There is persistent trade imbalance, by design, today.
If the trade surplus countries choose not to perpetuate this imbalance by merely accumulating ever more credits that they will not redeem for useful goods and services, because after all they are persistently running trade surpluses, then they can choose to instead simply redeem the credits for something useless but real today instead. This act would immediately address the balance of payments issue, directly through the current account. It would also give the trade deficit countries pause for thought, if they have to go back to parting with something real.
So why aren't any of the trade surplus countries doing just this today? That is the real question, and I suspect you would find the answer has little to do with the stock of money.
What? Me no more free stuff?
What? Me fewer jobs?
Maybe you are asking the wrong questions, when adressing "countries". Do "countries" actually exist? In the mind of a statist, who cheers his football team, definetly. When looking at it from the mind of a libertarian, you start to question. But just take a quick look at this:
Now can you specify again, what you mean by "countries"?
Okay, in the meantime, let's look at the individual. Why am I collecting tokens (paper or yellow stones or none influencial ownership titles of stock companies....) in the widest sense (exchanging the surplus of the fruits of my labor against)? Jep, that is something to ask yourself, first: I do hope that I get paid later. Well, that's just stupid me. BTW after reading this:
I finally made up my mind, never ever to work again for profit in my entire life.
If it comes to central banking, I suggest that you take a look at the actors, that maybe gives you a glimpse why and how they are doing "gods work". (e.g. Mr. Asmussen and his CV are really awesome for a good laugh, what a §$%§!. but it puts him in line with lots of those folks)
"So why aren't any of the trade surplus countries doing just this today?"
"countries: social, geographic and economic structures that one chooses to reside and act within"
You notice your flaw? Only an individuum (either you, or your slaveowner, landlord, commissar...) can do/decide/act upon something, not "a country". And what the commissars of the surplus "countries" decided is obvious: Stack paper (promises) forever and tell the slaves day in day out that it is at their very best, because otherwise they wouldnt have a job. And in the deficit "countries" their commissars rules over their slaves that it is in their very best interest to issue more promises, otherwise their EBT card wouldnt stop working.
And the IMF paper proves it, what decisions of all commissars worldwide will be taken in agreement, when problems in accounting the paper piles arise: Just take a pile of papers and put it onto another pile.
Simple as that, I really wounder why this is so hard to get into a freegolders head, just be gratefull and obedient that you have work ;)
"Just take a pile of papers and put it onto another pile.
Simple as that, I really wounder why this is so hard to get into a freegolders head“
Its not - we, at least I, just don't agree the worldwide stacks of paper will continue to be moved and stacked onto just moar and moar stacks of paper.
We'll have to wait and see…
Sure, there is no other way, than to wait and see...
But in the meantime I just like to understand on what in the real world you (folks) base that bias/assumption. You know, REALITY CHECK, based on facts, not on confirmation bias upon something some lunatic wrote 15yrs ago, and absolutely nothing happend accordingly to those "predictions", more or less the opposite, when it comes to market or geopolitical actions.
Let's compare: 1997 investing in 20yrs-treasury bonds and compare that to gold (regardless in what currency). Okay gold won, but just slidely, and I personally would prefer gold anyway, but that's just me anti-statist, while huge masses of people moved to be even more pro-statists.
Does that look like this "Just around the corner"?
Post a Comment