<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: The current debate: what good is money?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://rossparker.com/2009/08/05/the-current-debate-what-good-is-money/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://rossparker.com/2009/08/05/the-current-debate-what-good-is-money/</link>
	<description>Business, finance and economic miscellany</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 13 May 2012 18:59:16 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ross Parker</title>
		<link>http://rossparker.com/2009/08/05/the-current-debate-what-good-is-money/#comment-15</link>
		<dc:creator>Ross Parker</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 11 Aug 2009 21:51:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.rossparker.com/?p=293#comment-15</guid>
		<description>Jonny, thanks for the comment. You&#039;re right, of course. I should have been clearer about value. My position is the third option here: that money provides utility as insurance, even when that insurance isn&#039;t called in. When you lose that money, you use that ongoing utility.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Jonny, thanks for the comment. You&#8217;re right, of course. I should have been clearer about value. My position is the third option here: that money provides utility as insurance, even when that insurance isn&#8217;t called in. When you lose that money, you use that ongoing utility.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: JonnyN</title>
		<link>http://rossparker.com/2009/08/05/the-current-debate-what-good-is-money/#comment-14</link>
		<dc:creator>JonnyN</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 09 Aug 2009 23:11:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.rossparker.com/?p=293#comment-14</guid>
		<description>I understood the debate as discussing the utility of the money rather than its value., in which case whether you view the money as an option or just as an asset any explanation will involve at least one of:
-Pleasure from anticipated consumption;
-Pleasure from &#039;consumption&#039; which does not damage the good/money (e.g. if I own a shiny rock and enjoy looking at it); or
-Pleasure from enhanced consumption in some state of the world that may or may not occur (i.e. the money as insurance).</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I understood the debate as discussing the utility of the money rather than its value., in which case whether you view the money as an option or just as an asset any explanation will involve at least one of:<br />
-Pleasure from anticipated consumption;<br />
-Pleasure from &#8216;consumption&#8217; which does not damage the good/money (e.g. if I own a shiny rock and enjoy looking at it); or<br />
-Pleasure from enhanced consumption in some state of the world that may or may not occur (i.e. the money as insurance).</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

