Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
bogbrush

You Can Only Con A Greedy Man

Recommended Posts

Remember; the 419 scammed are aspiring fraudsters.

Maybe, but it is still fun to make somebody put a fish on their head because they are stupid enough to believe it will net them some money.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Numbers on a computer which are recording agreements made between people.

Imagine if credit as we know it didn't exist; how would you go about getting a loan?

Well, you could write out an iou to a supplier (an agreement to pay the holder x amount per month). The supplier could then trade this iou to someone else for goods and now you pay the new holder. The iou, is just marks on a piece of paper, and you could challenge such a system on the same grounds "the IOU is just a piece of paper". This information could be held on computer without changing the nature of the system - and now it is just bytes! The important thing is that is information about the real state of affairs between people.

The difference is the supplier has some physical or tangible goods to back the IOU.

The problem I have is there's clearly and inaccessable cartel who operate the printing of IOUs and once on computer it's very easy for people to add additional IOUs when nothing has been traded.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Disagree, I have no problem with 419 scams because they reward thieves and scoundrels by costing them loads of money.

Remember; the 419 scammed are aspiring fraudsters.

In fact I'm probably happier with them as a form of aid for Africa than I am with Bob Geldof organised self-promoting pop concerts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Disagree, I have no problem with 419 scams because they reward thieves and scoundrels by costing them loads of money.

Remember; the 419 scammed are aspiring fraudsters.

Sometimes that's true

Many of the scams just involve unusually high payments to the mark for doing something perfectly moral, though (helping to transfer funds to an orphanage etc)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Because he thinks it is something, obviously.

And the banks haven't got any money.

They have the widespread belief that they have money, which they use to acquire resources.

surely thats the crux of this whole unwinnable argument you two constantly have, whilst the belief system remains in place within society it is valid to invest in it until such time as there is no longer belief in it, much the same as all investments/schemes. The rest of the points from both sides of the argument are immaterial

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
surely thats the crux of this whole unwinnable argument you two constantly have, whilst the belief system remains in place within society it is valid to invest in it until such time as there is no longer belief in it, much the same as all investments/schemes. The rest of the points from both sides of the argument are immaterial

Only if you don't believe in objective reality or think that belief is higher than objective reality.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Only if you don't believe in objective reality or think that belief is higher than objective reality.

History quite clearly shows with human nature that in the shorter time frame belief can always trump objective reality although objective reality clearly has to succeed ultimately. It is the exact reason why asset bubbles happen

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Only if you don't believe in objective reality or think that belief is higher than objective reality.

No - Objectively money allows people to buy things - that's a recorded fact - a part of reality

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
No - Objectively money allows people to buy things - that's a recorded fact - a part of reality

Objectively the bansk lying to people (and being believed) allows transactions to happen.

That doesn't make lies into facts,

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
History quite clearly shows with human nature that in the shorter time frame belief can always trump objective reality although objective reality clearly has to succeed ultimately. It is the exact reason why asset bubbles happen

Right.

So is what I am saying true or not?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
No - Objectively money allows people to buy things - that's a recorded fact - a part of reality

1 zim in zimbabwe used to buy a cup of coffee.....

a cup of coffee, is STILL a cup of coffee.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 zim in zimbabwe used to buy a cup of coffee.....

a cup of coffee, is STILL a cup of coffee.

The value of a zim changed, the value of a cup of coffee can change as well; that doesn't mean a cup of coffee is outside objective reality.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Objectively the bansk lying to people (and being believed) allows transactions to happen.

That doesn't make lies into facts,

Or are they telling the truth and people are just observing the patently obvious reality and consequences of money?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The value of a zim changed, the value of a cup of coffee can change as well; that doesn't mean a cup of coffee is outside objective reality.

im sorry, but a zim was worth a cup of coffee, now its worth nothing at all, indeed, never was anything at all other than a creation of the mind.

a cup of coffee, whatever value you put on it, remains a cup of coffee.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Or are they telling the truth and people are just observing the patently obvious reality and consequences of money?

What money?

They don't have any.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
im sorry, but a zim was worth a cup of coffee, now its worth nothing at all, indeed, never was anything at all other than a creation of the mind.

a cup of coffee, whatever value you put on it, remains a cup of coffee.

And a zim remains a zim - what distinction are you pointing to?

Simply because something is absolutely valueless now (say salt water at Brighton beach) does not mean it does not, did not exist.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
And a zim remains a zim - what distinction are you pointing to?

Simply because something is absolutely valueless now (say salt water at Brighton beach) does not mean it does not, did not exist.

a zim can be a number on a screen... it is not real.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On the debt-dodging/paperwork issue, would a financial institution honour its obligations if you couldn't prove your entitlement? (or if it could find some other loophole getting it out of payment?)

Goose/gander situation IMO.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
a zim can be a number on a screen... it is not real.

Is an IOU real?

If i take an iou from you in payment and type the arrangement into a computer, so it duplicates the paper iou and get your agreement to pay according the numbers on the screen, is the iou still real or does it somehow become unreal?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Is an IOU real?

If i take an iou from you in payment and type the arrangement into a computer, so it duplicates the paper iou and get your agreement to pay according the numbers on the screen, is the iou still real or does it somehow become unreal?

no. a dog cant raise an IOU. its a state of mind, of honour.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On the debt-dodging/paperwork issue, would a financial institution honour its obligations if you couldn't prove your entitlement? (or if it could find some other loophole getting it out of payment?)

Goose/gander situation IMO.

Yeah, but it is hard to make that argument work practically, because mostly banks first provide a service and wait for the payment agreed for it. You would need some breaking of the agreement that was equivalent to not paying the debt. For instance, if the bank made a loan but only gave you half the money while you still owed the full amount on the loan agreement. I would call that grounds lol.

Edited by Stars

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • The Prime Minister stated that there were three Brexit options available to the UK:   324 members have voted

    1. 1. Which of the Prime Minister's options would you choose?


      • Leave with the negotiated deal
      • Remain
      • Leave with no deal

    Please sign in or register to vote in this poll. View topic


×

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.