Banking by Donald Trump & Gotham City

Melissa Rivera5 said:Okay, I guess some people here aren't quite catching my drift. Until we actually start building factories and working the land—you know, in areas where it makes sense based on the soil, the weather, our expertise, whatever—our economic situation isn't going to improve. Not even in theory. All this talk about how interest rates are too high to make anything worth it... I don't know, it just sounds like typical excuses from people waiting for some magic fix to happen out of nowhere. We really need to work harder and smarter, and maybe take out fewer loans. And when I say work harder, I mean doing things legally, paying the taxes and fees that are supposed to go in instead of everything being under the table.
Personally, I find it kind of hilarious how everyone always wants to trade with the government. I mean, that’s basically just trading with ourselves, right? Just moving money between taxpayers. We should be focusing on manufacturing and exports. As for tourism, yeah, that’s definitely a huge part of the income, and we shouldn't sleep on that either.
Just so there's no confusion, I am planning to start my own business and get into manufacturing myself, but I already know how people will react: they’ll probably label me some evil capitalist who's just stealing from "good, moral citizens" out of pure greed. At the same time, they'll wonder why I'm not just living off government checks and welfare. It was like that with, say, Anheuser-Busch. Or back when my parents bought land using money they Earned from a private company, people immediately jumped on them, claiming the Republican Party must have given it to them for free and asking who they think they are to deserve anything when others might deserve more. It never even crossed anyone's mind that they bought it with EARNED money. Look, guys, if you don't work, you won't Earn. There's no such thing as a free lunch, and there's definitely no economy without industry. All this whining about interest rates is just nonsense. Wake up, people! We need to start WORKING, not sitting around waiting for someone to hand us something on a silver platter.

This is honestly the simplest and most accurate way to put it!!

Maria Thomas48 said:Where did you find this info about money being printed in a controlled way today? Debt is what gets printed, not money. Credit is debt!

Preventing banks from accumulating debt altogether? That's absolute nonsense... let's try this: imagine for a second we abolish banks and borrowing through the Constitution. That's it. No banks, no interest, no debt, no borrowing. See?

Yeah, that's exactly what I did, and I concluded that something isn't right: http://sites.google.com/site/financi...zavni-proracun

There are no banks here, but there are obvious problems.

Where do you see the problem in America? It should be obvious that the issue lies in weak economic activity, low employment, massive government spending, inefficiency, lack of productivity, a huge shadow economy, and a small GDP that isn't enough to cover rising costs. Too much labor supply, too little capital, too few educated people, lacking technology, etc., etc.

So since you clearly have extra time on your hands, maybe spend it coming up with ideas to stimulate the economy, boost growth, reduce unemployment, increase productivity, exports, etc., etc., instead of just moving things from one empty hole to another..

The primary problem in America is money acting as debt. Money is the foundation of everything's development. Everything comes down to price and profitability. I used math to determine that work in America (if the trade balance were balanced and there were no credits) is simply not profitable. With a trade deficit, working becomes even less profitable globally, especially because our money is essentially debt.

A real stimulus for the economy is creating conditions where work is actually profitable. If we have global profitability in labor, then we have a reason to produce and work. It can't work the other way around! Would you take a job if someone told you: "Do it, and then we'll see if it ends up being profitable"? Probably not. I ran the numbers for the whole country and the result was: there is no profitability in labor. No kind of work has created capital accumulation. And if there is no global accumulation of capital, there is no way to pay off debts.😕

Export-heavy countries have capital accumulation from exports, but their internal banking systems produce even more debt for them. China has a major problem with inflation. Their move was to raise reserve requirements for banks. Specifically, reducing money multiplication. That is a rare move that shows which direction needs to be taken. Only they can do that because they have a surplus in trade.

Please, just take a second and actually read what I’ve put here. Just set aside all that nonsense about printing money for a moment. We aren't talking about handouts; we're talking about creating new value, and you can't have an increase in value without a corresponding increase in real money supply.

Also, it's strange how nobody seems to want to touch that article regarding the bleached state budget. What happened? Did everyone suddenly lose their voices? Is there some kind of cover-up? Because the full truth is being completely misinterpreted by the mainstream media.

Then there is this piece on the actual fallout from inflation:



Take a look at the image above. It’s pretty simple, really. Even someone who isn't paying attention should see that pumping out money through credit eventually leads to nothing but endless debt.

