W

Everything you think you know about economics is WRONG!

Recommended Posts

Way back when I was at University where I was a math major, my class used a classroom shared with some 500+ level economics group. We shared that room because even by the 250 level subject I was in at the time there were few students but we needed a Lot of chalkboard, and so did the Masters level economics students. One day we went to the classroom to see the prior occupants had filled every chalkboard with lots of maths attempting to prove something about supply and demand. The details are too far in the past for me to remember specifics. 

Our professor was getting ready to erase the boards when he said, "Hold on, let's see what they were doing here". We then proceeded to examine their logic and find the progression right up to the point where their prof clearly just gave up. The math at our level was relatively trivial  and we saw several mistakes and wrong turns in the process. Our teacher said,  "I'm no economist, but it seems like he was trying to get 'here' but didn't know how to", while pointing at a graph that wasn't really supported by the equations. Naturally he "solved" the problem with a little note in a corner of a chalkboard, saying something like, "cheers from the advanced calculus and numerical analysis class 251" or whatever we were called then. 

I found the whole exercise far more stimulating than our class that followed, because for a change I got to see math applied and not just math for maths sake. Next semester I found that prof and asked if there was a class I could take from him. He recommended a 499 level class and I was quite surprised to find I was the only one in it. I later learned he was just using me as an unpaid graduate assistant, which wasn't too bad since I was still a Freshman. I was in 200 level classes from all the Advanced Placement courses I'd taken in high school. He gave me all these special assignments, which mostly involved me doing the math be wasn't comfortable with and writing computer code to tie everything together. Again and again he brought me things to "prove" a contention he'd already decided on, rather than following the data where it led. Nowadays I'd call that "climate science", but I digress. He told me he could guarantee me a PhD in economics in record time if I'd just change my major. By then I'd lost interest because I could tell his fundamental viewpoint and that of the rest of economics was fundamentally flawed. They were looking at everything wrong. 

Money = Debt and nothing else. "Money" is created into existence only when a bank loans it out, their ability to "create" the money only limited by their "assets". Initial assets are created by the Central Bank when it "purchases" debt from the sovereign government and "creates" notes. 

This video gives a concise picture of how it works. There are others but this one is simplest. 

Given that what everyone calls money (but which I call currency to keep things straight) is really just debt piled on debt, the next question is, "How does this apply to our reality?"

If you start to visualize "the moneylenders" as this cabal of unscrupulous folk bound and determined to separate everyone from their hard earned possessions and commodities, you won't be far off the mark. Blaming it on "Jews" is simplistic and wrong but there are certainly some who claim to be from that tribe involved. If you just think about very smart people with little morality that's closer. If you believe the folks who are the public face of the Fed are actually in charge you've missed the boat. 

Elsewhere I posted The credit theory of money and I mistakenly attributed the publish date in 1914, when it was really May 1913. This date is important because the Federal Reserve was created 7 months later by some sketchy means while most of Congress was on Christmas vacation. I won't get into that here but can document it if you're interested. 

Why economics gets everything wrong is because, in my opinion, they aren't good at math and oversimplified the equations. For simplicity we say Supply and Demand and that's part of it, but the chasing of tails occurs with "elasticity" and other fixes to try and explain away what prices did contrary to the theory.

It's better to think of everything as a lossy transmission line (current=currency) and the losses are due to interest (it's all debt remember) and inefficiency. The "work" getting done, i.e. economic activity corresponds to the usual machines consuming "watts" at the end of those power lines. Electrical engineers easily stay on top of all the inputs and outputs in their utility systems including real time trading with other utilities to soak up or provide additional power as needed. Not a perfect mental model but closer to reality than what economists currently spout. 

Finally, I've mentioned Ray Dalio here before, and I strongly recommend giving him a listen or read. Also simple but clearly done. 

Cheers @Marcin, @Papillon, @Tom Kirkman, @DayTrader. Hopefully we can have an intelligent discussion here about these things and I'm interested in hearing your thoughts. 

