I just realised something fascinating in arguing with normies on the bird app. “credit creation” is talked about like it’s totally normal but it literally makes no sense. you can’t “create credit”. you either have credit or you do not. you can extend your own credit to others, but you cannot “create” it. you have to build it yourself and then transfer it. there is quite literally an element of proof of work involved. people only trust you because you have demonstrated your trustworthiness. it’s a fiat fantasy that you can just whip up (i.e. “print”) credit.
what “create credit” has to be taken to mean is just seigniorage. it’s fascinating to me that this is true by mapping to how fractional reserve and central banking actually works in the real world, but also in the linguistic scheme of the euphemism. by failing to extend *your own* credit, you are necessarily extending that of absolutely everybody else - without their consent, of course. it is blatantly fraud when framed this way (it’s blatantly fraud anyway, but I like how this framing forces the issue).
I realise this is just semantics but it’s fun when you catch them in these little traps that reveal they are just repeating things they’ve never actually thought about. next time somebody says “credit creation,” make sure you snap at them and explain what credit really is 😉
