Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
Sign in to follow this  
betterToDo

Money Creation

Recommended Posts

Well I've got a mortgage and I never received paper cash or coins. I received electronic base money and this is the form in which I repay the bank. Where's the problem?

No problem. I just wonder why you don't call them up and ask for proof of cash changing hands (as it was supposed to) before you make any more "repayments."

of course if you are happy that PC numbers are money - why don't you simply offer to email in what you owe?

They do provide evidence. When I took out my mortgage way back when I found that my account at my current account bank had been increased by the sum of the mortgage. I also had paperwork saying that I owed the mortgage bank. The banks would have had paperwork showing that the sum of the loan had been transferred from the mortgage bank to the current account bank, but this is a matter for the banks, and no concern of yours or mine.

What more evidence is needed?

Cashiers reciept, signed by a living human being would be a start.

Accounting has to be a record of events, it isn't an event in and of itself. And really, the accounting is irrelevent - what counts is what has happened in the real world. So i'd be askign for proof of what did happen. Which person did what action where?

how much did that action cost?

And so on. You've fallen for the con, sceppy. it'd be nice if you stopped giving your power away and thought properly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No problem. I just wonder why you don't call them up and ask for proof of cash changing hands (as it was supposed to) before you make any more "repayments."

I don't need that proof. I have proof I was given cash, and that's good enough for me. If I really want to test that my loan balance is in fact cash, I could just withdraw it all from an ATM, just to check.

As to where it came from, where the bank got it, what business is that of mine (except as a taxpayer who has to worry about insuring other peoples deposits)?

Cashiers reciept, signed by a living human being would be a start.

like I said, if I can just withdraw the cash, then job done.

Accounting has to be a record of events, it isn't an event in and of itself.

There was an event, money moved between banks, and then moved to me. Then if I take the cash out, that's another event. In fact the only events which are not recorded are those using physical cash.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't need that proof. I have proof I was given cash, and that's good enough for me. If I really want to test that my loan balance is in fact cash, I could just withdraw it all from an ATM, just to check.

Post contrevertibility isn't prior action.

As to where it came from, where the bank got it, what business is that of mine (except as a taxpayer who has to worry about insuring other peoples deposits)?

Erm people can only give you what they own.

like I said, if I can just withdraw the cash, then job done.

not the same as prior perfomance. if you tell me you built a wall 3 months ago, and then build it when I come to check up, you are still a fraudster.

There was an event, money moved between banks, and then moved to me. Then if I take the cash out, that's another event. In fact the only events which are not recorded are those using physical cash.

What money?

Either

Cash is money, in which case no money moved.

or

PC numbers are money - so email them in.

What I don't get is why you have a psychological need to treat all this rubbish as special. Gimme a clue?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Post contrevertibility isn't prior action.

Cash is money, in which case no money moved.

or

PC numbers are money - so email them in.

What I don't get is why you have a psychological need to treat all this rubbish as special. Gimme a clue?

But didn't you say earlier, money is what people agree it is. In which case, both parties agree in the first instance that the electronical balance is money which is ok, but if you try and pay in PC numbers, you are the only party accepting it as money which is why they would tell you to bugger off?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But didn't you say earlier, money is what people agree it is. In which case, both parties agree in the first instance that the electronical balance is money which is ok, but if you try and pay in PC numbers, you are the only party accepting it as money which is why they would tell you to bugger off?

I don't think you have thought it through.

If the bank maintains that PC numbers are money, then they are bound to accept an email.

If the bank doesn't maintain PC numbers are money, they never lent you anything in the first place.

People in a contract are equal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think you have thought it through.

If the bank maintains that PC numbers are money, then they are bound to accept an email.

If the bank doesn't maintain PC numbers are money, they never lent you anything in the first place.

People in a contract are equal.

No.

The bank has given you something which is accepted by people everywhere as money.

You are trying to pay the bank back in something which is accepted by money only by you.

You may think there is no difference between your numbers and the banks, but the difference is belief by all, which is what you pointed out earlier to be the exact thing that makes money.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No.

