From: Jeffrey Epstein <[email protected]> Sent: Friday, July 31, 2015 4:56 PM To: Noam Chomsky Subject: Re: insight I m back in santa fe. I hope <=div> On Fri, Jul =1, 2015 at 12:25 PM, Noam Chomsky > wrote: Hope so. It seemed to me that h=s analysis — basically repeated by Stiglitz, Krugman, and many oth=r economists — was accurate. Smart guy. You might want=to meet him — I have a few times. But don't talk to him=about UG. I suspect he doesn't know it exists.=/span> Noam From: Jeffrey E. [mailto:[email protected] Sent: Friday, July 31, 2015 5:59 AM To: Noam Chomsky > Subject: Re: insight I hope he understands more about UG and mods=C2 then he does about banking.. Noam, it seems endemic tha= people pontificating with regards finance seem to want to cut the i=testinal tract at a point of their choosing , closely examine their slice and then describe the patient. One mus= follow the money until it returns to its beginning./ =AO where he says its about the german and french banks not tak=ng a write off. yes, that is true. but why do they care? =C2 they care because the system is based on strange accounting. as all banking systems are..C2 " Assets ". are described in common parlance as thin=s you own of value.. your home ,your money, your current and s=metimes future income.. However if you are a bank , its akin to =AO alice in the mirror. -To the banks, "Assets " are loans--= yes, loans to people countries , corps etc . they value their=assets as a calculation of how much they are lent out. not how much =hey have in their bank, so when the bank lends more money, =AO its Assets go up. and then -It can lend more money as =t has more "assets." ? ( its like alice putting her hand on her =ead to measure if she is growing.) If the bank has to a=mit that it lent money to someone that now cant pay it back, that is=only required if the terms of the loan are not met only according to the spe=ificities in contract . the bank must then and