I ran across the video Money As Debt several years ago. Although I admit that I still don't understand it all, what I do grasp is exceptionally disturbing.
I've yet to come across someone who can negate the arguments presented in this 5-part series, cut up to fit YouTube requirements for posting. Would love to hear what you think about this, as it could inform any further discussions on creating new forms of "banking" as well as what might be presented as legal tender.
If this is true, it helps illuminate the disaster befalling global economies, including ours.
Everything I say I've only learned in the last two years. We were told that economics was over our heads and that we shouldn't even try to understand it. I think we have to try, and this thread is great so far in the sense that it feels like a safe place to ask questions.
I don't think banks HAVE to implode for any reason that's based on how they work. There's always the risk of it, but depressions have more to do with greed, I think, than the way banks work. But is the question whether they can work, or whether we need them? I think we can make a good argument for needing credit.
Mark, thank you for engaging in this conversation. @Les as well.lol!
You say" "I don't think banks HAVE to implode for any reason that's based on how they work."
This is what I don't understand.
How else does a bank function, other than interest on loans or other fees? If the the $ isn't present in the system to earn & pay back, it doesn't work. I suppose they can just print money, but then THAT dilutes the value of the $ so you still lose. I think that's why China was saying the US was defaulting on her loans, even B4 we lost our stellar credit rating. The Chinese lent us $ at X value but we are paying them back @ Y value, which is lower. Of course, even at value "Y value" I'm sure the Chinese would make a profit, but they make an interesting point.
What am I missing, (which I'm sure is plenty! LMAO!)
Anyway, that's as far as I've gotten with this. Any insights would be really appreciated.
I think I can only help you at the local bank level, for now. I'm slowly forming an understanding of this myself.
What's weird about banks, and what most people don't understand, is that they create money through loans. The money didn't previously exist before. And when they loan it to you, in the sense that I think you're very realistically thinking of it, most of it does not exist. Why does it work? Because we believe in it. That's it. That's all. Understand, they haven't printed money, they just said "You now have a loan, and you have to pay it back to us."
Why doesn't that cause inflation? I don't know. Ellen Brown has talked about that, but I'm going to have to read what she or someone else says about that a few more times before I get it. However I will say that I think it's based on growth. If you pump money into an economy that isn't growing, you devalue the money. But I honestly am not sure about that.
And I also don't get trade between nations. Ellen Brown and Ron Paul say that a very large part of our deficit doesn't really exist. It's make believe. We should just pop that fairy bubble. I think the powers that be are worried about the reaction that those headlines would have: Money is imaginary? What?
Kind of like Peter Pan and Tinklebell: money can't work if we don't believe in it.
I would highly recommend Chris Martenson's "The Crash Course" http://www.chrismartenson.com/crashcourse
Chapter 7 is on the Creation of Money.
The entire course is fantastic, and broken up into nice little 5-10 minute segments.