Donate Bitcoin

Donate Paypal


PeakOil is You

PeakOil is You

What if there was Zero debt?

Discussions about the economic and financial ramifications of PEAK OIL

Re: What if there was Zero debt?

Unread postby onlooker » Fri 03 Nov 2017, 08:00:10

Well in fact, the skeptics should take note because Care is precisely describing the makeup of where currencies are headed and it fits into this model which the planet desperately needs of a currency or currencies that may not be able to be taxed and which does not afford the opportunity for centralized money issuance. As Ibon asked it seems these cryptocurrencies are thus not easily monitored.

So, this in fact again as Care said a Internet currency in its distributed local non central aspect. As for Lending and Debt, if people are not taxed on these online funds then presumably they do not need lending to acquire "money". Their funds are personal and available only to them. This also lends itself to this asset/capital based form of lending when people or entities wish to engage in it. Collateral is held or offered as guarantee in the lending process and loans are meticulously accounted for by the actual wealth held by all. So no endless funny money printing/lending. And so we can start to get an actual truthful picture of values and worth of entities and assets rather than the distorted one now because of this rampant currency creation and lending. So, this is certainly a great step in the right direction.
“"If you think the economy is more important than the environment, try holding your breath while counting your money"”
User avatar
onlooker
Fusion
Fusion
 
Posts: 7967
Joined: Sun 10 Nov 2013, 12:49:04
Location: NY, USA

Re: What if there was Zero debt?

Unread postby evilgenius » Fri 03 Nov 2017, 10:22:32

I issue anybody who wants to read it a warning about crypto currencies. They are a false panacea. The most dangerous thing about them is that they are not linked to risk taking, in the form of debt. The fact that debt exists for something substantial provides for issuance of more debt based upon the future expectation of the repatriation of the money loaned plus interest. Because there is a legitimate expectation that people will pay back their loans more money can be loaned based upon that expectation. The supply doesn't grow because of coin mining. The money doesn't move around strictly as a substitute for bartering. Capital is allocated based upon need and opportunity. The great thing about fiat money is that it is linked in that way. The size of the money supply, therefore, is linked to the amount of either need or want within society. The problems outlined in this thread mostly pertain to how the size of the money supply mostly relies upon want rather than need. As such, there is an inherent disconnect between activity and repatriation. People take on too much debt without corresponding return and the burden of it actually slows them down financially.

The will to power stradles both need and want. It recognizes what a person considers fulfills them, in the form of purpose. It allows people to borrow in order to achieve their purpose. It's not the fault of the idea that people will use it to indebt themselves for trinkets or a fleeting romance with illusion. The idea's best intention is to provide people who see a profit making opportunity with the means to capitalize upon that opportunity. The will to power is best described as a means for entrepreneurs to go into business.

The problems in America greatly coincide with the development of credit cards. Not just cards, but a mentality that debt is for fun. Those stem out of a need to fund a system of largess toward elites who the system had to whore to in order to gain control over the political natures they came from. In so doing they prevent resources from being used by the people from whose countries the resources are extracted, and, instead, used by the consumers back home.
User avatar
evilgenius
Fission
Fission
 
Posts: 2234
Joined: Tue 06 Dec 2005, 03:00:00
Location: Stopped at the border.

Re: What if there was Zero debt?

Unread postby onlooker » Fri 03 Nov 2017, 15:42:42

Good thoughts Evil. However, I intrinsically disagree with the bedrock core of your argument. Risk taking is another anachronism of the age of expansion and growth. We are into the age of contraction whereby risk taking and profit even should become obsolete. Yes, I know the hard core Capitalists will wince at what I am saying. But, hear me out. The age of contraction will be characterizes by scarcity and real need. The whole idea is to set us in balance with nature and with the resources, so that nobody will be in need. A collective effort is needed rather than lone wolves trying to secure their survival and enhance their well being. This mentality is counterproductive for humanity to maintain some semblance of coherence and harmonious living. Capitalism via the profit motive and risk taking is inherently lone wolf maneuvers and indulgences. An effort to share and care for one another is not consistent with this maverick mentality.
So cryptocurrencies offer a right step towards a society whereby lending and risk taking will be bought under control. You will lose your money if you gamble/lend it away. People will become much more circumspect with the use of their funds, as they will not have the System or Borrowing to bail them out. The whole idea is to set frugality and wise use of limited funds as a high priority among everyone. This cannot be accomplished if we maintain remnants of this insatiable greed oriented system and its elements which encourage this mentality.
“"If you think the economy is more important than the environment, try holding your breath while counting your money"”
User avatar
onlooker
Fusion
Fusion
 
Posts: 7967
Joined: Sun 10 Nov 2013, 12:49:04
Location: NY, USA

Re: What if there was Zero debt?

