The next chapter is going to be horribly depressing, you know. Harry is going to have to have it explained to him why it’s a bad idea to do things that are a bad idea. Otherwise this arc would have the wrong moral...
On the other hand, it’s now in Dumbledore’s interest to see Harry make a lot of money quickly in order to discharge the debt, which means he’s far more likely to approve of things that otherwise would be considered unacceptable, like:
1) Tricks with the Time Turner involving lotteries, stock markets, and the like.
2) The gold/silver arbitrage idea.
3) Personal appearance fees and other financial trading on his fame as The Boy Who Lived.
4) Calling in debts owed by other Imperiused or supposedly-Imperiused victims of Voldemort.
5) Dumbledore himself using the Philosopher’s/Sorcerer’s Stone to make a lot of gold.
In short, a sixty thousand Galleon debt, while it feels huge, is not obviously a major obstacle given the number of possible solutions already implicitly presented in HPMoR, and it would almost seem a cheat for it to be one
That wiping out the debt easily might have its own negative consequences, on the other hand, is potentially interesting.
Making gold probably breaks the ‘no counterfeit’ rule as far as the goblins are concerned. Before it was edited out, there was a bit where a goblin was suspicious of this in an early chapter. It was silver, but still.
Lucius has some kind of control over what Harry does because of the debt. That may limit some of these choices or just weaken them.
Harry doesn’t need to use the Time Tuner to make money on a stoke market. He just needs to open a stock market.
But Dumbledore hasn’t sacrificed his (twisted) ethics to suit his cause before. He is no more likely to do so now, just because it’s convenient. This latest event is probably not strong enough to make him twist his ethics again, if you believe he twisted them in the past.
But Dumbledore has given no sign that he finds it unethical to make money. All he’s said was “You’re not ready to play, I’m not going to give you the bankroll to upset the board”. If the cash is going to something this concrete and hard to abuse, he’d likely allow it. I doubt he’d abet with a method as easy as the Philosopher’s Stone, but he’d likely not stand in the way.
That would be arguing that you should be allowed to do something because of all the things you were not successfully disallowed to do. It does not necessarily follow and probably does not Dumbledoredly follow.
Before it was edited out, there was a bit where a goblin was suspicious of this in an early chapter. It was silver, but still.
Of course, I could be wrong, but given that it was considered a legitimate source of “as much money and life as you could want” in canon, I’d expect HPMoR would be more explicit if it were considered illegitimate in HPMoR. Griphook’s original reaction (which I have in a PDF I downloaded before the change) looked to me not like Griphook was wondering if Harry would be counterfeiting, and more like he thought Harry was planning to steal the Stone itself. (I assume it was edited out probably because the HP version of the stone, unlike the one in the AD&D DMGs, only makes metal into gold, and thus couldn’t make silver.)
I believe it was cut because it told Harry the Philosopher’s Stone exists. Harry is interested in eternal life, so finding out about the Stone would cause a confrontation EY means to save for the end.
“I mean, suppose I came in here with a ton of silver. Could I get a ton of Sickles made from it?”
“For a fee, Mr. Potter-Evans-Verres.” The goblin watched him with glittering eyes. “For a certain fee. Where would you find a ton of silver, I wonder? Surely you would not be… expecting to lay your hands upon a Philosopher’s Stone?”
“Griphook!” hissed McGonagall.
“A Philosopher’s Stone?” Harry said, puzzled.
“Perhaps not, then,” said the goblin. His body, which had been taut, seemed to relax slightly.
“I was speaking hypothetically,” Harry said. For now, at any rate.
While the current version says
“I mean, suppose I came in here with a ton of silver. Could I get a ton of Sickles made from it?”
“For a fee, Mr. Potter-Evans-Verres.” The goblin watched him with glittering eyes. “For a certain fee. Where would you find a ton of silver, I wonder?”
“I was speaking hypothetically,” Harry said. For now, at any rate.
Based on canon, the Stone was being removed from the care of Griphook’s organization at that time. It seems less likely he’d be concerned about theft and more likely he’d be concerned about what impact the Stone might have on his people.