  • Great Response! 3
  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have a Masters degree in Economics. It does not give me any advantage by itself in the world of trading crude oil. I have a Masters degree in Finance. It has provided me with the tools to lose millions in the stock market. Seems like a waste of time and money on my behalf doesn't it ? By losing millions I learned my most valuable lessons by asking myself " Where does the money go ?" It seems to evaporate. It doesn't. It gets concentrated into the hands of a few. All stocks. All commodities markets are set up for one reason. Options trading. The most lucrative options market in the world is WTI. The most lucrative for the market makers of WTI that is. I have traded options from the short side for decades. The OVX ( Oil Volatilty Index ) is currently 32.2. The volatity index for the S&P is 14.8. This makes a huge difference in the pricing of puts and calls. Today I Sold to Open 2 Jan 58 calls at 1.25 each. Using all the same criteria except replacing the OVX with the VIX into the Black-Scholes calculator gives 52 cents. These options expire in 12 days. The further out in time I go this disparity in pricing becomes even more significant. You'll never see this strategy in a book or on Youtube. I started with 1 WTI contract in Nov 2017. Paid in full. No margin. I now control 8 contracts. All paid in full. I have never met another trader that does what I do. I've run across thousands of traders over the course of my 40 years in finance. Not one. It's almost like it's a closed society. Economics and finance enabled me to know the possibilities. Up until 2 years ago I had clientele. Had some for decades. Once I figured this out I fired them all. Best day of my life.

  • Like 2
  • Great Response! 2
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

9 hours ago, Ward Smith said:

Money = Debt and nothing else. "Money" is created into existence only when a bank loans it out, their ability to "create" the money only limited by their "assets". Initial assets are created by the Central Bank when it "purchases" debt from the sovereign government and "creates" notes. 

This video gives a concise picture of how it works. There are others but this one is simplest. 

Respectfully sir, I do not feel there is a great deal I could add to your thoughts, you appear to have summarised aspects of the financial system incredibly well to be quite honest and I can do nothing but agree wholeheartedly especially with the aspect of debt as noted above.

While reading I also pondered the exact same clip from Zeitgeist and considered finding it for users' consideration, then saw your 'this video gives a concise picture' link was precisely the section I had in mind. Your reference also to the Federal Reserve's creation itself being suspicious and rather pushed through due to many being on holiday is also referenced within the movie if my memory serves correctly.

Regretfully it could be argued debt and monetary enslavement occurred literally with those very signatures and has now reached the levels of today. Within the Global Debt conversation I found the following post from yourself most enlightening also so I thank you sir. 

There is no such thing as a medium of exchange. 

A sale and purchase is the exchange of a commodity for a credit. 

Credit and credit alone is money.

The monetary unit is an abstract standard for the measurement of credit and debt. It is liable to fluctuation and only remains stable if the law of the equation of credits and debts is observed.

A credit cancels a debt; this is the primitive law of commerce. By sale a credit is acquired, by purchase a debt is created. Purchases, therefore, are paid for by sales. 

The object of commerce is the acquisition of credits.

A banker is one who centralises the debts of mankind and cancels them against one another. Banks are the clearing houses of commerce.

A coin is an instrument of credit or token of indebtedness; identical in its nature with a tally or with any other form of money, by whomsoever issued.

The issue of money is not an exclusive privilege of government, but merely one of its functions, as a great buyer of services and commodities. Money in one form or another is, in fact, issued by banks, merchants, etc.

The depreciation of money in the middle ages was not due to the arbitrary debase­ment of the weight and fineness of the coins. On the contrary, the government of the middle ages struggled against this depreciation which was due to wars, pestilences and famines - in short to excessive indebtedness.

Until modern days, there never was any fixed relationship between the monetary unit and the coinage.

The precious metals are not a standard of value.

The value of credit does not depend on the existence of gold behind it, but on the solvency of the debtor.

Debts due at a certain moment can only be off-set against credits which become available at that moment.

Government money is redeemed by taxation.

The government stamp on a piece of gold changes the character of the gold from that of a mere commodity to that of a token of indebtedness.

The redemption of paper money in gold coin is not redemption at all, but merely the exchange of one form of obligation for another of an identical nature.