Unread postby kanon » Fri 03 Nov 2017, 16:05:37

careinke wrote:Nice thread, I enjoyed reading it.

It was particularly of interest to me, since I recently swallowed the red pill, about money. Specifically with crypto currencies and the block chain. I believe your arguments about who should control the money, and how it can be manipulated to achieve various outcomes, will become irrelevant. As irrelevant as people arguing how we are going to fit a million horses in NYC in 1911.

No one should control money. Just as Separation of Church and State led to greater freedoms and prosperity. The upcoming Separation of State and Currency will lead to increased monetary freedom for the entire world. . . . No one will be able to stop, divert or confiscate, transactions between consenting parties. Each individual will be their own bank with much greater security of your currency. Face it, if you trust someone else with your money, they will eventually steal it, they may even do it in such a clever way you don't even notice it (think inflation).

* * * *
We used to have a BOLD Prediction thread, so here is mine:
In less than five years the current monetary system will be completely disrupted. Banks, credit unions, government currencies, and most jobs involving financial middlemen, will become significantly less important than today . . . .

Very interesting comment. I would note that recently I experienced an internet outage due to an erroneous DNS setup by Spectrum. The bitcoin world comes to a screeching halt in that type of situation. Beyond the obvious dependency on technology, the weakness of bitcoin as money is exactly the virtues the proponents talk about. Money is not about independence or freedom. Money is about people interacting in a society, keeping score, and obtaining economic efficiency. The ability to achieve prosperity, i.e. leisure and resources, is either through interdependence or a very favorable environment. Money systems are created as much for the purposes of the state as for public benefit. The nature of the money system is important because it makes a huge difference in the quality and capabilities of the society.

I have read articles that claim the internet has lead to a media where people prefer echo chambers, limiting their information to items that support their worldview. Perhaps bitcoin is the currency for this type of society, with a blockchain for each like-minded group.

I think the independence argument for bitcoin ignores the extensive technology and resources that are needed to sustain a blockchain. I do not think it is necessary to crack the blockchain code to control bitcoin. Since it has to be transmitted through the internet it should be simple enough to block the transmission until a toll is paid, See tcpdump. And there is the complete record in the blockchain itself, so bitcoin offers absolutely no privacy from anyone who can read the blockchain record.

My guess is that bitcoin was getting used as a way to transmit money out of China. to hide transactions, and otherwise avoid assorted gatekeepers. But the speculative bubble surrounding bitcoin has generated a lot of excitement and the speculation is probably the main reason for bitcoin popularity. I know it is compared to precious metals, but don't agree that is a substitute because it depends on the internet. I don't compare it to the tulip mania because I think there is value in the blockchain technology. However, value in the token itself has not been important for money.

I don't quite know what to make of bitcoin at this point, and I expect the picture will continue to change. For now, I am a bitcoin skeptic.
kanon
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 246
Joined: Fri 24 Oct 2014, 08:04:07

Re: What if there was Zero debt?

Unread postby radon1 » Fri 03 Nov 2017, 17:33:28

Nobody is controlling the money. Who is?
radon1
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 1953
Joined: Thu 27 Jun 2013, 05:09:44

Re: What if there was Zero debt?

Unread postby careinke » Fri 03 Nov 2017, 19:06:31

radon1 wrote:Nobody is controlling the money. Who is?

Nobody :) it's basically a ledger that is distributed across the globe. It's a new technology, the only way to kill it would be to turn off the internet worldwide destroy all computers and cell phones. Even then, its probably stored somewhere. Outlawing bitcoin is like outlawing the wheel, it's a losing proposition.

On second thought, in bitcoins case, the person owning the bitcoin controls the money. Bitcoin let's everyone be a banker. Plus you don't need anyone's permission to do it.
Cliff (Start a rEVOLution, grow a garden)
User avatar
careinke
Fission
Fission
 
Posts: 3444
Joined: Mon 01 Jan 2007, 03:00:00
Location: Pacific Northwest

Re: What if there was Zero debt?