The UK recently realized they’ve racked up more debt than they actually have liquid cash in the country. This chart explains exactly why.

It’s interesting because I put this together over a year ago, and the timing where debt overtakes the money supply lines up perfectly with my prediction that we'd end up facing a situation just like modern-day Greece.

So what's the alternative? Just sit around crying about how life is hard and wait for the government to send us social security checks? How do you even survive on welfare? Or do you actually have some motivation to get moving and zaraditi some dollars? There isn't a single country in the world that isn't in debt, and there certainly isn't a country where labor isn't profitable (at least in theory). Even Zimbabwe, with inflation measured in trillions of percent, isn't like that. Let alone the USA...

Maria Thomas48 said:Where did you find this info about money being printed in a controlled way today? Debt is what gets printed, not money. Credit is debt!

Preventing banks from accumulating debt altogether? That's absolute nonsense... let's try this: imagine for a second we abolish banks and borrowing through the Constitution. That's it. No banks, no interest, no debt, no borrowing. See?

Yeah, that's exactly what I did, and I concluded that something isn't right: http://sites.google.com/site/financi...zavni-proracun

There are no banks here, but there are obvious problems.

Where do you see the problem in America? It should be obvious that the issue lies in weak economic activity, low employment, massive government spending, inefficiency, lack of productivity, a huge shadow economy, and a small GDP that isn't enough to cover rising costs. Too much labor supply, too little capital, too few educated people, lacking technology, etc., etc.

So since you clearly have extra time on your hands, maybe spend it coming up with ideas to stimulate the economy, boost growth, reduce unemployment, increase productivity, exports, etc., etc., instead of just moving things from one empty hole to another..

The primary problem in America is money acting as debt. Money is the foundation of everything's development. Everything comes down to price and profitability. I used math to determine that work in America (if the trade balance were balanced and there were no credits) is simply not profitable. With a trade deficit, working becomes even less profitable globally, especially because our money is essentially debt.

A real stimulus for the economy is creating conditions where work is actually profitable. If we have global profitability in labor, then we have a reason to produce and work. It can't work the other way around! Would you take a job if someone told you: "Do it, and then we'll see if it ends up being profitable"? Probably not. I ran the numbers for the whole country and the result was: there is no profitability in labor. No kind of work has created capital accumulation. And if there is no global accumulation of capital, there is no way to pay off debts.😕

Export-heavy countries have capital accumulation from exports, but their internal banking systems produce even more debt for them. China has a major problem with inflation. Their move was to raise reserve requirements for banks. Specifically, reducing money multiplication. That is a rare move that shows which direction needs to be taken. Only they can do that because they have a surplus in trade.

Please, just take a second and actually read what I’ve put here. Just set aside all that nonsense about printing money for a moment. We aren't talking about handouts; we're talking about creating new value, and you can't have an increase in value without a corresponding increase in real money supply.

Also, it's strange how nobody seems to want to touch that article regarding the bleached state budget. What happened? Did everyone suddenly lose their voices? Is there some kind of cover-up? Because the full truth is being completely misinterpreted by the mainstream media.

Then there is this piece on the actual fallout from inflation:



Take a look at the image above. It’s pretty simple, really. Even someone who isn't paying attention should see that pumping out money through credit eventually leads to nothing but endless debt.

The UK recently realized they’ve racked up more debt than they actually have liquid cash in the country. This chart explains exactly why.

It’s interesting because I put this together over a year ago, and the timing where debt overtakes the money supply lines up perfectly with my prediction that we'd end up facing a situation just like modern-day Greece.

Well, obviously you wouldn't do something if you calculated—or even just suspected—that it wasn't profitable. In our case, "making work profitable" won't result in some grand macroeconomic masterstroke; it would mostly just stop bleeding the government dry. Just look at a standard paycheck. Almost 50% vanishes into taxes, which eventually gets redistributed to fraudulent disability claimants, retirees who are basically thirty-five, and various social cases that don't even bother looking for work—not to mention certain minority groups who get special treatment because they vote for the Republican Party. Instead of that, you COULD create a situation where the tax burden is significantly lower, which would boost both domestic investment and individual spending. It really just comes down to whether anyone has the willpower or the guts to do it...

