No, borrowing money does not reflect wealth - it reflects your deficit and what you do not have to begin with.
If you borrow to try to increase profits (like prongman said) then you're gambling and you're only wealthy *later* if your debted investment pays off. . . and your wealth is only calculated *after* your debt is gone - so debt might be a way to gain profits but debt will be deducted from those profit-margins until your debt and interest in paid off.
LOL - sans "N" Progman.
But - investing is risky business. . . its' more akin to gambling. I would only count profit-post-debt if the debt is truly erased, leaving the profit behind.
Nah, now I really like the idea of being megaprongman.
Agreed, but as long as its yours, its wealth.
If you have to pay it back to someone - it's not wealth.
If you have to pay it back to someone - it's not wealth.
hrm.. well, if everyone were to go pay their debt off we'd run out of money.
Do you agree with this statement - "The more money you borrow, the wealthier you are."
prongman? That is truly awesome :lol: (seriously, I like prongman better than progman, its somehow more manly)
Also, it depends on the type of investment. Some can be sold off later for a profit while others can generate profits in a way that is continually paid out.
Do you agree with this statement - "The more money you borrow, the wealthier you are."
OK.. serious business here... If no one had any debt no one would have any money.
Where do you think money comes from? Some magical thing that exists on it’s own? Poof.. suddenly people just have money.
Well it depends on what kind of money system your talking about.
With fractional reserve lending removed, yea our currency would deflate heavily.
But there would still be money, less of it and more valuable.
Do you agree with this statement - "The more money you borrow, the wealthier you are."