The point is that newly-created credit, used by these companies as ‘cash’, finds its way into the economy, where its circulation creates activity, measured as part of GDP, which wouldn’t have existed without the cheap credit being created in the first place.

rogerglewis
on October 21, 2019 at 1:51 pm said:
“The point is that newly-created credit, used by these companies as ‘cash’, finds its way into the economy, where its circulation creates activity, measured as part of GDP, which wouldn’t have existed without the cheap credit being created in the first place”.

Tim that Begs the question, in my opinion, Richters previous video on the Housing bubble sets up the same strawman.

I have put up a blog on the question as to why Richter is wrong due to his faulty premise.

The control of the debt is the shell game that he and you are missing. as we move to an increasingly cashless economy it becomes ever more obvious but the same old robber barons are playing the same old cards.

“On Sept, 1, 1894, we will not renew our loans under any consideration. On Sept. 1st we will demand our money. We will foreclose and become mortgagees in possession. We can take two-thirds of the farms west of the Mississippi, and thousands of them east of the Mississippi as well, at our own price… We may as well own three-fourths of the farms of the West and the money of the country. Then the farmers will become tenants as in England …” — 1891, American Bankers Association, as printed in the Congressional Record of April 29, 1913