Home Original Content Funny Pictures Funny GIFs YouTube Funny Text Funny Movies Channels Search

hide menu
What do you think? Give us your opinion. Anonymous comments allowed.
#12 - infinitereaper ONLINE (07/06/2013) [-]
The problem isn't wealth it's wealth gained by becoming a parasite sucking the world economy and middle and lower class dry.
#132 to #12 - anisbanana (07/06/2013) [-]
im so rich i **** carrots
#124 to #12 - anonymous (07/06/2013) [-]
If you make money by the manipulation of money and do nothing else, you're a parasite.
#52 to #12 - superkewlguy (07/06/2013) [-]
[I Hate Kumagawa] [This is my favorite character!]
#33 to #12 - jastri (07/06/2013) [-]
I like this man
User avatar #182 to #33 - angelodlt (07/06/2013) [-]
Who is that?
User avatar #215 to #182 - jastri (07/08/2013) [-]
It's Andrew Ryan from the Bioshock games
#24 to #12 - tazze ONLINE (07/06/2013) [-]
the problem with economy is having large amounts of money (big fortunes) in banks, ALL money has to flow, in an ideal capitalist system everyone would earn money at the same rate they spend it and not a single cent would be left out of circulation
User avatar #26 to #24 - manicekman (07/06/2013) [-]
And you think the money stays in bank? Banks lend the money so people build **** and buy **** .
#27 to #26 - tazze ONLINE (07/06/2013) [-]
MFW people think banks lend remotely enough money to keep the economy working
User avatar #66 to #27 - scootpilgrim (07/06/2013) [-]
When they lend ten times more than they actually have, then yeah, I think they lend enough.
#50 to #27 - pennydragon (07/06/2013) [-]
As always it depends on what is actually done.   
   
But banks are usually a major money multiplier, which you should know if you've taken second year finance. If you're a lot more advanced than that and you disagree please show us your reasoning.   
   
The way it works is this. People put excess money that they haven't yet spent or invested long term into a bank. That then bank loans it out. Those that borrow the money usually don't spend it all at once, they spend it gradually on their building project or whatever as they buy more supplies, pay wages, and rent equipment. So a lot of that money returns to a bank, and the bank loans it out. This happens so much that the banks are basically stretching money.    
   
This is why if many many people were to pull their money out of a bank, that bank would not possibly be able to pay them. Only a tiny percentage of the total money they bank actually is in the bank at any one time.    
   
Your complaint with banks that money must be in circulation isn't how it usually works. I'd be more concerned with bank fraud. I'd be more concerned with other corporations sitting on their money, cutting jobs, exploiting oppressed global labor and monetary exchange rates. I'd be concerned with war spending that destroys lives, spending that isn't a good investment.
As always it depends on what is actually done.

But banks are usually a major money multiplier, which you should know if you've taken second year finance. If you're a lot more advanced than that and you disagree please show us your reasoning.

The way it works is this. People put excess money that they haven't yet spent or invested long term into a bank. That then bank loans it out. Those that borrow the money usually don't spend it all at once, they spend it gradually on their building project or whatever as they buy more supplies, pay wages, and rent equipment. So a lot of that money returns to a bank, and the bank loans it out. This happens so much that the banks are basically stretching money.

This is why if many many people were to pull their money out of a bank, that bank would not possibly be able to pay them. Only a tiny percentage of the total money they bank actually is in the bank at any one time.

Your complaint with banks that money must be in circulation isn't how it usually works. I'd be more concerned with bank fraud. I'd be more concerned with other corporations sitting on their money, cutting jobs, exploiting oppressed global labor and monetary exchange rates. I'd be concerned with war spending that destroys lives, spending that isn't a good investment.
#103 to #50 - tazze ONLINE (07/06/2013) [-]
look, for example, before the crisis the banks would lend anyone any amount of money, that made the system work pretty well, but it also made it unstable because people spent more money that what they earned, that caused many of them (banks) to crash, and after that they are very suspicious of everything and thus don't lend enough money, which is suffocating the economy, everyone is focused on saving money and that, in this system, is a terrible thing.
#116 to #103 - pennydragon (07/06/2013) [-]
Leading up to the crisis there was a lot of terrible behavior in finance, that's what kind of caused the crash. Bad loans, bad math, fraud, gambling on derivatives, wasting investor money, selling people on shady variable interest loans for way more than they should have had. It was all geared towards getting money from the housing bubble and the great supposedly rock solid interest they could make from the US housing market. Also student loans are a bit of a mess right now with how terrible the job market is.   
   
As for financing and credit no longer being as available, yes that's true, and that's a fair critique. That wouldn't prove 'bad banks, no banking, you take money out of circulation' that would actually seem to say 'oh, we need more financing, loans and credit apparently'.   
   
Yeah, you're right that austerity measures and cutting back are often a terrible thing during recessions. You're supposed to have austerity when times are GOOD to stock up for when times are bad. During a recession less spending and investment means less revenue in the market, which means more cutting back of production, which means less jobs, which means more suffering people. When people are hurting for work and money they tend to spend less so there's AGAIN less revenue in the markets, which means further cut backs of production. We want more money being invested now, but wisely, to pick things up and get back on track.
Leading up to the crisis there was a lot of terrible behavior in finance, that's what kind of caused the crash. Bad loans, bad math, fraud, gambling on derivatives, wasting investor money, selling people on shady variable interest loans for way more than they should have had. It was all geared towards getting money from the housing bubble and the great supposedly rock solid interest they could make from the US housing market. Also student loans are a bit of a mess right now with how terrible the job market is.

As for financing and credit no longer being as available, yes that's true, and that's a fair critique. That wouldn't prove 'bad banks, no banking, you take money out of circulation' that would actually seem to say 'oh, we need more financing, loans and credit apparently'.

Yeah, you're right that austerity measures and cutting back are often a terrible thing during recessions. You're supposed to have austerity when times are GOOD to stock up for when times are bad. During a recession less spending and investment means less revenue in the market, which means more cutting back of production, which means less jobs, which means more suffering people. When people are hurting for work and money they tend to spend less so there's AGAIN less revenue in the markets, which means further cut backs of production. We want more money being invested now, but wisely, to pick things up and get back on track.
User avatar #34 to #27 - volleys (07/06/2013) [-]
They usually invest money hopefully to make a profit. Otherwise all they would be doing is holding money. Thats the whole point of gaining interest on savings accounts/CD's. Banks are businesses they are supposed to make a profit.
#22 to #12 - anonymous (07/06/2013) [-]
That second option sounds easy. I wanna do that.
 Friends (0)