If that statement is true then how would new money get put into circulation because money is not just “out there”. Money is a manmade product that has to be manufactured.
I’ve never watched zietgiest.
and that is true, but when that money is spent back to the bank to pay off a loan the principle part of that loan is written off the books and extuiguished drying up the money supply. Do you understand that there is no money until someone borrows it from a private commericial bank and when that loan is paid back that money is written off the books?
my grandmother is debt free. explain this conundrum…
Your begging the question that new money needs to be created and enter into circulation. This is faulty logic and I have pointed out your circular reasoning in the past. When will you stop your faulty logic and actually think? For that matter read up on logical fallacies, your arguments are riddled with them.
Why does new money need to enter into circulation?
Answer that Tom
Simple, she has captured someone else’s borrowed money.
Because in our modern society we are dependent on money in order for it to work. All the ‘money’ that is in circulation right now is only temporarily in circulation and will be removed from circulation when the principle part of those loans are paid back. If no new money is put into circulation, in time 100% of the money will be pulled out of circulation. If you think you can live through that you’re either crazy, or a pretty good canabilist. There is no such thing as permanant money in our debt money system. Under a wealth money system you would have permanant money and you would only have to put enough in to satisfy the purchasing requirements of society.
Money is created when loans are issued and debts incurred; money is extinguished when loans are repaid" - Congressional research service.
Ok the primary reason this thread has been going on for 10 pages now is because you are incapable of formulating a coherent argument. Your jumping around from point to point not directly addressing any one of our questions. Since your incapable of using plain english to speak I’ll paraphrase your argument.
Try staying to a single point. We will go point by point refuting each of them. Stop going in circles and stop repeating yourself.
You have an asinine understanding of money and an even worse solution. I’ll lump you with Larry since you agreed with him as much and go through your solution piece by piece. You argue that our recent financial termoils are not related to any business cycle but to money mysticism. You even blatently and outright denied the ABCT.
So you want to believe the fairy tail that all money is dept. You want the nation to forgive all dept and make the money neutral. Since the money is only a unit of exchange and therefore only a representation of a nations wealth, and since the actual money really wasn’t dept at all but a representation of that nations wealth nothing happens. Step one literally does NOTHING to the state of the economy. No improvement is made, in fact a net loss would occur for the administrative overhead of moving the Fed beaucracy from the Fed to the Federal Reserve of the US GOv. Ignoring that point however, Step one literally does nothing to the wealth of the country. Nothing. It does not magically make new steal appear. It does not magically produce 1 billion new ipods instantaneously. It does not rain gold from the sky. It doesn’t even change the money supply stock. Since what you believe is a fairy tail at any rate, nothing happens. No “REAL” wealth is lost, and no “REAL” wealth is gained. Money is not wealth, it can only ever be a representation of wealth. That rule would apply gold or fiat currencies alike.
Reasoning for this step? All you’ve done here is changed violent cartelization of banking from government sponsored to government hosted. Both systems are a banking monopoly existing only by the means of violence. This step will not improve the health of the banking industry. All you’ve done is shifted around the mafia participants a bit, you didn’t dismantle the mafia. You just moved the goods from one gang to the next.
You don’t even know correctly what “Fractional Lending” means. You only know what this idiot boyl has told you.
If lending institutions are legally prevented from making money there will be no lending. This step shows a fundamental mis-understanding you and your cranks have regarding the roll of interest. The concept that credit should be free is akin to going to the store and believing all milk should be free. It’s lunacy which is pretty much what you represent. Goods and services are not free. If lending was interest free, and therefore free of charge there would be an insane demand for loans and we’d have the business cycle situation we have today. Not too mention then you actually would have rampant inflation.
Interest does not create new money. We’ve proven this before. I’ll prove it again.
If I lend you 10 gallons of gasoline with 10% interest. Do you fabricate the other 1 gallon of gasoline out of thin air?No you need to save up an additional 1 Gallon of gasoline and pay me back plus my principle. No NEW gasoline appeared out of the sky like magic, you took it from savings. You are the equivalent of a modern mystic believing such folly.
Now I think what we need to do here is correct an elementary cognitive error where you beleive that the wealth of a nation is tied to money. Money is not wealth, not in our system or any system. Gold money is not wealth, silver money is not wealth. Wealth is a collection of things that consumers find desirable. Most people in our country who have “savings” don’t own savings in dollars but in commodities, stocks, and other various investment models. They are invested in the “economy”. The dollars we have are mearly representations that the economic system as a whole has. If your economy increases output your purchasing power also increases dollar for dollar. No new dollars need to enter the system. The same quantity of dollars can represent a newer more plentiful quantity of goods and services. This is how an economy grows. Economy’s growing are not pegged directly to growth of the dollar perse. If that were true we could just print ourselves to wealth. Whats funny here is this point contradicts your entire premise but you seem to believe it. Your own arguments contradict themselves.
Now radical fluctuations in a money supply does cause problems. A currency swap would definately cause some problems, big problems to be sure. But your little system of swapping our banking system out isn’t going make 1 million pounds of useable steel appear out of the sky over night. It won’t generate any new economic wealth.
Whats worse is your solution is basically a point for point clone of the existing system. Your solution didn’t address any of the supposed concerns you’ve brought up. Though it’s hard to folow your concerns because you seem incapable of directly answering any point and you constant;y repeat refuted points.
You also seem to have a full arsenal of logical fallacies waiting to be used by you. Look lets be honest, you fail at debate, fail at reading comprehension, and probably fail at making us believe your crankish conspiracy theory’s.
