• 11 Posts
  • 245 Comments
Joined 3 年前
cake
Cake day: 2023年6月11日

help-circle


  • I didn’t consider that you could still classify banking as fractional reserve banking even though there are no fractional reserve banking requirements. In my mind the concept was one of regulatory oversight.

    Do you think that when a bank loans money to another bank they are creating money out of thin air? If they can do that then why do they need to borrow money?

    I think you’re doing a good job interpreting and explaining modern monetary theory, I just don’t agree with all of it, although I agree with the concept.

    Do you believe that the US government must collect taxes before it can spend money? Or do you agree that government spending is self financed and money creation (in spending by the US government) is only limited by concerns of inflation?

    Do you believe that Banks hold digital money in their reserves? I do. Who do you think created that money?



  • When a bank issues a loan it creates a credit in the borrower’s account. When the borrower withdraws/transfers the money from their account the money comes from the bank’s reserves. The bank’s reserves consists of deposits and other liquid assets. The money in the bank’s reserves started its life by being created by the federal government. You may argue that the bank is loaning money that it does not hold in reserves, but for lack of a better description, this is a huge liability for the bank that can create insolvency issues (bank run). For this reason, I do not agree that banks create money when they issue loans, since the bank’s reserves are not created by the bank.


  • Money collected from taxes is basically recorded in a ledger / account by the Treasury. Some people look at this as the end of the lifespan of that money or the destruction of that money.

    Money begins its life by being spent by the federal government. They essentially create money with the press of a keystroke (granted they are spending funds which are approved by Congress and allocated for projects), the money credits a Treasury account, then they transfer it / spend it which puts the money into circulation.

    The federal government does not actually NEED the money you pay in taxes to fund their spending. Money does not come from people. It is created solely by the treasury. The federal government WANTS the money from taxes to approximately match the amount they put into circulation through spending in order to prevent runaway inflation. If they spend more than they collect they are adding to the supply of money which seems to be normal for a society with a growing population and successful marketplaces, but if they spend too much you get inflation.

    The federal government believes that balancing is important. They want the amount of goods and services that America exports globally to match the amount America imports. Each year there is a deficit which means that America receives more goods and services than it exports. In order to balance this, the Treasury issues bonds equaling the amount of the year’s trade deficit. We don’t have to do this but we choose to because we believe it will create financial stability.

    When the US issues bonds it collects money and gives a promise to make interest payments and to repay those bonds when they are due. Those bonds are debt. This is essentially how the government borrows money.

    This is a fantastic article from the Bank of England which is like the US Treasury https://share.google/GmWpluu76vSJpuw5C

    Edit: read the discussion below for more context and clarification. Banks create more money then the federal government does, I wasn’t aware.











  • But women are already suffering from menstruation pain and taking time off, this would just allow them to be paid. Companies that are already male dominated are obviously already discriminating and don’t need any tools to do so… Male dominated management can already suggest that women aren’t suitable for higher level roles because they are unpredictable (that’s not true), and they can already claim they are physically less capable so I’m not sure what your point is. I haven’t worked in Thailand because I’ve never had a visa that allowed working. Not sure what your experience is. Maybe look at Johnny Cash’s links that show that Thailand is top 3 in the world for women in executive rolls.

    Your statement “Very on brand for modern conservative south-east asian country. You can appear to be accommodating to women while actually building barriers.” implies that the purpose of this change is actually to build barriers for women, which isn’t true. It’s obvious that the purpose is to help women- do you have any proof of your claim?

    You’re really focused on corporate executive roles but you know most women don’t have jobs like that.

    I would like to see initiatives like these in more countries. I think it sets a good example and it shows they are doing many things right.





  • I wrote my representative and advocated for lifting the trade embargo and this is what they sent back:

    As your Member of Congress, I am opposed to lifting the embargo. Cuba continues to be under control of a communist regime which suppresses any advancement toward a free and open society. In addition to not providing basic goods and services for its citizens, the Cuban government routinely restricts civil liberties and engages in significant human rights abuses. Specific information can be found by reading the State Department’s 2022 human rights report on Cuba. Cuba continues to undermine the interests of the United States, and most recently a Cuban spy was found to have infiltrated high levels of the U.S. government.