The Political Measuring Stick

[creator]

I see your point....do you see mine?

It is mathematically impossible to pay the debt (without the Banker spending that money back into the economy - thus transferring assets/labor to the banker along with complete control over the economy - is that better?)....

Yes, I have seen your point the whole time! I also saw the hole, which makes it mathematically possible under rare circumstances.

But glad to see you've finally come around to admitting there is a mathematical possibility under the right circumstance that circumstance being that the banker spends all the money back into the economy. Though the end of your sentence revealed you're not thinking in terms of mathematical possibility, you're thinking in terms of the corrupt reality we face today, I'm simply illustrating a mathematical possibility, not even trying to address babylon.

[Original_Intent]

I see your point....do you see mine?

It is mathematically impossible to pay the debt (without the Banker spending that money back into the economy - thus transferring assets/labor to the banker along with complete control over the economy - is that better?)....

Yes, I have seen your point the whole time! I also saw the hole, which makes it mathematically possible under rare circumstances.

But glad to see you've finally come around to admitting there is a mathematical possibility under the right circumstance that circumstance being that the banker spends all the money back into the economy. Though the end of your sentence revealed you're not thinking in terms of mathematical possibility, you're thinking in terms of the corrupt reality we face today, I'm simply illustrating a mathematical possibility, not even trying to address babylon.

However, is the end result not the same? (albeit the can will get kicked farther down the road)

So the banker spends money into the economy, and the cycle repeats itself for possibly hundreds of years - in the end does the banker not end up owning everything, while adding no real production of goods to the economy? So even if the debt, under our current system is ever paid off - would we not reborrow money to have in circulation and eventually give everything for the privilege of using the banker's paper?

[Jason]

I see your point....do you see mine?

It is mathematically impossible to pay the debt (without the Banker spending that money back into the economy - thus transferring assets/labor to the banker along with complete control over the economy - is that better?)....

Yes, I have seen your point the whole time! I also saw the hole, which makes it mathematically possible under rare circumstances.

But glad to see you've finally come around to admitting there is a mathematical possibility under the right circumstance that circumstance being that the banker spends all the money back into the economy. Though the end of your sentence revealed you're not thinking in terms of mathematical possibility, you're thinking in terms of the corrupt reality we face today, I'm simply illustrating a mathematical possibility, not even trying to address babylon.

Rodger - Thank you for making me think it through more thoroughly!!!

....if the banker were the government (organization representing the people - people borrowing from themselves)....the interest would satisfy the tax burden as the government spends for infrastructure, etc.

[Jason]

I see your point....do you see mine?

It is mathematically impossible to pay the debt (without the Banker spending that money back into the economy - thus transferring assets/labor to the banker along with complete control over the economy - is that better?)....

Yes, I have seen your point the whole time! I also saw the hole, which makes it mathematically possible under rare circumstances.

But glad to see you've finally come around to admitting there is a mathematical possibility under the right circumstance that circumstance being that the banker spends all the money back into the economy. Though the end of your sentence revealed you're not thinking in terms of mathematical possibility, you're thinking in terms of the corrupt reality we face today, I'm simply illustrating a mathematical possibility, not even trying to address babylon.

However, is the end result not the same? (albeit the can will get kicked farther down the road)

So the banker spends money into the economy, and the cycle repeats itself for possibly hundreds of years - in the end does the banker not end up owning everything, while adding no real production of goods to the economy? So even if the debt, under our current system is ever paid off - would we not reborrow money to have in circulation and eventually give everything for the privilege of using the banker's paper?

Yeppers! Eventually all the assets would be owned by the banker and the people would be indebted for their lifetimes, their children's lifetimes, grandchildren, great.....etc.

Sounds familiar doesn't it???

[7cylon7]

%%- B-( :-@ ^:)^ ] %-(

I could not find a parrot.... to post .... I did not parrot..anything... all those thoughts were my own.

[ithink]

I loan your family $500 bucks with $100 interest charge. Your family members work for each other - pay each other money for goods/services to your hearts content. Only $500 goes in the door to your home and $600 has to come out....where do you get the extra $100???

Where do I get the extra $100? From you! You pay me $100 to mow your lawn B-) problem solved.

Glad to see someone else chiming in, and catching on to what I see as a hole in the theory presented...

