I glimpsed at a small group of the children in the first grade class I was observing trade snacks at lunch time, the more sugary the snack the more value it held. 2. This argument over who was to obtain the fruit roll-ups or pretzels seemed childish and naive. 3. This agreement of the value of the snacks seemed very similar to the agreement between the Yap community and their precious rocks. 4. These innocent and communal agreement lead to the realization that a group of individuals considering rocks as anything of value seems more of an innocent childhood dilemma than a real life situation. 5. Yet, consider America and most other countries currency: thin green slices of rectangular paper, all of these pieces being the same shape, size and weight just stamped with numerous numbers.
P2.1. If such a foolish thing as fruit roll-ups, or rocks or stamped pieces of paper could become so valuable to a society, imagine what the world would be like if there was not even a tangible object to be transferred from one to another. 2. According to The Bubble on E-Currency Bitcon, there is now such thing as internet money, which seems like more problems than it’s worth. 3. E-currency was first created in 2009 in an effort to stop the global financial issues of the world. 4. The idea of internet currency can ultimately be created by any one person, is a key source for drug dealers and could easily be hacked by intruders but plenty of people still flocked at the chance to obtain some e-currency. 5. Too much faith is heavily placed on e-currency which is not actual money one can touch or see. 6. Society trusts so much in a system that can fail at any moment.
P3.1. In a similar case discussed in The Curious Case of Japan’s Economic Status, the economic strains on the Japanese government were saved by Mr. Abe through his constant money-pumps back into the system. 2. Like the possible bad intentions of the e-currency users, Mr. Abe’s intentions were not too good either, yet he is the one to fix the country with its massive fiscal cliff. 3. Yet again, one mans contribution to a country could make such a turn over as to economically save the country.
P4.1. Just like one man helped a country settle their economic quarrels, one first grader settled two classmates. 2. “Here,” Dylan said, “I have two fruit roll-ups, you can both have one,” and all the chaos came to a close.
alwaystired247
AnonymousStudent
azntaco
beforeverge
BigBabyBaller
bitagaming
breakingbad1820
Caravan
cinderella1013
davidbdale
Yankeelover18
fatboy489zt
giantsfan224
glacierfreeze21
gobirds17
green0728
gymrat230
Gir
jerseymikes1106
jesusisking1738
jetsfan806
Kenneth Alex Krug
manipulator66
mercythyhealer14
McCormick Karner
mochaatrain
oni
powerranger
peanut2348
pinkcottoncandy4
princess01430
redbird1123
rubes1256
shxrkbait
sillyinternetperson
soulpond47240
spatel8267
stingingcrib5
tacotyphoon
thepersonindisguise
usmnt23
worldofjuice999
xephos1
Counterintuitive Fall 2022 
The sugary snacks and pop tarts are a charming frame for your essay, Angela. And I’m delighted you incorporated readings as diverse as the Bitcoin and the yen. You’ll have to draw more substantive conclusions than It seems crazy, and It’s outrageous to keep up with your more ambitious classmates though, if that’s of interest to you. Before you finalize this post, remember to uncheck the “Uncategorized” category.
(this used to be the original “money” post. I did not make a separate post for the rewrite, I just edited the original and than changed the name to “Money Rewrite”. I would like a second comment pertaining to my new and edited version.
Feedback provided. —DSH
Angela, I took the wrong approach with you during our conference and I apologize for that. I’d like to respect your style more than I did in person, so instead of trying to radically revise your entire strategy, I’ll try to assist you on tactics. I may still be useful to you.
P1. I’ve numbered your sentences since we’ll be examining them closely for tactical-level changes. P1.1. is the first sentence in Paragraph 1.
P1.1. Glimpsing is too brief to learn what you learned. Admit you were intrigued enough to spy on the kids.
P1.2. plus P1.3. You didn’t and shouldn’t call this an argument unless you mean it particularly. Negotiation makes more sense. Which did it seem: childish or naive? If the two are different, one’s better. If they’re not, don’t repeat.
P1.4.
—this innocent agreement led
[Here I think your reader will expect you to acknowledge that the candy has an intrinsic value the rocks lack: it’s delicious and contains useful calories. So the stones are an abstraction.]
P1.5. This sentence eludes me, unless you’re on the same track I’m following, Angela. Fruit for pretzels makes sense. Big stones for little stones makes at least some sense (it’s just one level of abstraction away from big pumpkin for several small pumpkins.) But one small piece of paper in return for 100 small pieces of paper is even more abstract. So:
Does that seem a fair compromise to you, Angela? Instead of asking you to abandon your “narrative” approach, we just agree to make the steps in your logical chain more apparent?
P2.1. How about speculating that we may be about to enter an uncharted realm of pure abstraction instead of asking readers to imagine it. Would that work for both of us?
P2.2. Whose position is “more problems than it’s worth,” Angela? I can’t tell.
P2.3. What in the world do you mean by “the global financial issues of the world”? And does this really sound like the creation story for Bitcoin? That’s not my understanding at all, and you’d have to work hard to convince this reader.
P2.4. You mean “the currency can be created by one person” not “the IDEA of the currency can be created by one person.” I’m completely lost about your attitude about this currency, and confused why you haven’t called it Bitcoin yet. You’ve lost what I thought was the chain of reasoning from tangible objects of value to intangible symbols of value. You’re making value judgments on the currency (used in drug deals, insecure), which will be fine for another paragraph, but seem irrelevant at the moment.
P2.5. Would Bitcoin be more valuable and trustworthy if its issuers minted coins out of resin or something? Or is the novelty of Bitcoin that it doesn’t have a government behind it? Only its users and nobody else determine whether to accept it for goods and services. That’s weirder than the currency’s invisibility. (We rarely touch our dollars anymore.)
P2.6. Also true of any other currency. Why is Bitcoin different? (Again, I think it is, but you need to guide readers here.)
P3.1. What is the similarity of cases here, Angela? Does it have to do with a lone investor affecting an economy? That’s not really similar. Bitcoin’s inventors don’t invest in any country’s economy, or attempt to stabilize any currency other than their own.
P3.2. Huh. I don’t get it. What do you believe Mr. Abe’s intentions to have been? Whatever they are, you need to communicate them to make your case.
P3.3. Again, that’s at least as different from the e-currency example as it is similar to it.
P4.1. I like this technique of “framing” your essay with the first-graders, Angela.
—two classmates’.
P4.2. It’s a charming closer, but it doesn’t support your off-handed claim that Mr. Abe’s intentions were dishonorable. Dylan is willing to distribute his personal wealth to resolve a marketplace imbalance and restore domestic order. That sounds pretty admirable to me.
Are you more comfortable with these notes than you were with our Tuesday interaction, Angela?
—Watch