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

If You Think You Know What 'debt' Is, Read On

Recommended Posts

Quite a grown-up article...

If you think you know what 'debt' is, read on

The problem is by no means new. Thomas Edison summed it up very neatly in 1921: "[Henry Ford] thinks it is stupid, and so do I, that for the loan of $30m of their own money the people of the United States should be compelled to pay $66m – that is what it amounts to, with interest … It is absurd to say that our country can issue $30m in bonds and not $30m in currency. Both are promises to pay; but one promise fattens the usurer, and the other helps the people."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am surprised that quote actually made the editor's cut. It sums up exactly how absurd the current system is and hopefully wakes a few readers up to exactly what is going on.

I'm surprised the article made the editor's cut, given the comment at the end about market forces taking their course.

I think the reason it was allowed in is because it's quite vague and doesn't draw any firm conclusions, so as a typical Guardian reader you can conclude that "Government should pay for everything we need and just give people money" if you want.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Quite a grown-up article...

If you think you know what 'debt' is, read on

that is what it amounts to, with interest … It is absurd to say that our country can issue $30m in bonds and not $30m in currency. Both are promises to pay;

Well actually they are quite different, bonds take into consideration state imposed usury, Currency issuance simply ignores state imposed usury within the confines of the state

he seems to have omitted the first userer (state driven inflation forced via taxation which is ironic for someone of drachma heritage) which interest is set in place to offset. The natural endpoint to his position is the removal of forced taxes so that the original usury can be avoided, although being the Guardian that endpoint seems to have been omitted

Although to be fair from an MMT perspective as long as we owe/give money to ourselves its all ok as apparently borking over your own asset (read population) is perfectly acceptable with no negative consequences such as tax payer (read the underlying asset) repudiation

Edited by Maria Gorski

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

that is what it amounts to, with interest … It is absurd to say that our country can issue $30m in bonds and not $30m in currency. Both are promises to pay;

Well actually they are quite different, bonds take into consideration state imposed usury, Currency issuance simply ignores state imposed usury within the confines of the state

he seems to have omitted the first userer (state driven inflation forced via taxation which is ironic for someone of drachma heritage) which interest is set in place to offset. The natural endpoint to his position is the removal of forced taxes so that the original usury can be avoided, although being the Guardian that endpoint seems to have been omitted

Although to be fair from an MMT perspective as long as we owe/give money to ourselves its all ok as apparently borking over your own asset (read population) is perfectly acceptable with no negative consequences such as tax payer (read the underlying asset) repudiation

They're actually almost identical.

Except cash has zero maturity, bonds don't.

(and even that distinction effectively disappears when the central bank buys £375bn of them. Moreover at present 10yr debt has an effective negative real return so the govt. - i.e. taxpayer - is being paid to issue debt. Good eh?)

Edited by R K

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Any entity can both sell bonds and print bonds. The difference is, no one will hold the bonds, if you keep doing the latter.

When you can force people to hold/spend your 'bonds', then you can pretty much print what you like. However, people wouldn't accept this freely, which is why doing such a thing is oppressive. TBH though, forcing people to repay back previously sold bonds, which they did not directly agree to, is no better though.

Until people wake up and realise that it is tyrannical for some to take what is not theirs - on every scale - some will become wealthy from taking advantage of this.

Edited by Traktion

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
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • The Prime Minister stated that there were three Brexit options available to the UK:   206 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.