Pieces of paper? Or Gold?
P1. Whether its Stone Money, Dollars, Euros or any other form of regional currency, each has its own distinct value system, from country to country. This is when it gets tricky. When people have their own perspectives, and value their money differently. To start, ones perspective depends on the persons ideology and current socioeconomic status. Hypothetically speaking, comparing a wealthy mans perspective on value of currency, to a middle class mans perspective may show that one has a greater appreciation for the dollar that they earn. Whilst the other just stares at their banks mobile app and watches the number on the screen increase, and just has to imagine their stacks of paper in the vault of their local bank.
P2. So what makes these pieces of paper we call dollars have value? well because people in society decided to make it have value. This method of currency was created to make the trade of goods easier and faster to manage. After reading “The Island Of Stone Money” one can notice that the inhabitants of Uap had a similar system to the one we use today. Today technology has advanced so much that we can now digitally manage, distribute and hold our money through mobile apps and online websites. whether one prefers using credit cards, Pay Pal or bank apps a physical dollar is a place holder for that digital number on any of those digital outlets. Now comparing Uap’s method to our current method the people of Uap used the stones as their physical placeholder to replace their word. Essentially creating a word for product system. Whilst currently people are using a pixel for product system.
P3. The physical dollar is evaporating the more and more technology advances. It is increasing so much that eventually we may see a dollar-less future where society goes full digital. Currency is what controls our societies, pixels on a screen or worthless pieces of fabric in our wallets will always hold value to people, because money is what gives us control over our lives. It is how governments control their nations. it’s what motivates people to apply for jobs and work. it is not about the material the currency is made of it is about how one obtains the money, is what makes it valuable.
Works Cited
Calmes, Jackie. “Demystifying the Fiscal Impasse That Is Vexing Washington.” The New York Times. The New York Times, 15 Nov. 2012. Web. 10 Sept. 2016.
Friedman, Milton. “The Island of Stone Money.” The Island of Stone Money(1991): 3-7. Web. 10 Sept. 2016.
Glass, Ira, Chana Joffe-Walt, Alex Blumberg, and Dave Kestenbaum. “423: The Invention of Money.” This American Life. Prod. Planet Money. 7 Jan. 2011. This American Life. Web. 11 Sept. 2016.
Joffe-Walt, Chana. “How Fake Money Saved Brazil.” NPR. NPR, 4 Oct. 2010. Web. 13 Sept. 2016.
Reeves, Jeff. “Bitcoin Has No Place in Your – or Any – Portfolio.” MarketWatch. MarketWatch, 31 Jan. 2015. Web. 10 Sept. 2016.
Rowan Counterintuitive 
Smokesdabear, another reminder, please, to carefully categorize your posts. I found this one only because it showed up in the Recent Posts sidebar menu. It would have been invisible if it had dropped off the bottom of that list. I’ve categorized it properly for you.
You’re a bit of a thinker, Smokesdabear, which will benefit you in this class, which is at least as much a thinking class as it is a writing class. But you’ll have to show MUCH more scholarship to earn a passing grade, and a bit more than that to get the grade you probably want. You’ve given us a little meditation here on the “value” of money and its tangibility/intangibility. It’s a fine start, but it would fail in your Portfolio.
As you know, you’ll receive quick grades in four grading criteria: Argument, Rhetoric, Mechanics, Scholarship (ARMS). Grades can always be improved by revision. To understand your grades, you need to know your Grade Code, which I shared with you in class MON SEP 19. I’ve numbered your paragraphs for easy identification. Additional feedback is always available upon request.
Argument (Grade O)
I’m going to distill your argument to its essence if I can, Smokesdabear.
—P1. The middle class value money more than the wealthy.
[Your first stab at argument promises that you’ll tell us about money in different cultures, but you don’t deliver on that.] [You use the words “value system” and “ideology,” but don’t show what difference they make.] [You say the middle class “have a greater appreciation” for money, but not why.] [You don’t indicate why the rich value money at all.]
—P2. Money is a placeholder. On Yap it stood for a person’s word or bond, which in turn stood for a product. Today in the US it stands for a number, which is represented by pixels, which stands for products.
[Maybe you remember what I said the first day of class, Smokesdabear: that we don’t have an idea in our heads, just images of Salma Hayek and cheese, and that we only start to actually form ideas when we explain them to others in language. If the argument I’ve distilled above makes sense to you, you may have a good idea. I believe there’s something in it. But you haven’t begun to explain it in a way that readers can understand.]
P3. The increasingly abstract methods we use to track our money don’t change at all the power of wealth to control every aspect of our lives.
[That’s a gem, and it will make a fitting conclusion to a compelling argument that money is an abstraction and has always been so; only its representation has changed. You haven’t made that argument yet.]
Rhetoric (Grade P)
Rhetoric and Scholarship are inseparable in your case, Smokesdabear. You’re trying to thrive on observation and speculation alone, without bringing any evidence or support from the rich material at your disposal. You cite only the Yap, and you do so in a way that assumes your readers are all familiar with Milton Friedman’s article. They’re not. They haven’t listened to the NPR podcast. They have no idea what you’re talking about. They know only what you tell them. So tell them what you learned and help them understand.
Mechanics (Grade P)
Using only P1 as an example, I find repeated violations of the FFG Rules of Grammar. They’re very costly if they show up in your essays, but they’re easy to fix once you start to recognize them. In P1, you break Rules 2, and 4B. They continue throughout. You’re also writing fragments and runons, which don’t appear in the list of FFGs but which also harm your overall grade. If you need advice on how to spot and eliminate these pesky grade-killers, let me know.
Scholarship (Grade P)
Technically, this one is easy to fix, Smokesdabear.
You’ve named five sources in your Works Cited, but you’ve cited only one (The Island of Stone Money). The others might belong in a Bibliography as sources you consulted, but since you didn’t cite them, they have no place in your Works Cited.
Removing the four would fix your Works Cited.
However, you need to cite more than just the single primary source to earn a grade for this assignment. The harder fix is to read, absorb, reflect upon, and deliver your insights about, several other sources from those provided. And cite them, of course.
OVERALL
Take heart, Smokesdabear. Your current grade is a reflection of how this work would be graded if it were submitted as part of your Portfolio. The semester is young and help is available. Every post can be endlessly revised. The Writing Center offers free peer-to-peer assistance from Writing majors. I will meet with you any MON or WED in personal conferences and provide continuous feedback in and out of class.
LikeLiked by 1 person