Thanks for handling my sarcasm graciously! This is a very different statement than the initial:
"...because the key component of a dynamic and healthy economy requires customers to consume goods and services. Therefore, debt/financing is completely necessary to make it function."
My challenges on the initial statement, btw, would be:
(1) The key component of a dynamic an healthy economy is SAVINGS, not consumption. Consumption destroys savings. A certain amount of consumption is necessary or one can't produce efficiently (e.g., you starve to death) but the hallmark of rapidly growing wealth in an economy is that production of value is higher -- ideally far higher -- than consumption of value. Why? Because in the bigger picture, investment needs to come from the pool of real savings.
(2) Using debt to consume is like feeding yourself by drinking your own blood. It's about that stupid and absolutely that self-immolating.
Debt (leverage) CAN be used, sometimes, to grow wealth if you find an opportunity to invest where the production of value AFTER repaying interest is positive. However, the debt also adds risk - so you run the real risk that what could have been a value producing investment goes insolvent due to the debt and you probably have a destruction of value/wealth. And what happens when the "savings" being borrowed isn't real savings but is conjured from 'thin air'? In that case, I suspect, no growth in the real economy as a whole is possible.
I will defer to a trained Austrian here, but I have run numbers from before and after the establishment of the Fed and what seems clear enough to me is that the funny money added huge booms and busts did not increase real growth of GDP over the longer terms. Indeed, it appears to have STOLEN real GDP from the economy as a whole and transferred it in large quantities into the pockets of the PigMen. If you look at the average growth in GDP in the decades before the Fed it was considerably greater than the average growth after the Fed -- and GDP is a very deceptive way to measure real growth of wealth in the economy because it counts waste and government growth (worse than waste) and consumption as somehow "good" when they are, in fact, destructive to wealth and savings.
Here's a question for you: What is wealth?
Bill of Rights /Amendment X: "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."
Do you need a politician or judge to "interpret" those 28
Want DP delivered to your inbox daily? Subscribe here: