<story><title>The Casino-Chip Society</title><url>https://brettscott.substack.com/p/casino-chip-cashless-society</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>akira2501</author><text>If money only exists in the mind of people,  how could there truly ever be a &amp;quot;science&amp;quot; of it?  It strikes me,  from a somewhat cynical point of view,  that &amp;quot;economics&amp;quot; is a somewhat confused and lower resolution study of &amp;quot;psychology,&amp;quot;  which I think offers a the workable explanation for your final sentence.</text></item><item><author>jrm4</author><text>This is &lt;i&gt;so good.&lt;/i&gt;  I was in another thread suggesting that, even if you hate crypto, it&amp;#x27;s still valuable to understand and accept the &amp;quot;fiat is all made up&amp;quot; idea, even if it&amp;#x27;s often badly stated and argued.&lt;p&gt;I have a degree in economics, but I confess I really didn&amp;#x27;t understand the whole thing until much later in life, when I was able to look at it through the lens of e.g. video game design.  Which is to say, there are real consequences and real effects of actions -- but the economy still isn&amp;#x27;t something like &amp;quot;nature&amp;quot; or &amp;quot;scientific&amp;quot; despite what many would have you believe.  It&amp;#x27;s much more like a &lt;i&gt;designed game&lt;/i&gt; who&amp;#x27;s rules can be tweaked, sometimes arbitrary, etc.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>felix318</author><text>Numbers also only exist in our minds but that doesn&amp;#x27;t make mathematics a branch of psychology. There is a rational side to economics because money can be measured and the measurements are reliable.&lt;p&gt;The unpredictable side of economics is of course the behaviour of the various economical agents, and regarding this I think economics is closer to astrology than to psychology.</text></comment>
<story><title>The Casino-Chip Society</title><url>https://brettscott.substack.com/p/casino-chip-cashless-society</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>akira2501</author><text>If money only exists in the mind of people,  how could there truly ever be a &amp;quot;science&amp;quot; of it?  It strikes me,  from a somewhat cynical point of view,  that &amp;quot;economics&amp;quot; is a somewhat confused and lower resolution study of &amp;quot;psychology,&amp;quot;  which I think offers a the workable explanation for your final sentence.</text></item><item><author>jrm4</author><text>This is &lt;i&gt;so good.&lt;/i&gt;  I was in another thread suggesting that, even if you hate crypto, it&amp;#x27;s still valuable to understand and accept the &amp;quot;fiat is all made up&amp;quot; idea, even if it&amp;#x27;s often badly stated and argued.&lt;p&gt;I have a degree in economics, but I confess I really didn&amp;#x27;t understand the whole thing until much later in life, when I was able to look at it through the lens of e.g. video game design.  Which is to say, there are real consequences and real effects of actions -- but the economy still isn&amp;#x27;t something like &amp;quot;nature&amp;quot; or &amp;quot;scientific&amp;quot; despite what many would have you believe.  It&amp;#x27;s much more like a &lt;i&gt;designed game&lt;/i&gt; who&amp;#x27;s rules can be tweaked, sometimes arbitrary, etc.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>mattnewton</author><text>&amp;gt; economics&amp;quot; is a somewhat confused and lower resolution study of &amp;quot;psychology,&amp;quot;&lt;p&gt;Maybe sociology, since money matter because it can be exchanged between people, but personally I don&amp;#x27;t think you&amp;#x27;d be wrong for thinking about economics as a narrow but important branch of sociology&amp;#x2F;psychology, in the same way you might think of biology as a narrow but important branch of chemistry and physics.</text></comment>