What stops a country walking away from its debts like a company can?
- Thread starter Ag bullet
- Start date
Depends on the size of your military I guess.
It's called Greekanomics 
The Russians walked away from a large debt they had with America
America took Alaska
Imagine where we would be during WWII if Alaska still belonged to the Russians
The Russians walked away from a large debt they had with America
America took Alaska
Imagine where we would be during WWII if Alaska still belonged to the Russians
hennypenny
New Member
If your debt is denominated in, say, toilet paper - then you just print more to pay it.
They can, but then nobody will lend them money and the ones that owe enough that they might do this are the ones who most need injections of foreign cash.
National debts for major economies aren't such a problem though, they can just print the money they need to pay their debts. It's smaller countries that issue debts in USD or other currencies they don't control that can't print their obligations away that have problems. Similar story for corporate bonds.
National debts for major economies aren't such a problem though, they can just print the money they need to pay their debts. It's smaller countries that issue debts in USD or other currencies they don't control that can't print their obligations away that have problems. Similar story for corporate bonds.
spannermonkey said:Imagine where we would be during WWII if Alaska still belonged to the Russians
Sorry, I don't understand the reference. Would you mind explaining?
AFAIK, Alaska didn't produce any important resources during WWII.
Don't think the position was strategically important, either.
Ag bullet said:
That is 100% what every country in history that has reached unsustainable debt levels has done.
Either through currency devaluation, hyperinflation or just plan default.
The USA will be no different. Only question is how long the charade can continue.
Roswell Crash Survivor said:spannermonkey said:Imagine where we would be during WWII if Alaska still belonged to the Russians
Sorry, I don't understand the reference. Would you mind explaining?
AFAIK, Alaska didn't produce any important resources during WWII.
Don't think the position was strategically important, either.
gold , oil .
Location would have been handy if the Russian troops would have been there
Roswell Crash Survivor said:spannermonkey said:Imagine where we would be during WWII if Alaska still belonged to the Russians
Sorry, I don't understand the reference. Would you mind explaining?
AFAIK, Alaska didn't produce any important resources during WWII.
Don't think the position was strategically important, either.
that corresponds with the official version why Alaska was sold.
Russian Empire did not want as at that time and at that level of technological progress
(first announced in 1853 by the Russian Governer of Alsaks and ratified in 1867)
the territory was a cold s*hole no1 wanted.
I am not sure where spannermonkey got his information, but would be interesting to see which debt was settled.
as I understand not all political elites in America where happy to get that land at that time.
They do, usually followed by a war between the creditor and debtor.
It's nice to be the debtor when you have the worlds largest military.....and you control energy.
https://www.military1.com/all/artic...litary-compared-with-the-next-strongest-power
It's nice to be the debtor when you have the worlds largest military.....and you control energy.
https://www.military1.com/all/artic...litary-compared-with-the-next-strongest-power
Assuming the country can print its own money, I don't think anything really stops it from walking away from its debts except from severely affecting its future capacity to borrow as well as assuming the risks associated with a low value currency.
The US, for example, could pay off all its debt by printing a few trillion dollar bills. But then their currency would be worthless, inflation skyrocketing and in all likelihood, there would probably be a revolution that overthrows the government. And if they needed to borrow money (from anyone), they'd find it next to impossible.
This pretty much happened to Germany in the 20s after the war. They ended up having to pay people twice a day because their money bought less in the afternoon than it had in the morning and you needed a wheelbarrow of cash to buy a loaf of bread (and the wheelbarrow was worth more than the cash it was loaded with).
In short, it's better for a country to slowly decrease debt than it is to walk away from it.
The US, for example, could pay off all its debt by printing a few trillion dollar bills. But then their currency would be worthless, inflation skyrocketing and in all likelihood, there would probably be a revolution that overthrows the government. And if they needed to borrow money (from anyone), they'd find it next to impossible.
This pretty much happened to Germany in the 20s after the war. They ended up having to pay people twice a day because their money bought less in the afternoon than it had in the morning and you needed a wheelbarrow of cash to buy a loaf of bread (and the wheelbarrow was worth more than the cash it was loaded with).
In short, it's better for a country to slowly decrease debt than it is to walk away from it.
Pharm0r said:
That's right.
Countries cannot walk away easily if they don't have food and energetic autonomy, or unless other countries (obviously not creditors) are willing to supply the missing basic goods in exchange of something produced by the defaulting country or for geopolitical reasons.
Nobody would provide goods to a defaulting country in exchange for their fiat currency because it will become like toilet paper (fiat is based on trust or coercion and one can expend trust only once).
One thing to remember though now is the connectivity of the internet and the "moral outrage" (wont somebody please think of the children!!! )would most likely negate war on a financial default nowadays.
Consider if Greece was to default and the world was shown people on the streets and starving. Then Germany declared war and invaded?
No I don't think nowadays war would ensue unless the country had assets worth seizing, oil etc. And then you don't really need to wait for default, just claim terrorism and invade first!
)would most likely negate war on a financial default nowadays.Consider if Greece was to default and the world was shown people on the streets and starving. Then Germany declared war and invaded?
No I don't think nowadays war would ensue unless the country had assets worth seizing, oil etc. And then you don't really need to wait for default, just claim terrorism and invade first!
Pharm0r said:
All that they still cpuld not defeat the north koreans, vietnamese, talliban or isis
Court Jester said:
lol and just to follow up that article ius complete and utter BS
everything in it is a fabrication or a half truth.
US have fougt every where -- yes and lost almost in all instances,
the Russians have a competing GPS system on their own satellites -- lol the USA controls a set but not the ONLY set.
the USA has been fighting a conventional war for the last 15 years and loosing
it also lost in other major conventional wars
lol 1000 times stronger -- more like 1000 x times more full of full shit
systematic
Well-Known Member
Genghicat said:
Paying workers to build printing factories ... paying for printing technology to print currency .... paying workers to run it .... with money printed from the factory is rather "circular" .... of course then there is the "interest" to be paid back even though the money for that does not exist .... what a scheme ....
systematic
Well-Known Member
Why print when its easier to go digital and get people to work at the press of a button ...
systematic
Well-Known Member
HudsonDesign said:One thing to remember though now is the connectivity of the internet and the "moral outrage" (wont somebody please think of the children!!!
The USD is THE number 1 currency in the world .... and someone already DID think of the children ....
Peru Is Dollar Counterfeiting Expert Of The World
"LIMA, Peru -- The police colonel was stunned by the skill of the 13-year-old arrested during a raid on counterfeiters in Lima's gritty outskirts, how he deftly slid the shiny plastic security strip through a bogus $100 banknote emblazoned with Benjamin Franklin's face.
The boy demonstrated his technique for police after they arrested him on the street with a sack of $700,000 in false U.S. dollars and euros that he'd received from a co-conspirator and he led them to a squat house where he and others did detail work.
With its meticulous criminal craftsmen, cheap labor and, by some accounts, less effective law enforcement, Peru has in the past two years overtaken Colombia as the No. 1 source of counterfeit U.S. dollars, says the U.S. Secret Service, protector of the world's most widely traded currency."
read more at: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/09/05/peru-dollar-counterfeiting_n_3872743.html?ir=Australia
And the AUD is "rated" at less than 0.73 USD because its good for the economy and it's all fairdinkum ........