I highly recommend his books and scholarship. He is incredibly well-read and knowledgeable. Fortunately, he makes these large topics accessible and even entertaining. Great reading.
I love listening to this guy. He knows so much and is so well read that he inevitably ends up going on any number of asides that are often just as interesting as his main topic.
It is worth adding that a few centuries ago the term "interest" as used by writers on political economy as limited to describe that portion of tangible wealth produced (by labor and other capital goods) applied to land. The term "interest" was an unfortunate choice given the term's application to systems of money creation, lending and borrowing. A fundamental issue the political economists debated was whether the issuance of money was justly a function of government (creating legal tender), or that anyone ought to be able to create money (either by minting coinage or printing paper currency). In the instance of government-issued money as legal tender, this facilities the collection of tax revenue to fund public goods and services. In the instance of privately-issued money, the virtue is that no one is required to accept the money in exchange for goods and services. What do others think about this debate?
That shit happens in wars. Confederate bills, the Japanese Imperial notes. Necessarily, these are "counterfeit" after a conflict outcome. I like that you are "serious". Lunatic idea.
Private issued currency as far as fiat would look more like a promissory note or a certified check in the 21st century imo. Otherwise, privately issued money may not be accepted in every establishment, but would certainly be accepted. Assayed gold and silver, real money, is used as reserves in most countries, but could be used in exchange as well. As far as the philosophical “who should”, I can’t say this is the forum for long form debate.
@@brainkill7034 An economics professor I debated years ago on the subject argued the case for "free banking" as preventing monopoly of money issuance. Local currency networks seem to function well because there is community agreement to accept the currency if denominated in something tangible (e.g., labor hours).
Profit leads to economic growth (Islamic finance), interest (usury) leads to what the world is currently going through, making the rich richer in the expense of the poor.
The thing about boom and bust even if you can forsee the bust there is nothing you can do about its unravelling. When it rains the rich have umbrellas the proletariat get soaked. Best live in reality with cash. Waiting for a copy 1 of 4 in library of Chancellors book. 😅
The RBA had only $24.3 billion in capital and reserves to absorb this loss. It now finds itself in a negative equity position to the tune of $12.4 billion. If the RBA was a commercial bank it would be broke. But of course it is not.- comment dated 6th November, 2022.
I highly recommend his books and scholarship. He is incredibly well-read and knowledgeable. Fortunately, he makes these large topics accessible and even entertaining. Great reading.
I love youtube to be able to find such interesting talks like this. Best subscription.
Excellent talk - thank you.
I love listening to this guy. He knows so much and is so well read that he inevitably ends up going on any number of asides that are often just as interesting as his main topic.
a mindblowing book!
Now a fan of swiss finance jokes. 😭🤣
Great talk.
Amazing read! Fascinated that he also mentioned actuaries as they are often overlooked
We need taller actuaries?
Geoffrey Hinton makes good points .
Fantastic
It is worth adding that a few centuries ago the term "interest" as used by writers on political economy as limited to describe that portion of tangible wealth produced (by labor and other capital goods) applied to land. The term "interest" was an unfortunate choice given the term's application to systems of money creation, lending and borrowing. A fundamental issue the political economists debated was whether the issuance of money was justly a function of government (creating legal tender), or that anyone ought to be able to create money (either by minting coinage or printing paper currency). In the instance of government-issued money as legal tender, this facilities the collection of tax revenue to fund public goods and services. In the instance of privately-issued money, the virtue is that no one is required to accept the money in exchange for goods and services. What do others think about this debate?
That shit happens in wars. Confederate bills, the Japanese Imperial notes. Necessarily, these are "counterfeit" after a conflict outcome. I like that you are "serious". Lunatic idea.
Private issued currency as far as fiat would look more like a promissory note or a certified check in the 21st century imo.
Otherwise, privately issued money may not be accepted in every establishment, but would certainly be accepted. Assayed gold and silver, real money, is used as reserves in most countries, but could be used in exchange as well.
As far as the philosophical “who should”, I can’t say this is the forum for long form debate.
@@brainkill7034 An economics professor I debated years ago on the subject argued the case for "free banking" as preventing monopoly of money issuance. Local currency networks seem to function well because there is community agreement to accept the currency if denominated in something tangible (e.g., labor hours).
entering the great bubble in loans
Profit leads to economic growth (Islamic finance), interest (usury) leads to what the world is currently going through, making the rich richer in the expense of the poor.
It's not just Islam, in the book Price of Time, he references a lot of Jewish and Christian critiques of usury too
The thing about boom and bust even if you can forsee the bust there is nothing you can do about its unravelling. When it rains the rich have umbrellas the proletariat get soaked.
Best live in reality with cash.
Waiting for a copy 1 of 4 in library of Chancellors book. 😅
The RBA had only $24.3 billion in capital and reserves to absorb this loss. It now finds itself in a negative equity position to the tune of $12.4 billion. If the RBA was a commercial bank it would be broke. But of course it is not.- comment dated 6th November, 2022.
This is for book lovers but doesn't give me a thread of truth about interest.
Did you concentrate attention on this man's voice? Are you asleep?