I know - and I don't either. But we need to be consistent in how we talk about companies that have a revenue stream they create at a systemic cost to everyone: this is (from the companies') perspective, "building value."
By that argument the KLF were building value when they made a million quid with the express intention of setting it all on fire. And they possibly were, in artistic terms.
However, if we are talking about people who are just shifting money around without creating anything other than unnecessary work, then they are a cost to the wider economy, they are not increasing it's value.
To be fair the cost of burning 1 million dollars is only the cost to print and transport the money.
Assuming it only costs 10c to print a $20 bill then the cost to society of the act was a meagre $5000. I imagine the entertainment value provided would been worth more than $5000. Thus the act could have been a net gain for society.
The other $995,000 would have been redistributed through-out the money supply in the form of deflation.
