Debt to God is the linchpin of "Pauline" Christian theology. According to this theory, Adam incurred this more or less infinite debt in Eden for reasons that are irrelevant to these remarks. This debt was handed down to every single human being, including babies and people who lived and died without hearing any of the Old Testament stories. Jesus "paid off" this debt by sacrificing himself on the cross. Only for humans that believe the story, of course. I note that both this debt and the payment are arbitrarily declared "out of thin air" by the Lord of the Universe. It's really a story about "fiat" debt. Sacrifice to the Gods is universal in all the world's religions. The Old Testament lays out the theory of sacrifice over and over and in great detail, including the endorsement of human sacrifice. God demands sacrifice, usually in the form of an unblemished animal which is, paradoxically burned  *. The psychology is not that god needs ...

Anyone who delves into the theory of money eventually runs into a powerful analogy - that "money" in your hand is actually an IOU issued by the government "out of thin air"*. This is shocking at first, but the real shock comes when you realize that the government tears some of those IOU's from your hands and burns them. Taxes are not "revenue". They are a bonfire of IOU's. This is all totally true. Kinda. Like many great analogies, it's hard to recover from the impact of the words to step back and evaluate them as an analogy   Are we getting trapped by words that seem true but actually don't apply to the situation under discussion? Really powerful and "true" analogies are called "essential", as in " Surfaces and Essences ". Most "nonessential" analogies capture only one particular aspect of the similarity between two situations and lack power when digging deeper. Almost all analogies are like that ...

Good question: Can we tax the rich? Please excuse the lack of deep thinking in the following post. It originated as an email to possibly the only reader of this blog. It kicked off a line of thought that may be an original contribution to "Modern Monetary Theory" (MMT) - one that arises out of a discipline that arises out of a theme that has been common in this blog for years. But read the rant first and be sure to read the blog that triggered it .... https://www.nbcnews.com/think/ opinion/can-we-tax-rich-jesse- eisinger-explains-ncna970581  That's the blog I listened to this AM about how the IRS in the States was reduced to nothing by the Republicans. As we discussed, it suggests my long-standing question about whether there are built-in aspects of the system that are responsible for the "wealth gap". I think this is an obvious one. Bottom line, income taxes disproportionately hit wage earners - those whose taxes are deducted ...

More From Less If you are desperate for good news, this book may be a good read for you.  It's a book that "gets you thinking". The most eye-catching conclusion is that developed economies are using less and less total energy and material. This flies in the face of common assumptions, such as the idea that increasing the population will eventually "eat up" all of Earth's resources. That's quite interesting in itself, but perhaps more important is McAfee's theory as to why this happens in advanced economies and why it doesn't in "developing" nations. He talks about the four horsemen of optimism: Technology Capitalism Public Awareness Effective Government In his telling, these factors work together to produce increasing efficiencies in society. For example, capitalism forces companies to compete over the resource "inputs" they need, driving down the cost and absolute amount of resources used. I perso...

It is rare to find anyone who truly understands how money works and I count myself among the confused. The 2008 crisis led many of us to look more deeply into the issue and whole libraries of books were sold that "explained" the 2008 crash but turn out to have mainly deepened the confusion. One thing you learn quickly is that "fiat" money is really based on debt. Debt is generally quite real and it's the source of the solid reality of money. For example, it's true and somewhat mysterious that the bank can create $500,000 out of thin air and "lend" it to you to buy a house. The house is totally solid and real. So is the debt. For many of us who have spent their entire lives struggling to pay off a mortgage, we know that the money created out of "thin air" must be repaid. It is our dependable nature as solid citizens, our earnest desire to pay our debts and the bank's assessment that we are "good for it" that make money rea...