Or does the $900 they lent create a -$900 for the bank that is cancelled through repayment?

Correct (effectively). Remember how you are “loaning” money to the bank by depositing money in ur bank account? Think about it - if someone loaned you money, and you spent it somewhere, would you have 0 money or would you have negative money (in terms of cash)?

Interestingly, this is why Nordic countries technically have one of the highest wealth inequalities in the world. It’s because they easily get home loans as the government acts as their guarantors. Here’s a vid to explain this.

Holy shit. I get it! That’s a great explanation and I really appreciate your taking the time to type it all out. I’m glad we don’t have Lemmy medallions to award but, if we did, I’d give you one.

Awwww thankssss

I’m a scientist, not an economist

I’m neither lmao. We just had a macroecon credit in my degree program, which is where I learnt about this.

Halp!

Now onto this… You’re kinda right but kinda wrong in that fractional reserve banking “creates money”. Here’s a way to think about putting your money in a bank. By opening a bank account, you are not putting your money in a vault. You are loaning it to the bank. The bank then loans it out to another person, who then “loans” it to another bank. Hence, fractional reserve banking is a natural side effect of this logic. What would happen if we had a 100% fractional reserve? Well, the bank wouldn’t be able to loan your money to anyone then. It would essentially become a vault.

Therefore, fractional reserve banking is necessary to make loaning money possible. Loaning money is necessary for obvious reasons.

Now to the “creating money” part. Sure, at the macro scale, you get a lot of virtual money in the economy. At the micro level though, individual banks aren’t creating money. They still have to get the money that they’ve lent out back. If they fail to do so, they’re going to go bankrupt. Banks would never go bankrupt if they could print money on a micro scale, right?

Okay, so now let’s zoom out back at the macro scale. Now, you can accelerate or decelerate the economy by controlling the ratio of money that is in circulation vs money that is out of circulation. It’s simple- more money in economy = more demand = more profits = more investments in increasing supply to be competitive = more work done. If this demand however drops, profits drop, and increase in supply drops. This is very bad as no work will be done. However, if demand increases too much for essential goods (like food, housing, etc.), it is bad as it can cause problems for people till the supply can catch up. The economy is going too fast in such cases.

Now, you can slow the economy down by many ways- by increasing interest rates, increases the fractional reserve and so on. This way, less people are going to borrow (you just reduced demand by this simple technique). You now reduced demand in your economy and slowed it down. The opposite can be done to speed the economy up.

It’s a little more complicated than that. Without fractional reserve banking, the economy would be more difficult to control. I would recommend a quick macroecon video or something.

I myself took quite a while to really understand why this was legal even during my macroecon credit. It actually makes sense when you think about it.

Just made coffee using freshly ground beans for the first time (was using pre ground coffee powder this whole time). Goddayum is it like having something else entirely!!! It’s so sooo smooth and butter-ey?

This is going to make my mornings a lot more special now!

Nazis are all in on vegetarianism.

This is totally not an attempt to make a bad faith argument against vegetarianism btw.

Absolutely correct decision. YouTube is just so incredibly poor. They really need money guys. In fact, we should set up a donations page to support this great organization that totally respects its users and artists while being very strict against spam, dangerous misinformation and state funded propaganda! /s

In other words like GPUs. GPUs suck ass at complex calculations. They however, work great for a large number of easy calculations, which is what is needed for graphics processing.

Never liked Mastodon (neither did I like Twitter, X or whatever tf it is now) because of the no-community nature of it. Therefore, can’t speak for Mastodon vs Lemmy.

However, I do see the “why so serious” problem on Lemmy a lot compared to Reddit. It can be depressing at times honestly. Lemmy really needs to up its shitposting game. Unfortunately, I do find myself going to Reddit when I want to come across uplifting posts. I really don’t want to know how the world is inching towards fascism every day at such times.

Star wars acolyte.

Weirdly, I found the first two episodes to be bad (because of the bad acting of the twins).

However, I loved the third episode (which funnily others hated). I really loved the witch mothers (especially the leader). I also loved the creativity put in the initiation ceremony or whatever it was called (especially how Indian classical music was used in a setting I least expected it to be used in).

American politicians then: “The solution to a bad man with a gun is a good man who can shoot really sticky stuff really far without getting tired”.

Which would be incredibly cheap even in 2024 (compared to the amount of resources being transported).

Whose cost would be energy and light wear and tear on the railgun. Which won’t be much at all.

