Why bankers rule the world

roswell

Thats why you hold bonds + equties the goverments pay you to lend them and companies money and you get a divi off the companies to buy more shares and interest off the debt to lend out more and the world spins round.

;-)

John_Pierpoint

........and spirals up or down in terms of value added per citizen.

My hypothesis is that we are indeed reaching "the limits to growth" as compound interest growth produces an exponential curve, but we all live on a finite planet.

A simple summary - personally the nearest I have been to Easter Island is the Galapagos.

https://www.amherst.edu/users/B/hfbloomer56/easterisland

I am not sure what price you can place on a near deserted beach, with silver sand and clear water populated by fearless birds. Coming face to face with a shark kind of heightens the memory of the experience.

Lonesome George - RIP

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lonesome_George

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2237292/Lonesome-Georges-extinct-species-reintroduced-Galapagos-Islands-scientists-using-cross-breeding.html

Jegersmart

I see the thread had a break whilst certain people google:)

The point is that money=debt, if you can't see anything wrong with that then that's fine - but rejecting the idea is disingenuous. A monetary system will always be based on profit, scarcity, competition and labour. I would like something better for all of us, and the openness of mind to debate it.

As others have alluded to in this thread, we need limitless growth which is not possible, we are limited by resources ultimately.

Antrobus, you are unfortunately very blinkered in your views but I hope that this does not disadvantage you in the future.

Thanks to all who contributed, if you have been reading only so far please feel free to put your views forward. It is important we hear from you.

J

CLAPTON

Jegersmart wrote: »

I see the thread had a break whilst certain people google:)

The point is that money=debt, if you can't see anything wrong with that then that's fine - but rejecting the idea is disingenuous. A monetary system will always be based on profit, scarcity, competition and labour. I would like something better for all of us, and the openness of mind to debate it.

As others have alluded to in this thread, we need limitless growth which is not possible, we are limited by resources ultimately.

Antrobus, you are unfortunately very blinkered in your views but I hope that this does not disadvantage you in the future.

Thanks to all who contributed, if you have been reading only so far please feel free to put your views forward. It is important we hear from you.

J

I've already explained to you that BoE can and does simply print notes and can and does mint coins. Theses aren't 'debt' in any reasonable definition.

The creation of money by fractional banking generates both 'savings' and 'debt' so that 'total savings' = 'total debt';
so by your definition 'saving= money' which is wrong but just in the same way as 'debt = money'.

John_Pierpoint

Here is your Xmas gift and reading list

http://www.amazon.co.uk/s/ref=nb_sb_noss?url=search-alias%3Daps&field-keywords=Margrit+Kennedy

At the age of about 16, I had a seriously "God bothering" history teacher. One of his boasts was that in response to "the red menace" he has made it his purpose to read the bible from cover to cover.
So I was inspired to go the the local library and reserve this book:

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Das-Kapital-Capital-ebook/dp/B0082YUY1Q/ref=sr_1_2?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1354096782&sr=1-2

I am not sure if reading Kapital or Lady Chatterley's Lover, 50 years ago, would have scandalised the local worthies more.

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Lady-Chatterleys-Lover-D-Lawrence/dp/B0014K8J6M/ref=sr_1_3?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1354097040&sr=1-3


One Xmas, I was given this well intentioned tomb to read:
http://www.amazon.co.uk/s/ref=nb_sb_ss_i_1_18?url=search-alias%3Dstripbooks&field-keywords=the+end+of+poverty+jeffrey+sachs&sprefix=the+end+of+poverty%2Cstripbooks%2C147&rh=n%3A266239%2Ck%3Athe+end+of+poverty+jeffrey+sachs

The global economic put paid such pipe dreams.

I have read several books explaining how we can progress to the perfect society, but the reality is that the naked ape is inherently competitive and/or prepared to favour "is own" over distant members of the global society.
Some apes are inherently "short term optimisers" - the sort who will resort to a log book loan rather than get the bus.

So I have little hope that a "better" system will be along any time soon.

ruggedtoast

CLAPTON wrote: »

I've already explained to you that BoE can and does simply print notes and can and does mint coins. Theses aren't 'debt' in any reasonable definition.

The creation of money by fractional banking generates both 'savings' and 'debt' so that 'total savings' = 'total debt';
so by your defintion 'saving= money' which is wrong but just in the same way as 'debt = money'.

Except the total debt exponentially outweighs savings due to the compound interest attributed to it. And when the economy goes into recession and loans are defaulted on then they no longer appear as assets, and in fact leave an enormous hole in the economy that is devastating for everyone who has to get by on a paycheck month to month.

Now we have sclerotic zombie banks being bailed out by insane levels of taxpayer backed government borrowing backed up by assets that were never worth their loan value in the hope 20 years down the line it will all somehow be ok.

Yes the system works really well.

CLAPTON

ruggedtoast wrote: »

Except the total debt exponentially outweighs savings due to the compound interest attributed to it. And when the economy goes into recession and loans are defaulted on then they no longer appear as assets, and in fact leave an enormous hole in the economy that is devastating for everyone who has to get by on a paycheck month to month.

Now we have sclerotic zombie banks being bailed out by insane levels of taxpayer backed government borrowing backed up by assets that were never worth their loan value in the hope 20 years down the line it will all somehow be ok.

Yes the system works really well.

Interest whether compound or not doesn't change the fundamanentals.

When interest is charged one party increases their debt and the other party increases their savings.

savings = debt.

When debts are written off the person with the debt becomes debt free and the lender loses an asset(saving)

so savings = debts will still apply.

I agree it would be a better world if we never had recessions, there was no scarcity and it never rained on the days I wish to go cyling.
I'm still waiting but I'm not sure how interest whether compound or not comes into the matter.

ruggedtoast

CLAPTON wrote: »

Interest whether compound or not doesn't change the fundamanentals.

When interest is charged one party increases their debt and the other party increases their savings.

savings = debt.

When debts are written off the person with the debt becomes debt free and the lender loses an asset(saving)

so savings = debts will still apply.

I agree it would be a better world if we never had recessions, there was no scarcity and it never rained on the days I wish to go cyling.
I'm still waiting but I'm not sure how interest whether compound or not comes into the matter.

Charging someone interest and them paying it is not the same thing.

However most people try to pay their debts, really hard, even though the amount they collectively owe is ever exceeding the cash that notionally exists to pay, which is a shame as its a game of musical chairs where only one 1% of the players ever get left with a seat and the other 99% will end up metaphorically dumped on their a$$es.

CLAPTON

ruggedtoast wrote: »

Charging someone interest and them paying it is not the same thing.

However most people try to pay their debts, really hard, even though the amount they collectively owe is ever exceeding the cash that notionally exists to pay, which is a shame as its a game of musical chairs where only one 1% of the players ever get left with a seat and the other 99% will end up metaphorically dumped on their a$$es.

sorry this makes absolutely no sense to me.

also on an other note you often talk about compound interest causing exponential debt.

what sort of debts are you referring to that incur compound interest?
for the vast majority I am aware of, e.g. mortgages, HP, personal loan, car loans, commercial loans etc all require interest to be paid in full every month so there is no compounding of interest.

the only place where there is compound interest that I can think of, is my savings a/cs where I choose to leave the interest to accumulate and compound... are these the one's you are thinking of?

Thrugelmir

CLAPTON wrote: »

When debts are written off the person with the debt becomes debt free and the lender loses an asset(saving)

so savings = debts will still apply.

The lender has lost an asset. However the lender still has a liability.

I'm the depositor that wants their money back.

So who pays me?

Without the money I'm unable to settle a debt I owe.