/sci/ - Science & Math

[Anonymous No.3160634]

Hey guise i have the ultimate idea

I have 100$, I'm going to lend it to a friend for $10 interest a month.

He now owes me $110 because he took one month to pay it back.

He lends it to his friend, charging $10 a month, and his friend takes two months to pay it back.

his friend now owes him $120.

How does his friend get $120 when there is only $100 in circulation, where me, the money creator, has given him?

[EK !EKFQOBUFnQ No.3160644]

$100 + $10X [2 months] = $120

[Anonymous No.3160652]

>>3160644

But I lent out only one hundred dollar bill to him.

Where does the physical $20 come from to make it $120?

He has the $100 passed down, where is the $20 in interest going to come from?

[EK !EKFQOBUFnQ No.3160659]

>>3160652
erm, from the friend who he lends the $100 dollars to.
He will earn money during the 2 months, so he pays it back with interest.

[Anonymous No.3160667]

>>3160659

Since you are so fucking conditioned by capitalism and your piss-poor brainwashing environment, let me put this into a different context for you.

I'm the banker, no money exists in the world except for this $100 bill. (Concept: The bank creates X amount of money and thats all there is)

Now I'm lending it to my friend Joe and he must repay me $120. (How can he do that, I have only created $100 in the system?)

He can pay back $100, because I have given him $100. Where does he find the other $20 that is not in the system?

[Anonymous No.3160676]

>>3160667

he prints the 20$ because he is in debt to you?

are you fucking retarded?

[EK !EKFQOBUFnQ No.3160686]

>>3160667
well then obviously he cant pay it back then.
your question is still fucking retarded
>herp derp, imagine world with only $100 dollars in it.

[Anonymous No.3160697]

>>3160667

>implying banking is a closed system

[Anonymous No.3160699]

>>3160676

If he can print $20 why the fuck does he need to borrow $100?

God fucking damnit this is why you motherfuckers are slaves.

Another example:

Banker: I make 100 apples in the system. I lend them to Joe and he must return 120 apples(How does he create 20 apples? the fuck do I know, the banker is the only one able to create them)

Joe lends to Jackson, Jackson has to repay 120 apples.

Jackson owes 20 extra apples to Joe, and Joe owes 20 apples to Banker.

Effectively, the entire system owes 40 apples to the Banker if no one repays eachother.

The system initially started with 100 apples, now it has 140 apples in the system.

100 apples are real, 40 are fictional. Problem, economy?

[Anonymous No.3160705]

>>3160699

Because mass-printing money is fucking retarded, if you can't see why then you don't know shit about economics.

[Anonymous No.3160714]

>>3160634

Banks invest your money into other things where they can make a bunch of money. They give you a piece of the profit in the form of interest. It gets you to leave your money with them so they can make money with it. Otherwise, why would you give all your money to a stranger?

[Anonymous No.3160715]

>>3160697
>>3160686


Ok, turn that $100 into 100%.

I'm the banker, I lend 100% of my money out and you must repay it to 120% of my money I gave to you.

Where does Joe get this "20%" extra? He cannot create the money. He is in debt and can't pay it back. He can if the banker creates another 20%.

Now the banker has 20% and Joe has 100%.
The banker gives 20% to Joe for FREE(NO INTEREST) and now has 120% of his money!

HE JUST CREATED MONEY OUT OF THIN AIR LOLOLOLOL PROBLEM AMERICA?

[EK !EKFQOBUFnQ No.3160718]

oh i get it, OP has been watching zeitgeist...

[Anonymous No.3160723]

>>3160714

How did all the money get started into the system?

None of you seem to understand concepts. Or you're fucking brainwashed not to.

[Anonymous No.3160725]

>>3160699
yes economics is retarded, why can't we just stick with only the money that was created at the very beginning by the very first bank. In fact why don't we just go back to using valuable metals for our currency, money is so dumb.

[Anonymous No.3160732]

>>3160686
>>3160676
>>3160659
>>3160644


Oh my god you guys are so goddamn stupid. This is basic fucking economics. If any of you were older than 15, you would know this.