Maria Thomas48 said:Where did you find this info about money being printed in a controlled way today? Debt is what gets printed, not money. Credit is debt!

Preventing banks from accumulating debt altogether? That's absolute nonsense... let's try this: imagine for a second we abolish banks and borrowing through the Constitution. That's it. No banks, no interest, no debt, no borrowing. See?

Yeah, that's exactly what I did, and I concluded that something isn't right: http://sites.google.com/site/financi...zavni-proracun

There are no banks here, but there are obvious problems.

Where do you see the problem in America? It should be obvious that the issue lies in weak economic activity, low employment, massive government spending, inefficiency, lack of productivity, a huge shadow economy, and a small GDP that isn't enough to cover rising costs. Too much labor supply, too little capital, too few educated people, lacking technology, etc., etc.

So since you clearly have extra time on your hands, maybe spend it coming up with ideas to stimulate the economy, boost growth, reduce unemployment, increase productivity, exports, etc., etc., instead of just moving things from one empty hole to another..

The primary problem in America is money acting as debt. Money is the foundation of everything's development. Everything comes down to price and profitability. I used math to determine that work in America (if the trade balance were balanced and there were no credits) is simply not profitable. With a trade deficit, working becomes even less profitable globally, especially because our money is essentially debt.

A real stimulus for the economy is creating conditions where work is actually profitable. If we have global profitability in labor, then we have a reason to produce and work. It can't work the other way around! Would you take a job if someone told you: "Do it, and then we'll see if it ends up being profitable"? Probably not. I ran the numbers for the whole country and the result was: there is no profitability in labor. No kind of work has created capital accumulation. And if there is no global accumulation of capital, there is no way to pay off debts.😕

Export-heavy countries have capital accumulation from exports, but their internal banking systems produce even more debt for them. China has a major problem with inflation. Their move was to raise reserve requirements for banks. Specifically, reducing money multiplication. That is a rare move that shows which direction needs to be taken. Only they can do that because they have a surplus in trade.

Please, just take a second and actually read what I’ve put here. Just set aside all that nonsense about printing money for a moment. We aren't talking about handouts; we're talking about creating new value, and you can't have an increase in value without a corresponding increase in real money supply.

Also, it's strange how nobody seems to want to touch that article regarding the bleached state budget. What happened? Did everyone suddenly lose their voices? Is there some kind of cover-up? Because the full truth is being completely misinterpreted by the mainstream media.

Then there is this piece on the actual fallout from inflation:



Take a look at the image above. It’s pretty simple, really. Even someone who isn't paying attention should see that pumping out money through credit eventually leads to nothing but endless debt.

The UK recently realized they’ve racked up more debt than they actually have liquid cash in the country. This chart explains exactly why.

It’s interesting because I put this together over a year ago, and the timing where debt overtakes the money supply lines up perfectly with my prediction that we'd end up facing a situation just like modern-day Greece.

We aren't going to reach Greece's level even if we triple our debt!! It sounds ridiculous, but compared to them, we're basically industrious Japanese workers!! I mean, what products have they actually manufactured and exported? Metaxa? Ouzo? An olive branch? They survive on a few months of tourism while the national budget is brutally drained by excessively high pension payouts. That's the only area where we really resemble them. Our debt is "only" at 62% of GDP, while the European Union wants it under 60%. So, forget Greece. I'm not saying things are perfect here—far from it—but saying we are like Greece, or that we are heading there, is nowhere near the truth...

Since Pernar has basically adopted everything from the ideas of Nostradamus, we really ought to just rename this entire thread Banking by Nostradamus.

goldenwolf13 said:This is honestly the simplest and most accurate way to put it!!

So what's the alternative? Just sit around crying about how life is hard and wait for the government to send us social security checks? How do you even survive on welfare? Or do you actually have some motivation to get moving and zaraditi some dollars? There isn't a single country in the world that isn't in debt, and there certainly isn't a country where labor isn't profitable (at least in theory). Even Zimbabwe, with inflation measured in trillions of percent, isn't like that. Let alone the USA...

