Can you explain a wageslave why countries can't default

>>1697373

you sell of all your country's assets until your country basically belongs to (((someone else))) and on top of that your people wil have to suffer through austerity

>>1697373
ah /pol/, you poor morons

debt is necessary, without it fiat collapses.

you poor stupid fuckers think the government is a business or something.
it's not.

>>1697409

>debt is necessary, without it fiat collapses.

Please tell me more, Mordechai

>>1697417
>this note is legal tender for all debts public and private
without debt it's just pretty paper

also debt is how they get it from the printing press to the public.

debt is also how they convince you it has value.

why don't you take a break from being retarded and go read up on money illusion?

>>1697417

The entire monetary system is based on debt

>>1697430

The concept of debt/credit needs to exist but the state of people being massively indebted is not necessary

>debt is also how they convince you it has value.
it's just a store of work/energy. I can walk up to another person and give them some cash for a service and no one ever had to be in debt. Does there have to be someone theoretically in debt for this to work or is the threat of physical violence by government not enough?

>>1697454
>moron asks to be taught
>proceeds to argue
fuck off, moron

>>1697373
>Can you explain a wageslave why countries can't default their debt when they start having to spend half their budget on interest of banks?
The simple answer is... they can (and some have).

It means they're considered a poor credit risk, so future borrowing is more expensive (though with a fiat currency they can get around this drawback by borrowing from themselves). And even after defaulting, the debt is still debt, and under certain circumstances their creditors can sue them to get it back. Even so, default is actually the best option for many countries that haven't defaulted.


>>1697409
There's more than one kind of debt.
Debt is necessary, but foreign currency debt (aka sovereign debt) is not.

>>1697417
debt, properly handled, creates more value.

Say you're a African country with huge mineral resources but no infrastructure, so I the big bad capitalist first world country loan you like a billion dollars to build a rail link from your port to your best mine.

You start using the profits from the mine to pay back the loan, but now also thousands of your once large bellied, starving citizens are at work, earning a wage.

See? Third world economy grows, first world country now also gets accesses to minerals.

>>1697890
>And even after defaulting, the debt is still debt, and under certain circumstances their creditors can sue them to get it back.
Exactly: ships and overseas state owned assets can and have been seized from deadbeat countries. I think that's what happened to Argentina.


>>1697454
>I can walk up to another person and give them some cash for a service and no one ever had to be in debt.
But what at present they can't provide that service, but it would be advantageous, and fiscally worthwhile for you to loan them the money so they could provide you that service? They provide that service to other people as well, they make more income than before, and they pay you back interest on the principal sum, which is worthwhile for them because they are earning more money.

The simple fact is that a state has a finite amount of capital to get things done, sometimes they need to be resources from other countries, that requires capital. they can't just print money, look at interbellum Germany or Venezuela right now: so they borrow it. If they use that money strategically, then they can pay back their debtors like recipients Marshal Plan did, and prosper better than if they never had the money.

It speeds up the process of development.

>>1698253
if borrowing is so great and these poor countries are supposed to just build infrastructure and profit then what happened in bolivia? zambia? or pretty much any third world nation that tried to do what you just outlined?

They all got royally screwed and were expected to not only continue to be poor, but to see all of their money flow out to multinationals... why?

(Honest question, not trying to shitpost)

>>1698330
A mix of corruption and incompetence

>>1698330
Obviously it doesn't always work out, either due to predatory lenders, incompetent borrowers, or just poor luck in the market.

You can't grow if you don't have capital to invest. If you don't have it, you have to borrow it or stagnate.