OP, what you've noticed is one of the principals of macroeconomics, wherein banks can control the money supply with their interest rates, and by controlling lending.
Another way to look at it is like this:
Bob has $100, which is all of the money in an economy. He deposits all of this money in the bank. Rob takes out a loan from the bank for $100, and the bank uses Bob's cash to supply the loan. The amount of money in the economy has now effectively doubled, provided Bob does not try to withdraw from the bank any time soon.

[Anonymous No.3160743]

>>3160718

Continue to believe what they tell you. Go along, play dumb, play the sheep, lower your integrity and standards, let them control you.

Don't have a problem? Don't argument.

[m1ckey !dkJI/P7Y32 No.3160745]

I've seen better troll critiques of fractional reserve banking.

[Anonymous No.3160753]

>>3160715
>120% of his money

No, he now has 100% again, 100% of 120 dollars.

[EK !EKFQOBUFnQ No.3160752]

>>3160743
i'll take that as a yes.

[Anonymous No.3160751]

>>3160699

Then Joe has his own apple tree (aka job) and the bank is lending him 100 apples now because he needs to eat while he is waiting for harvest time to come around.

They did this at their own personal loss in the present, so expect to be repaid with a little extra coming back, so that they can lend apples to other people who just recently planted their own apple trees and haven't made it to harvest yet. As more people participate in the system and plant their own apple trees, more people are able to lend apples when they have a surplus to encourage even more apple growers and even more surplus.

[Anonymous No.3160773]

>>3160751

Motherfucker are you stupid? The concept of apples refers to the % of money in the system.

Jesus fucking christ are you moronic. You can't just create money out of thin air can you? Where do you think your employer gets the money to pay you dipshit? THE BANK

Where does the bank get it? The reserve

Where does the reserve get it? THEY CREATE IT

Holy fuck you are one stupid dumbass mothercunt of a douchebag and deserve to be manipulated

[Anonymous No.3160777]

>>3160753

What's the point of this thread? What are you wanting to hear, OP? Yourself? Okay, i get it, now what?

[Anonymous No.3160787]

>>3160753

I'm going to mathematically explain what you just said.

Banker gives 100 to Joe, Joe must return 120. (there is only 100 in the system)

100 = 100 (The system)

(The system requests a 20% increase from Joe)

100 + 0.2(100) = 100 + 0.2(100)

Sounds right? EXCEPT only one side of the system is being taxed 20%.
Therefore this is what is happening

100 + (0.2)100 = 100

And the system looks like this:
120 = 100
120 - 100 = 0
20 = 0
False logic is false.

[Anonymous No.3160789]

>>3160773

>Motherfucker are you stupid? The concept of apples refers to the % of money in the system.
I get the metaphor which is why I put (aka job) to refer to apples.

>Jesus fucking christ are you moronic. You can't just create money out of thin air can you? Where do you think your employer gets the money to pay you dipshit? THE BANK
My employer gets money from the customers who transfer their wealth for the goods and services we provide, no bank in the world world would give a business money if their only means to get money was from the bank.

[m1ckey !dkJI/P7Y32 No.3160795]

>>3160773
And like money, it can be used to make things. He also isn't the only one taking out a loan from the bank. Please learn about the credit multiplier before making bad troll threads.

[Anonymous No.3160798]

>>3160789
Smart man right here.
Where do your consumers get their money? From the fucking employer? It's a loop. You're being fooled

[Anonymous No.3160806]

>>3160798
Wait you mean fiat money doesn't actually have any value?! And we just trade it back and forth in exchange for goods and services?! Your right we are being fooled, should go back to a barter system because money is worthless

[Anonymous No.3160815]

>>3160667
Fucking liberal logic fail.

Money is a but a mere vehicle used to exchange products. Your friend can pay you in barter if there is more production then there is money.

[Anonymous No.3160818]

>>3160798
I love how you guys tack on "you're being fooled" to try to make yourselves sound smarter than everyone else.
gb2 obama birth certificates

[m1ckey !dkJI/P7Y32 No.3160819]

>>3160798
Yeah, I guess the financial system works in a loop. How in the world is this bad, and does it mean that money isn't of value to you?