Well, obviously you wouldn't do something if you calculated—or even just suspected—that it wasn't profitable. In our case, "making work profitable" won't result in some grand macroeconomic masterstroke; it would mostly just stop bleeding the government dry. Just look at a standard paycheck. Almost 50% vanishes into taxes, which eventually gets redistributed to fraudulent disability claimants, retirees who are basically thirty-five, and various social cases that don't even bother looking for work—not to mention certain minority groups who get special treatment because they vote for the Republican Party. Instead of that, you COULD create a situation where the tax burden is significantly lower, which would boost both domestic investment and individual spending. It really just comes down to whether anyone has the willpower or the guts to do it...

We aren't going to reach Greece's level even if we triple our debt!! It sounds ridiculous, but compared to them, we're basically industrious Japanese workers!! I mean, what products have they actually manufactured and exported? Metaxa? Ouzo? An olive branch? They survive on a few months of tourism while the national budget is brutally drained by excessively high pension payouts. That's the only area where we really resemble them. Our debt is "only" at 62% of GDP, while the European Union wants it under 60%. So, forget Greece. I'm not saying things are perfect here—far from it—but saying we are like Greece, or that we are heading there, is nowhere near the truth...

Exactly. Tell us slaves that we just need to work and not worry about ever being free. Look around, everyone else is a slave too. Just grind and forget about retirement.😂

Of course you aren't going to work if you think—or have calculated—that it isn't worth it. In this country, making work "profitable" won't be achieved through some grand macroeconomic maneuver; it's about relieving the burden on the state. Just look at a standard paycheck. Almost 50% disappears into taxes, which then gets redistributed to fake disability claimants, retirees who should be working, social cases who won't even try to find a job, and various minority groups who get special treatment because they vote for the Republican Party... instead, you COULD create a situation where the tax burden is much lower, which would boost both domestic investment and individual spending. It's just a matter of will and courage...

Wait, why am I even typing like this? I'm not talking about isolated incidents here, I'm talking about the entire nation. If you can prove to me that 4.5 million Ivica Todorić types can actually succeed, then more power to you.

We won't catch up to Greece even if we take on three times this much debt!! It sounds ridiculous, but we act like hardworking Japanese people!! What products have they even manufactured and exported? Metaxa? Ouzo? An olive branch? They live off a few months of tourism and brutally drain the national budget with excessive pension payouts. That's the only area where we really resemble them. Our debt is "only" at 62% of GDP, and the European Union wants 60%. Forget Greece, forget all that... I'm not saying things are perfect here, far from it, but saying we are like Greece or aiming for that is nowhere near the truth...

We aren't going to catch up to Greece; we're going to be in the exact same mess Greece is in today within six years. We are six years behind them. The first crisis will hit immediately after (if) we join the European Union. And they won't help us anymore, because once you're in the European Union, there is no rescue coming.

Jerry Williams41 said:Since Pernar has basically adopted everything from the ideas of Nostradamus, we really ought to just rename this entire thread Banking by Nostradamus.

The difference is that I don't care about a political career. Pernar needs a platform if he wants to break through in the political scene. And I have nothing against using that platform. Especially since we can say it guarantees results without any guesswork.

Everything is clean, simple, and easy to grasp. You just have to toss out the half-truths and the empty slogans we hear today. Like investigators would say: "Follow the money." That is exactly what I and Pernar do. Everything is explained through the flow of money. Simple math simulations reveal things you won't find in macroeconomics textbooks.

The most common complaints about this reform are usually:

1. Inflation - but actually, it is an anti-inflationary reform with a stable dollar
2. Controlling unnecessary price hikes - again, an anti-inflationary measure
3. Constant money supply - A developmental measure that works wonders when combined with no inflation—there are no crises dictated by big capital. No interest rate changes
4. Tariffs - there is no national development without defending against unnecessary imports—buying things we haven't earned
5. Cutting interest rates - everyone who held onto their money hoping it would work for them will see low returns because the dollar is stable, and money won't be sitting in banks anymore; instead, the government will issue it in the necessary amounts (which is less than what happens during credit expansion)

Not a single political party offers such a solid foundational program that serves as a basis for progress. They don't have the guts to fight for their own country. Everyone is just thinking about their own pockets. A country that doesn't issue its own currency is destined to fail under endless debt (like Japan, Italy, Germany, ...).

