Comments by "antonyjh1234" (@antonyjh1234) on "Economics Help" channel.

This is all wonderful information in a growing world, 23 countries are going to lose half their populations over the next 80 years due to old age, China 5-600 million, a lot of European countries, very difficult to have growth in a declining population. Whatever growth etc of the past is just that and the next 80 ears will be the opposite of the last.
4
It's a shame people don't realise taxes don't pay for current spending, taxes just make the loan amount lower, the govt can never run out of money, money be put into or not, healthcare is just pure choice. There is no brick wall, taxes don't pay for govt spending and once people realise all money is just bank debt we might be able to make it better.
4
On the other side of the world and same problems, I am glad I have something to blame now other than the system of debt we were born into.
2
I didn't like the rules for why one country succeeds and another fails as it's just that all money is debt, these people aren't able to get into debt because that debt must be paid back and the risk is always too high for subsistence farmers.
1
Ha, I made a long comment and ai removed it...This device I am typing on is the result of that previous bubble
1
As all money is debt based, pensioners are a debt instrument to input money into the economy and how other people get pay rises.
1
As all money is debt based all loans must return to zero, if you get more money you will have to be taxed more so that it equals the tax on the profits otherwise money builds up in society and asset prices increase even more. People not fundamentally understanding all money is debt based, therefore must return to zero, is where we have a problem in society. People think money builds up in society, it doesn't unless debt does and if all debt were paid back there would be zero money in the economy. As all money is debt based there is no get more money and we keep more money because we are playing a zero sum game and not looking at the overall benefit we are supposed to be creating by making things have less cost moving forward. People have to understand prices of assets are an indication of the debt that has passed through an item, the money for those assets if they are paid off, doesn't actually exist, until someone gets a new loan, inputting money into the system. We have been using bank debt as a means of excahnge, thinking we were getting rich by getting more, when all it did was make us poorer as a society.
1
You can't be in debt, if you issued the dollars. We live in a debt based society, that is literally how money exists and is created. You are also saying USA has created the most money. Taxes lower this amount and pay for zero current government spending, this 1.12 Trillion is lowering the money supply, if all debt was paid back there would be zero money in the system, as long as you understand what " lowering the debt means"? It means lowering the amount of money in society as every single dollar has a corresponding amount of debt somewhere. Will this bring prices down? For sure. Because if he lowers the debt then the money has to come from where it lies, in peoples accounts. Debt is money, but debt for us is different debt than debt for them, they always have to be the negative side of zero, we are always trying to stay, forced to stay above it, but all debt must return to zero to be paid off. The concern is that too much money is being inputted from all avenues as it is all debt and we aren't getting the proceeds and there is zero control, efficiency is not the definition of a free market in Elon's mind I would say.
1
Couple of things, the US is 4% of the world and has issued 51% of the currency of the world, mainly through the military, even if over priced, it still is how they get that money into society and as a reserve currency, that every other one is pegged to, when you understand all money is debt, then trillions in debt means they have issued trillions of dollars, China has a trade surplus because of these dollars and does not exist in a vacuum. Next, without the US spending trillions as you say, the 6 million or the model would not have been able to exist, show humility used to be an Asian thing but lately all I see is Chines Hype, whether you get a benefit like google hype I do not know but party talk like this is recognised. I understand you might have bias, at least you have ignorance of what trillions are spent and where or why.
1
The one time money printing would get sucked through the system and then lower demand for ever more? The business of govt is business, lowering overall demand might mean people have more money, then wages won't need to increase, then "growth" stops, this is not good for the govt that works for the central bank. The goal is for as much money to enter society as possible, not make things better
1
As all money is debt based then you are asking for debt to be inputted all the time and at higher rates than now. As all money is debt based and all loans are supposed to return to zero, taxes would have to increase to keep the money amount in society the same or asset prices would increase again. A guarantee of food, medical and shelter is easy enough to accomplish, why not just give it for free if ai is doing the work.
1
Because 90% of us had our own land and could grow our own food, something people dream about now. It didn't set people free, it incorporated them into a system of debt where they need to hold banker debt just to be able to buy food. You are right, it has been about the organisation of society, we are now born into a system of debt, while people ask for more money. As all money is debt based and a 400% population growth of the world has meant demand can repay the money supply as we earn and pay taxes and now have to work many multiples of what people did 300 years ago, what extra freedoms are you thinking we have now, if the system of debt has meant more dabt slavery and more poverty than those times?
1
Au universities are installing caps on foreign students, one University said it would have 2000 but with the caps would be cut to 850. As these are people who take their education back overseas with them, and then compete against the host country that educated them. You say education is a sham in UK, the UK does not live in a bubble but what you say about R and D happens with these students, which one do you want?
1
@test143000 How does student members going from 2000 to 650 mean you would still need to have the same amount of teachers. The subjects aren't being disbanded, they just aren't educating as many, therefore unviable. I don't understand why someone not making a washing machine in Australia means STEM is eroded but ok, you seem to have beliefs that it is all connected to something that is not true. What Uni is stopping all maths subjects, do you have a name of it?
1