[quadrangle]

debt and credit are zero-sum. The part that isn't necessarily zero-sum is productivity. So, debt/credit patterns can lead to productivity, depending on the details.

But I think the real point here is that when investments are dependent on others' debt and not on other types of returns, there's a whole system that is built on promoting debt, selling people on accepting debt…

[b9a2cab5]

In nominal terms, they are zero-sum. If you consider inflation then debtors have the advantage since we live in an inflationary economy, so wages will keep pace with general inflation but the debt amount remains constant.

Debt is an essential part to accelerating growth if used for productive investments (say, a degree in computer science). What the "middle class" (really the working poor but people call it the middle class) are using debt for is not productive; when we have layaway and things like Affirm financing, etc. we have lots of debt being used to purchase luxury goods and services. You can argue the "system" is to blame for people buying electronics on layaway or you can blame the people for being irresponsible.

To whoever is going to respond by saying poor people buy food on credit cards: you can't use layaway and Affirm like services for food.

[pydry]

>If you consider inflation then debtors have the advantage since we live in an inflationary economy

If inflation > interest. Otherwise, no.

[quadrangle]

"middle class" is not merely a term for how wealthy people are, it can also mean like professionals who do jobs beyond that of the "working" or "labor" class but are not the capitalist investor/owner class that employs the working class.

The issue of debt used poorly for consumption that isn't investment (e.g. fancy TV), the critique isn't a vague "the system", the critique is that advertisers and sales tactics are very specifically designed to manipulate people into such decisions. But the "system" aspect is about whether the assumptions behind larger investment patterns are set up to basically require that such debt-based consumption happen.

[dragonwriter]

> "middle class" is not merely a term for how wealthy people are, it can also mean like professionals who do jobs beyond that of the "working" or "labor" class

If they live primarily by renting out labor, they are part of the working class (for “intellectual” labor, the proletarian intelligentsia) while if their support comes from a rough balance of capital and labor (especially appyling their own labor to their own capital as independent business operators), they are genuinely part of the middle (petit bourgeois) class, no matter whether the kind of work is the same done by blue-collar laborers or not.

[sudosysgen]

Indeed, generally almost everything in economics is at best zero sum outside of productivity.

[imtringued]

That's the reason the US government is running deficits. It's because it is rescuing consumers from the burden of taking on that debt.