Spiraling debt is an integral part of our current economic system, and we are currently witnessing how it ends up like.
The requirement for continued growth is based on the fact that the current system requires there is always more debt than money in circulation. To pay for the debt, growth is absolutely required, or the system fails.
When one truly understands how the current worldwide financial system constructs fiat money based on debt owed to private central banks, one tends to not want to live on this planet anymore.
It really is only a step forward from slavery; peonage or debt bondage, to be specific.
Do you have a better alternative that provides an amount of money that matches the size of the economy and allows to have enough control to keep inflation at around 2%?
My working theory is that money is nothing more than a representation of an amount of work.
We need competition, market, and currency as an exchange medium. What we do not need is to tie the currency to
debt, like it is now. To change this, we would first have to assassinate a few thousand people (all major owners and executives of central banks). Looking at the past, tying the currency to major resources –– not just gold or raw materials (which used to be the bottleneck for production), but also to energy and human work –– seems like a much more stable and equitable option.
In the last fifty years or so, trying to move from debt-based fiat currency to something else, has sparked quite a few wars, though.
With more people around the world working to create better lives for themselves, I don't see how this system can fail in the next 500 years.
It is competition and market that is doing that, not currency tied to debt. I'm pretty sure we can agree that market competition is pretty much essential.
And central banks do have ways to make the amount of money in circulation to become less or more.
No. They cannot reduce the amount of money in circulation at all. They can only make more money out of nothing, and create more debt by lending money to governments. Governments can reduce the amount of money in circulation
in the future by borrowing less, but central banks oppose that because it means they profit less from the interest.