FuckyWucky

Also it was disputed even before 2022. This is objectively good for Ukraine (territory wise).

I agree that debt trap diplomacy is bullshit. But there is special irony with regards to the U.S, all the Dollars that Chinese banks and companies lent to American private sector came from the U.S. itself. Whether by export surplus, remittances, capital flows etc. If the Chinese companies can create employment and output instead of lending to parasitic and capital intensive sectors, then it's still a win for the U.S.

I mean it only makes sense, U.S. Dollars are easiest to recycle in the U.S. Most of China's Dollars are held in financial assets, putting some of it into real assets is good for the U.S. It's unfortunate since third world countries could use the Dollars better. Most of them are stuck in foreign currency debt with currency markets that aren't very deep, China should offer them a window to exchange their local currencies for Yuan/Dollars up to a limit. Such a shame this is considered as giving 'free money', there is a hierarchy where China is unwilling to accumulate third world currencies but is perfectly fine with accumulating Dollars, Euros etc. The claim that it's because first world currencies are more liquid or because of political instability is ridiculous since first world currencies in electronic entries in books don't do much either any way.

Wolf Among Us 2

This will go on forever, I'm just describing reality. Please read the book.

Regards.

Interest rates exist. It's set by the central bank.

Please read the book to understand more. This has been a long thread.

I'm not proposing anything this is how all economies work. This is just the accounting reality.

Gov can't take a loan when people don't have money. Spending will always come before income. That part is just standard Keynesian economics. Keynes limited it to private sector but it's exact same for Government.

Please tell me, a new country is formed on another planet. The newly formed state wants to spend, it imposes tax obligations. How will people pay taxes when money hasn't been spent yet?

No I am saying all money that exists comes from Government or Government authorised commercial banks.

Also economy is circular. Money goes round. Money is only deleted when you pay your debts whether tax debts or commercial bank debt.

Not to mention people are going to be using that money for foreign products where parts of it flow outward and not back to government coffers.

Nope. Money never goes out of the country. All money exists as electronic entries at banks or Central bank. When you exchange say Euro for Dollars, you are giving Euros to a bank who then gets the Euros and gives you Dollars from the market. The amount of Euros doesn't change.

But yes imports are a drain on demand, which is exactly why any leakage from imports must be countered to prevent drop in output and employment.

This is why US Govt must run fiscal deficits to counter Trade Deficits given rest of the world's desire to accumulate US dollar assets. Otherwise the local private sector will be indebted.

Where do you think the Government gets any money in general? You may say taxes. But where do people get the money to pay taxes? The Government itself.

That's what I'm saying, spending creates income. Spending logically comes before taxation because if Gov doesn't spend people won't have money to pay taxes. The two sources of widely used money are

1. Government spending

2. Bank lending

Banks make their own money ie your deposits at bank convertible to Government money, to prevent bank runs, the Central Bank provides reserves on demand. By managing reserves, the interest rate is maintained at target set by the CB.

Crypto hoarders dump tokens as shares tumble

https://www.ft.com/content/53473a9f-e801-4280-a78b-8e6e00bcac78

There are no loans. All money you have came from the Government. what I'm suggesting ie the Government replacing lost spending with its own does NOT raise aggregate demand in any significant way, it's a stabilizing policy.

Government deficit in this case keeps income of workers and employment unchanged relative to before.

It may be inflationary if the Govt decides to build new industries as that Increases aggregate demand. But keeping existing production doesn't do that.

I think it was Abba Lerner who said that imports cause unemployment and output losses only if there is no full employment policy in place by the Government.

You can read the book I linked if you want to.

This one may be

The polls showing crazy high % approval for Modi tend to have bias towards upper-caste, higher income, urban Hindus. And I think even among higher income top 10%ers, there may be a shift soon as tariff shock and U.S. recession squeezes the Indian economy.

Edit: Indian Rupee has been depreciating a bit recently, and all the wealthy rent seeking treatlers who love imported goods and vacations abroad are whining about it even though they are totally fine with the workers being paid like $100/month working 6-7 () days a week.