(I thought by “travel”, u meant having to use spaceships to transport material which would be significantly more expensive).

I’m not rlly that aware of how boring works, so I’ll take ur word for it there I suppose.

Any moon mining is going to be expensive because it’s the moon. That kind of travel is going to be expensive.

For this tho, u don’t have to “travel” anywhere. U just build a one time installation on the moon, which would be expensive. Once it’s built, u just launch stuff from the moon using a railgun like system with enough velocity to deorbit it, use the earth’s atmosphere to slow down enough that the material doesn’t vaporize on a crash landing in a designated location. This would most likely be how we would get our material in the future.

I’m sorry you feel that way. I think I explained my position very clearly whenever I disagreed with you.

I did “look into stuff” as you asked. Perhaps I didn’t look into the resources that you were talking about. Maybe you should’ve linked those sources in your post instead of saying “go look it up”.

I do listen to what other people have to say. That doesn’t mean I have to agree with it always, no? Whenever I disagree, I always explain my underlying motivation.

I really cannot see how I was arguing in bad faith anywhere above.

Don’t parrot what idiots like Musk say.

Aren’t you parroting what others say too though? You haven’t provided a single PHYSICAL problem. You are just telling me, “it doesn’t work that way”, without giving a single thesis statement.

And if people tell you there’s huge physics issues, think about that instead of waving it away and say “it’s just engineering”.

I have. I’m not saying that we will have anti gravity spaceships. The physics for anti-gravity simply doesn’t exist. I am talking about a vacuum tube. That is the biggest holdup. We have already built small vacuum chambers. The physics is there. HOW is this a PHYSICAL problem?

Give me one single reason as to why the laws of physics prevent hyperloops.

The hyperloop is a dumb project today. Think about it this way: U live in Siberia in the 1600s. U just discovered oil (and also processes to refine it). You most likely would make heating oil from it to keep you warm. But then if I told you that you could also use 1000 times the amount you use in a month to go to America in just a few hours, you would probably call me a dumbass. Would you be right then? Yes. Would you be right now? No.

I don’t think AR/VR will play a big role, I was talking about the acceptance and incorporation of digital systems in our every day lives.

I mean… AR/VR is a step forward in audio/visual IO systems. You technically don’t NEED an HD monitor and a good camera to have a video call. But it definitely makes things easier, no? AR/VR right now sucks. Although it doesn’t mean that it has to suck 100 years in the future.

Plus there’s already plenty of resources online that go into great detail about all the things that are totally impossible.

None of them talking about the physical impossibility of it. All issues of the hyperloop are economical ones. My premise removes these issues.

as you even start to contemplate this you run into huge issues.

Them being economical issues. NOT physical ones.

They still need fuel, they still produce nuclear waste

Sourcing fuel is incredibly easy if we have a mature nuclear fusion energy supply ecosystem. Most likely, nuclear fuel would be deuterium and tritium. Sourcing deuterium is very very easy. For tritium, you would just need breeding blankets at reactor walls. I don’t see how this tech won’t be mature a 100-150 years from now. As for nuclear waste, the fusion processes produce negligible waste. It’s the breeding blankets that could be the source of waste. They too won’t produce waste that would have to sit for more than a 100 years without being recycled/repurposed/disposed off.

the unwarranted fear people have towards nuclear fission

The politics around this is changing slowly. I don’t think it would be that many decades before people start liking nuclear fission again.

Agreed. The Concorde wasn’t sustainable.

In my premise, energy is abundant. Resources are abundant.

Also, my comment about speed being good was more from a civilisational perspective. Going from running to horses to rail to the plane (for long distances of course) had incredible advantages for humans. My point was that the Hyperloop would be a natural extension to this whenever the resources and necessary tech become available.

Sure, u won’t need to mine the moon to do this. But resources would be incredibly cheap WHEN we start mining the moon.

I disagree with the energy part though. I’m pretty sure we would need A LOT of energy to dig continent spanning tunnels. How many drills would we run out of? How much energy would be required to recycle these drills?

The point is, the resources required for Hyperloop construction would be cheaper when we uk… Increase their supply (by nuclear fusion or lunar mining). It would thus be kinda economical then, no?

Eh we’re talking about the future. We might have nuclear fusion engines for all we know. But sure, planes could run on hydrogen in theory. Sooo making them green in a hundred years? Sounds kinda possible, no?