The "reserves of lawful money" in the banks have no more importance than any other bank asset.

Laws of legal tender promote panics.

The governments of the world have conspired together to make a corner in gold and hold it up at an excessive price.

The nominal value of the dollar coin exceeds the market value of the gold of which it is made. Coins can only remain in circulation for any length of time if their nominal value exceeds their intrinsic value.

The issue of coins in exchange for gold at a fixed and excessive price, without pro­viding taxes for their redemption, causes an inflation of government money, and thus causes an excessive floating debt and a depreciation of government money.

Large reserves of "lawful money'' in the banks are evidence of an inflation of the government currency.

The inflation of government money induces a still greater inflation of credit throughout the country, and a consequent general depreciation of money. 

The depreciation of money is the cause of rising prices.

Edited by Papillon
  • Great Response! 1
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Ward Smith said:

Hopefully we can have an intelligent discussion here about these things and I'm interested in hearing your thoughts. 

When you logically regress the the proposition Money = Debt then you arrive at the bank of empty promises, and that's why Irving Fisher's ideas remain paramount in stabilizing the international monetary system.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, Ward Smith said:

By then I'd lost interest because I could tell his fundamental viewpoint and that of the rest of economics was fundamentally flawed. They were looking at everything wrong. 

Money = Debt and nothing else. "Money" is created into existence only when a bank loans it out, their ability to "create" the money only limited by their "assets". Initial assets are created by the Central Bank when it "purchases" debt from the sovereign government and "creates" notes. 

There is something interesting in this scene "Bid at Ebay", from the movie "Wreck it ralph 2"........ Real world economics for many might be happening in similar manner..............

bid scene at ebay

There might be misinterpretation regarding money or bank in the old days and now............. At the beginning of Earth economy O.o, only merchants were well off. Close friends started to borrow from them and profited from their ventures. In appreciation, the borrowers repaid with extra tokens or gifts or money. The lenders loved the kind gesture. Soon, a few gathered to form the first bank in the 16th century that lent out short term money by expecting a return. And many others followed suit. Money = asset then.......... Much later, in the modern era, creativity set in. Long term borrowers were allowed. Banks were running dry sooner than thought. Public were invited to put their money in the banks, regardless how little, with a promise of a few packets of peanuts at the end of a year......... Since most people were light pocketed i.e. whatever earned would be spent on daily necessities, banks were not that popular to the public back then. So, the banks resorted to print whatever they need........... And the story continues with the perception above Money = Debt. :$:$

 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, Ward Smith said:

If you start to visualize "the moneylenders" as this cabal of unscrupulous folk bound and determined to separate everyone from their hard earned possessions and commodities, you won't be far off the mark. Blaming it on "Jews" is simplistic and wrong but there are certainly some who claim to be from that tribe involved. If you just think about very smart people with little morality that's closer. If you believe the folks who are the public face of the Fed are actually in charge you've missed the boat. 

^ this

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

19 hours ago, Ward Smith said:

Money = Debt and nothing else. "Money" is created into existence only when a bank loans it out, their ability to "create" the money only limited by their "assets". Initial assets are created by the Central Bank when it "purchases" debt from the sovereign government and "creates" notes. 

This video gives a concise picture of how it works. There are others but this one is simplest.

Good post.  I've said this same thing numerous times on the forum.

That "documentary" is worth watching in entirety.  It's a little crazy (conspiracy theories etc.) at points put also has some excellent food for thought.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HbvCxMfcKv4

Also watch The Corporation

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y888wVY5hzw

Edited by Enthalpic
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I see this as having absolutely no value to this site. It's OilPrice.com not " Let me show how smart I am" site. Know anything that relates to oil or oil trading ? Dazzle us with that. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Gary LeBlanc said:

I see this as having absolutely no value to this site. It's OilPrice.com not " Let me show how smart I am" site.

If that were the mantra for this site (ie, relevance) then the moderators would not be needed and the stream of memes would be superfluous (as if they were not already) so on-topic you said  " Where does the money go ?" It seems to evaporate. It doesn't. It gets concentrated into the hands of a few. All stocks., which implies that money has a property value over and above any debt value so maybe safer trading strategies can leverage off of that intrinsic value to mitigate risk.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, remake it said:

If that were the mantra for this site (ie, relevance) then the moderators would not be needed and the stream of memes would be superfluous (as if they were not already)

Actually, much of what moderators do is behind the scenes housekeeping and responding to private messages about concerns by members and dustbinning spam.  Like this spam from earlier today. I screencapped this spam after removing it from public view because this was just so incredibly ludicrous that it made me laugh.

Screenshot_20191205-170627_Chrome.thumb.jpg.75ba3fe4ba0a78231724fa5c79192625.jpg

Screenshot_20191205-170636_Chrome.thumb.jpg.c5206425458594da9b39d13daec902c2.jpg

  • Haha 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Screenshot_20191205-170643_Chrome.thumb.jpg.7f296f986f15a36e43c1da0f7d97eb04.jpg

Screenshot_20191205-170656_Chrome.thumb.jpg.aa444bb74ced524706f24777968690fa.jpg

 

 

Yep, everything most people know about economics is wrong.  Clearly, joining the occult is the way to go to become rich and famous and successful.

 

  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've been hanging around some MMT people, and they suggest that the sovereign government currency issuer 'prints' money by spending it, and it 'destroys' money by collecting it back in taxes. Therefore, the difference between spending and taxation is the amount of money in circulation.

My take on this is somewhat different: the value of a currency is related to 'proof of work'. In a basketball game, the points that show up on the scoreboard are derived from the accomplishment of getting a basketball through the hoop.

Australia has a huge amount of coal and iron ore. So does Brazil. The value of an Australian dollar is driven, in part, by their success in mining the iron and coal, transporting it to a port, loading it on to a ship, and delivering it to China. If the iron remained in the ground, it might be hypothetically worth something, pretty much as hypothetical as mining tritium from asteroids.

The US produces a huge basket of stuff, some of which is critical commodities (wheat, corn, soybeans, etc.), some of which is high powered computer chips, and some of which is the various online services such as search and social media. A lot of the value of the USD is driven by either the uniqueness of the product or it's dominance. Intel and AMD chips aren't really available in any other currency, the same goes for aircraft such as the 787. A lot of cultural content (movies, music, books, etc.) are only possible in an environment of political and cultural tolerance. The USD is worth a lot, not simply because the US is a big market, but because the US produces vast quantities of high-valued goods and services.

When the US government purchases goods it usually pays the 'going market rate' or less. Someone with a GSA credit card is going to get a lower rate at a hotel than someone with a regular credit card. This suggests that the government doesn't print an 'unfair' amount of money in either direction, particularly 'too much' leading to inflation.

There is definitely a lot of wealth concentration at work, but not all of it is from banking. Corporations, particularly those that make certain kinds of consumer goods, place huge markups on their shoes, smartphones, and breakfast cereals. Some of these pile up obscene amounts of cash. Another source of wealth concentration is from real estate rents, whether commercial property or apartments. The Piketty book explores this in significant detail.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Quote

Some people think the Federal Reserve Banks are U.S. government institutions. They are not . . . they are private credit monopolies which prey upon the people of the U.S. for the benefit of themselves and their foreign and domestic swindlers, and rich and predatory money lenders. The sack of the United States by the Fed is the greatest crime in history. Every effort has been made by the Fed to conceal its powers, but the truth is the Fed has usurped the government. It controls everything here and it controls all our foreign relations. It makes and breaks governments at will.
-- Congressman Charles McFadden, Chairman, House Banking and Currency Committee, June 10, 1932

I'm sorry @Gary LeBlancif sir, you were talking to me. I made this subject here because of interesting side discussions over the course of the past few weeks. In fact I asked @Marcinto make the post and did it myself when he wouldn't. I also neglected to invite @Jan van Eckwho has evinced similar views. 

