weighed every relevant concept, questioning whether it is valid or not, used correctly or not. This means that I will most likely challenge your premises, namely, some of the ideas you take for granted; which, on your part, to truly grasp my views, will require your curiosity to learn something new.
Now for the reason of putting this pen to paper.
My interest in economics started less than three years ago. I delved into the science not from a general interest but with a particular question in mind: why did gold become money? Everywhere I looked offered a non-satisfactory answer. The better answers came close to the underlying issue, but were not adequately fundamental. My question was like a puzzle with pieces went missing. One piece, however, I did possess. I knew from the outset that money was linked to measurement. The weight and fineness of gold were key to the value of money. But why?—and how? It was the attempt to answer these two questions that opened the door to an entire science. It occurred to me that one cannot answer the question of money before one can answer prior questions of value, exchange and wealth.
My original intent was to keep my interim findings “in the closet” until I could investigate the field much deeper, for both a broader context and a specialized understanding of the different schools and their particular arguments.
What unfolded, however, was that despite my “light” reading of economics works, I started to put the pieces together until I was able to tackle the fundamental problems of economics in one integrated, non-contradictory hypothesis.
It was at the point of breaking down the meaning of economic value that I became eager to share my thoughts. Apparently, however, I could not write about value without bringing in the other pieces of the puzzle. The subject was too intricately dependent on earlier concepts and necessitated the dispelling of common misconceptions; a fuller exposition of my holistic view was needed—and I accepted the challenge.
And on a more, perhaps, naïve, romantic note—these ideas are important to me and I simply want them to exist in the world.
A few words on the content. The essay anon is akin to an anteroom before we enter the main hall and treasury of the second and third essays respectively. My goal is for each essay to be read as a standalone; but reading them in order will help understand the context and cardinal concepts better.
The goal of the essay entitled, “What Are Goods?”—other than answering its subject matter—is to introduce you to two fundamental concepts: usefulness and surplus. These will be crucial as we build our knowledge toward economic value and money.
Although I expect the first essay to be somewhat demanding due to its length and numerous examples, it is by no means exhaustive. It swoops through the concepts of usefulness, resources, surplus, goods, services and, finally, scarcity; which is a lot to absorb in one go. Hopefully, it is definitive enough to end with the satisfaction of learning something new rather than being left with more questions.
Now enough with the introduction, let us get right to it.
☞
If you value this newsletter, help spread the word by hitting the like button and sharing.