alexw Posted May 22, 2010 Share Posted May 22, 2010 To put it simply within a debt based monetary system (97% of it is debt based) if you attempt to pay off the debt you decrease the money supply by an equivalent amount, while leaving the interest portion of the debt intact. This interest portion appears to be paid off but is in reality merely shifted to others in the economy.* Thus paying off the national debt infact increases the overall uk debt burden to gdp ratio. In the past when the uk has attempted to pay of its debt what it has done in reality is shifted the debt to others while using economic growth to take care of the problem, lessening that debt to gdp ratio. Now however we are reaching the maltusian limits to growth meaning that within the next few decades and quite likely within the next few years the system will collapse under its own weight. The media and government, and many here, have got it completely wrong. The idea of paying off the national debt under the current system is a smokescreen. What is desperately needed is not for the debt to be paid off, but the implentation of a monetary system that does not have a basis on debt and its continued expansion through economic growth. *This is a direct result of how when a loan is made only the principal is created the interest must come from more loans made in the future. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bloo Loo Posted May 22, 2010 Share Posted May 22, 2010 To put it simply within a debt based monetary system (97% of it is debt based) if you attempt to pay off the debt you decrease the money supply by an equivalent amount, while leaving the interest portion of the debt intact. This interest portion appears to be paid off but is in reality merely shifted to others in the economy.* Thus paying off the national debt infact increases the overall uk debt burden to gdp ratio. In the past when the uk has attempted to pay of its debt what it has done in reality is shifted the debt to others while using economic growth to take care of the problem, lessening that debt to gdp ratio. Now however we are reaching the maltusian limits to growth meaning that within the next few decades and quite likely within the next few years the system will collapse under its own weight. The media and government, and many here, have got it completely wrong. The idea of paying off the national debt under the current system is a smokescreen. What is desperately needed is not for the debt to be paid off, but the implentation of a monetary system that does not have a basis on debt and its continued expansion through economic growth. *This is a direct result of how when a loan is made only the principal is created the interest must come from more loans made in the future. debt isnt the problem its the settlement of credit thats the problem...money just circulates. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Abstra Posted May 22, 2010 Share Posted May 22, 2010 To put it simply within a debt based monetary system (97% of it is debt based) if you attempt to pay off the debt you decrease the money supply by an equivalent amount, while leaving the interest portion of the debt intact. This interest portion appears to be paid off but is in reality merely shifted to others in the economy.* Thus paying off the national debt infact increases the overall uk debt burden to gdp ratio. In the past when the uk has attempted to pay of its debt what it has done in reality is shifted the debt to others while using economic growth to take care of the problem, lessening that debt to gdp ratio. Now however we are reaching the maltusian limits to growth meaning that within the next few decades and quite likely within the next few years the system will collapse under its own weight. The media and government, and many here, have got it completely wrong. The idea of paying off the national debt under the current system is a smokescreen. What is desperately needed is not for the debt to be paid off, but the implentation of a monetary system that does not have a basis on debt and its continued expansion through economic growth. *This is a direct result of how when a loan is made only the principal is created the interest must come from more loans made in the future. This appears to be correct. When a loan is made and repayed someone else has to borrow money into the economy so that the interest can be paid. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bloo Loo Posted May 22, 2010 Share Posted May 22, 2010 This appears to be correct. When a loan is made and repayed someone else has to borrow money into the economy so that the interest can be paid. no. money is only needed to settle. any amount of credit can be issued to settle minor details like interest. limited only by law. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest DissipatedYouthIsValuable Posted May 22, 2010 Share Posted May 22, 2010 Oh come on, this has been done to death. Non-interest bearing money creation. There you go, done. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
