Offshore
Photo
memenodes
When she knows you took out a 50 year mortgage to save $100 on monthly payments to buy bitcoin https://t.co/tNZzt3Uw1U
tweet
When she knows you took out a 50 year mortgage to save $100 on monthly payments to buy bitcoin https://t.co/tNZzt3Uw1U
tweet
Offshore
Video
memenodes
this is how mfs used to look at you when you coughed back in 2020 https://t.co/qYj42fmyzp
tweet
this is how mfs used to look at you when you coughed back in 2020 https://t.co/qYj42fmyzp
tweet
Offshore
Photo
memenodes
the brokest nigga you know will post some shit like this on his story https://t.co/VJJGI312oz
tweet
the brokest nigga you know will post some shit like this on his story https://t.co/VJJGI312oz
tweet
Offshore
Photo
Giuliano
There's a question in economics I've been obsessed with for 2 years and couldn't answer.
We all just hear people say how GDP growth will continue, how the rate of growth might even go vertical.
And I just wonder, how is that even possible?
I'll use VERY rough numbers.
Say that:
- There are $2tn in circulation. (The Physical Anchor)
- M2 is $20tn. (The Ledger)
- US GDP is $30tn. (The Output). 1.5x M2.
- US debt markets worth $50tn. (The Promises). 1.6x GDP
- S&P's market cap is $60tn. (The Expectations). 2x GDP and 3x M2.
- US real estate market is worth $80tn. (The Collateral).
$2tn in circulation is holding up all of that economic activity and theoretical wealth.
How can one envision a world where theoretical wealth's growth continues to outpace the actual money that's out there?
That's why busts hurt so much, and they'll hurt increasingly more as the gap between "reality" and "theoretical" broadens.
The reason why people say GDP will grow indefinitely is that "new, better products will come along. Productivity will be enhanced. Etc"
Sure, but what if future technology and businesses, by the nature of competition, have lower profit margins than nowadays? How does this translate into market returns?
And what if you create a better solution for a $100bn market but you end up destroying the previous $500bn inefficient one?
Will the $400bn just go somewhere else? I don't think so. I would think $400bn in theoretical wealth vanishes. And how do you start filling all these gaps? If it happens at one level, it's likely happening at many levels.
How do you keep economic growth when you have such destruction?
People will quote Schumpeter and say it's what has happened all throughout history, but I don't know if that's so right.
There's such a gap between theoretical wealth and real wealth that the only way you continue to patch things is by either maintaining the gap or increasing it.
And how do you even increase it when you are this stretched?
tweet
There's a question in economics I've been obsessed with for 2 years and couldn't answer.
We all just hear people say how GDP growth will continue, how the rate of growth might even go vertical.
And I just wonder, how is that even possible?
I'll use VERY rough numbers.
Say that:
- There are $2tn in circulation. (The Physical Anchor)
- M2 is $20tn. (The Ledger)
- US GDP is $30tn. (The Output). 1.5x M2.
- US debt markets worth $50tn. (The Promises). 1.6x GDP
- S&P's market cap is $60tn. (The Expectations). 2x GDP and 3x M2.
- US real estate market is worth $80tn. (The Collateral).
$2tn in circulation is holding up all of that economic activity and theoretical wealth.
How can one envision a world where theoretical wealth's growth continues to outpace the actual money that's out there?
That's why busts hurt so much, and they'll hurt increasingly more as the gap between "reality" and "theoretical" broadens.
The reason why people say GDP will grow indefinitely is that "new, better products will come along. Productivity will be enhanced. Etc"
Sure, but what if future technology and businesses, by the nature of competition, have lower profit margins than nowadays? How does this translate into market returns?
And what if you create a better solution for a $100bn market but you end up destroying the previous $500bn inefficient one?
Will the $400bn just go somewhere else? I don't think so. I would think $400bn in theoretical wealth vanishes. And how do you start filling all these gaps? If it happens at one level, it's likely happening at many levels.
How do you keep economic growth when you have such destruction?
People will quote Schumpeter and say it's what has happened all throughout history, but I don't know if that's so right.
There's such a gap between theoretical wealth and real wealth that the only way you continue to patch things is by either maintaining the gap or increasing it.
And how do you even increase it when you are this stretched?
tweet