Unread postby kanon » Sat 04 Nov 2017, 12:03:55

I appears that the global elites are two steps ahead of the reformers. The scenario in this article is for some crisis in 2018 to open the door to the SDR international money system, controlled by the IMF. The Economic End Game Continues. Ironic that the bitcoin advocates are pawns in the game.
When The Economist in 1988 called for a global currency to launch in 2018, they were perhaps not aware of the exact form the destructor would take. Even in 2014 I was not fully convinced we had enough evidence on what that unit of measurement would be or look like. Today, it is clear as crystal — the one world currency system will not only be a cashless system, but it will also be based on digital blockchain technology.

As I examined in my article ‘The Globalist One World Currency Will Look A Lot Like Bitcoin,’ while some politicians and banking moguls publicly attack blockchain-based products like Bitcoin or Etherium, in the background they are actually heavily invested in these systems and are even building their own. With central banking mascots like Ben Bernanke becoming keynote speakers at blockchain conferences, it is not exactly an elusive secret that the global banks love blockchain tech.
. . . .
What is interesting to me is that even in the highly vigilant world of alternative economics, which is well aware of the trend towards a global currency system, blockchain systems are still revered as if they will save us from central bank tyranny. Very few people have noticed that The Economist call for a 2018 one world monetary framework has arrived slightly early; it has been right under our noses for several years. With blockchain-based methods of exchange, a replacement structure for the dollar and all other national currencies is not very far away.

I don't want to be a conspiracy theorist, but like so many such theories, this one is in plain sight if one will only look at it. It works out to near total control of global society through the money system. Money becomes simply an accounting ledger with electronic access, secured by bitcoin blockchain. If the powers that be don't like you, they simply disable your bitcoin code. International payment balances would also be more manageable in this scenario. This would be, IMHO, a move to solidify the corporate feudalism system.
kanon
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 246
Joined: Fri 24 Oct 2014, 08:04:07

Re: What if there was Zero debt?

Unread postby evilgenius » Sat 04 Nov 2017, 14:21:21

onlooker wrote:Good thoughts Evil. However, I intrinsically disagree with the bedrock core of your argument. Risk taking is another anachronism of the age of expansion and growth. We are into the age of contraction whereby risk taking and profit even should become obsolete. Yes, I know the hard core Capitalists will wince at what I am saying. But, hear me out. The age of contraction will be characterizes by scarcity and real need. The whole idea is to set us in balance with nature and with the resources, so that nobody will be in need. A collective effort is needed rather than lone wolves trying to secure their survival and enhance their well being. This mentality is counterproductive for humanity to maintain some semblance of coherence and harmonious living. Capitalism via the profit motive and risk taking is inherently lone wolf maneuvers and indulgences. An effort to share and care for one another is not consistent with this maverick mentality.
So cryptocurrencies offer a right step towards a society whereby lending and risk taking will be bought under control. You will lose your money if you gamble/lend it away. People will become much more circumspect with the use of their funds, as they will not have the System or Borrowing to bail them out. The whole idea is to set frugality and wise use of limited funds as a high priority among everyone. This cannot be accomplished if we maintain remnants of this insatiable greed oriented system and its elements which encourage this mentality.


I don't think so because what you describe is very much like the factory situation under communism in the 20th Century. I used to read a lot of communist economists. That was a long time ago, so I don't recall the details. What occurred there, though, was hoarding of factory resources. The incentives simply weren't in place such that those who were capable could produce according to their ability. And the structure of them was such that the factories couldn't be organized by command to do so. Productivity was unable to reach what those who looked at the thing believed it should have. The strange thing was that it wasn't for the reasons that people who just heard about the outcome would guess, that there was an inefficient pipeline of materials, or that the workers didn't feel they wanted to work. I can't remember the particulars, as I said, but the reason had more to do with an inherent fault in command dynamics that decision makers found lead them that way. They actually got rewarded for hoarding.

It isn't just risk taking, in the strictest sense that risk taking brings about a visible outcome within society, by the way, that defines the dynamic condition of fiat money. That's an important aspect, but, since money is only worth what the people believe it to be, repatriation is more important than risk taking. The fact that people borrow money and then keep their word about paying it back is very important. Without that the level of supply cannot be trusted. Stop gap measures aside, without repayment more loans cannot be made on the expectation of repayment. If it is bad enough, the level of money supply can shrink, especially in relation to demand. That can be good in the sense that money supply under fiat money is dynamic, and responds to the real activity of the people within the economy. The downside, as people here have rightly criticized the scheme, is that it makes the thing manipulable. It can be made to benefit political concerns. Lack of proper function can be made up with investment brought from the outside.
User avatar
evilgenius
Fission
Fission
 
Posts: 2234
Joined: Tue 06 Dec 2005, 03:00:00
Location: Stopped at the border.