To summarize... Mummy, you are saying it's mathematically impossible, without new debt or new money printed/pumped into the system, to pay off all the debt and interest.

The problem I see is that while you're saying it's "mathematically impossible" you're only using the scenario's that make it impossible and not the scenario's which reveal it is possible... if we're just trying to see what's mathematically possible we can use any scenario, however unlikely or unrealistic, so long as it is also possible scenario.

What has been presented by myself, and teancum, is that there are possible scenario's which reveal the hole and show that it is in fact mathematically possible to pay off all the debt and interest without taking on new debt, or feeding more money into the system.

One more simple example...

Mr. Smith owes $130,000 to Mr. Banker. This is the total of his loan plus interest... Mr. Smith built a huge slide, and people pay him $100 to slide down his slide. Mr. Banker happens to love slides, he loves them so much, he slides down the slide about 10 times a day - thus Mr. Banker is giving Mr. Smith $1000/day! Mr. Smith takes that $1000/day and gives it right back to Mr. Banker... Thus we see that the same $1000 continues to circulate between Mr. Banker and Mr. Smith... No new money into the economy, no additional debt, just a circulating exchange... Therefore the debt Mr. Smith owes to Mr. Banker is decreasing by $1000/day, and within 130/days Mr. Smith is debt free! No new debt, no new money into the economy... And all the other people in the community also happen to offer a product or service that Mr. Smith loves just as much, so eventually they too have their debts paid off. Everyone is debt free, and the money continues to be exchanged for the various products and services available in the community. Oh, and Mr. Banker had to switch professions after all the debts got paid off.

You see - It is mathematically possible, under certain possible scenario's, while maybe not likely or realistic, it is mathematically possible to pay off all the debt and interest, without new debt or new money.

Your simple example is a joke, and sorry, but you fail grade 5 math.

You say Mr. Smith owes 130K for a slide. Full stop right now, you've made a massive error. Mr. Smith may owe 130K, but what was the principal he received? Was it 100K? If so, the economy received $100K, but Smith owes $130K. Where does Smith get the other $30K? The answer is he does not. The impossible cycle is broken and Smith is bankrupt. Interestingly, Smith is bankrupt the day after he receives the loan, because after he owes 10 cents in interest he still can't pay that back.

The only hope Smith has is that Jones gets a loan from Bankster B and likes slides 1/3 as much as Bankster A. That helps Smith today, but unless Jones and his donut company have a lot of clients that took out loans like he and Smith did and they like donuts too, he'll default as well.

You better hope the banks keep loaning money, or the entire system collapses overnight. And of course, when the amount being called in for compounding interest becomes too onerous, it collapses the system as well, like what is going on in your country, where 1/3 of all new venture capital now goes entirely to financing. This is just one sign that the end is near, and no, Ron Paul's gold will not save you.

For the love of God, please wake up. Ignorance will kill us if we are not more careful and less prideful than we are. We can spout off on this website til the cows come home, but until the so called men humble themselves and are willing to regurgitate each and every lie they have been spoon fed from every source and institution they have been a part of excepting none, there is no hope of coming out on top.

[ithink]

%%- B-( :-@ ^:)^ ] %-(

I could not find a parrot.... to post .... I did not parrot..anything... all those thoughts were my own.

In saying your thoughts are your own, you parrot again. It is all propaganda. Those who deny it illustrate how powerful and pervasive the machine is. Certainly your feelings are your own, but sorry, your thoughts are not original.

[Jason]

In further thought on this subject today I would like to submit the following for thought and reflection -

If the government (as a collective representation of the people) were the sole entity allowed to create money via debt (to both banks and individuals) of which the interest and principle would be spent by the government back into the economy thus negating the probability of creating default or deflationary spiral...

if interest rates were raised the government would get a greater portion to spend on government needs.....but the people would borrow less due to the higher cost.....and vice versa for lowering interest rates. Seems that a long term equilibrium would be maintained.

Of course private banks could lend out deposits (make money off the margin) unrestricted.

[ithink]

In further thought on this subject today I would like to submit the following for thought and reflection -

If the government (as a collective representation of the people) were the sole entity allowed to create money via debt (to both banks and individuals) of which the interest and principle would be spent by the government back into the economy thus negating the probability of creating default or deflationary spiral...

if interest rates were raised the government would get a greater portion to spend on government needs.....but the people would borrow less due to the higher cost.....and vice versa for lowering interest rates. Seems that a long term equilibrium would be maintained.