[Anonymous No.3160825]

OP here, had a good time trawling.

Be seeing you all buttflustered negros.

[m1ckey !dkJI/P7Y32 No.3160843]

>>3160825
You caused mild annoyance at best, because even EK saw it was stupid. Sorry brah. You should make threads about why brown people are violent or Asians are superior for maximum asspain.

[Anonymous No.3160845]

>>3160825
8/10 op. although i kind of knew when you kept stating the same thing..

[Anonymous No.3160846]

It is common to hear adventurers in the different channels of industry assert, that their difficulty lies not in the production, but in the disposal of commodities; that products would always be abundant, if there were but a ready demand, or market for them. When the demand for their commodities is slow, difficult, and productive of little advantage, they pronounce money to be scarce; the grand object of their desire is, a consumption brisk enough to quicken sales and keep up prices. But ask them what peculiar causes and circumstances facilitate the demand for their products, and you will soon perceive that most of them have extremely vague notions of these matters; that their observation of facts is imperfect, and their explanation still more so; that they treat doubtful points as matter of certainty, often pray for what is directly opposite to their interests, and importunately solicit from authority a protection of the most mischievous tendency.

[Anonymous No.3160850]

>>3160798

Unless of course my customers are themselves employers, then they get the money from their customers.

Money does help create a loop and a nice small loop at that. Without money, if I produced product A and my customer produced product B, but they had a customer themselves that produced product C, I would have no direct way to obtain product C if I wanted it as I would have to negotiate a way to trade my product A for their product B in such a way that I could then trade product B for product C. However being no expert in product B or C, I have no way of knowing if I made a fair trade compared to if I would have traded A for C (or maybe I could even have traded less product A for a product D and product D for more of a product C than if I was using product B) because their is no way to make a value comparison. This is what money attempts to provide: a fair, universal way to compare the value of unlike goods.

for them to exchange product B to produce C, so that I could

[EK !EKFQOBUFnQ No.3160851]

>>3160843
>even EK saw it was stupid.
the fuck is that supposed to mean??

[Anonymous No.3160849]

To enable us to form clear and correct practical notions in regard to markets for the products of industry, we must carefully analyse the best established and most certain facts, and apply to them the inferences we have already deduced from a similar way of proceeding; and thus perhaps we may arrive at new and important truths, that may serve to enlighten the views of the agents of industry, and to give confidence to the measures of governments anxious to afford them encouragement.

A man who applies his labour to the investing of objects with value by the creation of utility of some sort, can not expect such a value to be appreciated and paid for, unless where other men have the means of purchasing it. Now, of what do these means consist? Of other values of other products, likewise the fruits of industry, capital, and land. Which leads us to a conclusion that may at first sight appear paradoxical, namely, that it is production which opens a demand for products.

[Anonymous No.3160856]

In a society ever so little advanced in civilization, no single individual produces all that is necessary to satisfy his own wants; and it is rarely that an individual, by his single exertion, creates even any single product; but even if he does, his wants are not limited to that single article; they are numerous and various, and he must, therefore, procure all other objects of his personal consumption, by exchanging the overplus of the single product he himself creates beyond his own wants, for such other products as he stands in need of. And, by the way, it is observable, that, since individual producers, in every line, keep for their own use but a very small part of their own products; the gardener, of the vegetables he raises, the baker of the bread he bakes, the shoemaker, of the shoes he makes, and so of all others; the great bulk, nay, almost the whole of the products of every community, arrive at consumption by the medium of exchange.

[m1ckey !dkJI/P7Y32 No.3160857]

>>3160851
You know what I'm implying, honey.