The bank has given you something which is accepted by people everywhere as money.

You are trying to pay the bank back in something which is accepted by money only by you.

It's the same item.

You may think there is no difference between your numbers and the banks, but the difference is belief by all, which is what you pointed out earlier to be the exact thing that makes money.

And once the banks hold the numbers, they will be believed.

:)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's the same item.

One can be exchanged for goods and services the world over, or can be transferred into paper currency which can be exchanged for goods and services the world over. One can't.

So obviously they're not the same.

And once the banks hold the numbers, they will be believed.

:)

If the banks ever accepted them, that would be true.

Edit - Spelling.

Edited by Vagabond

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One can be exchanged for goods and services the world over, or can be transferred into paper currency which can be exchanged for goods and services the world over. One can't.

One is only owed because it's supposed to be paper currency in the first place (and that transfer is not 100% guaranteed either.)

I've already exchanged my numbers with the bank once - at the start of the process when they "credited my account."

So obviously they're not the same.

They are the same. Beliefs don't change facts.

If the banks ever accepted them, that would be true.

Edit - Spelling.

If the banks refuse them, that's their affair.

They are the same.

Of course if you can show me factual differences between them (other than widely held false belief that collapses on questioning) that'd be great.

Even if we take your "banks are different" argument onboard, it just makes the debt permanently unpayable, credibility isn't something which you can transfer.

Edit : PC numbers are no widely held to be money, either. Legal tender banknotes are widely held to be money, the bank is supposed to have 1:1 relationship between it's numbers and that type of money. As we know, it doesn't, it cashes in on the conflation. I can see no way of justifying debts made under false pretenses.

Edited by Injin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've already exchanged my numbers with the bank once - at the start of the process when they "credited my account."

No, you exchanged their numbers in return for a promise to repay them with their numbers. Not yours.
They are the same. Beliefs don't change facts.

In which case you'll agree that your belief that they are the same is misguided, as facts show that one is accepted as money, one isn't. So they're not the same.

If the banks refuse them, that's their affair.

They are the same.

Of course if you can show me factual differences between them (other than widely held false belief that collapses on questioning) that'd be great.

Actually as the one making the claim, you would have to be the one to support it. So if you can get a shop, bank or other person to go ahead and accept your numbers as being the same as the banks numbers then I'll agree you are right.

Edit : PC numbers are no widely held to be money, either. Legal tender banknotes are widely held to be money, the bank is supposed to have 1:1 relationship between it's numbers and that type of money. As we know, it doesn't, it cashes in on the conflation. I can see no way of justifying debts made under false pretenses.

PC numbers aren't, electronic bank balance numbers are though. Given this, there is no need for all balances to be physical.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No, you exchanged their numbers in return for a promise to repay them with their numbers. Not yours.

Not so - the numbers came from me signing the form. They've already accepted I can create money once and have accepted it once. The process starts with them exchanging my numbers for theirs, which can then be exchanged for others.

In which case you'll agree that your belief that they are the same is misguided, as facts show that one is accepted as money, one isn't. So they're not the same.

They are the same. The belief is erroneous.

Actually as the one making the claim, you would have to be the one to support it. So if you can get a shop, bank or other person to go ahead and accept your numbers as being the same as the banks numbers then I'll agree you are right.

Acceptance isn't anything to do with the item. That's other peoples opinions about the value of the item. I propose a series of objective tests - height, weight, colour and so forth to decide. In the same way as we would use to determine anything else of the same class. We don't magically say "these boron atoms are special, let's call them super boron" when they have the same physical characteristics as all other boron atoms.

Science, the highest standard of proof we have is on my side.

PC numbers aren't, electronic bank balance numbers are though. Given this, there is no need for all balances to be physical.

I'm sorry, but "electronic bank balances" is a belief. PC numbers is the reality.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not so - the numbers came from me signing the form. They've already accepted I can create money once and have accepted it once. The process starts with them exchanging my numbers for theirs, which can then be exchanged for others.