The flow of money explains everything:

-Why privatization fails
-Why mutual funds fail
-Why tax policy can't find a solution
-Why debts are rising in all countries
-Why inflation doesn't hurt the banks
-Why a drop in credit expansion leads to crisis, while growth leads to inflation
-Why the government has to take out loans for the budget deficit
-Why we have a budget deficit in the first place
-Why companies go bankrupt one after another across various industries
-Why we can't get rid of loss-makers
-Why extending work years for retirement is a scam
-Why new investments can't jumpstart the economy and reverse the trend
-Why debts grow at an abnormal speed
-Why free trade is a hoax
-Why the European Union is a scam
-Why foreign investment is ultimately bad
-Why Greece can't function without a revolution on the green branch (when they lack sense)
-Why the euro falls (because the banks' appetite for earning from Greece and other countries is unsustainable)
-Why the euro will fail
-Why our only option in the EU will be accumulating debt
-Why fractional reserve banking is just a simulation of money issuance
-Why inflation is merely a consequence of greed and the inability to cover costs
-Why the credit system creates inflation
-Why low interest rates don't solve the debt problem
-Why government control over these banks doesn't solve the problem
-Why selling off state assets is unnecessary to exit a crisis
-Why interest rates are linked to trade surpluses, not to a country's risk
-Why even countries with the best exports continue to increase their debts
-etc.

So now you tell me, which economist have you heard lately that gave a correct answer to all these questions?

So, what’s the verdict on this one?



http://juliasegal.tumblr.com/post/212241319

Of course we can't just have 4.5 million versions of Ivica Todorić. Someone actually has to be the maid, the chef, the machinist, the doctor, or the business owner... this isn't some Platonic utopia, it's real life. Honestly, 200 Todorićs would be plenty for us. 🙂

I know it’s probably a bit tough to swallow the fact that we’re all going to have to actually WORK, but there really isn't any other way. The government isn't handing out checks anymore. It’s not even that they don't want to, it's just that the money isn't there. You're going to have to put in the hours and zaraditi for yourself, just like I do and everyone else who wants to live an honest life...

goldenwolf13 said:Of course we can't just have 4.5 million versions of Ivica Todorić. Someone actually has to be the maid, the chef, the machinist, the doctor, or the business owner... this isn't some Platonic utopia, it's real life. Honestly, 200 Todorićs would be plenty for us. 🙂

I know it’s probably a bit tough to swallow the fact that we’re all going to have to actually WORK, but there really isn't any other way. The government isn't handing out checks anymore. It’s not even that they don't want to, it's just that the money isn't there. You're going to have to put in the hours and zaraditi for yourself, just like I do and everyone else who wants to live an honest life...

That is just a crude example which basically means: We cannot have every single citizen be successful (meaning they save money or cover their costs through their labor) because that is impossible right now. And that has absolutely nothing to do with work ethic; it's about how money is regulated within the country.

Take your own family as an example. If you were all trading within the family, how would you manage to make sure everyone covers their expenses from their work, and some even manage to save? It is an impossible mission without adding more money (either via an outside influx or by issuing it yourselves).

If you can't figure out the money regulation for your own working family, why do you think it works for the entire country?

Maria Thomas48 said:Exactly. Tell us slaves that we just need to work and not worry about ever being free. Look around, everyone else is a slave too. Just grind and forget about retirement.😂

Of course you aren't going to work if you think—or have calculated—that it isn't worth it. In this country, making work "profitable" won't be achieved through some grand macroeconomic maneuver; it's about relieving the burden on the state. Just look at a standard paycheck. Almost 50% disappears into taxes, which then gets redistributed to fake disability claimants, retirees who should be working, social cases who won't even try to find a job, and various minority groups who get special treatment because they vote for the Republican Party... instead, you COULD create a situation where the tax burden is much lower, which would boost both domestic investment and individual spending. It's just a matter of will and courage...

Wait, why am I even typing like this? I'm not talking about isolated incidents here, I'm talking about the entire nation. If you can prove to me that 4.5 million Ivica Todorić types can actually succeed, then more power to you.

We won't catch up to Greece even if we take on three times this much debt!! It sounds ridiculous, but we act like hardworking Japanese people!! What products have they even manufactured and exported? Metaxa? Ouzo? An olive branch? They live off a few months of tourism and brutally drain the national budget with excessive pension payouts. That's the only area where we really resemble them. Our debt is "only" at 62% of GDP, and the European Union wants 60%. Forget Greece, forget all that... I'm not saying things are perfect here, far from it, but saying we are like Greece or aiming for that is nowhere near the truth...