Of course private banks could lend out deposits (make money off the margin) unrestricted.

Wrong. Any compound interest system currency will fail whether closed or not. What we have now is no different that what you just described, and it doesn't matter if you call it the Federal Reserve or the Federal Government.

I've provided links with material for you to study, material which you must all study or we will all suffer for our collective ignorance / stubbornness, or pride if you will, the exact pride Benson counseled against. I have found sadly, that the most closed minded people I have ever met besides Jehovah's Witnesses are Mormons. A sad statement indeed. Especially for a people who have been warned against "a bible, a bible, there can be no more bible" kind of mentality.

Here it is again: http://perfecteconomy.com/pg-if-i-were-president.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Jason]

In further thought on this subject today I would like to submit the following for thought and reflection -

If the government (as a collective representation of the people) were the sole entity allowed to create money via debt (to both banks and individuals) of which the interest and principle would be spent by the government back into the economy thus negating the probability of creating default or deflationary spiral...

if interest rates were raised the government would get a greater portion to spend on government needs.....but the people would borrow less due to the higher cost.....and vice versa for lowering interest rates. Seems that a long term equilibrium would be maintained.

Of course private banks could lend out deposits (make money off the margin) unrestricted.

Wrong. Any compound interest system currency will fail whether closed or not. What we have now is no different that what you just described, and it doesn't matter if you call it the Federal Reserve or the Federal Government.

I've provided links with material for you to study, material which you must all study or we will all suffer for our collective ignorance / stubbornness, or pride if you will, the exact pride Benson counseled against. I have found sadly, that the most closed minded people I have ever met besides Jehovah's Witnesses are Mormons. A sad statement indeed. Especially for a people who have been warned against "a bible, a bible, there can be no more bible" kind of mentality.

Here it is again: http://perfecteconomy.com/pg-if-i-were-president.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

....I've read through it a time or two before....but I'll go through it again!

[shadow]

Your simple example is a joke, and sorry, but you fail grade 5 math.

In saying your thoughts are your own, you parrot again. It is all propaganda. Those who deny it illustrate how powerful and pervasive the machine is. Certainly your feelings are your own, but sorry, your thoughts are not original.

Wrong.

For the love of God, please wake up. Ignorance will kill us if we are not more careful and less prideful than we are. We can spout off on this website til the cows come home

I thought you were done with this site. Welcome back :-\

[ithink]

In further thought on this subject today I would like to submit the following for thought and reflection -

If the government (as a collective representation of the people) were the sole entity allowed to create money via debt (to both banks and individuals) of which the interest and principle would be spent by the government back into the economy thus negating the probability of creating default or deflationary spiral...

if interest rates were raised the government would get a greater portion to spend on government needs.....but the people would borrow less due to the higher cost.....and vice versa for lowering interest rates. Seems that a long term equilibrium would be maintained.

Of course private banks could lend out deposits (make money off the margin) unrestricted.

Wrong. Any compound interest system currency will fail whether closed or not. What we have now is no different that what you just described, and it doesn't matter if you call it the Federal Reserve or the Federal Government.

I've provided links with material for you to study, material which you must all study or we will all suffer for our collective ignorance / stubbornness, or pride if you will, the exact pride Benson counseled against. I have found sadly, that the most closed minded people I have ever met besides Jehovah's Witnesses are Mormons. A sad statement indeed. Especially for a people who have been warned against "a bible, a bible, there can be no more bible" kind of mentality.

Here it is again: http://perfecteconomy.com/pg-if-i-were-president.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

....I've read through it a time or two before....but I'll go through it again!

Your attitude is the same attitude as mine, which is I am willing at every point to receive more knowledge. This is my attitude: "for unto him that receiveth I will give more; and from them that shall say, We have enough, from them shall be taken away even that which they have." The strangest thing is that for some reason, the majority seem to choose the latter.

[ithink]

Your simple example is a joke, and sorry, but you fail grade 5 math.

In saying your thoughts are your own, you parrot again. It is all propaganda. Those who deny it illustrate how powerful and pervasive the machine is. Certainly your feelings are your own, but sorry, your thoughts are not original.