Nope. The form you signed authorised them to create the money to give to you. It couldn't be done without you, but you didn't do it by yourself. Thats why you can't pay them back with your numbers.

Acceptance isn't anything to do with the item. That's other peoples opinions about the value of the item. I propose a series of objective tests - height, weight, colour and so forth to decide. In the same way as we would use to determine anything else of the same class. We don't magically say "these boron atoms are special, let's call them super boron" when they have the same physical characteristics as all other boron atoms.

Science, the highest standard of proof we have is on my side.

If we're talking about something which can be proved via science. You can't find me a faith molecule using science, but that doesn't mean faith doesn't exist.

Money can be anything accepted between parties for exchange of goods and services. Acceptance is everything to do with it.

I'm sorry, but "electronic bank balances" is a belief. PC numbers is the reality.

Then how can you physically swap an electronic bank balance for something whereas you can't with PC numbers?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nope. The form you signed authorised them to create the money to give to you. It couldn't be done without you, but you didn't do it by yourself. Thats why you can't pay them back with your numbers.

Are you sure? I asked to borrow money. I only found out what actually happened afterwards.

If we're talking about something which can be proved via science. You can't find me a faith molecule using science, but that doesn't mean faith doesn't exist.

I can do a brain scan and show you the process in the brain, or use hypnosis to alter, add, delete and create faiths and beliefs though.

Belief in no way changes the items and objects involved. You can have two identical (as far as possible) objects and put them side by side. Ask members of the public to tell you which one is the different one and how it is different in a blind test. Socialised beliefs are relatively easy to remove for testing.

Money can be anything accepted between parties for exchange of goods and services. Acceptance is everything to do with it.

You aren't being asked for money. You are being asked for numbers (or paper based on the idea that you were originally given paper.)

Then how can you physically swap an electronic bank balance for something whereas you can't with PC numbers?

Belief.

Habit.

What's the relevence. You cannot provide belief or habits, nor are you being asked to.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Most people assume that when you take a loan out with a bank (for a mortgage, car or whatever) the money they use comes from the deposits of savers. However, according to this Professor this is not the case at all. The banks CREATES the money when you apply for your loan. The money didn't exist until you agreed to the loan. Then, in the case of a mortgage, they use the collatoral in you newly purchased house as a guarantee, if you don't repay the loan they take possession of the property. So to sum up, the banks creates money out of thin air (after all in our debt based economy credit equates to real money with real purchasing power) and for a couple of hours paperwork tie you into economic servitute for the next 20-30 years.

This in my opinion is legalised fraud.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just a thought, Vagabond - assume equality in contract.

We've got a bit away from what I wanted to pick your brains on, or at least circled around it. Earlier you said;

The thing that makes it money is general agreement. Central banks don't decide what money is, the general public do

I completely agree with this, it fits my understanding of 'money'. But given that, I can't see how you don't accept that electronic balances are money?

Most people assume that when you take a loan out with a bank (for a mortgage, car or whatever) the money they use comes from the deposits of savers. However, according to this Professor this is not the case at all. The banks CREATES the money when you apply for your loan. The money didn't exist until you agreed to the loan. Then, in the case of a mortgage, they use the collatoral in you newly purchased house as a guarantee, if you don't repay the loan they take possession of the property. So to sum up, the banks creates money out of thin air (after all in our debt based economy credit equates to real money with real purchasing power) and for a couple of hours paperwork tie you into economic servitute for the next 20-30 years.

This in my opinion is legalised fraud.

As I understand it, its more monetising their reserves. They can't make the loan (create the credit) if they don't have enough reserves to cover it.

In any case though, how the money comes about it isn't important. You got exactly what you wanted and signed the contract for.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We've got a bit away from what I wanted to pick your brains on, or at least circled around it. Earlier you said;

I completely agree with this, it fits my understanding of 'money'. But given that, I can't see how you don't accept that electronic balances are money?

Because the general public don't think that electronic balances are money?

They think legal tender banknotes are money and the balances are a recording of piles of them. Pretty damn near everyone think the bank has a little box with their cash in it.

