Search Results
ID: 8W4QTl/L/biz/60577585#60582135
7/4/2025, 8:57:10 PM
>>60582031
>I disagree completely.
Only because you have taken "interest" on "credit" and, therefore, are a convert and a believer.
>Savings is supposed be scarce and utilizing that savings needs to come at a cost.
It did, and the price has been paid.
>This prevents the misallocation of resources such as financing consumer spending instead of capital investment.
Capital is nourished by consumption. It's symbiotic, not exclusive.
>Our economy was hollowed out and this was enabled with the expansion of credit. That was a function of interest rates and it brought us to this point of wild, rampant speculation and unsustainable government spending.
Maybe, maybe not. Some don't believe in instruments being able to substantiate demands, demands are met by supplies and suppliers, goods and services by and for the people. You assert that the economy has been hollowed out, to which I can not agree or disagree because I do not fully subscribe to or believe in instruments of representative value, but instead I accept that which is real is true, and that which is true is also real. Meaning: if there's a need, it shall be met. Supply/demand. Not if there's a desire, it shall be fulfilled debt/credit.
>It's going to end in a financial calamity because the real-world economy can't just be ignored forever. If no one is saving then where is all of this stuff coming from? How can the government spend trillions on a military and wars only to turn around and repay you plus interest?
On this, we agree, however, from different perspectives. You have chosen to view the economy from the perspective that the government has programmed into you, that debt exists only through the medium of the instruments they either create (FRN's) or that they sanction to be used (anything tied to FRN's) I on the other hand don't calculate valuation through FRN's exclusively but choose to take "interest" in the people as wherein the inherent value exists, regardless of the imaginary unit's of account.
>I disagree completely.
Only because you have taken "interest" on "credit" and, therefore, are a convert and a believer.
>Savings is supposed be scarce and utilizing that savings needs to come at a cost.
It did, and the price has been paid.
>This prevents the misallocation of resources such as financing consumer spending instead of capital investment.
Capital is nourished by consumption. It's symbiotic, not exclusive.
>Our economy was hollowed out and this was enabled with the expansion of credit. That was a function of interest rates and it brought us to this point of wild, rampant speculation and unsustainable government spending.
Maybe, maybe not. Some don't believe in instruments being able to substantiate demands, demands are met by supplies and suppliers, goods and services by and for the people. You assert that the economy has been hollowed out, to which I can not agree or disagree because I do not fully subscribe to or believe in instruments of representative value, but instead I accept that which is real is true, and that which is true is also real. Meaning: if there's a need, it shall be met. Supply/demand. Not if there's a desire, it shall be fulfilled debt/credit.
>It's going to end in a financial calamity because the real-world economy can't just be ignored forever. If no one is saving then where is all of this stuff coming from? How can the government spend trillions on a military and wars only to turn around and repay you plus interest?
On this, we agree, however, from different perspectives. You have chosen to view the economy from the perspective that the government has programmed into you, that debt exists only through the medium of the instruments they either create (FRN's) or that they sanction to be used (anything tied to FRN's) I on the other hand don't calculate valuation through FRN's exclusively but choose to take "interest" in the people as wherein the inherent value exists, regardless of the imaginary unit's of account.
Page 1