4 comments on “Commerce or economics?

  1. That is a distinction I had not previously been astute enough to realize and indentify on my own. Thanks for pointing it out.

    So when speaking with others in the future, I need to endeavor to alter my terms. In stead of using the word “economics” so frequently and without thought, perhaps I should use the term “commerce science”? It doesn’t roll off the tongue as easily, but language needs to be specific.

  2. Your frivolous definition of “economics” ruins this piece. Economics does not “rely on a centralized system or a grouping of systems based around whatever specie or form of currency each state allows to be utilized.” Quite the contrary, your first definition was right: “The branch of knowledge concerned with the production, consumption, and transfer of wealth.” Of course it can exist without a State. In short, your redefinition of “economics” to mean only the taxed unfree part of the economy is contrived.

    • I would say that having someone milk the producers to science out what is obvious to many is a scam. After all, value should not be arbitrary it should be worth versus worth to the mutual benefit of all involved. Hence my disdain for the “science” that is economics. Now, economies as such have not existed outside of state instigated approaches historically. Commerce, yes, economy? Nope

You're thinking it, write it!

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s