Wrong.

For the love of God, please wake up. Ignorance will kill us if we are not more careful and less prideful than we are. We can spout off on this website til the cows come home

I thought you were done with this site. Welcome back :-\

Thank you. I have never believed life was a popularity contest. If I open my mouth and too many people tell me how great it was, I feel I need to repent, because in a wicked world, opening your mouth should get you into trouble, not make you (m)any friends. And yes, that applies to this forum as well, doubly so, because shadow, we ought to know better than have shown we do.

[creator]

Mr. Smith owes $130,000 to Mr. Banker. This is the total of his loan plus interest... Mr. Smith built a huge slide, and people pay him $100 to slide down his slide. Mr. Banker happens to love slides, he loves them so much, he slides down the slide about 10 times a day - thus Mr. Banker is giving Mr. Smith $1000/day! Mr. Smith takes that $1000/day and gives it right back to Mr. Banker... Thus we see that the same $1000 continues to circulate between Mr. Banker and Mr. Smith... No new money into the economy, no additional debt, just a circulating exchange... Therefore the debt Mr. Smith owes to Mr. Banker is decreasing by $1000/day, and within 130/days Mr. Smith is debt free! No new debt, no new money into the economy... And all the other people in the community also happen to offer a product or service that Mr. Smith loves just as much, so eventually they too have their debts paid off. Everyone is debt free, and the money continues to be exchanged for the various products and services available in the community. Oh, and Mr. Banker had to switch professions after all the debts got paid off.

You see - It is mathematically possible, under certain possible scenario's, while maybe not likely or realistic, it is mathematically possible to pay off all the debt and interest, without new debt or new money.

Your simple example is a joke, and sorry, but you fail grade 5 math.

You say Mr. Smith owes 130K for a slide. Full stop right now, you've made a massive error. Mr. Smith may owe 130K, but what was the principal he received? Was it 100K? If so, the economy received $100K, but Smith owes $130K. Where does Smith get the other $30K? The answer is he does not. The impossible cycle is broken and Smith is bankrupt. Interestingly, Smith is bankrupt the day after he receives the loan, because after he owes 10 cents in interest he still can't pay that back...

Sorry, but it is you who have failed in the math here, seems you don't understand how money can continue to circulate so long as it is not held onto by one person... you must re-read and re-read and re-read the example(s) I have given and you will see the truth, that the math is sound, despite the example not being realistic or at all likely... My point is not to argue the reality of the system as it is today but only to show that there is a possibility to pay back all the interest and debt without acquiring new debt or injecting new money into the system - the point is to show the mathematically possibility, not the chances of that scenario actually happening in real life. Take a step back, re-read, and just think. And if you respond, don't stray from the example scenario given, as you have done. How can you hope to disprove something if you stray from the scenario being used to prove it?

[Jason]

Mr. Smith owes $130,000 to Mr. Banker. This is the total of his loan plus interest... Mr. Smith built a huge slide, and people pay him $100 to slide down his slide. Mr. Banker happens to love slides, he loves them so much, he slides down the slide about 10 times a day - thus Mr. Banker is giving Mr. Smith $1000/day! Mr. Smith takes that $1000/day and gives it right back to Mr. Banker... Thus we see that the same $1000 continues to circulate between Mr. Banker and Mr. Smith... No new money into the economy, no additional debt, just a circulating exchange... Therefore the debt Mr. Smith owes to Mr. Banker is decreasing by $1000/day, and within 130/days Mr. Smith is debt free! No new debt, no new money into the economy... And all the other people in the community also happen to offer a product or service that Mr. Smith loves just as much, so eventually they too have their debts paid off. Everyone is debt free, and the money continues to be exchanged for the various products and services available in the community. Oh, and Mr. Banker had to switch professions after all the debts got paid off.

You see - It is mathematically possible, under certain possible scenario's, while maybe not likely or realistic, it is mathematically possible to pay off all the debt and interest, without new debt or new money.

Your simple example is a joke, and sorry, but you fail grade 5 math.

You say Mr. Smith owes 130K for a slide. Full stop right now, you've made a massive error. Mr. Smith may owe 130K, but what was the principal he received? Was it 100K? If so, the economy received $100K, but Smith owes $130K. Where does Smith get the other $30K? The answer is he does not. The impossible cycle is broken and Smith is bankrupt. Interestingly, Smith is bankrupt the day after he receives the loan, because after he owes 10 cents in interest he still can't pay that back...

