> Saying "For one business to pay back what it owes, another must go bankrupt", he reveals a childish idea that all business must be zero-sum, so that there mus

> Saying "For one business to pay back what it owes, another must go bankrupt", he reveals a childish idea that all business must be zero-sum, so that there must always be a winner and a loser. I think he's making a comment about the fact that fiat money bears interest. So if there's $1000 of fiat money in the system, then there's a total of (say) $1200 owed to the central bank. So we have 2 corporations, each of which has borrowed $500 from the central bank, and owes $600 to it. If the bank were unwilling to increase the money supply through further loans, then one of those corporations would necessarily default (assuming that they have to pay it back in the currency they borrowed.) But fiat money doesn't really work this way, so it's a very moot point.