I loved your comment above talking about your trading strategy and adding your background info. I don't believe this subject matter is off topic, because if this conversation goes the way I hope, I'll be able to add in the mechanism by which "bankers" are currently manipulating oil prices. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

Things started to change in the 1970s after the U.S. dollar went off the gold standard and the price of a barrel of crude oil went up around four times.  This resulted in inflation and higher prices along with interest rates going up as well as precious metals going up too.  For the last  forty years neoliberlism has ruled the economy no matter what political party has been in office.  The sooner everyone finds out about neoliberalism, the better.  There will be a very big divide between most people being anti-neloliberalism and a few being pro-neoliberalism. 

Edited by canadas canadas

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

11 hours ago, Tom Kirkman said:

Screenshot_20191205-170643_Chrome.thumb.jpg.7f296f986f15a36e43c1da0f7d97eb04.jpg

Screenshot_20191205-170656_Chrome.thumb.jpg.aa444bb74ced524706f24777968690fa.jpg

 

 

Yep, everything most people know about economics is wrong.  Clearly, joining the occult is the way to go to become rich and famous and successful.

 

I seem to agree with this given that many years ago a classmate of mine said to me "S-t-n is the L--d".  Today, he is the most successful out of all my classmates.  However, it helped that his dad was already well-connected and successful so that he could guide him with his educational choices and fully pay for all of his tuition costs while he followed in his dad's footsteps.  

Edited by canadas canadas
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Meredith Poor said:

I've been hanging around some MMT people, and they suggest that the sovereign government currency issuer 'prints' money by spending it, and it 'destroys' money by collecting it back in taxes. Therefore, the difference between spending and taxation is the amount of money in circulation.

My take on this is somewhat different: the value of a currency is related to 'proof of work'. In a basketball game, the points that show up on the scoreboard are derived from the accomplishment of getting a basketball through the hoop.

Australia has a huge amount of coal and iron ore. So does Brazil. The value of an Australian dollar is driven, in part, by their success in mining the iron and coal, transporting it to a port, loading it on to a ship, and delivering it to China. If the iron remained in the ground, it might be hypothetically worth something, pretty much as hypothetical as mining tritium from asteroids.

The US produces a huge basket of stuff, some of which is critical commodities (wheat, corn, soybeans, etc.), some of which is high powered computer chips, and some of which is the various online services such as search and social media. A lot of the value of the USD is driven by either the uniqueness of the product or it's dominance. Intel and AMD chips aren't really available in any other currency, the same goes for aircraft such as the 787. A lot of cultural content (movies, music, books, etc.) are only possible in an environment of political and cultural tolerance. The USD is worth a lot, not simply because the US is a big market, but because the US produces vast quantities of high-valued goods and services.

When the US government purchases goods it usually pays the 'going market rate' or less. Someone with a GSA credit card is going to get a lower rate at a hotel than someone with a regular credit card. This suggests that the government doesn't print an 'unfair' amount of money in either direction, particularly 'too much' leading to inflation.

There is definitely a lot of wealth concentration at work, but not all of it is from banking. Corporations, particularly those that make certain kinds of consumer goods, place huge markups on their shoes, smartphones, and breakfast cereals. Some of these pile up obscene amounts of cash. Another source of wealth concentration is from real estate rents, whether commercial property or apartments. The Piketty book explores this in significant detail.

 

On 12/4/2019 at 10:56 PM, Gary LeBlanc said:

I have a Masters degree in Economics. It does not give me any advantage by itself in the world of trading crude oil. I have a Masters degree in Finance. It has provided me with the tools to lose millions in the stock market. Seems like a waste of time and money on my behalf doesn't it ? By losing millions I learned my most valuable lessons by asking myself " Where does the money go ?" It seems to evaporate. It doesn't. It gets concentrated into the hands of a few. All stocks. All commodities markets are set up for one reason. Options trading. The most lucrative options market in the world is WTI. The most lucrative for the market makers of WTI that is. I have traded options from the short side for decades. The OVX ( Oil Volatilty Index ) is currently 32.2. The volatity index for the S&P is 14.8. This makes a huge difference in the pricing of puts and calls. Today I Sold to Open 2 Jan 58 calls at 1.25 each. Using all the same criteria except replacing the OVX with the VIX into the Black-Scholes calculator gives 52 cents. These options expire in 12 days. The further out in time I go this disparity in pricing becomes even more significant. You'll never see this strategy in a book or on Youtube. I started with 1 WTI contract in Nov 2017. Paid in full. No margin. I now control 8 contracts. All paid in full. I have never met another trader that does what I do. I've run across thousands of traders over the course of my 40 years in finance. Not one. It's almost like it's a closed society. Economics and finance enabled me to know the possibilities. Up until 2 years ago I had clientele. Had some for decades. Once I figured this out I fired them all. Best day of my life.

