Comments by "Dr. Ricco Lindner" (@Dr.RiccoMastermind) on "The national debt need never be repaid" video.

@RichardJMurphy anyways, thank you for your very comprehensive an on-the-spot videos! I really enjoy them! Wish many more (influential) people would see them and get convinced by your very clear and flawless argumentation. Only this time I felt some lack of understanding from my site 😅🙏🇩🇪
5
Did you imply that all national debt consists of bonds that some private persons or institutions can hold to trade with or earn interest? I always thought national debt, in first place, is money left in the non-governement sector due to direct public spendings which do not directly go to savings but drive economy through consumption or investments in ifra structure etc. However, yearly public deficit might be covered or matched by bonds. So the true deficit is ideally spent to the poorer people who spend it all again for consumption. On top of it some big savers earn interest from bonds that match the deficit from spending and taxing, but save the nominal amount, therefore not spending it productively. So, isn't the a kind of double effect of publicly spend money in the private sector?
3
@RichardJMurphy sorry, to ask further, you mean savings as an economic term, since this not only means money bound in a bond or asset, not circulating in the economy? I thought it's only an basically unnecessary policy or rule to issue bonds matching the deficit, parallel to the surplus spending. I mean this surplus is important for the private sector, also according to MMT. The money spent is technically not the same money spent into the issued bonds, even if net zero out. I always hoped that, ideally,government spending goes directly there where it's needed and ressources are available (so not inflationary) and some money is redeemed by taxes plus some other money "put on hold" in bonds - but from different places, people and at different times. So yes, according to current policy there are bonds for the equal amount of deficit spending but thus amount was also (ideally) used productively. If not, we have a hard time to justify public deficit spending, do we?
2
@RichardJMurphy Ok, I'm sorry, I try to put It differently. The excess/surplus money spent by the government is not going directly into bonds to be saved again, correct? Technically, bonds issued are issued on parallel to government spending, because they like to let it look as if government needs to borrow the money. But truly we would not need bonds to cover or match the size of the anual deficit (it seems to be done in Germany). So the total public debt is a private surplus at first, that will be spent for consumption not put back into some bonds right away. But maybe I misunderstood the message of your video 😅 Please, enjoy your weekend!
1
@adenwellsmith6908 but Gilts are not Bonds, right?
1
@adenwellsmith6908 Right. I just wonder because technically bonds/gilts are not needed to perform public spending, if I'm informed correctly. If the government pays their civil servants or any supplier or construction companies, they don't issue bonds before paying, right? Maybe the system in England us even weirder than in Germany
1