So they progressed towards them, eagerly but drenched with hesitation. Ladethe looked down to the ground as he walked, and noticed one of those details that are utterly irrelevant in the situation, but become perceivable through the disordering effect of strain on awareness: the blades of the grass were rather long, and placed awkwardly wide apart, with lots of brown mould visible between them. When they entered the gap between two tanks, merrily tapping the muddy tracks with their hands, like when soothing a horse, the soldiers hardly seemed to notice them, and the ones that did showed no signs of hostility.
The chilly void the swans left made him reflect their disappearance. There was an emergency door close by. He pushed the bar, which had been designed to automatically have the door unlocked by panicking crowds. He entered a totally dark room, and slowly walked in with his hands stretched out in front of him.
This morning, when I heard it again on the radio, I wondered if putting “worry” and “hurry” at the end of a line is a case of poetic license. They have different vowels, haven’t they?
No, they haven’t.
So why Spanish llanto is pranto in Portuguese, not chanto, I still do not know. It could have existed, but doesn't. I found one case of the reverse situation: Portuguese chumbo (lead) is plomo in Spanish, not llumbo or llumo. That is, I don’t find any such word in my small dictionary. Italian regularly has piombo for this. When Google-ing for Spanish llumbo, I found this related link.
Addendum, April 2003: I received a hint, that prumo also exists in Portuguese, it means plumb bob, plummet, lead.
Humans once lived in small communities in Garden of Eden-like environments, probably in Africa or not too far from it. For picking fruit and eating it, no trade or money is needed. Neither does hunting prey and eating it together with all members of the community.
The economy was based on everybody contributing to their ability, and benefiting to their needs.
The effect of the acute and circumflex accents in Portuguese may seem rather unexpected for those familiar with French or Hungarian, because they work more or less the other way around in comparison with those languages. French and Hungarian don't have a variable stress, so the accent marks are not used to indicate stress. But they can indicate vowel quality:
So we could also say that money creation is so ill-understood by many, because they do not properly distinguish between the various functions of money. Money creation involves an enlargement of the money supply, and in the notion of money supply, money is only looked at as a medium of exchange, not in any of its other possible roles.
The text is about word formation mechanisms in Esperanto, how they make Esperanto a unique language with possibilities of its own, which tend to be fully employed only when writing directly in the language itself, instead of translating existing texts into it.
Money creation, as a result of a bank granting credit to someone in the public, logically follows from two elements:
The monetary definition of money: total money supply consists of coins in the possession of the public, banknotes in the hands and pockets of the public, and credit balances in (on demand and short term savings) bank accounts held by the public.
The rules of accounting, as outlined (probably based on already existing best practices) by Luca Pacioli in 1494, now 519 years ago.
Money that someone, a company, including a bank, could use to buy something or pay for something, must be at the left of the balance sheet. It is an asset, something the bank owns.
Money that results from money creation however, is always at the right side of the balance sheet. It is a liability, a debt to the owner of that money.
In a democracy the majority decides. This is the basic principle of every system of democratic government.
But there is yet another foundation of the rule of law, and that is the protection of minorities. Minorities have rights, and in my opinion, minorities should also have a voice, clearly heard in a representation of the people, an elected parliament.
The definition from which money creation results, and which entails that banks and the government can never have money, is the definition of money as a medium of exchange.
If money creation does not directly benefit a bank, the bank will have to cover its costs in some other way. The solution is to use the interest margin, a.k.a. spread. Supplied loans bring in more interest than on demand balances and savings. Also if on the balance sheet, other types of assets balance the money liabilities at the right, e.g. government bonds, other bonds, shares, precious metals, they can yield a profit, in the form of interest, dividend or price rises.
That together is also sometimes called seigniorage. But it is a very different kind of seigniorage than the minting benefit that is so easy to depict. I find it important to distinguish those meanings of ‘seigniorage’, and not to mix and confuse them without mention, which in my opinion happens too often.
The increased value of the metal, that has now turned into coins, is at the left of the balance sheet, being belongings. The yield of striking the coins, the minting benefit, is at the right (credit item) of the profit and loss statement.
Minting is clearly a lucrative business.