From wikipedia:

Contrary to popular conception, there is no evidence that societies relied only on barter before using money for trade.[73] Instead, non-monetary societies operated primarily along the principles of gift economics, and in more complex economies, on debt.[74][75][76] When barter occurred, it was usually between strangers or would-be enemies.[77]

  • emeralddawn45@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    12
    ·
    4 months ago

    Have you never had a friend group? Like that’s a dead-ass simple ‘study’ of a gift economy. Sometimes someone pays for lunch, sometimes someone pays for beer, sometimes someone brings weed or bakes cookies or sings a song. Everyone helps everyone else out. Each according to their need, based on their ability. Or is that not something you’re familiar with, because if not, you need better friends.

    • ripcord@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      4 months ago

      First part was good and got the point across. The personal attack at the end was unnecessary.

    • chonglibloodsport@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      4 months ago

      Yes, and then there’s the one who always receives gifts but never contributes. The free rider problem is present even at this tiny scale. Reputation takes care of it, generally, when the friend group decides to stop hanging out with the non-reciprocal individual.

      I haven’t heard of any proposal that could scale up a reciprocal economy like this up to a city of thousands (let alone millions). The issue is Dunbar’s number: our brains simply cannot track relationships with thousands of people.