A week or so ago, I made a statement along the lines of "I don't understand the arguments *against* the credit theory of money"

@KevinCarson1 here does a fantastic job of fleshing those out, on @C4SS

https://c4ss.org/content/61050

Capitalism in Inches and Pounds: A Parable

The argument that capitalists are needed to provide workers with means of production, and profit is their reward for doing so, is nonsense. All capitalists have are paper or digital claims on the right to allocate means of production or material resources. All of the actual material resources — means of production and raw materials...

Center for a Stateless Society
@neonsnake @C4SS Just today I had an "ancap" who goes by the name Hogeye Bill (who, I found out when I checked his feed, also turned out to be an Epstein defender dismissing Virginia Giuffre as a gold-digger) show up in my replies at Bluesky attempting to argue against the piece. He was so immersed in Austrian "money theory of credit" and "advance theory of capital" assumptions that he didn't even realize, after supposedly reading the piece, that I *didn't* agree with him that the capitalist performs a "necessary function" of "saving and building capital," and that it naturally "compounds".

@KevinCarson1 @C4SS oooff at the Epstein thing.

It's one of those things that sort of intuitively makes "sense". You and I , after all, save money to afford stuff. Stands to reason that Pete The Peasant saved his money until he was able to purchase, like, half of Essex, right?

Which...fine?...I guess...until you know how it actually works.

If you still keep up the pretence of people squirreling away gold under the mattress after knowing how it works, then...hey, I've a bridge to sell you, I suppose.

@neonsnake @C4SS Shit, I read a college textbook on banking and finance that said banks "aggregated savings" to provide investment capital, and this was a fucking ECONOMIST pretending they don't just create money and credit.

@KevinCarson1 @neonsnake @C4SS

I just had a sudden memory of sitting in high school economics class thinking, "this...this just seems like a big scam..."

Took years to unlearn thinking I wasn't smart enough to understand economics.

@CorvidCrone @KevinCarson1 @neonsnake @C4SS

Not just a scam. Death cult.

@violetmadder @CorvidCrone @KevinCarson1 @C4SS

I have vague memories of being a teen and my Dad* "explaining" to me that banks lend to their customers from the savings of other customers, and also invest savings into other companies.

I'll be totally honest, I still think I'm not smart enough to understand "that" side of economics. Like, everytime I feel I've got a handle on MMT, I read something that makes me completely doubt my understanding of it. I have an acquaintance who is *very* high up in one of the banks in the UK who has told me that no, banks don't create money out of nothing, and that everything has to balance every single day at 4.15pm.

I "believe" him, but I couldn't follow his arguments at all, and there's a chance that in fact they do create money out of nothing, but his way of thinking (liabilities vs assets or something) was at odds with my own - very limited - understanding.

I further believe that this is, in part, deliberate. I've got a vague thought that the whole thing is confusing to us mere lay-people, to keep us from just...going off and ignoring it altogether and doing our own thing.

(In a very, very, very small way, I'm involved with some LETs in my local area - which is literally just a spreadsheet we use to keep track of who owes who what lol)

*My Dad was a Certified Accountant; eventually at CFO level, which might make it even worse 😬

@neonsnake @violetmadder @CorvidCrone @KevinCarson1 @C4SS

I feel like it's important to mention that without guns, currencies are worthless and so is property.

@johnzajac @violetmadder @CorvidCrone @KevinCarson1 @C4SS

I've just had a kneejerk "hard disagree" reaction to this.

On reflection, I suspect it's because we might be approaching both currencies and property in different manners.

I believe that currency - the very strict sense of something that all relevant parties agree to - can be a useful tool for tracking obligations. I have no ties to *government-issued* currencies, however. Just a unit of measure, I don't massively care what it is, and I absolutely do not believe that it needs to be valuable "in and of itself"

Likewise with "property" - property has a lot of different definitions, but in the sense that my house and land is my own, and that it's of a "reasonable" enough size (ie. not stupidly large to the point that I'm excluding others from reasonable use), then the concept has value.

Is your view on both different to mine?

(I live in a country where "guns" are not a thing in the same sense as the US, so allow that as well, my conception might be a little different. Memory serves, you're US-based?)

@neonsnake @johnzajac @violetmadder @CorvidCrone @KevinCarson1 @C4SS tracking obligations is how societies get into trouble. No matter what systems for tracking obligations you adopt someone will successfully game it — to the point that, as we see now, the least deserving walk away with most of the wealth.

You can have property or you can have a good society. You can't have both.

@simon_brooke @neonsnake @johnzajac @violetmadder @CorvidCrone @C4SS No, horizontal tracking of obligations as such does not inevitably lead to concentration of wealth. The concentration of wealth depends on a compounding process, and without the legal enforcement of what Polanyi called fictitious commodities, that enable rent extraction -- rent on land, interest on credit, intellectual property, etc. -- that compounding cannot occur.

@KevinCarson1 @neonsnake @johnzajac @violetmadder @CorvidCrone @C4SS go to #Gaza.

Most people there do not have food. A few people have access to trucks or snuggling tunnels that cross the border. They have plenty of food.

Those who don't have food must buy food today, or else they starve. Those who do, do not need to sell food today — the prices may be higher tomorrow, when people are more desperate.

So the poor will always pay a premium. Markets always, automatically, benefit the rich.

@simon_brooke @KevinCarson1 @johnzajac @violetmadder @CorvidCrone @C4SS

At the risk of imagining a spherical cow - that's a market which is hugely managed by state forces and not, by any means, free.

I get it, in that circumstance, but it's not what I'm talking about here.

@simon_brooke @neonsnake @johnzajac @violetmadder @CorvidCrone @C4SS What they're going through is horrible, but it's a stretch to tie it in with any particular form of money. The limiting factor is the physical lack of means for creating consumption goods, which is the result of military destruction.
@simon_brooke @neonsnake @johnzajac @violetmadder @CorvidCrone @C4SS They're paying a premium because no one's allowed to produce enough food.