Re: What if there was Zero debt?

Unread postby vtsnowedin » Sat 04 Nov 2017, 15:15:07

" They pretend to pay us so we pretend to work"
User avatar
vtsnowedin
Anti-Matter
Anti-Matter
 
Posts: 8028
Joined: Fri 11 Jul 2008, 02:00:00

Re: What if there was Zero debt?

Unread postby onlooker » Sat 04 Nov 2017, 15:32:35

Interesting Evil but the point is not to achieve super efficiency or productivity, the point is to have an economic system that will attend to EVERYONE'S needs (not wants). One must exit from the Capitalistic mindset and imagine the world vastly different. This brave new world will require precisely that hoarding in times of particular scarcity, it will require unprecedented amount of cooperation and a genuine caring between people and sharing between them. This is because scarcity will be a constant menance and so resources should be meted out fairly and equally among all. And no room for wants but only needs. Perhaps I am going a bit beyond the timeline the rest of you are and am focusing on a truly collapsed world economy and situation and how our species should deal with that. Oh and V, for all the dysfunctions of Communist systems in the 20th century, how many people within those systems truly starved or were truly destitute.? Contrast that with the homeless situation in the US and the dire situation of many in the poorer countries. I am not advocating Communism but neither for a second do I believe Capitalism will function adequately for most in a Contracting and downward spiraling world and regional Economy.
“"If you think the economy is more important than the environment, try holding your breath while counting your money"”
User avatar
onlooker
Fusion
Fusion
 
Posts: 7967
Joined: Sun 10 Nov 2013, 12:49:04
Location: NY, USA

Re: What if there was Zero debt?

Unread postby GHung » Sat 04 Nov 2017, 16:15:56

vtsnowedin wrote:" They pretend to pay us so we pretend to work"


Where's that? McDonalds? Walmart?
Blessed are the Meek, for they shall inherit nothing but their Souls. - Anonymous Ghung Person
User avatar
GHung
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 1775
Joined: Tue 08 Sep 2009, 15:06:11
Location: Moksha, Nearvana

Re: What if there was Zero debt?

Unread postby Plantagenet » Sat 04 Nov 2017, 16:40:00

onlooker wrote:...the point is not to achieve super efficiency or productivity, the point is to have an economic system that will attend to EVERYONE'S needs (not wants).


In every society there are a certain number of people who don’t have the ability and/or any interest in working.

The point of an economic is not to cater to the drug addicted or the talentless but to unleash the intellect, innovation and energy of the talented class, and then to get out of way as they create products, companies and jobs jobs jobs

Cheers!

"Its a brave new world"
---President Obama, 4/25/16
"Il bel far niente"
---traditional Italian saying
User avatar
Plantagenet
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 20514
Joined: Mon 09 Apr 2007, 02:00:00
Location: Alaska (its much bigger than Texas).

Re: What if there was Zero debt?

Unread postby vtsnowedin » Sat 04 Nov 2017, 16:42:55

GHung wrote:
vtsnowedin wrote:" They pretend to pay us so we pretend to work"


Where's that? McDonalds? Walmart?
The quote comes from Soviet controlled Poland. I don't recall who said it first.
User avatar
vtsnowedin
Anti-Matter
Anti-Matter
 
Posts: 8028
Joined: Fri 11 Jul 2008, 02:00:00

Re: What if there was Zero debt?

Unread postby onlooker » Sat 04 Nov 2017, 16:48:25

GHung wrote:
vtsnowedin wrote:" They pretend to pay us so we pretend to work"


Where's that? McDonalds? Walmart?

:razz: :lol:
“"If you think the economy is more important than the environment, try holding your breath while counting your money"”
User avatar
onlooker
Fusion
Fusion
 
Posts: 7967
Joined: Sun 10 Nov 2013, 12:49:04
Location: NY, USA

Re: What if there was Zero debt?

Unread postby evilgenius » Sun 05 Nov 2017, 10:16:02

onlooker wrote:Interesting Evil but the point is not to achieve super efficiency or productivity, the point is to have an economic system that will attend to EVERYONE'S needs (not wants). One must exit from the Capitalistic mindset and imagine the world vastly different. This brave new world will require precisely that hoarding in times of particular scarcity, it will require unprecedented amount of cooperation and a genuine caring between people and sharing between them. This is because scarcity will be a constant menance and so resources should be meted out fairly and equally among all. And no room for wants but only needs. Perhaps I am going a bit beyond the timeline the rest of you are and am focusing on a truly collapsed world economy and situation and how our species should deal with that. Oh and V, for all the dysfunctions of Communist systems in the 20th century, how many people within those systems truly starved or were truly destitute.? Contrast that with the homeless situation in the US and the dire situation of many in the poorer countries. I am not advocating Communism but neither for a second do I believe Capitalism will function adequately for most in a Contracting and downward spiraling world and regional Economy.


I see what you mean in reaching toward a future point. I don't agree that we have to go there. That point is one of permanent scarcity. It's not only conceivable under communist or pseudo communist systems, but also under capitalism. The fault in communism has been widely delineated. Only people who talk about resource depletion and the dangers to the planet, like on this site, even begin to get at how it appears under capitalism. Command structures are dangerous things. Communism isn't the only place where they appear. When corporate governance is monopolar it, at the very least, mimics what goes on under command dynamics. It leads right to the tragedy of the commons. Worse, it takes us there and then is golden parachute blind to the reality of the environment it lives in.

The fact is, however, that there has been a lot of push back from within various places against the monopolar structure. Increasingly, ideas that stress the viability of stakeholders both within and without corporations have been put forward. Management has become, at least in theory, about empowerment rather than nut cutting. Some have even begun to ask what it means to return value to shareholders. And these things don't just reside in academia. Efforts to rein in corporate conceit have been going on for some time. Probably you could cite the meat boycotts of the 70's, which took a procedural nod from the anti-nuclear movement's success at getting publicity, as one of the first examples. Granted, very much like the anti-nuclear movement's actual success, they didn't amount to much.

I know it's very popular to bash political correctness, but look at the power it has today in comparison to the flailing nature of the consumer boycotts of the 70's. And, if you think it takes sides, you can ask Harvey Weinstein about the power it has to root out the establishment in any context. But those things are still disconnected in a grave way from the immediate needs of the people. They don't speak to forming any kind of consensus around the idea of prospering the individual genius evident in humanity. They're mostly an elevated means of complaint. Complaint, at its root, is a form of unbelief. As I've been saying, money needs belief in order to exist as any sort of effective fungible mechanism for facilitating both the demands and wants of the people. PC chips at want, yes, but teaching people to avoid getting into needless or excessive credit card debt as a means toward understanding how a person can actually use debt to help them succeed might leap chasms in comparison to it.

While we're at it, doing something about usury wouldn't be such a bad thing. Usury is like applying math that comes to infinities to everyday life. The very idea that it is acceptable to squeeze a human being like that should be egregious on its face, but we allow it. I ask you, whatever happened to stewardship? Shouldn't those in charge of lending seek assurance of repayment? Why do we allow these situations where it's ok to lend to persons of high credit risk at very high interest rates? There are other avenues within society to address inequality than making a new kind of slave of them. The situation gets swept under the rug because it feeds the sort of thing which channels both money and power toward this vainglorious order I've been speaking about in this thread wherein a segment of the US system obtains global dominance. It feeds right into both the monopolar corporate order, and the subconscious arguments having to do with how the world has always been a certain way that can support it. Usury wears the guise of being punitive, and in that way teach something, but what it really does is service the system with a meet the minimum payment monthly supply of cash.
User avatar
evilgenius
Fission
Fission
 
Posts: 2234
Joined: Tue 06 Dec 2005, 03:00:00
Location: Stopped at the border.

Re: What if there was Zero debt?

Unread postby onlooker » Sun 05 Nov 2017, 11:46:17

Very good thoughts as usual Evil. Now as for the question of where our modern technological civilization is headed, that is an open question. However, I think the preponderance of data and evidence would suggest we are headed for a rather steep fall. So again my concern is how to liberate ourselves from the presumptions and the basic premise that our advanced industrialization and technology wiill endure and by extension the Capitalistic system which flourishes in this environment.

My interest in thus to debunk all the narratives that contain in one way or the other this basic assumption. The age of Contraction will be radically different than the age of Growth. In some ways our economic systems will have to function in a diametrically opposed manner. Many are already giving thought to this and a form of Restorative Ecologically balanced living in being touted now by increasing numbers of people. Of course at the root of this transition will be our Economic system.

