Thoughts on Intrinsic value & Capitalism

The question I pose to you is what conceptually is intrinsic value..? Gold increases in value when the probability of a negative tail scenario increases; and even more so if the scenario becomes reality. This is true because of its inability to be created out of thin air and that it is non-perishable. Peter Schiff proposes that gold has intrinsic value, primarily on the premise that humans have desired the metal for thousands of years. This is an illusory, and very subjective axiom. That intrinsic value is based on the perception of others. If people had a paradigm shift in their perception of gold and saw it just as a metal that sits and collects dust, then what is its intrinsic value? I believe that human life is the only thing that has humanistic intrinsic value. Productivity is a function of human ability; from computer programs to carpentry. In a hypothetical situation, would you rather live in a world by yourself with 100 million pounds of gold and the other natural resources to survive; or 100 people each with different skills and the other natural resources to survive? Would metal eye candy be more valuable than people who can help you build a warm living space, hunt and cook, and give companionship? Humans have evolved thus far because of our mental capabilities, and our ability to transfer and pass down that capability(i.e. communication and writing). We have built society off of previous human ideas. You may think that such conceptual idealistic thinking has no basis in your life. Or put another way, such thinking is unlikely to increase your net worth. In the short run that is usually correct. Capitalism is notorious for disregarding long-run stability for short-term gain. For any shortsighted individual overly focused on their net worth, I would point you to individuals such as Carl Icahn and George Soros. These legendary investors are well read in philosophy and have the ability to see the big-picture(at least for the proposed investment). Such conceptual big-picture thinking likely would have curtailed an investment in the technology stock bubble. After a few years it became clear that some tech companies were never going to achieve the NPV that its stock had predicted.

The strength of the paradigm determines its time duration. In the long term, paradigm shifts are a certainty; which hegel proposed through dialectics. Some paradigms, such as the overall capitalist system, may not shift while were living, but the probability has increased significantly since cronyism and fiat currency dominated world order. The natural boom-bust cycle has become more acute with information technology, and fiat currency is likely to create a liquidity trap. The certainty of a new social and economic paradigm, or New World Order, is clear due to the commoditization and devaluation of human life. The word capitalism denotes that capital is of intrinsic value. That not just human labor receives compensation i.e. wages, but financial assets as well are compensated through dividends and interest. Over time financial assets become worth more than human life, and third level derivative financial instruments are created. Our society is at the epitome of this tragedy, as humans kill other humans over acouple pieces of paper. And 400 people have more wealth that 155 million others do. Yes, these 400 were very clever, and much better at playing the game. But is the game right? Could the human mind create a better game? One that doesnt hinder hard work, innovation, and human life? If you contrast real wage and productivity, a paternity test if you will, Capitalism is the son of feudalism and grandson of slavery. Slaves, serfs, and workers all get paid less than what they produce. The difference is that now we are given a choice how to be productive. This is a smart maneuver from the elite, or masters, because a desire to perform a task makes you more productive. It also creates a perception of freedom on a relative basis. Funny how the income tax is twice as much as capital currently. But people are manipulated in their thinking, and the two political parties often debate religiously on a flat vs progressive rate. As the middle class neocon argues for a flat rate, an 18yr old elites son earns more on dvd & interest in a year than he does in his life.Can we talk about corporate and elite welfare as much as lower class welfare?