money as debt

Discussion in 'Economy' started by Delbert, Mar 7, 2007.

  1. Delbert
    Offline

    Delbert Rookie

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2007
    Messages:
    31
    Thanks Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    1
    Ratings:
    +3
    Im not allowed to post urls (less than 15 posts)

    So go to google then videos, and search "money as debt"


    video is 47min but worth the watch
    explains how money is created by banks.

    enjoy
     
  2. JeffWartman
    Offline

    JeffWartman Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2006
    Messages:
    1,309
    Thanks Received:
    101
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Suburban Chicago
    Ratings:
    +101
    I'll check it out when I get a chance and get back to you...might be interesting.
     
  3. Delbert
    Offline

    Delbert Rookie

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2007
    Messages:
    31
    Thanks Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    1
    Ratings:
    +3
    ...and by the way, this is why lowering interest rates spurs the economy
    much more than cutting taxes. What a scam the bankers are running.
     
  4. gonegolfin
    Offline

    gonegolfin Member

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2005
    Messages:
    412
    Thanks Received:
    36
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Location:
    Austin, TX
    Ratings:
    +36
    If you liked this video and want to learn more, you will love G. Edward Griffin's - The Creature From Jekyll Island.

    Brian
     
  5. gonegolfin
    Offline

    gonegolfin Member

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2005
    Messages:
    412
    Thanks Received:
    36
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Location:
    Austin, TX
    Ratings:
    +36
    A scam that has been running for a few centuries now (began in London).

    Yes, it is not difficult to create artificial economic growth by increasing liquidity in a fractional reserve system. And remember that lowering interest rates is just one way to bring more liquidity into the system. There are several other ways that are much less obvious ... until you see the monetary base outpacing true economic growth. Monetization of debt is one. Reserve levels is another.

    Brian
     
  6. Toro
    Offline

    Toro Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Sep 29, 2005
    Messages:
    50,718
    Thanks Received:
    11,047
    Trophy Points:
    2,030
    Location:
    The Big Bend via Riderville
    Ratings:
    +25,044
    The last few centuries have also seen the greatest creation of wealth and improvement in living standards in the history of mankind. So fractional banking hasn't appeared to have had an adverse effect on the economy. In fact, it has almost certainly benefited economic well-being.
     
  7. loosecannon
    Offline

    loosecannon Senior Member

    Joined:
    May 7, 2007
    Messages:
    4,888
    Thanks Received:
    263
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +264
    sure anything you say.

    I read an article this AM that said that the outstanding value of derivatives contracts has increased $103 trillion dollars in the last year, from $297 trillion to $400 trillion.

    AND that the fed reserve money supply increased 13% in the last 12 months.

    Creating liquidity to drive up the prices of existing assets is not economic growth. In this case it is bubble madness/suicide.

    BTW The expansion of mainly credit swap derivatives in just the last year amounts to $16,000 for every human being alive. IOW the money supply is increasing faster than world income. MUCH faster.

    Only exponentially increasing credit is keeping the worlds economy's from a collapse after bubble effect growth.

    Talk about alice in wonderland.
     
  8. Toro
    Offline

    Toro Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Sep 29, 2005
    Messages:
    50,718
    Thanks Received:
    11,047
    Trophy Points:
    2,030
    Location:
    The Big Bend via Riderville
    Ratings:
    +25,044
    Trust me, I see derivatives every single day - deals in structured finance, with this CDO, and that synthetic swap, etc. Its mind-boggling.

    Nor do I disagree with the increase in liquidity.

    Nor do I disagree with Buffett's assertion that derivatives are "weapons of financial mass destruction."

    However, there have been many, many crashes in the financial system over the past 200 years. There will be many more in the future. But that doesn't mean that the financial system has been a bane to the economy. In fact, the economy could not function well and grow without a fundamentally sound financial system.
     
  9. loosecannon
    Offline

    loosecannon Senior Member

    Joined:
    May 7, 2007
    Messages:
    4,888
    Thanks Received:
    263
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +264
    yeah, financial collpases were quite a bit more debilitating before the central banks discovered monetarist interventionist policies.

    I do not believe we have a fundamentally sound financial system. We have a fiat based credit driven system. It is inherently unsustainable.

    The problem many people have is seeing the big picture. 35 years is a short cycle for a fiat currency to expand and collapse. And yet most appearances are that our financial system is a runaway train today. It seems unconceivable that it could crash at a fundamental level. Yet it appears that is exactly what we are primed for.
     
  10. BaronVonBigmeat
    Offline

    BaronVonBigmeat Senior Member

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2005
    Messages:
    1,185
    Thanks Received:
    160
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +160
    The video in question can be found here.

    The growth of the last three centuries has been despite fractional reserve lending, not because of it. The biggest improvement in living standards was probably from 1813-1913 or so, when most of the world was on the classical gold standard, when banks were more limited in the money they could create. There have also been a few brief examples of full-reserve banking, and economic growth did not suffer; in addition, banking panics did not result in economic collapse. People lined up to pull their money out, and once it became obvious that everyone would get their money out, they lost interest and things went back to normal quickly.

    The important thing to remember about creating money from thin air--whether it's governments or banks--is that creating money is not creating wealth. You haven't increased the productivity of workers, you haven't increased the output of factories. All you've done is transfer purchasing power from people who hold currency, to those who are printing the money. Instead of creating money, you could get the same effect by having a flat tax and handing the proceeds over to government and banks, really. Of course, this would not be stealthy like inflation is, and people would go ape-shit bezerk. (Why this isn't a huge issue for the grassroots left, I will never understand. There are a few exceptions though).

    In our current system, the beneficiary of this money creation would be the federal government, banks (who make profits from lending the newly created money), as well as people and businesses that benefit from artificially low borrowing standards and interest rates. It raises prices for ordinary people, while raising asset values for the rich, and giving them cheap credit for business plans that would otherwise not be viable.

    Because of this, it distorts the economy--the most recent example being the housing boom. However, it eventually becomes apparent that this overinvestment in business expansion, housing expansion, etc. is not viable, because there is not enough customer demand to match up with the distorted signals that investors were getting, via low interest rates. When this happens, these newly over-expanded businesses begin to fail, and a recession follows, as investments are liquidated. Thus, we get an exaggerated boom/bust cycle.
     

Share This Page