Sorry, but it is you who have failed in the math here, seems you don't understand how money can continue to circulate so long as it is not held onto by one person... you must re-read and re-read and re-read the example(s) I have given and you will see the truth, that the math is sound, despite the example not being realistic or at all likely... My point is not to argue the reality of the system as it is today but only to show that there is a possibility to pay back all the interest and debt without acquiring new debt or injecting new money into the system - the point is to show the mathematically possibility, not the chances of that scenario actually happening in real life. Take a step back, re-read, and just think. And if you respond, don't stray from the example scenario given, as you have done. How can you hope to disprove something if you stray from the scenario being used to prove it?

Just to clarify -
the money has to do more than just change hands between people.....has to go back into the economy from the bank without an IOU attached (for example - payment for goods/services)....otherwise ithink is correct. See scenario 1 in previous post. If scenario 2 changes from Mr. Banker sliding down the slide (goods/service) to just offering another loan....back to no money to pay interest.

[creator]

Just to clarify -
the money has to do more than just change hands between people.....has to go back into the economy from the bank without an IOU attached (for example - payment for goods/services)....otherwise ithink is correct. See scenario 1 in previous post. If scenario 2 changes from Mr. Banker sliding down the slide (goods/service) to just offering another loan....back to no money to pay interest.

Yes, I do realize that, but in my scenario the money changes hands and goes back into the economy without IOU's attached.

[Rincon]

I measure everything against the Constitution which was handed to the Founding Fathers by the Lord. That is why I vote for Constitutional Party Candidates. Not that they could ever be elected, but as a show of respect for the Constitution.

I think politics is meaningless at this point. President Benson was quoted many years ago as saying we had already passed the point when the Constitution could have been saved by peaceful means. Now it will cost blood to save it. An enemy hath done this. We shouldn't be surprised, everything is on schedule like the prophesies indicate.

[Teancum-Old]

I see your point....do you see mine?

It is mathematically impossible to pay the debt (without the Banker spending that money back into the economy - thus transferring assets/labor to the banker along with complete control over the economy - is that better?)....

Yes, I have seen your point the whole time! I also saw the hole, which makes it mathematically possible under rare circumstances.

But glad to see you've finally come around to admitting there is a mathematical possibility under the right circumstance that circumstance being that the banker spends all the money back into the economy. Though the end of your sentence revealed you're not thinking in terms of mathematical possibility, you're thinking in terms of the corrupt reality we face today, I'm simply illustrating a mathematical possibility, not even trying to address babylon.

Brian: Good to see you have brought most to agreement on this. If the banker puts his money back into the system with no IOUs attached, the loan's principal + interest can indeed be paid off -- definitely a mathematical possibility. However, this is not what is going on today through central banking. (

[Original_Intent]

I see your point....do you see mine?

It is mathematically impossible to pay the debt (without the Banker spending that money back into the economy - thus transferring assets/labor to the banker along with complete control over the economy - is that better?)....

Yes, I have seen your point the whole time! I also saw the hole, which makes it mathematically possible under rare circumstances.

But glad to see you've finally come around to admitting there is a mathematical possibility under the right circumstance that circumstance being that the banker spends all the money back into the economy. Though the end of your sentence revealed you're not thinking in terms of mathematical possibility, you're thinking in terms of the corrupt reality we face today, I'm simply illustrating a mathematical possibility, not even trying to address babylon.

Brian: Good to see you have brought most to agreement on this. If the banker puts his money back into the system with no IOUs attached, the loan's principal + interest can indeed be paid off -- definitely a mathematical possibility. However, this is not what is going on today through central banking. (

Yes Brian is indeed correct - it is possible but extremely unlikely. Which I believe he has acknowledged all along. And the massive scale of providing all of the money in the entire economy at interest, the banks would have to be buying things up at an equally massive scale to keep up with the interest and make the loan truly paid off. So on the one hand you have an unpayable debt, and everything transfers to the bank by default on the loan, OR the bankers spend money into the economy hand over fist, the loan is paid off, but all assets have been transferred to the bank thru purchasing.

