just like debt is adjusted over time for inflation

So it's preicated on only buying things that are neccesities. not fun alowwed

what would probably happen in deflation would be the ability to get a lower interest rate

The weird thing is a negative interest rate would be extremely gameable...

depends on how rapid things deflate

its more likely that you would see very low interest rates

because how quickly would you need to be deflating to get a negative interest rate

It'd likely be fair to waive interest.

thats more likely what would happen

with perhaps the option to get the last bit waived at the end

because it would need to devalue so fast that the amount you borrow ends up deflating so rapidly that it will cover the operating and profit margins over the course of the loan to get an interest rate of 0.

or a negative one

That seems like economy crash levels of change.

Rye here trying to push shria law over here. Fuck off undercove sand nigger

... Crap. I've been found out.

I would disagree. In my country the national bank runs negative interest rate on the accounts of the commercial banks. And the government issue bonds with a negative rate too, to discourage foreign investment in them

Where you form? Is that to discourage companies from hording money?

Denmark. Ever since the 70s the national currency has been pegged to the D-mark and later the euro

In order to keep the exchange rate constant the national bank must conduct a constrictive monetary policy

It is primarily to discourage other central banks and pension funds to not buy danish treasury bills.

The side effect is the global capital markets are funding the welfare state here.

In the late 70s early 80s the economy was in shit so the interest rate was 22% in order to keep on par with west germany.

If it's not the banks buy the bonds, who are they selling them to.

The usual suspect that buy bonds, other central banks, pension, funds sovereign wealth fund other uber rich, that have large quantities of cash they need to store inflation safely and don’t want to buy risky bonds like Greece or Italy, and must be tied to the euro

Now that I'm at a computer, and off work now...

To get to the point: In general I'd say that fears and concerns about 'hoarding money' generally stem from a concern for the haves and have nots.

Most people who raise it as a concern are trying to advocate for some means of separating a person from their property.

I'm not one of those 'Taxation is Theft' types

but... it kind of is, in a way.

Imagine if money were substituted for any other goods that can be bought *with* money.

Let's say you farm rice.

You handle your fields entirely on your own. You've purchased grain silos, etc. you've got the means to store as much rice as you like.

Would you argue that, at a certain point, this person's excess rice from farming should be taken from them, based on the fact that they have it and aren't doing anything with it?

Would you argue that they're only entitled to the amount of rice that they need to sustain themselves?

With some here and there for trade?

You can't compere a field of rice that you farm on your own to money. You are not providing a service to aquire that 'wealth' so you aren't taking from the system.

If there is only a certian amount of land to grow the communities wealth then it's a different story.

Ah, so if they own more land than they need

then they might have to give up some of that land.

If this is the case then yes he should only be entitled to his share.

But what if he paid for that land that he grows the rice on?