Wrong.
This is a baseless assertion. It’s not reality however. Units of exchange are discovered on the market on their own.
How do we put banana’s into circulation? Banana’s are not just “out there”.
People acquire banana’s on the market. It’s not for us to dictate the most efficient way for them to purchase banana’s and it’s not for us to dictate how many banana’s they should have. To assume this is to assume to have the knowledge of the needs of every man women child on the planet. I doubt you are the omniscient being the prophets told us about. But you are to be sure a modern mystic.
False. We are dependent on the dollar only because we are violent compelled to do so. In the absence of the us government who knows what unit of exchange we would use. It would definitely not be federal reserve notes.
Oh yes i’ve heard this. And our lives will be like it was in Mad Max, and meteors will fall from the sky, and pigs will fly and all that shit right? The usual garbage for you today? Would you like some creme in your garbage latte?
There is no such thing is as “Money as Dept”.
Wealth money system is an arbitrary term that conceptually is identical to the “Money as Dept” system. But since you’ve changed the name semantically you think it’s somehow different. Since you don’t know jack shit I don’t expect you to understand this. Semantics do often effect the less informed much more.
P.S. Stop posting random non cited quotes. =p
Captured?
It is not as if the loaned money then disappears into a black hole. This money can be used to pay the bank workers who could use it for buying their own things or it can be loaned out again all the while the borrow is providing labor power in whatever sphere in which he/she is being compensated and thus acquiring the money necessary to pay off interest. I have student loans from my undergraduate years…must I borrow money to pay off borrowed money? The principle of it is absurd.
A Note on Mathematical Economics by Murray N. Rothbard
Looks like they should read this then. [:)]
Maybe this video series can help you understand how the mechanics of modern money works and why we are having such hard financial times.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FxiTbrlGJGs part 1
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h22UjKwI7rI part 2
These videos focus directly on how our monetary system really works when you cut all the fluff and spin away. I’ll agree with you that it is absurd that we have to borrow money to pay off borrowed money, but that is just how our system works. It’s more than absurd, it’s impossible. The interest is never created in our system.
Who ever said i was trying to predict human action with math? What I can predict, and mathematically prove is that it’s clearly impossible for all of us to get out of debt when all the money is created as an interest bearing debt.
Captured, gained, traded, engaged in commerce for, ect… Captured might not be a commonly used term but its probably the most accurate. Most people would say grandma made some money and has no debt but that is misleading because money is only made in private commercial banks when they issue loans.
Wealth Money is money that is brough into circulation that is neither an obligation of the issuer or the user. Under our current system of debt money it’s an obligation of both the issuer and the borrower. Both principly different.
So corn, fish, tasty buds, or troll droppings could be good wealth money?
I’m guessing you’ve recently seen Zeitgeist Addendum?
If not, don’t worry - it’s repeating the same errors and fallacies you are.
Here is page 191-192 from The Creature From Jekyll Island; G. Edward Griffin - not an Austrian from what I know though;
WHO CREATES THE MONEY TO PAY THE INTEREST?
One of the most perplexing questions associated with this process is “Where does the money come from to pay the interest?” If you borrow $10,000 from a bank at 9%, you owe $10,900. But the bank only manufactures $10,000 for the loan. It would seem, therefore, that there is no way that you - and all others with similar loans - can possibly pay off your indebtedness. The amount of money put into circulation just isn’t enough to cover the total debt, including interest. This has led some to the conclusion that it is necessary for you to borrow the $900 for the interest, and that, in turn, leads to still more interest. The assumption is that, the more we borrow, the more we have to borrow, and that debt based on fiat money is a never-ending spiral leading inexorably to more and more debt.
This is a partial truth. It is true that there is not enough money created to include the interest, but it is a fallacy that the only way to pay it back is to borrow still more. The assumption fails to take into account the exchange value of labor. Let us assume that you pay back your $10,000 loan at the rate of approximately $900 per month and that about $80 of that represents interest. You realize you are hard pressed to make your payments so you decide to take on a part-time job. The bank, on the other hand, is now making $80 profit each month on your loan. Since this amount is classified as “interest,” it is not extinguished as is the larger portion which is a return of the loan itself. So this remains as spendable money in the account of the bank. The decision then is made to have the bank’s floors waxed once a week. You respond to the ad in the paper and are hired at $80 per month to do the job. The result is that you earn the money to pay the interest on your loan, and - this is the point -the money you receive is the same money that you previously had paid. As long as you perform labor for the bank each month, the same dollars go into the bank as interest, then out the revolving door as your wages, and then back into the bank as loan repayment.
It is not necessary that you work directly for the bank. No matter where you earn the money, its origin was a bank, and its ultimate destination is a bank. The loop through which it travels can be large or small, but the fact remains all interest is paid eventually by human effort. And the significance of that fact is even more startling than the assumption that not enough money is created to pay back the interest. It is that the total of this human effort ultimately is for the benefit of those who create fiat money. It is a form of modern serfdom in which the great mass of society works as indentured servants to a ruling class of financial nobility.
If you monetized them as a wealth then yes they could be wealth money, but if you monetized them as a debt then they would be debt money. I wouldn’t condsider those to be good money though. Corn is heavy and rots, fish smell, tasty buds? We know why you’re an austrian now, and troll droppings? I didn’t think trolls exsisted so that might not be on the list.
It really matters not what money is made of but the principles it functions under. Clearly what we use for money works. Anyone can see that, what most people can’t see/understand is the effects of a interest bearing debt money system, and the effects that has on their personal life.