3343
Comments (172)
sorted by:
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
1
dixond 1 point ago +2 / -1

You're applying opinion and conjecture to a factual problem.

It's really simple.

If a central bank creates $100 (in the form of a debt-money repayable "loan"), and expects $100.10c in repayment later, where does the extra 10c come from?

I'll wait.

2
ConvergenceMan 2 points ago +2 / -0

It is indeed simple.

That 10 cents has to created by other loans to pay back the first loan.

But the real mindjob is that the opposite also happens. Once that $100.10 of that original is paid back, all of that money is "destroyed."

This means that new loans have to be continuously be made or the money supply will contract on its own.

2
dixond 2 points ago +2 / -0

This means that new loans have to be continuously be made or the money supply will contract on its own.

Correct (although in the case of the "Federal" "Reserve" no capital is ever repayable). But what you omit is that the money supply contracting on its own won't be a tidy process that winds up nicely - instead a bunch of people will get left holding debts that can never be repaid.

The alternative is that debts keep getting repaid, only by creating more and larger debts.

This is the very definition of a Ponzi scheme; QED.

1
ConvergenceMan 1 point ago +1 / -0

In real life, this would cause interest rates to surge due to a shortage of cash, and then the NAVs of those bonds to plummet (as well as stocks, commodities, etc). This almost happened last year in March 2020 which is why they fired up the printing presses.