We aren't going to catch up to Greece; we're going to be in the exact same mess Greece is in today within six years. We are six years behind them. The first crisis will hit immediately after (if) we join the European Union. And they won't help us anymore, because once you're in the European Union, there is no rescue coming.

I see how it is. You and people like you are just plain old lazy, honestly. I guess you just expect everyone else to do the heavy lifting for you because you think you're some kind of big deal. I guess I'm just gonna say it... P.Look, you’re being pretty personal here. I don't think you have any clue about how economics actually works, let alone regulation or how to actually tackle inflation. Honestly, what you're suggesting feels way more like a planned economy or some kind of social communism than anything resembling actual democracy or capitalism.
I guess it’s because of people like you—folks who just don't want to put in the work and instead blame everyone else for their own mess, while simultaneously acting like money is evil and making poverty seem some kind of virtue—that we ended up stuck exactly where we are.

Maria Thomas48 said:That is just a crude example which basically means: We cannot have every single citizen be successful (meaning they save money or cover their costs through their labor) because that is impossible right now. And that has absolutely nothing to do with work ethic; it's about how money is regulated within the country.

Take your own family as an example. If you were all trading within the family, how would you manage to make sure everyone covers their expenses from their work, and some even manage to save? It is an impossible mission without adding more money (either via an outside influx or by issuing it yourselves).

If you can't figure out the money regulation for your own working family, why do you think it works for the entire country?

Man, you're talking nonsense. Nobody is talking about some isolated island here. That influx of cash you're obsessing over comes from exports. But to get that, you actually have to produce stuff, which is something you don't seem to be considering at all.

Melissa Rivera5 said:I see how it is. You and people like you are just plain old lazy, honestly. I guess you just expect everyone else to do the heavy lifting for you because you think you're some kind of big deal. I guess I'm just gonna say it... P.Look, you’re being pretty personal here. I don't think you have any clue about how economics actually works, let alone regulation or how to actually tackle inflation. Honestly, what you're suggesting feels way more like a planned economy or some kind of social communism than anything resembling actual democracy or capitalism.
I guess it’s because of people like you—folks who just don't want to put in the work and instead blame everyone else for their own mess, while simultaneously acting like money is evil and making poverty seem some kind of virtue—that we ended up stuck exactly where we are.

So now we've moved the goalposts to qualifications. You can't win an argument, so you just claim you're qualified to have the argument instead. Nice move.

Here is something to chew on: An Excel trading spreadsheet within a closed system

You can swap out the transactions and watch what happens. The result always points back to the same thing: for every single entity to turn a profit or at least break even, the government has to run a deficit. And that deficit gets covered by issuing debt. No banks involved.

No empty buzzwords here—just pure math.

Melissa Rivera5 said:Man, you're talking nonsense. Nobody is talking about some isolated island here. That influx of cash you're obsessing over comes from exports. But to get that, you actually have to produce stuff, which is something you don't seem to be considering at all.

Bravo, we're getting closer to the point now. So, basically, 4.5 million people can't live in prosperity if there isn't an outside market.

By that logic, the entire planet couldn't live in prosperity without interplanetary exports. So we just wait. Maybe that was the whole meaning behind 2012?

😵😵😵😵 Look, man, you’re out here acting like we're talking about some isolated island with zero exports, but we're actually talking about a nation that trades. I don't know, is that really that hard to wrap your head around? Like, if you export stuff, money flows in, and then everyone can get paid. You just keep ignoring that part and insisting the country is totally cut off, which honestly feels like you're either clueless or just choosing to ignore reality (and, uh, you're putting words in my mouth by saying I think it's an isolated state).
So, if it's just me and my family trading amongst ourselves, yeah, that's a zero sum game where the total amount of cash stays the same. But, if I suddenly decide to start trading with people outside the family, then the influx of money into the family is huge, and we'll all be driving Aston Martins.
Does that click now? I feel like I've said this four times already, but you just keep obsessing over this idea of an isolated country with nothing but internal trade.

PS
It's called an ad hominem, not qualifying, and that economic principle you were tripping on—the one I just debunked—is "zero sum game." Maybe try picking up some basics.