So in either scenario, the banks end up with all the money (which they don't really care about - why would they? THEY SEE FRNS FOR WHAT THEY REALLY ARE!) and they also end up owning most if not all of the assets. What profiteth it a man if he gain the world but loses his soul? The Global conspiracy is very close to achieving the first part of that equation.

[7cylon7]

Ithink your annoying. :ymapplause:

[Teancum-Old]

I loan your family $500 bucks with $100 interest charge. Your family members work for each other - pay each other money for goods/services to your hearts content. Only $500 goes in the door to your home and $600 has to come out....where do you get the extra $100???

Where do I get the extra $100? From you! You pay me $100 to mow your lawn B-) problem solved.

Glad to see someone else chiming in, and catching on to what I see as a hole in the theory presented...

To summarize... Mummy, you are saying it's mathematically impossible, without new debt or new money printed/pumped into the system, to pay off all the debt and interest.

The problem I see is that while you're saying it's "mathematically impossible" you're only using the scenario's that make it impossible and not the scenario's which reveal it is possible... if we're just trying to see what's mathematically possible we can use any scenario, however unlikely or unrealistic, so long as it is also possible scenario.

What has been presented by myself, and teancum, is that there are possible scenario's which reveal the hole and show that it is in fact mathematically possible to pay off all the debt and interest without taking on new debt, or feeding more money into the system.

One more simple example...

Mr. Smith owes $130,000 to Mr. Banker. This is the total of his loan plus interest... Mr. Smith built a huge slide, and people pay him $100 to slide down his slide. Mr. Banker happens to love slides, he loves them so much, he slides down the slide about 10 times a day - thus Mr. Banker is giving Mr. Smith $1000/day! Mr. Smith takes that $1000/day and gives it right back to Mr. Banker... Thus we see that the same $1000 continues to circulate between Mr. Banker and Mr. Smith... No new money into the economy, no additional debt, just a circulating exchange... Therefore the debt Mr. Smith owes to Mr. Banker is decreasing by $1000/day, and within 130/days Mr. Smith is debt free! No new debt, no new money into the economy... And all the other people in the community also happen to offer a product or service that Mr. Smith loves just as much, so eventually they too have their debts paid off. Everyone is debt free, and the money continues to be exchanged for the various products and services available in the community. Oh, and Mr. Banker had to switch professions after all the debts got paid off.

You see - It is mathematically possible, under certain possible scenario's, while maybe not likely or realistic, it is mathematically possible to pay off all the debt and interest, without new debt or new money.

Your simple example is a joke, and sorry, but you fail grade 5 math.

You say Mr. Smith owes 130K for a slide. Full stop right now, you've made a massive error.

Hold on! Did I read that right? Is this supposed to say, "Fool, stop right now?" I hope this is not what was meant. If so, it is extremely arrogant and unChrist-like (as is the "grade 5 math" comment), as well as poor spelling on your part.

You say we cannot have debt, but you belong to a church which holds you in perpetual debt to Christ with a debt that can never be paid. Well surprise surprise, you also belong to another organization on this planet to whom you also owe a debt that can never be paid, and how does it feel?

I never knew this forum was a good source of anti-Mormon rubbish! If I was really looking for that sort of thing, I would talk to Jerald and Sandra Tanner or Ed Decker.

900 years ago, anyone practicing usury was excommunicated from the Christian church. With that in mind, I can only say God help you all that continue to sustain this bastard financial system child of the devil, because if I was in a position to do so, I would start purging in the same way that old Christian church did.

Aaahhh... So during the Great Apostasy, the corrupt Christian Church of the Dark Ages was holding fast to the Iron Rod on their way to the Tree of Life, while the Restored Church today is somewhere in the mist of darkness??? More anti-Mormon rubbish...

I am willing at every point to receive more knowledge.

