Date: Sun Apr 27
Subject: TURMEL: LETS registry debate
From: (John Turmel)

From: (Stephen DeMeulenaere)

SD: Thomas writes:
*Every economic entity, be it an individual, a LETSystem, a town, or a
*nation, has imports and exports (of goods and services). The credits
*(currency, if you will) that you issue are just your i.o.u. or
*promise to deliver goods or services. Why should there be any worry
*about "leakage?" The more i.o.u.'s you put out there, the more goods
*and  services you  must produce and sell to redeem them.
SD: And the deeper the committment (IOUs) then the more unlikely this
can be done over time. The account holder quits and stiffs the system;
     JCT: Where's he going to go to in a Global LETS? Mars? Besides,
this "half the members must be in the negative" problem is only caused
by not having a central depository where members may deposit
collateral and product for trade and leave with a positive. The
store's negative balances all the more members who may be
participating in the positive. It's the whiff of there being a problem
with being in the negative that bothers me. Most children and poorer
nations will be in the negative, and the big negative, for a long long
time but it doesn't not mean that they won't become productive and
someday deposit enough at the storehouse to enable them to join all
the others who have been in