Melissa Rivera5 said:😵😵😵😵 Look, man, you’re out here acting like we're talking about some isolated island with zero exports, but we're actually talking about a nation that trades. I don't know, is that really that hard to wrap your head around? Like, if you export stuff, money flows in, and then everyone can get paid. You just keep ignoring that part and insisting the country is totally cut off, which honestly feels like you're either clueless or just choosing to ignore reality (and, uh, you're putting words in my mouth by saying I think it's an isolated state).
So, if it's just me and my family trading amongst ourselves, yeah, that's a zero sum game where the total amount of cash stays the same. But, if I suddenly decide to start trading with people outside the family, then the influx of money into the family is huge, and we'll all be driving Aston Martins.
Does that click now? I feel like I've said this four times already, but you just keep obsessing over this idea of an isolated country with nothing but internal trade.

PS
It's called an ad hominem, not qualifying, and that economic principle you were tripping on—the one I just debunked—is "zero sum game." Maybe try picking up some basics.

Just please, get it once. Some people (the big bankers) impose wrong money regulations through credit issuance (Federal Reserve) just to economically enslave nations and their citizens, and yet you guys insist our answer is simply exporting.

If fifteen people trading among themselves doesn't create a net profit, why should one hundred nations trading among themselves? It always ends up being divided into winners and losers—zero sum. The losers take out loans and become even bigger losers because they'll end up having to sell off everything in the country, falling right back into debt again.

By saying this, you're showing that you don't respect the arguments. A nation isn't just some regular family. It has to issue money. Right now, banks do that through credit expansion, and they are essentially enslaving all of us globally with debt that is larger than the actual credit issued.

We need to abolish the ability for private entities to issue money and return that power to the state. That would create the most important condition: any honest work can actually be paid for. Without that, there is no progress. An Excel spreadsheet proves it's impossible to pay everyone if someone is constantly hoarding even the smallest savings (like successful companies, individuals, or banks).

Maria Thomas48 said:Just please, get it once. Some people (the big bankers) impose wrong money regulations through credit issuance (Federal Reserve) just to economically enslave nations and their citizens, and yet you guys insist our answer is simply exporting.

If fifteen people trading among themselves doesn't create a net profit, why should one hundred nations trading among themselves? It always ends up being divided into winners and losers—zero sum. The losers take out loans and become even bigger losers because they'll end up having to sell off everything in the country, falling right back into debt again.

By saying this, you're showing that you don't respect the arguments. A nation isn't just some regular family. It has to issue money. Right now, banks do that through credit expansion, and they are essentially enslaving all of us globally with debt that is larger than the actual credit issued.

We need to abolish the ability for private entities to issue money and return that power to the state. That would create the most important condition: any honest work can actually be paid for. Without that, there is no progress. An Excel spreadsheet proves it's impossible to pay everyone if someone is constantly hoarding even the smallest savings (like successful companies, individuals, or banks).

I honestly find myself wondering how any kind of progress was even possible before they invented printing money...

Private money versus giving it back to the government... so you're saying the state should get to decide how much I can earn? That's just silly. It sounds like a planned economy, and we all know those are total failures. Honestly, if you're worried about this stuff, maybe the answer is just properly implementing Islamic banking—where there's an extra focus on making sure banks are actually "full reserve." Then the whole problem is basically solved.
The kind of socio-communism you’re pushing here would just lead us straight into a ditch. I don't think the government should be controlling anything at all.

Melissa Rivera5 said:Private money versus giving it back to the government... so you're saying the state should get to decide how much I can earn? That's just silly. It sounds like a planned economy, and we all know those are total failures. Honestly, if you're worried about this stuff, maybe the answer is just properly implementing Islamic banking—where there's an extra focus on making sure banks are actually "full reserve." Then the whole problem is basically solved.
The kind of socio-communism you’re pushing here would just lead us straight into a ditch. I don't think the government should be controlling anything at all.

So, it's better if bankers just fleece us dry for their own gain rather than having no debt and being in control of our own destiny?

Planned economy? A natural disaster doesn't yield a predictable result. If that's the logic, then we don't need a government at all. It’s also pretty logical that you probably support the European Union, where we won't be a real player, just a decorative state.

The government has to plan global supply because it shouldn't need a middleman. It has to plan infrastructure too. We've all seen that privatization doesn't actually improve a nation's financial standing. Which means we could sell everything off and deregulate everything, but there are still no solutions. There's no profit within a state unless you're exporting, which just moves the problem onto other countries. Anyone who carefully read what I wrote over at http://sites.google.com/site/financijskisustav could have grasped the whole thing and understood the current issue.

