“…The correct answer is: “market prices and money”. (It’s funny that Hayek doesn’t mention money in that essay, because I don’t think he would disagree with me.)
Suppose we had market prices and a barter economy. With n goods there would be n(n-1)=n2-n markets, and so n2-n market prices. One market and one price for each possible pair of goods. Even for a very simple economy, with only 100 different goods, there would be 9,900 different markets and 9,900 different prices. Hayek's user of tin would need to know not just one price of tin: he would need to know 99 different prices of tin. And in order to know which of those 99 prices was the cheapest price of tin, he would need to know all 9,900 prices. It would take an army of arbitrageurs to keep all the cross-prices in line. And those arbitrageurs would need to be experts in all the goods they traded, so when they sell tin for apples, and apples for bananas, and bananas for tin, they didn't get stuck with a lemon somewhere along the line. Not to mention ensuring the warehouse receipts were worth the paper they were written on, and the apples and bananas were safely stored.
If one of the 100 goods is used as money, as medium of exchange and unit of account, that army of arbitrageurs can be put to more productive uses. The user of tin needs to know only one price of tin: the price of tin in terms of money. He needs to be an expert in only two goods: tin, and money. He needs to be able to warehouse only two goods: tin, and money.”
Дальше следует толчение воды денежной политики в духе money make the World go round на э-э-э… шесте. “Any economy that was simple enough to work without money would also be simple enough to work without markets.”
О big data наименований цен Nick Rowe задумался, но и здесь тупой америкашке длины копчика не хватило. А вот детская вера во всемогущество Санкты и чулка… упалпацстол! À propos, иде енто чучелО видит деньги? Опять в чулочке у выхлопной трубы?