What is Wealth? Is Time Money?

The evolution of economics stems from the first time people got together to trade one possession for another. People now ascribe certain dollar amounts to certain items and services based upon how much supply and demand there are for that item or service. But what does that mean? When something has a high demand and a limited supply, the price for that item goes up.

Take a 120 ft luxury yacht, for example. There is a considerably low supply of them out there. But who demands them?

It would take someone making minimum wage years to save up for one. That person (let's call him Bob) could effectively translate the dollar amount of that boat into how many hours (or years) he would have to work to afford it, and in doing so, would probably not demand it at all. He probably wouldn't buy it for half price (unless he could quickly sell it). He would find something else to spend his money on. Lottery tickets, perhaps.

The man that employs Bob might be able to afford the boat after one month of work. Since the boat is considerably more attainable to him, his personal demand for it might be far greater than his employee's.

Now, lets assume that Bob's employer (let's call him Jeff) could not effectively make enough money to purchase the boat unless he has the assistance of Bob, whom he pays minimum wage. Bob's contribution to the business enables the business to make far more profit than if Bob was not there. Does Bob then deserve more compensation for his labor (or time)? At first glance, one might say yes. But what if Bob's task was extremely simple, and Bob could be replaced by virtually anyone? Replaced by anyone willing to take a lower share of the profits? Does he still "deserve" a bigger share of the profits? He certainly couldn't effectively negotiate for a bigger cut if there was always someone willing to take a smaller cut.

Bob is, in effect, selling his time at the going market value. Since he can be replaced easily, there is a very high supply for the time he can devote to a task. High supply=lower price. If Bob could possess any quality that would make him less replaceable, he could than demand a higher wage.

Jeff is also selling his time (the time involved in creating a item or service of value, which he then sells at the going rate). But Jeff has made his time far less replaceable, and has a higher price on it. In fact, one of the ways Jeff has done this is his ability to leverage Bob's time away from him. He is buying Bob's time for far less than Bob time is worth to him and selling it to someone else for a higher value. Jeff works the same amount of time as Bob. In that fact, they are equals. But Jeff's abilities are a multiplier to the value of his time.

Is it safe to say that people must either spend time to create something of value, or they (or someone else in the case of charity and gift) must sell time to buy something of value?

Does that mean that time is in fact money?

If you came to the realization that time is money, would that change how you spend tour time? Or how you spend your money?