And in the end, it just leaves you with a basic Excel spreadsheet that is completely unsolvable for you people. Basically, you can't accept mathematics, but you can talk half-truths with total conviction just to try and prove that a lie is actually the truth.

placidranger said:I honestly find myself wondering how any kind of progress was even possible before they invented printing money...

Progress and prosperity aren't actually the same thing. You could have a world-class mansion built entirely by slaves living in luxury conditions. Is that progress? Sure. Is it prosperity? Not in my book. You just have one group working like slaves with nothing to show for it, while another group runs the show and pockets all the fruits of their labor.

Look, if you’re pulling in enough cash that you don't need a loan—or if you’ve actually got the discipline to save up before buying stuff—you’ll be totally fine and won't owe anyone anything. I mean, history pretty much shows that planned economies just end in a total disaster, leaving everyone broke and miserable. I guess the real issue here is that you just don't want to admit that. It isn't about some spreadsheets or whatever; it's more like you might not really grasp the fundamentals of what we're even talking about, or maybe you aren't looking at how things played out in the past. Honestly, high wages, solid exports, and moving toward full reserve banking would solve basically everything you're worried about.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Full-reserve_banking

Proponents argue that full reserve banking would get rid of the whole need for a lender of last resort, like the Federal Reserve, which usually steps in to prop up the banking system during a crisis. In this kind of setup, those systemic risks shouldn't even exist. Basically, it means banks would have enough liquid assets on hand to cover every single deposit if everyone tried to withdraw at once. This was actually a huge part of the Social Credit Party proposals.

Maria Thomas48 said:Progress and prosperity aren't actually the same thing. You could have a world-class mansion built entirely by slaves living in luxury conditions. Is that progress? Sure. Is it prosperity? Not in my book. You just have one group working like slaves with nothing to show for it, while another group runs the show and pockets all the fruits of their labor.

You're missing the point. Prosperity is entirely subjective.

If an economy requires constant money printing just to stay afloat, then neither true progress nor actual prosperity is even possible.

And how do we know progress can exist without constant monetary expansion? History proves it—it happened before, and it'll happen again. Everything you've argued falls apart under that reality.

Melissa Rivera5 said:Look, if you’re pulling in enough cash that you don't need a loan—or if you’ve actually got the discipline to save up before buying stuff—you’ll be totally fine and won't owe anyone anything. I mean, history pretty much shows that planned economies just end in a total disaster, leaving everyone broke and miserable. I guess the real issue here is that you just don't want to admit that. It isn't about some spreadsheets or whatever; it's more like you might not really grasp the fundamentals of what we're even talking about, or maybe you aren't looking at how things played out in the past. Honestly, high wages, solid exports, and moving toward full reserve banking would solve basically everything you're worried about.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Full-reserve_banking

Proponents argue that full reserve banking would get rid of the whole need for a lender of last resort, like the Federal Reserve, which usually steps in to prop up the banking system during a crisis. In this kind of setup, those systemic risks shouldn't even exist. Basically, it means banks would have enough liquid assets on hand to cover every single deposit if everyone tried to withdraw at once. This was actually a huge part of the Social Credit Party proposals.

The full reserve banking stuff you guys are talking about is a total scam. There’s a huge difference between having a 50% mandatory reserve on every deposit to make a profit and being without any reserve at all. Debt would just keep piling up.

For example. I have $33 and I put them in a one-year CD. You take out a loan from $33 and get in debt for $40. I go out, make some quick cash, and put those new $33 back into CDs. Your neighbor takes a loan from $33 and gets in debt for $40. And so on. Over the summer, I make 200 bucks and suddenly I have $6667 in CDs.

Do you see the result here? Money expansion. From an initial $33, we end up with a total of $6667 and $8000 in debt.

Then comes the next year. I start withdrawing slowly as the CDs mature. The main question is: Where is my $7333 going to come from? I didn't have it, and I couldn't spend it. Once I withdraw it, I'm just putting it in a safe. The bank still needs to make $667.

People talking about full reserve banking this way are clearly clueless because their math doesn't add up. They assume citizens can only save about 6% and think the scam won't be exposed for a long time. 😂