This is such a strange and pernicious thing to say. Marxist-style class anger combined with blaming the enabler combined with a complete lack of understanding o

This is such a strange and pernicious thing to say. Marxist-style class anger combined with blaming the enabler combined with a complete lack of understanding of the numbers and the character of the various families of loans in the US. Also, it's all poorly written. So how are you wrong? Let me count the ways. You seem to blame a facet of capitalism (banks) for conspicuous consumption. One, all capital is handled by people. Two, all transactions are voluntary. Three, long term supply equals long term demand--a borrower does not change the allocation of goods simply by borrowing, and does especially not changing the temporal allocation thereof, unless he has a time machine... so you're going to need to change your mental model of how debt and credit work if you want it to make any sense. If banks stopped lending and borrowing, do the big vacation packages and luxury cars just go poof and disappear? How about all the money that was invested before, but now no longer is?