[JamesBond !!JAU/DZkp95n No.3160860]

ITT: Communist retards from /new/

[Anonymous No.3160862]

>>3160857
dude ur such a flamibg fegget man.

lol EK is kinda cute XD

[Anonymous No.3160866]

This is the reason, why it has been erroneously concluded, that exchange and transfer are the basis and origin of the production of wealth, and of commerce in particular; whereas they are only secondary and accessory circumstances; inasmuch as, were each family to raise the whole of the objects of its own consumption, as we see practised in some instances in the back settlements of the United States, society might continue to exist, without a single act of exchange or transfer. I make this remark, merely with a view to correctness of first principles, without any design to detract from the importance of exchange and transfer to the progressive advancement of production; indeed, I set out with the position, that they are indispensable in an advanced stage of civilization.

[Anonymous No.3160869]

>>3160856
>>3160866
continued:

Admitting, then, the necessity of interchange, let us pause a moment, and consider, what infinite confusion and difficulty must arise to all the different component members of society, who are for the most part producers of but a single article, or two or three at the utmost, but of whom even the poorest is a consumer of a vast number of different products; I say, what difficulty must ensue, were every one obliged to exchange his own products specifically for those he may want; and were the whole of this process carried on by a barter in kind. The hungry cutler must offer the baker his knives for bread; perhaps, the baker has knives enough, but wants a coat; he is willing to purchase one of the tailor with his bread, but the tailor wants not bread, but butcher's meat; and so on to infinity.

[EK !EKFQOBUFnQ No.3160872]

>>3160856
>>3160866
and tl;dr.

[Anonymous No.3160871]

>>3160869
By way of getting over this difficulty, the cutler, finding he cannot persuade the baker to take an article he does not want, will use his best endeavours to have a commodity to offer, which the baker will be able readily to exchange again for whatever he may happen to need. If there exist in the society any specific commodity that is in general request, not merely on account of its inherent utility, but likewise on account of the readiness with which it is received in exchange for the necessary articles of consumption, and the facility of proportionate subdivision, that commodity is precisely what the cutler will try to barter his knives for; because he has learnt from experience, that its possession will procure him without any difficulty, by a second act of exchange, bread or any other article he may wish for.

[Anonymous No.3160881]

>>3160871
In a very advanced stage of civilization, when individual wants have become various and numerous, and productive operations very much subdivided, exchanges become a matter of more urgent necessity, as well as much more frequent and more complicated; and personal consumption and barter in kind becomes less practicable. For instance, if a man makes not the whole knife, but the handle of it only, as in fact is the case in towns where cutlery is conducted on a large scale, he does not produce any thing that he can turn to account; for what could he do with the handle without the blade? He can not himself consume the smallest part of his own product, but must unavoidably exchange the whole of it for the necessaries or conveniences of life, for bread, meat, linen, &c. But neither baker, butcher, nor weaver, can ever stand in need of an article, that is fit for nobody but the finishing cutler, who can not himself give either bread or meat in exchange; because he produces neither; and who must, therefore, give some one commodity, that, by the custom of the country, may be expected to pass currently in exchange for most others.

[Anonymous No.3160888]

>>3160872

fairly informative copypasta is fairly informative.

you should read it and give it a chance, it looks long due to text blockyness, but I am sure you read much more during your research about various buttplugs before you settled on your current Kong Dong

[EK !EKFQOBUFnQ No.3160893]

>>3160888
nah.
also, lol wut?

[Anonymous No.3160901]

babbysfirstreserveratio.jpg

[Anonymous No.3160905]

>>3160881
Thus, money is the more requisite, the more civilized a nation is, and the further it has carried the division of labour.*28 Yet history contains precedents of considerable states, in which the use of any specific article, as money, was utterly unknown; as we are told it was among the Mexicans at the time of the discovery. We are informed, that, just about the period of their conquest by the Spanish adventurers, they were beginning to employ grains of cacao as money, in the smaller transactions of commerce

[Anonymous No.3160908]

