Comments by "The Phoenix Saga" (@The_Phoenix_Saga) on "Japan's Poverty u0026 Distrust in Politics" video.

The sign of a currency that is supported and backed only by the debt that the loaning of said currency from the banks has accrued. It's an never ending spiral which lends heed the question: how do you pay back debt with debt?
17
@robertchandler2063 The problem is that people keep focusing on the idea that wealth must be distributed by an external source: that absolutely never works. China and Venezuela are perfect examples of that; I don't even need to mention the Soviet Union. The problem is two fold - first is that people keep wanting someone else to do the thinking for them and the second as I stated is an economy backed solely by debt as the gold standard; even if reintroduced today, would not be enough to cover the debt that exists from interest. There is a way out of it, but it's one no one wants to do because it means having to do things for themselves; instead people are going to opt for the worst choice - subjugation. The same mistake China made under Mao. The problem isn't just in Japan, it's everywhere.
7
@nanaholic01 Which works in theory but never in practice. I've read Smith's work and frankly where his ideal fails is the folly of man: you can't take away the right of one choosing to be idle and unawares wilfully just as you can't do the same with those being opportunistic and avaricious.
3
@nanaholic01 Yeah I've read the works of Smith and on paper the principal works, however the weak link is - people are inherently wanting more and wanting to do less to attain it. There are those who choose diligence and those that will let distraction take its course. Hence the result in China and it's corruption - the same can be said anywhere. As such the theory never makes it anywhere off paper and history has always proven that the problem isn't inherent to the principle, but to people and you can't take away people's right to either be avaricious or lazy, just as you can't force those who choose to improve themselves to have to submit their gains for the sake of those just demanding it.
1
@Luziferne I refer you to the same response I gave to Nanaholic01 only replace the works of Smith with that of Marx.
1
@steemlenn8797 Well first of all - we kind of already are and always were financial slaves - unless you're the sort prepared to fend for yourself in woodlands and wilderness and scavenge on the land. Not to mention as I point out that currency is based primarily the existence of debt. To which I ask you how to pay back debt with a currency backed by it? The money was never government owned, it was loaned to them by banks. So redistribution is as much as an impossible notion as it is wrongly perceived as to be applied. The welfare state can only exist with more capital going into it than being used to support those needing it and unlike your historical example, the currency can only lose value as it's not based on a physical collateral. And let's be honest, even if you tried putting a Gold or Silver Standard: the amount of material needed to balance the debt is either non-existent or simply is beyond our technical means to attain. Face it - there's only one way out and it's the one no one wants to admit: toughen up and adapt, because it's either that or revert back to the serfs of yesteryear when the offer of a reset of said debt comes - nothing is free, not even good intentions.
1
@steemlenn8797 And just where is the value in a currency not backed by a collateral? How will that debt be paid back? It isn't the government who owns the money, they loan it from the banks.
1
@Alpha-Omega-TFOA Ask each foolish government who accepted such conditions to begin with and who have allowed the debt to snowball.
1
@steemlenn8797 Because the inflation of currency is tied to said debt the country owes. What happens when you raise the wage? Inflation rises to meet it and so what changes? Absolutely nothing to the one pursuing the wage.
1
@studijasymrov7630 In other words convenient rational to justify a lack of doing anything.
1
@robertchandler2063 The irony being that the money in of itself only has a perceived value, not one tied to a collateral. If everyone realised the rub - the value of that money would vanish instantly. Problem again isn't the theory - it's the nature of people. Unless you want to indoctrinate them into being obedient automatons, there never will be an answer and by doing that, you destroy the very humanity you're trying to progress.
1
@Luziferne I read them and understood them, I merely point out the flaw. Can't read that, sorry. Translation?
1
@steemlenn8797 Answer me this - when say a dollar you lent in ten years is only worth fifty cents and in interest you owe one dollar seventy five - how do you pay it back?
1