It’s still a stab in the dark. But since pretty much the only thing we know about MoR!goblins is that they run ‘banks’ and they are in a constant state of war with counterfeiters, I think it’s the best guess possible without diving out of MoR and into canon even more.
Yes, it’s super sad to let a little girl be tortured to death. But there is a cost large enough that it is not worth paying to prevent it, even if the cost is only in terms of mere cash, political capital, personal reputation as not being more fearsome than Fear itself, keeping important military secrets for the coming war secret, and the enmity of those you failed to lose to. That’s the meaning of the phrase “Taboo Tradeoffs”, it’s that stating you kept Hermione out of Azkaban is not enough justification.
Of course, if he had counted the cost, he would have been an awful hypocrite. Recall what he said after Hermione rescued him from the Dementor:
I’ll say that no matter what it ends up costing you to have kissed me, don’t ever doubt for a second that it was the right thing to do.
At least he’s holding himself to the same standard, even if it’s a bad one.
A lot of people would pay a lot of money for a reputation for being more fearsome than fear itself. Speaking entirely in terms of money, I think that this was probably a clear cut good idea, because in the long run, for Harry, money is likely not to be a limited resource in practical terms. Sure, millions of dollars worth of gold could theoretically be used to save a lot more people, but Harry doesn’t have management of his account for the time being. By the time he’s old enough to actually access his account at will, his debt to Lucius is likely to be a triviality, or already dispensed with.
The math here depends entirely on what the “certain rights” Lucius has over Harry are. Were the debt a purely financial issue, saving Hermione would be a no-brainer. Did those rights allow Lucius to realistically cripple Harry’s efforts to fix the world, not saving Hermione would be a no-brainer.
We still don’t know, although the fact that Dumbledore ultimately went along with it suggests that it’s closer to the former than the latter.
Any political capital that could only be preserved by NOT rescuing a 12-year-old-girl from having her dreams, hopes, and life tortured out of her until she dies… isn’t political capital I’d be willing to preserve, frankly.
Also; consider the political capital he just GAINED that day. “The Boy-Who-Lived is so powerful that even Dementors fear him! Clearly, he is a power to be reckoned with!” <-- political capital out the wazzoo.
I think you are equivocating political power and political capital. Scaring dementors doesn’t show legitimacy quite the way winning elections does. In other words, political capital is a kind of political power, but not the only kind.
The blood debt was political capital. Scaring the dementor will create political power of another kind.
The next chapter is going to be horribly depressing, you know. Harry is going to have to have it explained to him why it’s a bad idea to do things that are a bad idea. Otherwise this arc would have the wrong moral...
On the other hand, it’s now in Dumbledore’s interest to see Harry make a lot of money quickly in order to discharge the debt, which means he’s far more likely to approve of things that otherwise would be considered unacceptable, like:
1) Tricks with the Time Turner involving lotteries, stock markets, and the like.
2) The gold/silver arbitrage idea.
3) Personal appearance fees and other financial trading on his fame as The Boy Who Lived.
4) Calling in debts owed by other Imperiused or supposedly-Imperiused victims of Voldemort.
5) Dumbledore himself using the Philosopher’s/Sorcerer’s Stone to make a lot of gold.
In short, a sixty thousand Galleon debt, while it feels huge, is not obviously a major obstacle given the number of possible solutions already implicitly presented in HPMoR, and it would almost seem a cheat for it to be one
That wiping out the debt easily might have its own negative consequences, on the other hand, is potentially interesting.
Making gold probably breaks the ‘no counterfeit’ rule as far as the goblins are concerned. Before it was edited out, there was a bit where a goblin was suspicious of this in an early chapter. It was silver, but still.
Lucius has some kind of control over what Harry does because of the debt. That may limit some of these choices or just weaken them.
Harry doesn’t need to use the Time Tuner to make money on a stoke market. He just needs to open a stock market.
But Dumbledore hasn’t sacrificed his (twisted) ethics to suit his cause before. He is no more likely to do so now, just because it’s convenient. This latest event is probably not strong enough to make him twist his ethics again, if you believe he twisted them in the past.
