4 ms·

I didn't mention, nor did I refer to any issues, so whatever you are stating here is none of my concern, nor does it have anything whatsoever to do with anythin

I didn't mention, nor did I refer to any issues, so whatever you are stating here is none of my concern, nor does it have anything whatsoever to do with anything I wrote about, nor does it have anything whatsoever to do with me. I also did not talk nor did I write about any efficiency of any public system, so that does not concern me or what I wrote about either. "If the banking sector is corrupt - there can be no real economy." There is no economy in Croatia; it has very little industry of any significance, with tourism being the only significant influx of funds into the country. "Mortgages enable people to spread payments out over time and are a fundamental artifact of affordability." SIGH Sir, how do I explain this? You are so deep into classical economy thinking, whereas the reality in Croatia is one of tribal mentality. People take on debts from friends and family, and nobody worries about making payments the way you understand them, because the money owed is paid back in cash, with physical bills, in person and in one lump sum. Cars, condominiums, houses... it has always been this way in Croatia, for hundreds of years, and will be that way for a very, very long time, possibly the next hundred years, if not longer. It's Croatia: that is the only way that people there were able to come up with which functions reliably. Ergo, nobody gives a flying fuck about a mortgage over there, that's just something one reads about on the InterNet. No Croat will trust themselves to apply for one after all that corruption, and even if one did, nowadays the banks are reluctant to lend money to consumers. So the chances of both parties coming together to consume a financial transaction are zero. It has effectively become a cash only economy, and even though kuna has been a stable currency for almost three decades now, every Croat will convert their excess cash (which they hide at home) into euros, cash again, the first chance they get. When a Croat goes to buy a car, he or she will literally walk around with a small sport bag full of physical currency. There was a period of people going deep into debt with consumer credit to buy cars, of course that has failed spectacularly with most being unable to service their debt, so things are back to the usual - cash. When a Croat goes to buy a house, he or she will literally walk around with a briefcase full of stacked bills.

jariel 5y ago
"so whatever you are stating here is none of my concern, nor does it have anything whatsoever to do with anything I wrote about, nor does it have anything whatsoever to do with me." Why are you commenting on a thread about X and Y, and then saying 'X and Y are none of my concern and have nothing to do with me?' You original response was in a thread concerning public welfare systems. You commented extensively about financial systems in response to issues concerning mortgage debt and credit. "You are so deep into classical economy thinking," This has nothing to do with 'classical economics' it has to do with a working financial system. What you just did was more effectively explain why Croatia is poor. If banks are corrupt and/or don't offer credit, and if consumers have no interest in it, then of course, a credit system won't exist and it will keep Croatia poor. If, as you say, Croatia won't have anything but a 'cash economy for hundreds of years' then Croatia will be poor for hundreds of years. It's like not having electricity or water.
- Annatar 5y ago
  The people aren't poor, even though the country is poor on paper, but Croatia isn't really poor, because the people have cash stashed away and the rest of their savings are in real estate ownership. And then there is the matter of Croatia having so many natural resources, that the country isn't actually poor. They are not a poor nation and they do not live in a poor country, it's just that this country functions very differently from how you expect a non-poor country should function. Just because they don't do debt doesn't mean they are poor, or will be poor. People without debt are not only rich but free, because nobody can have them by the balls.
  - jariel 5y ago
    You're having a difficult time grasping what debt and credit is. It's not a negative thing, it's a positive thing. Advanced economies run on credit, not cash and it's a matter of allocating services and resources more efficiently based on need, and of course, being able to plan ahead for outcomes. Nations that don't have a functioning financial and credit system will not be wealthy, it's just that simple. Here is a YouTube by Ray Dalio where he explains what credit is, and how it functions in the economy. [1] [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PHe0bXAIuk0 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PHe0bXAIuk0
    - Annatar 5y ago
      Debt is NEVER a positive thing; not even when it's leveraged, not even when it's used to lower one's taxes. All debt is toxic, for as long as one carries debts, one is not free, not to mention that in case of non-liquidity id est inability to service debt, one can easily lose everything. The current economists' debt is good hypothesis will lead to a big reset and a global economic crash. By the way, you incorrectly assume that I am financially illiterate. I have done more than 100,000 trades with complex financial instruments. Debt is extremely toxic and dangerous.
      - jariel 5y ago
        Annatar, you've completely misunderstood the concept of debt and credit, the entire economy runs on it, and unfortunately yes, it's a signal of financial illiteracy on your part. All businesses and nations carry debt, it's a financial instrument like any other, and it's a very useful thing. Like all things, it can be misused. This isn't remotely controversial. Saying 'debt is toxic and dangerous' is like saying 'roads are toxic because they have cars, which can lead to crashes', it's completely bizarre. These financial systems are part what enables rich countries to be rich. Nations that don't have the ability to structure are poor, it's that simple.

jariel 5y ago

"so whatever you are stating here is none of my concern, nor does it have anything whatsoever to do with anything I wrote about, nor does it have anything whatsoever to do with me." Why are you commenting on a thread about X and Y, and then saying 'X and Y are none of my concern and have nothing to do with me?' You original response was in a thread concerning public welfare systems. You commented extensively about financial systems in response to issues concerning mortgage debt and credit. "You are so deep into classical economy thinking," This has nothing to do with 'classical economics' it has to do with a working financial system. What you just did was more effectively explain why Croatia is poor. If banks are corrupt and/or don't offer credit, and if consumers have no interest in it, then of course, a credit system won't exist and it will keep Croatia poor. If, as you say, Croatia won't have anything but a 'cash economy for hundreds of years' then Croatia will be poor for hundreds of years. It's like not having electricity or water.

Annatar 5y ago
The people aren't poor, even though the country is poor on paper, but Croatia isn't really poor, because the people have cash stashed away and the rest of their savings are in real estate ownership. And then there is the matter of Croatia having so many natural resources, that the country isn't actually poor. They are not a poor nation and they do not live in a poor country, it's just that this country functions very differently from how you expect a non-poor country should function. Just because they don't do debt doesn't mean they are poor, or will be poor. People without debt are not only rich but free, because nobody can have them by the balls.
- jariel 5y ago
  You're having a difficult time grasping what debt and credit is. It's not a negative thing, it's a positive thing. Advanced economies run on credit, not cash and it's a matter of allocating services and resources more efficiently based on need, and of course, being able to plan ahead for outcomes. Nations that don't have a functioning financial and credit system will not be wealthy, it's just that simple. Here is a YouTube by Ray Dalio where he explains what credit is, and how it functions in the economy. [1] [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PHe0bXAIuk0 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PHe0bXAIuk0
  - Annatar 5y ago
    Debt is NEVER a positive thing; not even when it's leveraged, not even when it's used to lower one's taxes. All debt is toxic, for as long as one carries debts, one is not free, not to mention that in case of non-liquidity id est inability to service debt, one can easily lose everything. The current economists' debt is good hypothesis will lead to a big reset and a global economic crash. By the way, you incorrectly assume that I am financially illiterate. I have done more than 100,000 trades with complex financial instruments. Debt is extremely toxic and dangerous.
    - jariel 5y ago
      Annatar, you've completely misunderstood the concept of debt and credit, the entire economy runs on it, and unfortunately yes, it's a signal of financial illiteracy on your part. All businesses and nations carry debt, it's a financial instrument like any other, and it's a very useful thing. Like all things, it can be misused. This isn't remotely controversial. Saying 'debt is toxic and dangerous' is like saying 'roads are toxic because they have cars, which can lead to crashes', it's completely bizarre. These financial systems are part what enables rich countries to be rich. Nations that don't have the ability to structure are poor, it's that simple.