SamuelRSmith said:
This is my problem with politicians/economists/media outlets who talk about zero, or near-zero interest rates (or anybody who believes that the interest rates can be effectively centrally planned), is that they are proving that they don't even know what an interest rate indicates. It scares me that we have people trying to control something of which they don't even understand the basic principle of. |
A Negative interest rate means HEAVY risk and calamity. Or at least, perceived risk and calamity.
Imagine for example, Angola. It's the most expensive city in the world to live. Largely because of it's lack of saftey. You essentially need to hire people to protect your shit.
In such an enviroment, an Angolian bank probably doesn't have to offer an interest rate, and can even mean they could charge you.
You might be able to get a negative interest loan in a case where it's expected there to be a massive deflation and then later, revaluation. Say for example. The Europeon union breaks up.
A nation that has a weaker currency value, but a stronger baseline economy might end up getting a huge loan with a negative interest rate, because they know that when they're paid back... they will actually make more money then if they activly let there capital rate depriciate in value.
Or this can be done as per government policy just to force peoples hands into spending.
Think of it like a wealth tax spend it now or lose it anyway!








