3 ms·

>I think you are implying the companies and people borrow money for shits and giggles. Nope. I was just using an example. It could have been $100k and only $50

>I think you are implying the companies and people borrow money for shits and giggles. Nope. I was just using an example. It could have been $100k and only $50K was lent out. You sill would need $105k at the end of the year to satisfy all debts and have an equilibrium within the economy. Where is the extra $5K coming from? Magic?? > The reality is that most companies borrow money only when the availability of extra capital would help them generate more revenues or capture additional market share. This doesn't change the fact that the demand back for money will exceed the actually money supply. It is simple math really. The fact that they are using the cash to, hopefully, generate more revenues is irrelevant. Private companies have no control over the the supply of money. This is a central banking problem.

vageli 8y ago
What happens when there are new entrants to your economy? Are they all forced to split the 100k? If not, where does new money come from? Magic?
- jaxtellerSoA 8y ago
  How do you guys think the money supply works? I mean have never even thought about it? >What happens when there are new entrants to your economy? Nothing. >Are they all forced to split the 100k? No, if the new entrant can provide value then someone that already has some that $100K can give it to them for a good or service. >If not, where does new money come from? Magic? Comes from the Federal Reserve, when they decided to increase the money supply. The problem is you are on a never ending treadmill that is designed to have bubbles and failures, not that new money has to sometimes be created.
  - Matumio 8y ago
    > Comes from the Federal Reserve, when they decided to increase the money supply. Wait, really? I was pretty convinced that the vast majority of new money is created by private banks, when they decide to loan out money that nobody has paid in. It's called fractional reserve banking.
    - fjp 8y ago
      Private lending actually destroys money supply, contrary to the "money multiplier effect". (Fed recently admitted this was bullshit) that has been taught for a long time. Government/public lending creates money supply
kryogen1c 8y ago
>You sill would need $105k at the end of the year to satisfy all debts and have an equilibrium withing the economy. Where is the extra $5K coming from? Magic?? this makes very little sense. You are not lending the entire economy and then demanding more than the economy be paid back. You only lend a portion of the money supply so that a slightly larger portion is repaid. Even if that were the case, isnt that what QE does?
- jaxtellerSoA 8y ago
  >You are not lending the entire economy and then demanding more than the economy be paid back. You are right that you are not lending the entire economy, I was just making the example as simple as possible. But, the second interest is being charged then the demand of money back exceeds the actual money supply. What companies and investors do to increase revue for 1 particular organization has no effect on the money supply. All companies are doing are vying to try and redistribute the money that already exists in their favor, they aren't creating money (if they are that is called counterfeiting and is illegal). > Even if that were the case, isn't that what QE does? Yes, QE increases the money supply. I am not saying that the money supply doesn't get increased (by the Federal Reserve), merely pointing out the fact that once you get on this treadmill it just goes faster and faster and faster, and there is no way to get off without a disaster (bubble).
  - kryogen1c 8y ago
    > But, the second interest is being charged then the demand of money back exceeds the actual money supply. Not true, and I'm having a hard time finding your argument. You think if I loan you 1$ at 0% that's fine, but 1$ at 1% now exceeds the world's money supply? Even debt > total money supply is payable as long as interest payments are < payments being made. > once you get on this treadmill it just goes faster and faster and faster, and there is no way to get off without a disaster (bubble). Not strictly true. I have taken on debt with interest and paid that debt. Why is a disaster needed?
  - Droobfest 8y ago
    When a company pays back interest to a bank, the interest isn't magically removed from the money supply. So the bank also has $10k more profits, with which it pays its employees more, who can then buy more widgets from the company etc. Yes, whether this is sustainable does depend on increased economic activity. Which is why it's so important to lend for (sustainable) productivity growth or you get a bubble which creates liquidity problems when it pops.
rjtavares 8y ago
> You sill would need $105k at the end of the year to satisfy all debts and have an equilibrium within the economy. Where is the extra $5K coming from? Magic?? The extra $5K come from the same place the initial $100k came.

vageli 8y ago

What happens when there are new entrants to your economy? Are they all forced to split the 100k? If not, where does new money come from? Magic?

jaxtellerSoA 8y ago
How do you guys think the money supply works? I mean have never even thought about it? >What happens when there are new entrants to your economy? Nothing. >Are they all forced to split the 100k? No, if the new entrant can provide value then someone that already has some that $100K can give it to them for a good or service. >If not, where does new money come from? Magic? Comes from the Federal Reserve, when they decided to increase the money supply. The problem is you are on a never ending treadmill that is designed to have bubbles and failures, not that new money has to sometimes be created.
- Matumio 8y ago
  > Comes from the Federal Reserve, when they decided to increase the money supply. Wait, really? I was pretty convinced that the vast majority of new money is created by private banks, when they decide to loan out money that nobody has paid in. It's called fractional reserve banking.
  - fjp 8y ago
    Private lending actually destroys money supply, contrary to the "money multiplier effect". (Fed recently admitted this was bullshit) that has been taught for a long time. Government/public lending creates money supply

kryogen1c 8y ago

>You sill would need $105k at the end of the year to satisfy all debts and have an equilibrium withing the economy. Where is the extra $5K coming from? Magic?? this makes very little sense. You are not lending the entire economy and then demanding more than the economy be paid back. You only lend a portion of the money supply so that a slightly larger portion is repaid. Even if that were the case, isnt that what QE does?

jaxtellerSoA 8y ago
>You are not lending the entire economy and then demanding more than the economy be paid back. You are right that you are not lending the entire economy, I was just making the example as simple as possible. But, the second interest is being charged then the demand of money back exceeds the actual money supply. What companies and investors do to increase revue for 1 particular organization has no effect on the money supply. All companies are doing are vying to try and redistribute the money that already exists in their favor, they aren't creating money (if they are that is called counterfeiting and is illegal). > Even if that were the case, isn't that what QE does? Yes, QE increases the money supply. I am not saying that the money supply doesn't get increased (by the Federal Reserve), merely pointing out the fact that once you get on this treadmill it just goes faster and faster and faster, and there is no way to get off without a disaster (bubble).
- kryogen1c 8y ago
  > But, the second interest is being charged then the demand of money back exceeds the actual money supply. Not true, and I'm having a hard time finding your argument. You think if I loan you 1$ at 0% that's fine, but 1$ at 1% now exceeds the world's money supply? Even debt > total money supply is payable as long as interest payments are < payments being made. > once you get on this treadmill it just goes faster and faster and faster, and there is no way to get off without a disaster (bubble). Not strictly true. I have taken on debt with interest and paid that debt. Why is a disaster needed?
- Droobfest 8y ago
  When a company pays back interest to a bank, the interest isn't magically removed from the money supply. So the bank also has $10k more profits, with which it pays its employees more, who can then buy more widgets from the company etc. Yes, whether this is sustainable does depend on increased economic activity. Which is why it's so important to lend for (sustainable) productivity growth or you get a bubble which creates liquidity problems when it pops.

rjtavares 8y ago

> You sill would need $105k at the end of the year to satisfy all debts and have an equilibrium within the economy. Where is the extra $5K coming from? Magic?? The extra $5K come from the same place the initial $100k came.