All money is loaned into existence

At any moment in time, there is always more debt in a society than there is money.
If you want empirical data, in the US today there is roughly US$52 Trillion in debt, and 10 to 14 Trillion in money.
Well how does that work?
If we wanted to pay that debt back, we'd have to borrow the money to pay it back.
...
Perpetual growth is a requirement of modern banking.

If you're math minded, you'll realise I'm pulling a fast one here.

It's meaningful if you can fix the axis though.
If you can constrain that axis, and you know what the limit of the system is, if it has a boundary, all of a sudden it is legitimate to say am I on the flat part or on the steep part?

Quality is an issue

Must grow versus Can't grow.
Which of these two things wins?
I always lean towards the reality side.

Problem or Predicament?

My standard of living got whacked, my quality of life is a lot higher than it's ever been.

When were the great cathedrals of Europe that lasted a thousand years, when were those built?

Right after the black plague came through, and they were built under a system where money wasn't the limiting factor, it was labour, so money was actually at 0% during that period.
It stretched people's time horizons out.

Many people over the centuries have come on gone, who used to think like you...they have all been proven wrong...why should I consider that you are right?

BECAUSE I SAY SO

If you think Thomas Melthus had the same quantity of information available as I do today, you've got a pretty good point to make, but he did not.
...
I just operate on facts.
Here's a fact, global oil discovery peaked in 1964.
You have to find it before you produce it.

The stone age didn't end because we ran out of stones.

Because we went from stones to bronze to steel, all that stuff.
But in energy, we went from wood to coal to oil, I need to know what's that question mark.
We don't have another source of energy.

To fast forward, we don't talk to our kids about this very much.

They got some bank stock from their grandmother.
And they got their first dividend cheques.
We had one of those proud moments we I was going to take them down the bank to open their first bank accounts.
...
I said all right, we're going to take this down and open bank accounts. I stood back thinking I was going to get run over, and they all 3 sat their looking at me, and my oldest one said:

What if the bank goes bankrupt?
My middle child says, I'd prefer silver. Can I have silver?
And my youngest said, me too.

My wife and I said, I guess it's been leaking in

what would you do if I said "Your house has a 20% chance of burning down"?

I hope you'd buy smoke detectors, a sprinkler system...

I think in probabilities.

I have gold and silver, because I don't want to be all in that house

"They tried to keep a lid on it."

Funnily enough I haven't seen a posting on the CM site about this.... And after my tangle with Erik T I'm choosing to stay in stealth mode on that site. I'm sure someone else will point it out.

My only comment is your view on NZ Central Bank. Which I disagree with. If i had had coffee in my mouth when you used the New Zealand Central Bank as an example of a Central Bank that was better than the rest, the screen would have been covered with coffee.

New Zealand had a housing bubble from 2002 - 2007. Fuelled by the Carry Trade which the Reserve Bank of NZ (RBNZ) completely mishandled. Every time the RBNZ raised the interest rate, NZ became even more attractive to the originators of the Carry Trade. Plenty of people were prepared to pay a high interest rate when it seemed like 20% per annum capital gains were the new normal.

The only tool the RBNZ chose to use to try to prevent a housing bubble was higher interest rates. This led to a huge influx of hot money via the Carry Trade. John Needham pointed this trade out in early 2008. And boy, did that NZD-JPY Carry Trade rubber band snap in late 2008

Over the past 18 months the RBNZ has been looking at adding other tools to its kit bag like local funding ratios for the local banks. So they have to raise a percentage of the money they lend from onshore sources only. The aim is to prevent the huge housing bubble that occurred from 2002 to 2007, funded to a large degree by offshore money, and the effects of which hit the export sector very hard. So, while they now seem, to a large extent, to have "got it:. Their handling of the issue from 2002 - 2007 was awful.

For me, living in NZ, the RBNZ had, in my opinion, a Big Fail. They were totally impotent and incompetent in their handling of the Carry Trade.

Banks were lending 100% finance on houses. And in New Zealand, the activity of cowboys in every other investment sector meant, to a large degree, housing was the favoured investment. Once the bubble started to be blown, it was away. Just like the USA, UK, Ireland, Australia.