akphidelt, i enjoy your threads. not necessarily because i agree with you but it's interesting. i don't understand these assholes who just insult you when they could prove you wrong with facts. if you are a republican and only listen to rebublican news you are an idiot and if you are democrat and only listen to democrat news you are an idiot. my point is if you are giving a different side, these assholes should either debate or ignore you, i don't need to see these contests about who can type the most curse words.
I am curious as to why Obama does not use your title as a pitch when trying to sell his programs to the public. We only get away with not producing shit, because we are the worlds currency, right? You don't see things ending badly? Do you think that our military adventures overseas and monetary system are correlated in some way? I get the idea of an infinite credit card, where you only make the minimum payment, but what happens when you can't match the minimum with production?
No one in their right mind would think something as stupid as debt never have to be repaid. His fallacy theory wouldn't qualify for a fun activity in kindergarden class. What really bizarre is some libtards actually think that how it works in really life and I have yet to see any of them could show me how.
You know the problem with theory's dont you? They are all not created equal. Yours in particular has no explanatory power, the predictive asset to your theory simply doesnt exist over time. Why? Because the current situation isnt sustainable. Period. Point to me how the current economic situation is sustainable at this current pace without taking drastic measures to sustain it. And most people with any economic sense states that interest payments exceeding 10% of GDP will cause a default. Tic-toc, tic-toc. And that is just one of a hundred examples why you are wrong. Your a man of thoughts thus you call yourself a theorist. But if a theory isnt actionable, what is it? A Waste of time. Stop wasting yours.
he's started this exact type of thread 25 times give or take, touched on something in this area 100 times give or take, and many of us have disputed his arguments substantively on multiple occasions
but riddle me this, if he argues "the debt doesn't have to be repaid", isn't the counter "yes it does" just as factual?
do you actually think he proved his argument with facts?
pleeeeeeeease, just stop with the nonsense
You have an awful understanding of how fractional reserve banking works. Presumably, if bank has $50 in deposit, if the reserve ratio requirement is 10%, then total amount of loans bank is allowed to make equal $45 x 9 = $405. Banks can't just credit their accounts all they want. And you have yet to explain how did the bank get $50 in the first place.
Modern Monetary Theorist? LMAO!!!!
Thanks for the morning laugh.
man, I admire your resiliency and determination
damn, that's good
At current rates by 2015 that GDP will be 17.6 Trillion while the National Debt will be 24 Trillion. The interest payment on that debt will have increased by 50% in just three years and that is with record low interest rates. Just think in 2000 the Debt was 5.7 Trillion and the GDP was 9.1 Trillion. What we are seeing is unprecedented and it is clearly not sustainable, how can anyone be so damn dumb?
Lol, thanks. I know there are people out there who read the stuff I write and find it interesting. Those people that are intelligent enough to conceptualize such a complex issue.
Then you have the people on this forum, lol!! Do not listen to Willie, he has never once refuted anything I've said. Try it out for yourself, ask him a quesiton. Say "Can you please explain to me what akphidelt is wrong about?". His response will be that he already refuted it or he'll give you a link that tells you to go to another link than another link and you'll never actually get a direct answer from Willie, haha.
And Snoop is on a whole different level of idiocy. Willie is smart enough to not sound like an idiot, but Snoop pays no mind to what he says. Just look at his response to you. After reading the original thread how do you come up with me saying that the loans do not need to be repaid. The entire description is of how loans are repaid, lol. He is a stalker and a borderline schizo also.
The only two people to listen to is fletcher and guitarjosh. Even though fletcher is a dick. But take a look at fletchers response to this thread. He is talking about sustainability and things that have nothing to do with my thread. I'm simply describing how it works I'm not trying to say what the Govt should or shouldn't do!
I have plenty of hard evidence on everything I talk about if you ever want to see the information I'm reading and why I come to these conclusions. But whatever you do, do not listen to anyone of these clowns that are trying to refute me right now. They are embarrassingly dumb!
I explained how the debt is repaid. Are you really this dumb Willie? Please show me a quote in my thread that says the debt does not have to be repaid. I said the overall debt of the United States will NEVER be repaid because they just pay off the loans with new loans and there is an infinite amount of loans that can be made (of course with the Fed's help if you needed to make the amount of loans we made in the past 3 years).
Banks don't lend your deposits. They create deposits.
Yes, I have explained it numerous times. The debt isn't really "debt". As in we don't have to pay off the national debt. We have to pay off maturing debt by just rolling over more debt. And since we have an infinite amount of money we can rollover the national debt never actually has to be paid off and the national debt simply represents how much money the Govt has spent not "borrowed"... unless of course you consider the made up money by the banks to be considered real "borrowing".
You are beyond dumb snoop, you will never understand this!
Strawman is walking. Where did I say banks lend deposits? I said banks need reserve/deposit to create deposit. In your stupid theory, banks simply create deposit out of thin air and credit money to everybody accounts. How?
Basically you haven't said anything that none of us is not aware of. US Treasuries are mature and redeemed everyday. Government simply issues new debts to pay off old debts. Put it in easy term, it's same thing as an individual continues to transfer his/her balances from one credit card to another, and another, and another...until one day he or she can't find new creditor. That's is your argument and you need 1997358906 threads to try to explain this simple concept? LMAO!!!
If anyone is beyond dumb, it would be you, and it's been proven for 17497595 times yet again.
It's a conceptualization of how it would start with out previous reserves. Something that you can't grasp. It's a chicken or the egg. Either the Fed has to create the reserves first with out buying debt or the bank has to create deposits first to purchase the debt before the Fed can purchase. I do not see how hard this is grasp. But I also can not fathom how dumb you are as a person.
And in reality what happened was the Treasury took our gold stock, created certificates for this gold (basically creating Govt debt), and the Fed purchased these certificates from the Govt in order to back it's currency/reserves. So in reality the money did originate from Govt debt just like I show in my hypothetical example on how it would start off. But how it works does not change regardless of if you have reserves or if you don't.
The concept was turning the debt in to loans so people can conceptualize it better. Because people are still saying the Govt is broke, the Govt can't pay back the debt, etc. I'm sorry my simple example is to elementary for you. I didn't know your knowledge was so advanced, lol!!!
Yes, I'm sure people who read our threads believes I'm the dumb one... haha. I have yet to see a friend of yours come in to back your idiotic claims.
I don't deal with with conceptualization and fallacy theory. I'm handling money and deposit everyday. Unless you can explain it me how banks create deposit out of nothing, stick your stupidity in your ass.
What does this have anything to do with your stupid theory. How did bank create deposit from thin air?
Why don't you impress us with your "advance knowledge"? How could bank create loans when they don't have any deposit?
The bitch is pulling the last page from his debate handbook, when he is the corner, proceed with name calling, it will work 10 out of 10.
