4 ms·
>Why don't we just collectively forget/forgive our debts, then? I know, right? I mean, why don't I just throw these BofA bonds I own, paying 6.5% annually, in
by hnnewguy 12y ago
>Why don't we just collectively forget/forgive our debts, then?
I know, right? I mean, why don't I just throw these BofA bonds I own, paying 6.5% annually, into the trash because I don't like money. In the meantime, why doesn't Ford just give me the car I financed?
>Folks, if you think this astrologist/alchemist Krugman is doing scientific work in Economics, please stop and think
Don't project your financial ignorance on other people, just because you don't understand how a balance sheet works. Someone's debt is another's asset; someone's income is another's expense.
His politics aside, Krugman is right in pointing out a fallacy that I see over and over again in the mainstream. That is, looking at only one side of the sheet. For example, the US households have so much debt! Well, guess how much value they have in assets?
- msandford 12y ago> For example, the US households have so much debt! Well, guess how much value they have in assets? After the housing bubble collapse? Many of them have fewer assets than debt leading to bankruptcy. Assets aren't required to go up along with debt as a law of nature. Some people do a good job of buying undervalued things, other don't.
- innguest 12y agoValue is in the eye of the beholder (or potential buyer). I see you cut my quote halfway so you didn't have to present a case that mainstream economics is scientific, which I'm yet to see. Please show some yet-unfalsified falsifiable statements in mainstream Economics so that it can be shown that it is scientific and true. Don't give me a run around with lots of words and no proof.