The Other McCain

"One should either write ruthlessly what one believes to be the truth, or else shut up." — Arthur Koestler

Games As A Teaching Opportunity

Posted on | September 25, 2011 | 6 Comments

by Smitty (via Paceset999)

At the Chicago Toy and Game Fair:

This year we picked up the new version of the old classic, Monopoly.  It’s pretty cool how the board is now round, they have replaced all the paper money (remember the pink 500’s?) with credit cards, the properties are (terribly realistically) priced in the millions, instead of hundreds and there’s the electronic “chance” that interrupts every now and then for comic relief.  You actually swipe your credit card to load the $2M when you pass “GO!”

If the money is all electronic, you could have the bank inflate the currency, and show just how immoral the Federal Reserve is to young people.

Category: End The Fed, humor

Comments

6 Responses to “Games As A Teaching Opportunity”

  1. Edward
    September 25th, 2011 @ 7:51 pm

    Interesting.

    Actually the concept is interesting.  A web-based game where players compete and the whole litany of crazy regulations, corruptible politicians, inflation, deflationary money policies, increasing taxes and etc could all show in a very well defined way how absurd life is today if you’re trying to create jobs and earn wealth.

    Games do offer a way to present very complex concepts and ideas in a more accessible way.

  2. Charles G. Hill
    September 25th, 2011 @ 8:03 pm

    $500s were more yellow-orange than pink.  You want pink, you want the $5.

  3. Joe
    September 25th, 2011 @ 8:10 pm

    I like the concept.  Of course so does Parker Brothers since it gives them the opportunity to sell a lot of new sets. 

  4. Kitty Myers
    September 25th, 2011 @ 8:16 pm

    The primary reason we played the game with kids was to teach them how to count money and how to count back change. It gave them a math education. How can you do that with credit cards? Reminds me of Sinbad’s hilarious routine of kids working at McDonald’s who can’t make change:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lAWv-Mv1V_8&feature=related

  5. JeffS
    September 25th, 2011 @ 9:04 pm

    If those bogus bills are replaced with “play” credit cards, children may soon forget the definition of “play money”, and equate “play credit cards” with real credit cards.  I’m not sure that this is a great idea.

    Besides, should the America dollar finally crash and burn, what will we use as a new currency, if Parker Brothers doesn’t print their play money any more?

  6. Adjoran
    September 26th, 2011 @ 2:29 am

    Well Smitty, I suppose it is a positive thing that you aren’t saying the Fed is “illegal” or “unconstitutional” now, just that inflating the currency is “immoral.”

    It is important that people understand the role of currency in an economy.  It is the standard of exchange which enables virtually all economic activity. 

    Currency itself is perishable, and paper money comes with a shelf life of handling before it disintegrates.  If the total amount of money, including currency, can be kept in rough balance with the amount of economic activity, pricing will be market-based.  If the constantly declining supply is not replaced continuously, the result is a market where too many goods are chasing too few dollars, and deflation begins its deadly destruction.  Falling prices depress economic activity, since everything will cost less tomorrow and next week, most will postpone buying decisions as long as they can.  It’s a black hole which would make the Great Depression or the Obama Economy look like a walk in the park.

    Now, if the disappearing cash is replaced too fast, there are more dollars chasing too few goods, and inflation sets in.  But it is far safer to err on the side of modest inflation instead of risking deflation.  Economies can still thrive and grow with the former, but not the latter.

    Now, putting far more currency in the market than is indicated by the economy is very bad policy and ultimately counterproductive.  The Fed’s “quantitative easing” moves are fairly criticized as such.  But doesn’t the “immoral” label imply they are knowingly doing evil? 

    In my years, I’ve suffered far more at the hands of well-meaning idiots than those acting immorally.  YMMV.