betterToDo Posted May 22, 2010 Share Posted May 22, 2010 You haven't distinguished between deficit and debt which might be useful. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Steve Cook Posted May 22, 2010 Share Posted May 22, 2010 To put it simply within a debt based monetary system (97% of it is debt based) if you attempt to pay off the debt you decrease the money supply by an equivalent amount, while leaving the interest portion of the debt intact.  This interest portion appears to be paid off but is in reality merely shifted to others in the economy.*  Thus paying off the national debt infact increases the overall uk debt burden to gdp ratio.  In the past when the uk has attempted to pay of its debt what it has done in reality is shifted the debt to others while using economic growth to take care of the problem, lessening that debt to gdp ratio.  Now however we are reaching the maltusian limits to growth meaning that within the next few decades and quite likely within the next few years the system will collapse under its own weight. The media and government, and many here, have got it completely wrong.  The idea of paying off the national debt under the current system is a smokescreen.  What is desperately needed is not for the debt to be paid off, but the implentation of a monetary system that does not have a basis on debt and its continued expansion through economic growth.  *This is a direct result of how when a loan is made only the principal is created the interest must come from more loans made in the future. Yep The debt can never be repaid because it would require new growth and new issuance of new debt to do so. The days of growth are over. It's not going to end well Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
piece of paper Posted May 22, 2010 Share Posted May 22, 2010 Yep The debt can never be repaid because it would require new growth and new issuance of new debt to do so. The days of growth are over. It's not going to end well Will we still be allowed to sing or dance if we want to? p-o-p Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Steve Cook Posted May 22, 2010 Share Posted May 22, 2010 (edited) Will we still be allowed to sing or dance if we want to? p-o-p In the long run yes. In the medium run, I wouldn't be surprised if the answer to your question is no. Edited May 22, 2010 by Steve Cook Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
piece of paper Posted May 22, 2010 Share Posted May 22, 2010 In the long run yes. In the medium run, I wouldn't be surprised if the answer to your question is no. I'm older than most posters so it doesn't look good for me. Glad to know the kids will be OK though. p-o-p Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joboxer Posted May 22, 2010 Share Posted May 22, 2010 This 97% - not doubting - just wonder how you worked it out? If the Govt reaches a surplus in tax revenues and decides to buy back Gilts in reverse auctions - not with printed dosh, but with actual receipts - how does the interest still remain or get shifted to others in the economy? Does your Malthusian growth-limit assertion relate to oil or something else? Could you work me through that one as well? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Steve Cook Posted May 23, 2010 Share Posted May 23, 2010 This 97% - not doubting - just wonder how you worked it out? If the Govt reaches a surplus in tax revenues and decides to buy back Gilts in reverse auctions - not with printed dosh, but with actual receipts - how does the interest still remain or get shifted to others in the economy? Does your Malthusian growth-limit assertion relate to oil or something else? Could you work me through that one as well? Primarily oil and the other hydrocarbons. However, hydrocarbons are implicated in the processing of all other resources and so, in effect, the decline of hydrocarbons equals the decline of most other resources at the same time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Authoritarian Posted May 23, 2010 Share Posted May 23, 2010 Primarily oil and the other hydrocarbons. However, hydrocarbons are implicated in the processing of all other resources and so, in effect, the decline of hydrocarbons equals the decline of most other resources at the same time. I wouldn't worry about it tbh. Man has invented a million ways to overcome logical problems such as this, it's this talent alone that has made us so successful as a species. As long as the market is free to run without too much interference from the state I dount even the decline of hydrocarbons will hold us back, even if it does prove to be the apocolyptic scenario that you suggest there's nothing that can be done anyway apparently, so again, no need to worry. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Steve Cook Posted May 23, 2010 Share Posted May 23, 2010 I wouldn't worry about it tbh. Man has invented a million ways to overcome logical problems such as this, it's this talent alone that has made us so successful as a species. As long as the market is free to run without too much interference from the state I dount even the decline of hydrocarbons will hold us back, even if it does prove to be the apocolyptic scenario that you suggest there's nothing that can be done anyway apparently, so again, no need to worry. You seem unclear in your thinking here. Do you think that there is not a problem looming or do you think that there is a problem looming but there is nothing to be done so eat, drink and be merry for tomorrow....? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bloo Loo Posted May 23, 2010 Share Posted May 23, 2010 I wouldn't worry about it tbh. Man has invented a million ways to overcome logical problems such as this, it's this talent alone that has made us so successful as a species. As long as the market is free to run without too much interference from the state I dount even the decline of hydrocarbons will hold us back, even if it does prove to be the apocolyptic scenario that you suggest there's nothing that can be done anyway apparently, so again, no need to worry. one way nature deals with a shortage of resource is by allowing the consumer to die out. works every time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Errol Posted May 23, 2010 Share Posted May 23, 2010 What is desperately needed is not for the debt to be paid off, but the implentation of a monetary system that does not have a basis on debt and its continued expansion through economic growth. Spot on. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Authoritarian Posted May 23, 2010 Share Posted May 23, 2010 (edited) one way nature deals with a shortage of resource is by allowing the consumer to die out. works every time. There is no shortage of resource, total oil production may be decreasing (it may even be inecreasing) but oil isn't the only form of energy available. It would be dirt cheap if it wasn't taxation, indicating an abundence. Edited May 23, 2010 by Chef Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Authoritarian Posted May 23, 2010 Share Posted May 23, 2010 Spot on. Money has to be debt based, think about it. Why would we want something that indicated how wealthy we were? The very wealth itself - food, cars, houses etc - would be more than sufficient. Money is just a form of debt and there's nothing fundamentally wrong with that, as long as people are getting into debt out of their own free will. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest DissipatedYouthIsValuable Posted May 23, 2010 Share Posted May 23, 2010 That is not the issue. Principal goes out the front door, interest goes out the back. All assets and liabilities net off to zero at all times. Just don't worry about it. The issue as I have said many times before and has now become mainstream is one of BALANCE between trading entities. It's the amount going out the back and the relative autonomy that this removes from the majority of the population that is the problem. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest DissipatedYouthIsValuable Posted May 23, 2010 Share Posted May 23, 2010 Money has to be debt based, think about it. Why would we want something that indicated how wealthy we were? The very wealth itself - food, cars, houses etc - would be more than sufficient. Money is just a form of debt and there's nothing fundamentally wrong with that, as long as people are getting into debt out of their own free will. State and media control of psychology is not developing free will. Where are the compulsory school lessons on money creation and real economics? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Godley Posted May 23, 2010 Share Posted May 23, 2010 Primarily oil and the other hydrocarbons. However, hydrocarbons are implicated in the processing of all other resources and so, in effect, the decline of hydrocarbons equals the decline of most other resources at the same time. And the answer is.....................? And to get people to belive in the solution? Stevie boy, why the feck do you think governments invented mmgw? At the end of the day you have always made your position clear, you want capitilism to fail. You are clever enough to figure out the models failings but constantly ignore the solutions. Man will find a way of dealing with the issue of finite resources, jeepers we have endlessly talked about some of the technological solutions and even this week we learn that we can now 'create' life. Bugs, that could unleash tremendous potential not least the ability to 'create' fuel are just one of many solutions. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Authoritarian Posted May 23, 2010 Share Posted May 23, 2010 It's the amount going out the back and the relative autonomy that this removes from the majority of the population that is the problem. That's nothing to do with money creation though. Bog standard taxation and state borrowing are mostly to blame for this. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Authoritarian Posted May 23, 2010 Share Posted May 23, 2010 State and media control of psychology is not developing free will. Where are the compulsory school lessons on money creation and real economics? Statist solutions to statist problems, was it ever thus? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest DissipatedYouthIsValuable Posted May 23, 2010 Share Posted May 23, 2010 (edited) Statist solutions to statist problems, was it ever thus? Ok, so you advocate having a dim population to plunder? As has happened. Relatively I'd rather have kids at school not blind to economic reality, instead of, for example having compulsory religious education. Edited May 23, 2010 by DissipatedYouthIsValuable Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bloo Loo Posted May 23, 2010 Share Posted May 23, 2010 Money created as debt and inflation of the money supply is a way to stop hoarding and put money to use. Otherwise it would just sit around doing nothing and people would hide it from you to stop you collecting taxes. shame the people who issued all the credit are now hoarding it the real stuff. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.