by “The “nature of money” is the most important factor, Pettifor says. She believes that the common view of banks is that they act as intermediaries between patient savers and impatient borrowers, but “banks haven’t done that since 1694,” she says. If this were the case, she adds, then “we wouldn’t have a massive expansion of credit at the same time as we have a contraction of savings” – something she cites as the cause of the 2000 dotcom bubble bursting. The conversation turns to the new, impending debt crisis. Pettifor states that, before the crisis, the sum-total of global debt was 275% of GDP – now it is closer to 340% of GDP. ” For more, follow this link. http://www.theactuary.com/features/2017/12/prophet-and-loss/ Related Posts
Topics:
Ann Pettifor considers the following as important: Uncategorized
This could be interesting, too:
Merijn T. Knibbe writes ´Fryslan boppe´. An in-depth inspirational analysis of work rewarded with the 2024 Riksbank prize in economic sciences.
Peter Radford writes AJR, Nobel, and prompt engineering
Lars Pålsson Syll writes Central bank independence — a convenient illusion
Eric Kramer writes What if Trump wins?
“The “nature of money” is the most important factor, Pettifor says. She believes that the common view of banks is that they act as intermediaries between patient savers and impatient borrowers, but “banks haven’t done that since 1694,” she says. If this were the case, she adds, then “we wouldn’t have a massive expansion of credit at the same time as we have a contraction of savings” – something she cites as the cause of the 2000 dotcom bubble bursting.
The conversation turns to the new, impending debt crisis. Pettifor states that, before the crisis, the sum-total of global debt was 275% of GDP – now it is closer to 340% of GDP. ”
For more, follow this link. http://www.theactuary.com/features/2017/12/prophet-and-loss/