Why an economic crisis is inevitable. - page 5

 
Maxim Romanov:

Based on the above logic, the economy turns out not to be unprofitable, but=0. There is no profit and no loss. The resources expended (man-hours) are fully converted into a commodity and, in fact, this commodity is paid for by those same man-hours, if we remove the money.

That is, the price of the product is made up solely of the time spent on it + some kind of surcharge and inflation of the cost of time. In the end the result is 0.

But that's the way it would be if there was no emission!!! Emission creates inflation and puts the economy in the black. More accurately, a "virtual plus" because it stays =0, but because of the time differential, we have growth.

It is unprofitable because people tend to save, i.e. there is not enough demand, and people do not spend all the money. And they are exporting it abroad. So the domestic market is catastrophically insufficient.
 
QuantumBob:
Yes, and the end of this model is near because it leads to exponential growth in debt for all actors, from households to the state. The exponent is soft in the beginning, but then there is a rapid collapse.

These are just numbers, they can be manipulated as you like. To maintain stability, a simple and elegant mechanism has been devised - bankruptcy (death). a bankrupt enterprise/state ceases to exist as a unit and is sold off to new owners at residual value. The important thing is that the bankruptcy is spread over time for different states and companies. If America goes bankrupt, it will be bad, but it will not collapse, others will come. Only the form of "America" will die Content, people, businesses, everything will remain in place, you only need to reorganize, give up debt (bankruptcy), sell everything, introduce a new currency or denominate the old one. So there will always be countries that go through a cycle of growth and a cycle of bankruptcy. The main challenge is to make sure that these don't happen at the same time. But the more global the economy, the more likely simultaneous bankruptcy.

Collapse will not happen if people start exploring new planets and creating colonies. This will support exponential growth. Without continuous development, yes, there will be a collapse, but then the system will line up exactly as it is now.

 
Maxim Romanov:

Based on the above logic, the economy turns out not to be unprofitable, but=0. There is no profit and no loss. The resources expended (man-hours) are fully converted into a commodity and, in fact, this commodity is paid for by those same man-hours, if we remove the money.

That is, the price of the product is made up solely of the time spent on it + some kind of surcharge and inflation of the cost of time. In the end the result is 0.

But that's the way it would be if there was no emission!!! Emission creates inflation and puts the economy in the black. More accurately, a "virtual plus" because it stays =0, but because of the time differential, we have growth.

If we remove money, it would be feudalism, i.e. how much is produced and how much is consumed. Unlike capitalism, feudalism is fine in a closed system. As if we are not going back there.)
 
QuantumBob:
It is unprofitable because people tend to save, i.e. demand is already insufficient, and people don't spend it all. And they are exporting it abroad. So the domestic market is catastrophically insufficient.

so people don't save))) there is inflation. The value of money saved falls due to emission. With the right level of income/expenditure a person cannot save more than a certain amount of money, because if they save 5% in a year and their savings depreciate by 5%, eventually zero comes out and people feel like there is more money. Plus, the more a person has saved, the richer he is, and the richer he is, the more he spends, driving up inflation.

 
Maxim Romanov:

These are just numbers, they can be manipulated as you like. To maintain stability, a simple and elegant mechanism has been devised - bankruptcy (death). a bankrupt enterprise/state ceases to exist as a unit and is sold off to new owners at residual value. The important thing is that the bankruptcy is spread over time for different states and companies. If America goes bankrupt, it will be bad, but it will not collapse, others will come. Only the form of "America" will die Content, people, businesses, everything will remain in place, you only need to reorganize, give up debt (bankruptcy), sell everything, introduce a new currency or denominate the old one. So there will always be countries that go through a cycle of growth and a cycle of bankruptcy. The main challenge is to make sure that these don't happen at the same time. But the more global the economy, the more likely simultaneous bankruptcy.

Collapse will not happen if people start exploring new planets and creating colonies. This will support exponential growth. Without continuous development, yes, there will be a collapse, but then the system will line up exactly as it is now.

So that's the problem. Globalism has killed capitalism. It already moves on automatic, like a chicken with its head cut off. We need a constant growth of markets and effective demand, and the whole earth has already been ploughed away. We won't have time to develop mars, it's only a matter of years.
 
Maxim Romanov:

so people don't save))) there is inflation. The value of money saved falls due to emission. With the right level of income/expenditure a person cannot save more than a certain amount of money, because if they save 5% in a year and their savings depreciate by 5%, eventually zero comes out and people feel like there is more money. Plus, the more a person has saved, the richer he is, and the richer he is, the more he spends, driving up inflation.

I don't think inflation will save, as it's a value of a different order. There's not enough 20%. Inflation will not save that. And it also hits investors, which does not help the economy.
 
Maxim Romanov:

so people don't save))) there is inflation. The value of money saved falls due to emission. With the right level of income/expenditure a person cannot save more than a certain amount of money, because if they save 5% in a year and their savings depreciate by 5%, eventually zero comes out and people feel like there is more money. Plus, the more a person has saved, the richer he is, and the richer he is, the more he spends, driving up inflation.

We have already said that even if the population spends every penny, there is no profit. And inflation will further reduce solvent demand.
 
There are figures in the economy that for self-sufficiency and for the domestic market to work well, you need a population of 180 million people or more. That is why expansion and reintegration is needed. Not the separation of independent states.
 
Edgar:
Inflation is bad, but deflation would be fatal for the US.

Oh, the US inflation mechanism is brilliant! When I figured it out, I was just amazed at how brilliantly it was done.

I thought: If there's inflation, the currency gets cheaper, simple as that. So if US inflation was higher than UK inflation for a year, then the dollar should be cheaper against the pound for that year, generally logical. I gathered statistics for 8 countries over 10 years on inflation and compared rates. That's where I was surprised! Inflation is higher in america and the dollar is getting more expensive.... It's a mystery. And then I realised all the genius. We will create demand for USD all over the world, so we will make its price rise against other currencies, BUT at home we will create inflation!!! and keep it stable. It turns out that the USD is becoming more expensive for everyone but the Americans, for them it is becoming cheaper. Domestically, citizens are getting more and more dollars that are cheap for them, but these dollars are becoming more expensive on the foreign market. This is how they have created a permanent increase in the wealth of their citizens. Take manufacturing out to China... That way U.S. citizens can buy even more goods and become richer at the expense of other countries, earning at home cheap dollars that are expensive to the rest of the world.

And only the Swiss franc appreciates against the dollar despite inflation. That is, roughly speaking, the whole world is supporting America and America is supporting Switzerland.

 
Maxim Romanov:

These are just numbers, they can be manipulated as you like. To maintain stability, a simple and elegant mechanism has been devised - bankruptcy (death). a bankrupt enterprise/state ceases to exist as a unit and is sold off to new owners at residual value. The important thing is that the bankruptcy is spread over time for different states and companies. If America goes bankrupt, it will be bad, but it will not collapse, others will come. Only the form of "America" will die Content, people, businesses, everything will remain in place, you only need to reorganize, give up debt (bankruptcy), sell everything, introduce a new currency or denominate the old one. So there will always be countries that go through a cycle of growth and a cycle of bankruptcy. The main challenge is to make sure that these don't happen at the same time. But the more global the economy, the more likely simultaneous bankruptcy.

Collapse will not happen if people start exploring new planets and creating colonies. This will support exponential growth. Without continuous development, yes, there will be a collapse, but then the system will line up exactly as it is now.

Remember the game of musical chairs. This is a very close analogy to capitalism in a closed system. A very quick death. So our job is to keep exports at a sufficient level.
Reason: