5 ms·

As I've seen time and time again from pepple with views like yours, you simply can't see the wood for the trees. Fact 1: The amount of dollars is continuously

by npoc 3y ago

As I've seen time and time again from pepple with views like yours, you simply can't see the wood for the trees. Fact 1: The amount of dollars is continuously increasing, at a rate of ~100% per decade. The amount which it has dropped in the last 2 years is tiny - that you use this as a counter is a simply ridiculous. https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/M2SL https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/M2SL Fact 2: The money is created effortlessly. Fact 3: The banking system is collecting interest on every single dollar in existence. Assuming 3% average interest, and $100 trillion total, that interest would amount to ~$3,000,000,000,000 per year or * ~15% of the total GDP of the USA*. I'd love to hear your justification for how this is value for money. It's absolute theft through deception. > It's not difficult to find savings opportunities at above the average rate of inflation, unless you define "saving" as "bury money in the ground". But yes, if you think the purpose of the economy is ensure the unproductive maximize their returns, the existing system is definitely worse... Yes, "saving" is storing your earnings for use later. This is entirely sensible and natural. Most people who are not aware of hard money are forced to either a) lend their life savings to the stock market for essentially free (7% returns only make up for the 7% devaluation due to money printing). b) take a house off the market and rent it out to a tenant who is unable to buy due the monetisation of real estate, only making it even harder for the next person to buy. The only reason this whole scam continues is because the general population has no idea of the rate at which the banking system is stealing value from their money. And people like you only exacerbate the problem. “It is well enough that people of the nation do not understand our banking and monetary system, for if they did, I believe there would be a revolution before tomorrow morning.” - Henry Ford Ultimately digital hard money doesn't care about your Keynesian pseudo-science. Just like the law of gravity and the law of nature, Thier's and Gresham's Laws will prevail and shut the whole central banking scam down.

notahacker 3y ago
I assume by "people with views like yours" you mean people who haven't formed their impression of how the financial system works from solely from lists of falsely-attributed pithy quotes Learning how stuff actually works doesn't mean you can't see woods, but it does save the embarrassment of claiming that the banking system is no worse off if debts aren't repaid. I mean, I've encountered some pretty wild takes on the 2007 financial crisis before, but I've never encountered anyone that thinks it didn't happen! It also means you can say stuff like "Fact 4: "printing" dollars and bearing the risk of non-repayment of loans represents a cost to banks", and come to the conclusion that seems to give them a pretty good reason to be able to charge interest. And also to suggest that if you think current interest rates aren't "value for money" you should probably rethink your calls for them to go up! The irony of shilling for "digital hard money" - i.e an ever increasing range of entirely synthetic assets entirely printed in the last 15 years whose demand is driven partly by counterfeit dollars and partly on people borrowing to speculate on other-newly printed entirely synthetic assets... after complaining about expansionary dynamics in M2 (which unlike "digital hard money" sometimes has a downslope) is just chefs kiss.
- npoc 3y ago
  Once again you're entirely missing the bigger picture. Bank interest rates aren't paying for money - they're just paying for the banking system. The banking system doesn't provide money - it just provides credit, backed by more of their credit, which is all just worthless digits in their database. I would happily pay higher interest rates on real money, money the banking system can't just magic out of thin air. What a scam it is. By "people with views like yours", I'm referring to those who are educated in finance, but a) have sadly been indoctrinated with Keynesian nonsense b) don't understand what money actually is
  - notahacker 3y ago
    Bless, you're still feigning superior understanding. Hint: if you want to insist that it's other people who "don't understand what money is", it helps for you not to flip from "fresh money is handed to the debtor" to "the banking system doesn't provide money" in mid-argument. And nope, even eliding definitions of money doesn't salvage an argument as hopelessly ignorant as "if it isn't repaid, the banking system is no worse off than before". (For the record I understand the theory that a "sound" monetary system is ideally based on quantities of a durable commodity of naturally limited supply perfectly well, just like I understand other terrible nineteenth century theories like the idea that value is ideally based on a fixed quantity of labour. Judging by your utterance of the phrase "digital hard money" to refer to digits in a distributed database created out of thin air, I'm not so sure you actually do.)

by npoc 3y ago

notahacker 3y ago

I assume by "people with views like yours" you mean people who haven't formed their impression of how the financial system works from solely from lists of falsely-attributed pithy quotes Learning how stuff actually works doesn't mean you can't see woods, but it does save the embarrassment of claiming that the banking system is no worse off if debts aren't repaid. I mean, I've encountered some pretty wild takes on the 2007 financial crisis before, but I've never encountered anyone that thinks it didn't happen! It also means you can say stuff like "Fact 4: "printing" dollars and bearing the risk of non-repayment of loans represents a cost to banks", and come to the conclusion that seems to give them a pretty good reason to be able to charge interest. And also to suggest that if you think current interest rates aren't "value for money" you should probably rethink your calls for them to go up! The irony of shilling for "digital hard money" - i.e an ever increasing range of entirely synthetic assets entirely printed in the last 15 years whose demand is driven partly by counterfeit dollars and partly on people borrowing to speculate on other-newly printed entirely synthetic assets... after complaining about expansionary dynamics in M2 (which unlike "digital hard money" sometimes has a downslope) is just chefs kiss.

npoc 3y ago
Once again you're entirely missing the bigger picture. Bank interest rates aren't paying for money - they're just paying for the banking system. The banking system doesn't provide money - it just provides credit, backed by more of their credit, which is all just worthless digits in their database. I would happily pay higher interest rates on real money, money the banking system can't just magic out of thin air. What a scam it is. By "people with views like yours", I'm referring to those who are educated in finance, but a) have sadly been indoctrinated with Keynesian nonsense b) don't understand what money actually is
- notahacker 3y ago
  Bless, you're still feigning superior understanding. Hint: if you want to insist that it's other people who "don't understand what money is", it helps for you not to flip from "fresh money is handed to the debtor" to "the banking system doesn't provide money" in mid-argument. And nope, even eliding definitions of money doesn't salvage an argument as hopelessly ignorant as "if it isn't repaid, the banking system is no worse off than before". (For the record I understand the theory that a "sound" monetary system is ideally based on quantities of a durable commodity of naturally limited supply perfectly well, just like I understand other terrible nineteenth century theories like the idea that value is ideally based on a fixed quantity of labour. Judging by your utterance of the phrase "digital hard money" to refer to digits in a distributed database created out of thin air, I'm not so sure you actually do.)