Will Population Growth Outpace Currency Availability?

  • Thread starter Thread starter evthis
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Money population
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the relationship between population growth and the availability of currency, exploring whether an increasing population will inevitably outstrip the limited amount of money in circulation. The conversation touches on concepts of inflation, the nature of money, and the implications of a non-gold-backed currency.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Exploratory

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants argue that if the total sum of money remains constant, then population growth could lead to a situation where there are more people than currency available.
  • Others challenge this view by stating that inflation and the non-constant nature of money supply complicate the scenario, suggesting that money is not a limited resource.
  • One participant emphasizes that money is an effect of economic activity rather than a fixed quantity that must be distributed among people.
  • Another viewpoint suggests that as population increases, so too do goods and services, which could maintain or increase the perceived worth of currency.
  • Some participants reference the transition away from the gold standard, arguing that modern currencies derive value from perceived worth rather than a fixed commodity.
  • There is a discussion about how worth is assigned to money and how it can be adjusted based on societal growth, indicating that running out of money is not a concern.
  • One participant notes that the dynamics of money circulation mean that a single bill can effectively represent multiple transactions, further complicating the idea of money as a zero-sum quantity.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express multiple competing views on the relationship between population growth and currency availability. There is no consensus on whether an increasing population will outpace the availability of currency, with some arguing for the inevitability of such a scenario and others refuting it based on the nature of money and economic principles.

Contextual Notes

The discussion includes assumptions about the nature of money, inflation, and economic growth that remain unresolved. Participants do not reach an agreement on the implications of these factors for future currency availability in relation to population growth.

evthis
The population is increasing but the sum total of money remains the same. Is it inevitable that there will be more people than the limited amount of currency can supply for?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
evthis said:
The population is increasing but the sum total of money remains the same. Is it inevitable that there will be more people than the limited amount of currency can supply for?

No. Look up inflation on google.
 
evthis said:
The population is increasing but the sum total of money remains the same. Is it inevitable that there will be more people than the limited amount of currency can supply for?
dduardo said:
No. Look up inflation on google.
Clarification: evthis said if the total sum of money remains the same, so inflation wouldn't apply. But, as dduardo's statement would imply, that situation is not reality. The reality is that the total sum of money available is not constant (inflation is just one of several reasons).
 
Money is not a limited resource that has to be spread among people. It is meaningless to set a fixed amount of money and then discuss its distribution it as if it were oxygen.

If everyone in the world is employed and is contributing to the economy, then we have a thriving world.

Money is an effect, not a cause.
 
"they say the best things in life are free... but you can save it for the birds and bees, i want money, you that's what i want, i want money..."

But i guess if you look at it like behind money is gold or whatever, and there's only so much gold, so if there's more people, won't there eventually be more people than gold... Well ya, but then every little bit of gold would be super valuable and silver would be more valuable and so on... and eventually we'll find something that is about as valuable in that overpopulated world as gold, (or money, whatever) is today. eh?
 
Gale17 said:
"they say the best things in life are free... but you can save it for the birds and bees, i want money, you that's what i want, i want money..."

But i guess if you look at it like behind money is gold or whatever, and there's only so much gold, so if there's more people, won't there eventually be more people than gold... Well ya, but then every little bit of gold would be super valuable and silver would be more valuable and so on... and eventually we'll find something that is about as valuable in that overpopulated world as gold, (or money, whatever) is today. eh?

Read the link I posted above about fiat money. We're not on the gold standard anymore.
 
That's exactly why money is no longer backed by gold. It is simply backed by perceived worth at this point. Whatever a seller is willing to give you in exchange for one dollar is the worth of that dollar. As more people come into the world, more goods and services do as well. These are the only things that are truly worth anything in and of themselves, and there is no reason in principle why they cannot increase forever so long as we have the space and resources to accommodate the persons and their respective businesses. In practice, our resources and space are limited, and so we do run into an absolute barrier beyond which no further item of worth can be created, but we are not yet anywhere near that point.
 
i know we're not on a gold standard, but really it doesn't matter. we designate worth to something ie gold, or money. And we just keep adjusting that worth based on how society grows. We can't ever run out of money because we can just adjust how much that money is worth. i agree with dduardo and DaveC426913. i just thought the gold standard was easier to understand.. meh
 
  • #10
Gale17 said:
"they say the best things in life are free... but you can save it for the birds and bees, i want money, you that's what i want, i want money..."

But i guess if you look at it like behind money is gold or whatever, and there's only so much gold, so if there's more people, won't there eventually be more people than gold... Well ya, but then every little bit of gold would be super valuable and silver would be more valuable and so on... and eventually we'll find something that is about as valuable in that overpopulated world as gold, (or money, whatever) is today. eh?


Given that modern currencies are not tied to gold, that's entirely irrelevant.

Money is not a zero sum quantity.

If a bill changes hands and is spent 3 times, its as if 3 different bills had been spent.
 

Similar threads

Does energy currency make sense?
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
How Does Population Affect the Value of Land and Currency?
  • · Replies 52 ·
2
Replies
52
Views
14K
How Does Bitcoin Really Work?
  • · Replies 41 ·
2
Replies
41
Views
4K
AI vs. Humans as Processors in an Environment
  • · Replies 74 ·
3
Replies
74
Views
3K
News Is unrestrained population growth ethical....
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
4K
Money, Debt, Value: Leveraging Commodities to Manage Economy
  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
9K
Graduate Mathematics Behind Global Currency as a Wealth Inequality Regulation System
  • · Replies 26 ·
Replies
26
Views
2K
Explore Weird Population Distrib. of China, India, USA, Russia, Canada
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
3K
I need help understanding this quote about recent Natural Selection
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
6K
High School Basic Idea of Differential Equations
  • · Replies 25 ·
Replies
25
Views
4K