Not at all, but didnt I already tell you in a previous post? My issue with this is not Fractional Reserve Banking (the proper term) or the fact that loans create more money. My issue is with some of the conclusions you people draw from it. Like that Youtube vid you posted, where they made it seem we are all slaves of some secret corporate overlord bank or something. The bond holders. Its with that specific thing I had an issue, bond holders somehow owning you, being capable of lifting you out of your home if they felt like it. Anyways, I explained all of that already.
Second is the idea that if I work Im somehow in debt. Why? Because the company I work for probably took out a loan? Loans do get repaid you know. Its like you guys think no loan ever gets repaid or something. Anyways, Im probably missing something here, so could you please explain why Im in debt when I work?
Right ok
now were talking instead of yelling
You are correct in the sense that it does seem very ominous.. and while you mentioned that the fed is regulated by law.. the laws on the subject are so loose that the fed has... alot of free reign. Over the years however the balance has shifted over to private banking.
The vid and shit like that go excessively overboard on that matter, I agree, calling them cartels etc. And the banks are not to blame for the system and the system itself cannot maintain without debt-based currency. This has to do with the principle that you. "Cant Just Mint Money". While I fully agree that the provided proof and general opinion makes it sound like theres a conspiracy theory.
But are you willing to accept or atleast see that there is truth to it, without that particular system there is no currency whatsoever. It used to be said that it was gold reserves for each country that decided worth. Thats where the whole conspiracy feeling comes from(its a 40 year old story though
) because the stories that were told were simply not true. Even before that gold decided worth but everything changed when the Dutch east india trading company decided that gold... would not longer fly since almost the entire world was being colonized they could no longer accept currency in the form of gold in the old sense.(it still had worth but less than it did when countries minted their own ducats everytime a new king took over(im exaggerating but yea)
Alright now I will explain what I meant by that comment about having a job = debt.. problem is.. ive done this whilst talking a million times... on text it doesnt POP but I will give it a go.
Say you have a job where you make 10 dollars a year under contract regardless of how many hours you work or whether or not its a permanent contract. Assume that besides that money you have nothing else. This means that you are worth 10 dollars a year to company X for the labor you provide. They reward you by giving you 10 dollars a year. So now you have 10 dollars.
Logic deduction says you worked for this money and therefore own it. I wont argue that. But this is not true. The money is literally lent to the company to compensate you so yes you are allowed to spend that money and by all accounts it is yours. However because the money was never the company that pays you to begin with the money technically doesnt belong to you its just a compensation for your time. By all accounts you are 10 dollars richer... at the same time.. from an accounting point of view you are now 10 dollars in debt. Thats where the conspiracy theory comes from not everyone knows accounting and not everyone actually balances their checkbook.
So you earn 10 dollars and you spend 10 dollars.... net result = -20 dollars
You will never view your expenditures like that because it will be depressing but companies and banks do it all the time. So when you spend 10 dollars youve earned you are actually spending 20 dollars. You wont be in debt when you spend that money... like a slave to a company.. but you need more money dont you? Thats also how salaries and balancing your checkbook works.
Making it just a bit more complicated:
10k salary
150k house
1000k dollars
-----------
Total networth 1160k using simple math however when balancing that you are also 1160k in debt not to a bank or to anyone in particular just for the fact that you have money and have spent it.
What the little vid and other places will tell you is that BONDS well.. used to be a slaver contract. A company is worth X amount in bonds and therefore can give out 1/10th X bonds to 10 different people... who own 1/10th of the companies networth.. who in turn own 1/10th the labor. Thats 16-18th century.. now its all.. alot more complicated but everyone here gets the basic principle of STOCK so lets stick with that
It goes on to say if you own the bonds you arent in debt which is a lie because you bought the bonds therefore your balance will be double what it cost but thats another thing entirely
I went a little overboard and it may be totally boring... but hey I figured i'd try.
Do we have any accountants here that can back me up?
hmmmm final example!
Someone loans you 100 dollars so now your bank balance reads +100 income now you spend all of it... which means -100 for whatever you spend it on Is your total now 0 or -100?
If your answer was -100 then we move on to the second round! Lets go for that refridgerator! <3
Because you still have to pay back what you loaned right? so you work... you spend 100 dollars worth of man hours which is -100 on your part to gain +100 dollars back... which means.. in the end you are still down 100 dollars.
There are only few examples in which you get out at 0.(Reinvesting in your own company(if you are a shareholder.. in most cases only applies to MAJOR shareholder(51% or 66% depending on regulations and safety), or if you invested that money into solid stock(fairytail!
) or real estate)
Because if you bought an item or a service there comes a time when that item or service... loses its usefulness. This is only based on monetary gains this is not based on the principle that you get emotional reparations or heightened efficiency stuff
(So thats an argument you can use to disclaim everything I said but... i sincerely doubt everything you ever spent your money on... fully satisfied your needs right?
) This is based on the principle of Current assets and Fixed assets. But regardless of what you buy or spend it on.. that loses its worth. Good example is a car..you lose 50% the moment you drive it off the lot
kk thats it for me.. I hope you... read it... *dies*
I just noticed today that I left out the whole construct of a startup company and why loans/investors even come in( its the step between the creation of money and the creation of second hand(true) debt. If you need me to explain that aswell..
just gimme a shout.