It is quite apparent to me that the elite currently of this planet seek to perpetuate business as usual. So you see it in the toothless climate accords, in hardly any mention of the energy predicament, in cursory references to our environmental degradation etc. The Corporations still seek the highest rate of return. And Debt has taken on monstrous proportions. And so we are now existing in an extreme state of denial reflected by how easily we lend money out and in fact create it. The faith in currency is Now dangerously precarious as currencies and prices have so strayed from any valid connection with real worth. And all now threatening to catastrophically implode. What will be left behind after this explosion? The hope is that a framework that stresses living within your means, living ecologically sustainably, not burdening future generations with obligations in an uncertain world. And above all a human environment of mutual aid and yes sharing whereby the consensus is we must all look out for one another as the difficult demands of the new age require it.
“"If you think the economy is more important than the environment, try holding your breath while counting your money"”
User avatar
onlooker
Fusion
Fusion
 
Posts: 7967
Joined: Sun 10 Nov 2013, 12:49:04
Location: NY, USA

Re: What if there was Zero debt?

Unread postby kanon » Mon 06 Nov 2017, 08:22:43

onlooker wrote:* * * *
It is quite apparent to me that the elite currently of this planet seek to perpetuate business as usual. So you see it in the toothless climate accords, in hardly any mention of the energy predicament, in cursory references to our environmental degradation etc. The Corporations still seek the highest rate of return. And Debt has taken on monstrous proportions. And so we are now existing in an extreme state of denial reflected by how easily we lend money out and in fact create it. The faith in currency is Now dangerously precarious as currencies and prices have so strayed from any valid connection with real worth. And all now threatening to catastrophically implode. What will be left behind after this explosion? The hope is that a framework that stresses living within your means, living ecologically sustainably, not burdening future generations with obligations in an uncertain world. And above all a human environment of mutual aid and yes sharing whereby the consensus is we must all look out for one another as the difficult demands of the new age require it.

Nice thoughts, but how is such a society to be organized? With a several hundred year history of capitalist exploitation under the Bank of England and now the Federal Reserve, the idea of an ecological sustainable, mutual aid, and sharing system would require a profound cultural shift. Appropriate social institutions and appropriate incentives are a necessity. The current debt-money system works against these ideas and would need to be replaced by a new system.
kanon
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 246
Joined: Fri 24 Oct 2014, 08:04:07

Re: What if there was Zero debt?

Unread postby vtsnowedin » Mon 06 Nov 2017, 08:25:14

Why not just return to sound financial practices under the current system?
User avatar
vtsnowedin
Anti-Matter
Anti-Matter
 
Posts: 8028
Joined: Fri 11 Jul 2008, 02:00:00

Re: What if there was Zero debt?

Unread postby kanon » Mon 06 Nov 2017, 09:06:28

vtsnowedin wrote:Why not just return to sound financial practices under the current system?

Another nice thought, but I don't believe it is possible. As you have pointed out, the issuance of money for debt requires that the debt will be paid. If he system were to be "marked to market" and unpayable debt valued at its worth, then most of the banking/corporate system would be insolvent. Since it is really a political/accounting system it has been too easy to simply QE the problems away. The nature of the FED debt-money system is that there is never quite enough money to pay the debt in total and now that so much has been wasted in malinvestment, consumerism, and unprofitable wars, the level of deflation would be intolerable. The public has no idea how it really works so elected officials and corporate leaders are not held accountable because no one knows what they have done wrong.

Unfortunately, the ruling class is built around the FED system and they will not volunteer to accept market discipline. This is why I think the scenario described in The Economic End Game Continues has some plausibility. Since a monetary crisis is inevitable, the elites will try to direct the resolution in their favor. However, IMHO, it would by an illusory victory as the hoax of global warming will unravel the system over the next two generations.
kanon
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 246
Joined: Fri 24 Oct 2014, 08:04:07

Re: What if there was Zero debt?

Unread postby vtsnowedin » Mon 06 Nov 2017, 09:27:53

Frankly I think the "Economic End Game Continues" piece is a load of horse feathers. China , Russia and India can swap goods in yaun or Rubles all they want but as long as the USA imports seven million barrels a day they will pay for them in dollars.
User avatar
vtsnowedin
Anti-Matter
Anti-Matter
 
Posts: 8028
Joined: Fri 11 Jul 2008, 02:00:00

PreviousNext

Return to Economics & Finance

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 20 guests