- 14 Dec 2011 09:48
#13851908
That's true, technically. But it's also pretty much true under gold standard, unless everybody lugged pieces of gold everywhere, which of course didn't happen under the gold standard. Without debt (i.e. liabilities) there can be no checking accounts, no banknotes, no bonds and, no mortgages, no business loans, gold standard or not. The institution of debt is a good thing.
Again true, but only technically. It's not a "problem". There doesn't need to be a national debt, and nobody else has to have negative net worth. Liabilities need to exist, but they are a good thing rather than a "problem". One can hardly imagine an economy without pervasive liabilities, gold standard or not. It would hardly be possible to start most businesses without borrowing.
Negotiator wrote:Well, first of all, as long as we have fiat money and debt is actually the new gold standard, its simple: without debt, there would be no money.
That's true, technically. But it's also pretty much true under gold standard, unless everybody lugged pieces of gold everywhere, which of course didn't happen under the gold standard. Without debt (i.e. liabilities) there can be no checking accounts, no banknotes, no bonds and, no mortgages, no business loans, gold standard or not. The institution of debt is a good thing.
Therefore, the only alternative to state debt is private debt. That is the core problem of why we cannot get rid of debt, and state debt seems to be ever increasing. Our economy couldnt operate at all if there is nobody with debt.
Again true, but only technically. It's not a "problem". There doesn't need to be a national debt, and nobody else has to have negative net worth. Liabilities need to exist, but they are a good thing rather than a "problem". One can hardly imagine an economy without pervasive liabilities, gold standard or not. It would hardly be possible to start most businesses without borrowing.