Money, money circulation and credit - стр. 3

It can be assumed that some nebbish sellers at a risk of the goods loss or in despair exchanged them not on needed but on fast-moving in order to exchange it again on required. Thus, the fast-moving goods appeared which played the role of the first «commodity» money. Multiple usage of the fast-moving goods as an intermediary made them common twice. That is why the ratios in which they were exchanged on the other goods became stable. It let us say about the birth of «the equivalent goods» which confirms their role and functions of the commodity money.

Thanks to such money the process of purchase and sale separates in space and time and the commodity money themselves become the payment units which formulate the scale of prices in terms of the money units’ quantity paid for the purchased goods.

This process happens spontaneously beyond the control and desire of the concrete goods producer simultaneously to the market and its divisions’ birth. The predictability of the other subjects’ behavior increases, the indefiniteness decreases and as a result the individual expenses (charges) diminish together with the common.

In case of such local equivalent good elimination a random quotient of the two individual commodity producers who on their own risk and peril determine the cost of the concrete good passes. It’s becoming apparent that the cost of the good is not determined by the exchange but the cost itself (the specific type of labor put in the good production) and its volume determine the exchange relations in which the one good exchanged on the other.

Therefore we can see that the cost exists objectively and has a social character reflecting the social relations between the individual commodity producers. As a result the general form of value appears when one of the goods opposes the others as an equivalent.

The function of such common equivalent in different nations played different goods. As a rule they were the results of mass production playing the important role in their economics. The farmers had grains, the breeders had cattles, etc. The man who had such commodities could purchase the other products of labor to meet his own and his family needs.

Nevertheless we see that this common equivalent is local however because the other nations can deny the equivalent popular of the certain territory. With the goods production and exchange development the involvement of different nations into the common course of business happens. Thus the requirement for the common equivalent appears which could be popular among the farmers, breeders, hunters, etc.