Really?! That does not appear to be the case from your unChrist-like behavior illustrated above. ithink, you may think you are smart but I am sure you are far from perfect (as are most of us--including myself). Your elitish behavior just makes me say =;

[ithink]

Mr. Smith owes $130,000 to Mr. Banker. This is the total of his loan plus interest... Mr. Smith built a huge slide, and people pay him $100 to slide down his slide. Mr. Banker happens to love slides, he loves them so much, he slides down the slide about 10 times a day - thus Mr. Banker is giving Mr. Smith $1000/day! Mr. Smith takes that $1000/day and gives it right back to Mr. Banker... Thus we see that the same $1000 continues to circulate between Mr. Banker and Mr. Smith... No new money into the economy, no additional debt, just a circulating exchange... Therefore the debt Mr. Smith owes to Mr. Banker is decreasing by $1000/day, and within 130/days Mr. Smith is debt free! No new debt, no new money into the economy... And all the other people in the community also happen to offer a product or service that Mr. Smith loves just as much, so eventually they too have their debts paid off. Everyone is debt free, and the money continues to be exchanged for the various products and services available in the community. Oh, and Mr. Banker had to switch professions after all the debts got paid off.

You see - It is mathematically possible, under certain possible scenario's, while maybe not likely or realistic, it is mathematically possible to pay off all the debt and interest, without new debt or new money.

Your simple example is a joke, and sorry, but you fail grade 5 math.

You say Mr. Smith owes 130K for a slide. Full stop right now, you've made a massive error. Mr. Smith may owe 130K, but what was the principal he received? Was it 100K? If so, the economy received $100K, but Smith owes $130K. Where does Smith get the other $30K? The answer is he does not. The impossible cycle is broken and Smith is bankrupt. Interestingly, Smith is bankrupt the day after he receives the loan, because after he owes 10 cents in interest he still can't pay that back...

Sorry, but it is you who have failed in the math here, seems you don't understand how money can continue to circulate so long as it is not held onto by one person... you must re-read and re-read and re-read the example(s) I have given and you will see the truth, that the math is sound, despite the example not being realistic or at all likely... My point is not to argue the reality of the system as it is today but only to show that there is a possibility to pay back all the interest and debt without acquiring new debt or injecting new money into the system - the point is to show the mathematically possibility, not the chances of that scenario actually happening in real life. Take a step back, re-read, and just think. And if you respond, don't stray from the example scenario given, as you have done. How can you hope to disprove something if you stray from the scenario being used to prove it?

First fix your "example", it is flawed. Tell us the principal issued by the bank, not what is owed by Smith.

[Jason]

I see your point....do you see mine?

It is mathematically impossible to pay the debt (without the Banker spending that money back into the economy - thus transferring assets/labor to the banker along with complete control over the economy - is that better?)....

Yes, I have seen your point the whole time! I also saw the hole, which makes it mathematically possible under rare circumstances.

But glad to see you've finally come around to admitting there is a mathematical possibility under the right circumstance that circumstance being that the banker spends all the money back into the economy. Though the end of your sentence revealed you're not thinking in terms of mathematical possibility, you're thinking in terms of the corrupt reality we face today, I'm simply illustrating a mathematical possibility, not even trying to address babylon.

Brian: Good to see you have brought most to agreement on this. If the banker puts his money back into the system with no IOUs attached, the loan's principal + interest can indeed be paid off -- definitely a mathematical possibility. However, this is not what is going on today through central banking. (

But it doesn't resolve the flow of assets to the banker for creating money out of nothing....it just depicts the level of control the banker has over the economy.

[ithink]

Just to clarify -
the money has to do more than just change hands between people.....has to go back into the economy from the bank without an IOU attached (for example - payment for goods/services)....otherwise ithink is correct. See scenario 1 in previous post. If scenario 2 changes from Mr. Banker sliding down the slide (goods/service) to just offering another loan....back to no money to pay interest.

No, you need to go deeper. If you wish, you can think of paper money "circulating" so to speak, but in reality, the loans that allow that paper money to be in circulation do not. Those loan dollars are created and destroyed! However, the part of the loan repayment that is interest, is destroyed only. There was no creation of the interest by the bank, but since the bank requires interest to be paid in dollars which can only be loaned into existence, it requires more loans to cover this interest portion.

[ithink]

Just to clarify -
the money has to do more than just change hands between people.....has to go back into the economy from the bank without an IOU attached (for example - payment for goods/services)....otherwise ithink is correct. See scenario 1 in previous post. If scenario 2 changes from Mr. Banker sliding down the slide (goods/service) to just offering another loan....back to no money to pay interest.

Yes, I do realize that, but in my scenario the money changes hands and goes back into the economy without IOU's attached.

There is no money that enters the economy without an IOU attached.