As I understand it, its more monetising their reserves. They can't make the loan (create the credit) if they don't have enough reserves to cover it.

In any case though, how the money comes about it isn't important. You got exactly what you wanted and signed the contract for.

No, you didn't.

Most people wanted cashey money. Go and ask a thousand people and you'll get a very tiny percentage who think money isn't pound notes and coins. They also all thought they were borrowing existing money belonging to someone else.

The beliefs around banking are all contradictory and insane, but these are what they are.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Most people assume that when you take a loan out with a bank (for a mortgage, car or whatever) the money they use comes from the deposits of savers. However, according to this Professor this is not the case at all. The banks CREATES the money when you apply for your loan. The money didn't exist until you agreed to the loan. Then, in the case of a mortgage, they use the collatoral in you newly purchased house as a guarantee, if you don't repay the loan they take possession of the property. So to sum up, the banks creates money out of thin air (after all in our debt based economy credit equates to real money with real purchasing power) and for a couple of hours paperwork tie you into economic servitute for the next 20-30 years.

This in my opinion is legalised fraud.

Yes but the bank doesn't create any money, it just does some accounting.

People then have to run around after the tiny pool of actual cash in order to get this debt cancelled (unless they do something radical or go bust) and in doing so, wind up working for decades at stuff they don't want to do to pay for mortgages and the like.

Soft slavery.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Because the general public don't think that electronic balances are money?

They think legal tender banknotes are money and the balances are a recording of piles of them. Pretty damn near everyone think the bank has a little box with their cash in it.

Really? 10 years ago I'd have said you were correct. Not so sure these days.. I think people accept that balances are money without the need to associate it with the paper stuff..

I just transferred 300 GBP to a friend electronically. I'm pretty sure at no point did he think that someone at the bank went to an internal ATM, withdrew the money from my stash and put it in his.

No, you didn't.

Most people wanted cashey money. Go and ask a thousand people and you'll get a very tiny percentage who think money isn't pound notes and coins. They also all thought they were borrowing existing money belonging to someone else.

The beliefs around banking are all contradictory and insane, but these are what they are.

So what if when you took out the loan, they gave it to you there and then in 'cash money'?

I can't see how people misunderstanding how the system works means the system is defrauding them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

People then have to run around after the tiny pool of actual cash in order to get this debt cancelled (unless they do something radical or go bust) and in doing so, wind up working for decades at stuff they don't want to do to pay for mortgages and the like.

Soft slavery.

This would be no different if every single eelctronic balance in the UK was actually monetised though.

Debt = slavery. It doesn't matter what form the currency is!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Really? 10 years ago I'd have said you were correct. Not so sure these days.. I think people accept that balances are money without the need to associate it with the paper stuff..

I just transferred 300 GBP to a friend electronically. I'm pretty sure at no point did he think that someone at the bank went to an internal ATM, withdrew the money from my stash and put it in his.

Betcha half a dollar?

So what if when you took out the loan, they gave it to you there and then in 'cash money'?

Then it would have to still be

1) Their own cash

2) Not created for the purpose

For that to be a valid loan.

I can't see how people misunderstanding how the system works means the system is defrauding them.

They sign contracts. Contracts have several elements, one of the important being meeting of minds. IF one party is being mislead (even by ommision) that contract is fraudulent.

The other one, ofc is consideration - and banks don't have anything genuinely their own to offer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This would be no different if every single eelctronic balance in the UK was actually monetised though.

If it was all monetised it'd be all payable.

Debt = slavery. It doesn't matter what form the currency is!

Actually fraudlulently conveyed lies to trick you into thinking you have debt =- slavery.

The chains fall off if you ask some fairly simple questions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • 317 Brexit, House prices and Summer 2020

    1. 1. Including the effects Brexit, where do you think average UK house prices will be relative to now in June 2020?


      • down 5% +
      • down 2.5%
      • Even
      • up 2.5%
      • up 5%



×
×
  • Create New...

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.