Stone Money—ilovenas

After reading Island of Stone Money by Milton Friedman, I started to think about the actual real meaning of money. All these different thoughts started to surface in my head, for example, I asked myself if someone can actually be rich if they are not able to physically see all of their money. If you’re not in control over all of your money, how is it yours? Personally, I believe being rich and wealthy is a status or lifestyle.

The government of Brazil using the concept of fake money to help the country out of poverty was very deceitful, and although it worked, it goes to show that we the people really have no control over anything. This connects with the article, Money Matters by Teresa Murray, the article touches base on an interview with a man who was denied the access to withdraw his own money weeks. I think the fact that a man that worked hard throughout his whole life not being able to withdraw $600,000 from his account without a two-week notice is sickening, and adds to my point that money is a concept of our imagination.

Whether it be an enormous stone or pieces of paper, the only value money has is the value we claim it to have. It is simply a tool to keep us mentally enslaved by the government.

Works Cited

Friedman, Milton. “The Island of Stone Money.” Diss. Hoover Institution, Stanford University , 1991.

Joffe-Walt, Chana .

“How Fake Money Saved Brazil.” 4 Oct. 2010. 30 Jan. 2015. <;.

“Current FAQsInforming the Public about the Federal Reserve.” FRB: Is U.S. Currency Still Backed by Gold? N.p., n.d. Web. 10 Sept. 2015.

This entry was posted in Stone Money Links. Bookmark the permalink.

3 Responses to Stone Money—ilovenas

  1. davidbdale says:

    Thank you for your post, ilovenas. Be sure to title your posts in the future; I have done so for you this time. We use categories, not tags, to identify posts. I have removed your A01: Stone Money tag and replaced it with an A01: Stone Money category. These details will soon become second nature.


  2. ilovenas says:

    feedback was requested.

    Feedback provided.


  3. davidbdale says:

    These are good and understandable first reactions to the abstract nature of money, ilovenas, but you haven’t yet responded in an organized way to demonstrate a thesis of your own.

    P1. What, for example, is the “real meaning of money”? You seem to promise you’ll tell us, but you don’t quite deliver. Not being able to physically see all of our money doesn’t prevent us from being rich any more than being in Philadelphia keeps us from having a house at the shore. We own many things that aren’t in our pockets.

    P2. I don’t know the details of the man who couldn’t get his money from his account, but it doesn’t quite prove that we have no control over anything. It might demonstrate that we sometimes pledge our money to others for a time, or that we agree to terms with a bank that we have entrusted to keep our money safe. The fact that we can only withdraw $400 from the ATM on any given day doesn’t mean that we have relinquished control, does it? It means that we have traded away convenience for protection. We don’t really want someone who finds our ATM card (the one we wrote our PIN on) to be able to empty our entire account. As for the Brazilian currency episode, it was “the money” that was out of control, right? People needed a way to control their behavior so that their wealth didn’t disappear overnight, and the “fake currency” gave them back a money system that didn’t steal value from them with rampant inflation.

    P3. What you say here is completely true, ilovenas. Money has the value we assign to it. But your conclusion doesn’t follow from that truth. We’re not enslaved by money if we don’t permit it to rule our behavior. And I’m not at all sure what you believe the government has to do with it.

    Good writing is simply a matter of having good ideas and communicating them directly and clearly, ilovenas. Decide what one good idea you want to share about money and then deliver that truth with support from the material at hand. You’re responding to the individual sources instead of building your own argument.

    Is this at all helpful? Reply, please.


Leave a Reply

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

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

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google 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 )

Connecting to %s