>>3160905
I have referred to custom, and not to the authority of government, the choice of the particular article that is to act as money in preference to every other: for though a government may coin what it pleases to call crowns, it does not oblige the subject to give his goods in exchange for these crowns, at least not where property is at all respected. Nor is it the mere impression, that makes people consent to take this coin in exchange for other products. Money passes current like any other commodity; and people may at liberty barter one article for another in kind, or for gold in bars, or silver bullion. The sole reason why a man elects to receive the coin in preference to every other article, is, because he has learnt from experience, that it is preferred by those whose products he has occasion to purchase. Crown pieces derive their circulation as money from no other authority than this spontaneous preference: and if there were the least ground for supposing, that any other commodity, as wheat, for instance, would pass more currently in exchange for what they calculate upon wanting themselves, people would not give their goods for crown pieces, but would demand wheat, which would then be invested with all the properties of money. And this has occurred occasionally in practice, where the authorized or government money has consisted of paper destitute of credit or public confidence.

[m1ckey !dkJI/P7Y32 No.3160915]

>>3160888
>fairly informative copypasta is fairly informative.

Agreed, Say makes for a good read.

[JamesBond !!JAU/DZkp95n No.3160914]

Dang it.

The answer is this:

The extra money is created through earnings. When you borrow $100 you are supposed to produce objects worth more than $100 and then make profit.

[Anonymous No.3160931]

>>3160893

ah yes, I forgot who I was talking to and you probably settled on the King Dragon Dildo

[Anonymous No.3160929]

>>3160908
I have referred to custom, and not to the authority of government, the choice of the particular article that is to act as money in preference to every other: for though a government may coin what it pleases to call crowns, it does not oblige the subject to give his goods in exchange for these crowns, at least not where property is at all respected. Nor is it the mere impression, that makes people consent to take this coin in exchange for other products. Money passes current like any other commodity; and people may at liberty barter one article for another in kind, or for gold in bars, or silver bullion. The sole reason why a man elects to receive the coin in preference to every other article, is, because he has learnt from experience, that it is preferred by those whose products he has occasion to purchase. Crown pieces derive their circulation as money from no other authority than this spontaneous preference: and if there were the least ground for supposing, that any other commodity, as wheat, for instance, would pass more currently in exchange for what they calculate upon wanting themselves, people would not give their goods for crown pieces, but would demand wheat, which would then be invested with all the properties of money. And this has occurred occasionally in practice, where the authorized or government money has consisted of paper destitute of credit or public confidence.

[EK !EKFQOBUFnQ No.3160932]

>>3160905
hah, you trying to make that an advice dog?
zoology =/= biology. you fail at trolling.

[Anonymous No.3160944]

>>3160932
so you admit that its you in this pic>>3160905

[m1ckey !dkJI/P7Y32 No.3160953]

>>3160931
You mean the extra large version of these?

[Anonymous No.3160945]

This money equation lacks 'sense'

[Anonymous No.3160957]

the reserve creates money by several means and not just through fractional reserve banking. by buying bonds on the market for example.

did you just watch zeitgeist and then blindly accept what they were telling you? this information is freely available.

[Anonymous No.3160960]

>>3160932

Ok sorry, so what weird phallus shaped biological entity did you craft into your buttplug?

[m1ckey !dkJI/P7Y32 No.3160966]

>>3160901
>>3160914
>>3160945
>>3160957
Guys, OP already outed himself as a troll. This thread is now about what dildos EK uses.

[EK !EKFQOBUFnQ No.3160969]

>>3160966
fuck off, ive never used one.

[m1ckey !dkJI/P7Y32 No.3160971]

>>3160969
u mad
why?

[EK !EKFQOBUFnQ No.3160975]

>>3160971
nope.

[Anonymous No.3160978]

>>3160966

Looks like EK even made first page of GIS for "this thread is dildos"
http://images.google.com/search?tbm=isch&hl=en&source=hp&biw=1024&bih=571&q=this
+thread+is+dildos&gbv=2&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&oq=

[m1ckey !dkJI/P7Y32 No.3160981]

>>3160975
ok

[m1ckey !dkJI/P7Y32 No.3160986]

>>3160978
Hey, I think I see it. roflolololol

[Anonymous No.3161007]

ITT trolls and usurers.

[Anonymous No.3161010]

>>3161007

also, dildos