Comments on: Is debt a dirty word? http://reconomy.org/is-debt-a-dirty-word/ Community-led economic change. Wed, 12 Mar 2014 14:33:06 +0000 hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=5.3 By: Tom Danby http://reconomy.org/is-debt-a-dirty-word/#comment-70196 Tue, 17 Dec 2013 10:28:20 +0000 http://reconomy.org/?p=8732#comment-70196 The interest charged, whether low or not, is not the issue. It is the source of the reserves behind the loan. Banks and other financial institutions can legally lend far more than they hold in reserves ( up to 90% more in some countries ), and this debt is a claim on the real world’s ability to generate wealth in the future.

In other words, the loan offered by a bank is a phantom until you take it up, and then it becomes your real future potential wealth – but owned by the bank.

Debt to fund community projects should come from real reserves, actual savings of cash, already earned superannuation funds, or at worst, government issued bonds, but never from banks unless from 100% declared cash reserves.

The real debt building up in the environment – the degraded soil and water, the chemical residues in the food chain – is quite enough to reduce our future wealth and standard of living, without giving away more to the imaginary debt of a “standard” bank loan.

]]>
By: Josef Davies-Coates http://reconomy.org/is-debt-a-dirty-word/#comment-69581 Mon, 16 Dec 2013 04:12:37 +0000 http://reconomy.org/?p=8732#comment-69581 Low interest debt can be very useful, for sure. But “barter-based economies” never actually existed according to David Graeber’s ‘Debt: The First 5,000 Years’. And you don’t need £250 to invest in renewable energy, you can invest via Abundance for as little as £5 🙂

]]>