The only time that I can recall making serious money from stocks was when I bought stock in a company just before they were going to have a stockholders meeting and which according to information that I had read online there were going to be several things discussed there that would result in advantages to the company if approved.  These things were approved at the meeting and the stock price went up as a result.  Did I repeat doing this with other companies since every week there is a company having a shareholders meeting? No, since I have a wandering mind that made me try other things instead of a single minded one that sticks to success and this has led me to not do well in this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, Gary LeBlanc said:

I see this as having absolutely no value to this site. It's OilPrice.com not " Let me show how smart I am" site. Know anything that relates to oil or oil trading ? Dazzle us with that. 

image.png.6879c032d854e7f987597c7ea6fda6f2.png

According to the latest mode of operandi on "how the world is operated", the above picture shows it all.......... we have to leave the functionally essential part untouched..............:D

Likewise with the discussion on oil prices......... ;)

  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On 12/5/2019 at 2:33 AM, remake it said:

When you logically regress the the proposition Money = Debt then you arrive at the bank of empty promises, and that's why Irving Fisher's ideas remain paramount in stabilizing the international monetary system.

Who are you, and what have you done with @remake it ?

  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, canadas canadas said:

Things started to change in the 1970s after the U.S. dollar went off the gold standard and the price of a barrel of crude oil went up around four times.  This resulted in inflation and higher prices along with interest rates going up as well as precious metals going up too.  For the last  forty years neoliberlism has ruled the economy no matter what political party has been in office.  The sooner everyone finds out about neoliberalism, the better.  There will be a very big divide between most people being anti-neloliberalism and a few being pro-neoliberalism. 

The inflation already existed even when we were on gold. The damage being done to the gold reserves was extensive as our "allies" like France demanded gold for dollars. We were already bankrupt by the Bretton Woods Agreement by the time Nixon took us off the gold standard. 

The best way to look at prices of commodities is think of them as fixed and the dollars buying them as fluctuating. Based on various issues the dollars'value is going up and down. Kind of mind bending but not wrong.  

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On 12/5/2019 at 11:09 AM, Ward Smith said:

Hopefully we can have an intelligent discussion here about these things and I'm interested in hearing your thoughts. 

This how people can rightfully define a non sequitur

47 minutes ago, Ward Smith said:

The best way to look at prices of commodities is think of them as fixed and the dollars buying them as fluctuating.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, remake it said:

This how people can rightfully define a non sequitur

Nope

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Ward Smith said:

Nope

Nope is not an argument and what you have done is abuse the very concept of money as commodities can be realizable means of exchange without debt or the need of fiat money (as proven in the exchange of gold for oil vis-à-vis Turkey and Iran)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, remake it said:

Nope is not an argument and what you have done is abuse the very concept of money as commodities can be realizable means of exchange without debt or the need of fiat money (as proven in the exchange of gold for oil vis-à-vis Turkey and Iran)

Your "argumentation" needs a lot of work. You come up with an obscure edge case and break your arm patting yourself on the back. Meanwhile someone trading gold for oil has now confounded two commodities. What currency did they use to buy the gold? What price did they pay and how much did the gold (and oil) move in the meantime? You'll need linear algebra to keep track. Sounds amusing. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, Ward Smith said:

 What currency did they use to buy the gold? What price did they pay and how much did the gold (and oil) move in the meantime?

Those are not at issue, as it is what you somehow magically propose as money given that prior to and after fiat money is introduced tangible assets underpin wealth and remain means of exchange.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All economies are based on trust and belief.  Destroy the trust/belief, and the economy fails.  

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, please sign in.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.