|
Message 2832
|
|
< Previous | Next >
|
|
|
| Subject: | [socialcredit] short replies to 3 people | | Date: | Monday, September 19, 2005 09:12:01 (EDT) | | From: | Triumphofthepast <Triumphofthepast @...com>
|
I am happy to say that over the weekend, I received every message that appears in the archives. Thanks, Bill, if you did something.
Per: First you offered us very dense math. Now a chart, but it is not self-explanatory. For example, I don't know what the same-sized "Cash" rectangle on both sides means. In fact, I don't see what this chart has to do with comparing consumer purchasing-power with consumer prices, which is what the A+B Theorem is about.
Ryan: "The flux from the banks consists of loan principle, ordinary business disbursements plus dividends." Cook's statement was "when credit institutions CREATE money. A bank's spending and dividend-paying are not a creation of money. I would criticize Cook's statement not as being wrong but as being irrelevant. Why obsess about interest if we can't pay the principal?
Martin - "The 'Virtual Wealth' of a nation was that amount of monetary tokens [equalling] the value of everything that was 'on the market' at that time. This Virtual Wealth . . . is appropriated by the banking system." This is clear as mud. Real Wealth ("everything on the market") would be on the balance sheet as Inventory. What you are calling Virtual Wealth just means this Real Wealth might be distributed but is not. It doesn't mean there is potentially double the wealth. And don't say the banking system has appropriated Virtual Wealth, say it has appropriated the Real Wealth.
Michael
|
short replies to 3
Reply to this message