But Dumbledore has given no sign that he finds it unethical to make money. All he’s said was “You’re not ready to play, I’m not going to give you the bankroll to upset the board”. If the cash is going to something this concrete and hard to abuse, he’d likely allow it. I doubt he’d abet with a method as easy as the Philosopher’s Stone, but he’d likely not stand in the way.
That is convincing and I’d change my post if this was that sort of place.
Still, with more that six years before the debt comes due, Dumbldoe can say the same thing, “Not old enough.”
And Harry can say, “Old enough to storm Azkaban. Old enough to get Lucius Malfoy to back down. Old enough to be deeply in debt.”
That would be arguing that you should be allowed to do something because of all the things you were not successfully disallowed to do. It does not necessarily follow and probably does not Dumbledoredly follow.
Of course, I could be wrong, but given that it was considered a legitimate source of “as much money and life as you could want” in canon, I’d expect HPMoR would be more explicit if it were considered illegitimate in HPMoR. Griphook’s original reaction (which I have in a PDF I downloaded before the change) looked to me not like Griphook was wondering if Harry would be counterfeiting, and more like he thought Harry was planning to steal the Stone itself. (I assume it was edited out probably because the HP version of the stone, unlike the one in the AD&D DMGs, only makes metal into gold, and thus couldn’t make silver.)
Would you please quote that passage here?
I believe it was cut because it told Harry the Philosopher’s Stone exists. Harry is interested in eternal life, so finding out about the Stone would cause a confrontation EY means to save for the end.
While the current version says
Thank you.
Based on canon, the Stone was being removed from the care of Griphook’s organization at that time. It seems less likely he’d be concerned about theft and more likely he’d be concerned about what impact the Stone might have on his people.
It’s still a stab in the dark. But since pretty much the only thing we know about MoR!goblins is that they run ‘banks’ and they are in a constant state of war with counterfeiters, I think it’s the best guess possible without diving out of MoR and into canon even more.
Dunno about that. The debt will have concsequences, certainly, but Hermione is not in Azkaban.
Yes, it’s super sad to let a little girl be tortured to death. But there is a cost large enough that it is not worth paying to prevent it, even if the cost is only in terms of mere cash, political capital, personal reputation as not being more fearsome than Fear itself, keeping important military secrets for the coming war secret, and the enmity of those you failed to lose to. That’s the meaning of the phrase “Taboo Tradeoffs”, it’s that stating you kept Hermione out of Azkaban is not enough justification.
Of course, if he had counted the cost, he would have been an awful hypocrite. Recall what he said after Hermione rescued him from the Dementor:
At least he’s holding himself to the same standard, even if it’s a bad one.
A lot of people would pay a lot of money for a reputation for being more fearsome than fear itself. Speaking entirely in terms of money, I think that this was probably a clear cut good idea, because in the long run, for Harry, money is likely not to be a limited resource in practical terms. Sure, millions of dollars worth of gold could theoretically be used to save a lot more people, but Harry doesn’t have management of his account for the time being. By the time he’s old enough to actually access his account at will, his debt to Lucius is likely to be a triviality, or already dispensed with.
The math here depends entirely on what the “certain rights” Lucius has over Harry are. Were the debt a purely financial issue, saving Hermione would be a no-brainer. Did those rights allow Lucius to realistically cripple Harry’s efforts to fix the world, not saving Hermione would be a no-brainer.
We still don’t know, although the fact that Dumbledore ultimately went along with it suggests that it’s closer to the former than the latter.
The cost wouldn’t be worth it, except that it may well allow Harry to amass wealth in excess of what he had before if he plays his cards right.
Any political capital that could only be preserved by NOT rescuing a 12-year-old-girl from having her dreams, hopes, and life tortured out of her until she dies… isn’t political capital I’d be willing to preserve, frankly.
Also; consider the political capital he just GAINED that day. “The Boy-Who-Lived is so powerful that even Dementors fear him! Clearly, he is a power to be reckoned with!” <-- political capital out the wazzoo.
I think you are equivocating political power and political capital. Scaring dementors doesn’t show legitimacy quite the way winning elections does. In other words, political capital is a kind of political power, but not the only kind.
The blood debt was political capital. Scaring the dementor will create political power of another kind.
I’m not equivocating; I’m equating. Political power is political capital; political capital is political power. If you have one, you have the other.