Ever Wondered Why There’s So Much Debt?

There’s another whole thread on this lot’s mistaken ideas here:http://www.worldsocialism.org/spgb/forum/general-discussion/100-reserve-bankingIt’s being used to record news items which refute the basic view of groups like Positive Money about banks creating money to loan out of thin air. No doubt they’ll be using the current LIBOR fixing scandal to bash the banks, without realising that if banks really could just create money out of thin air why would they need to borrow money from each other? There wouldn’t be a need for LIBOR.”Positive Money” of course falls into the same category as Square Circle and Military Intelligence as a good example of a contradiction in terms.After Paul Dyson, the head of Positive Money, was seen lurking around Occupy St Pauls in January, we did write to him challenging him to debate the issue. He replied:

A reminder email to him will go off later today proposing a date in September. 

Paul Dyson, of Positive Money, has just replied agreeing to a debate some time in September. Watch this space for details.

Lancaster branch weekend video workshop will hopefully come up with inspiration and be a spring-board, providing examples of what we can do ourselves. But we should not be opposed to contracting others to do what we cannot do or if they can do it better. For a lot of internet propaganda the means are not all that difficult technically but can be very effective.  Flash animation can be quite basic – text – images/video clips – music soundtrack. I believe DIY programmes exist that can be purchased. Probably the only limitation is an artistic one of imagination. (and that counts me out since i lack both an artistic mind and an imagination). One caveat i have is the time involved. If i recall correctly Kids Stuff took hours to make but years to appear…okay i exaggerate, of course, but if each and every member insists upon his democratic right to cross the t and dot the i we will get bogged down in procedure. I know some comrades will say lets do one thing and do it right, rather than several projects, and maybe not all perfect . I say very few artists have only one colour on their palates, despite Picasso’s blue period.    

Incidentally, in connection with my theoryandpractice.org.uk site and distributed through radicalbooks.co.uk I will soon be issuing a pamphlet debunking the ‘creationist’ school of banking theory, as well as some other things. Anyway self promotion over…An important thing to bear in mind in these debates is what is meant by ‘money’. The standard definition these days probably does include bank deposits, whether or not created through the issue of loans, so by definition banks do expand the money supply by issuing loans – but only because the definition of money makes no differentiation between credit and debit.The real question I guess is “what creates real wealth?” (or purchasing power) and if real wealth can be increased or destroyed by issuing or paying back loans.

On my daily travels around the web i encounter several commentators who are frequently cited and quoted by liberals/progressives. One such figure is Joseph E. Stiglitz . But to offer ammunition to those who claim to be anti-capitalist and approving refer to Stiglitz here he is:”I’m not arguing that there should be no inequality,” Stiglitz said “There is a need for incentives, and any system of incentives will lead to some differences — perhaps large differences — in incomes…Talented American workers worked longer hours, took more risk and earned more income than their counterparts in Europe who diminished their work effort. Success produced new companies, like Google and Facebook, that provided valuable on-the-job training, which increased their workforces’ chances of success. Success put equity into the hands of investors more willing to bear the risks needed to produce innovation… We should also grow concerned when a backlash to inequality threatens to dampen the incentives for the risk-taking needed to produce innovation and employment growth.”It’s just “excessive” levels of those who don’t contribute to making the pie larger, only their slice of it, he is against.http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/15/books/review/inside-the-list.html?pagewanted=all