Money is given out by the central banks of the currency.
There is no other way to destroy or create it other than either printing more money (de facto devaluation), or changing to a different system (de facto revaluation).
If the money market is free (which it never completely is; at times political influences are not only big; In the past countries like for example Austria did not have a free money market but traded the "Schilling" in a fixed ratio with the German "Mark"), Money can be concentrated or dispersed.
It makes sense for the individual to have a big bank account when the economy is healthy, because you can trust the financial system to provide you with ways to easily trade your money for goods and vice versa.
If the economy is in a bad shape, the opposite is true;
To fulfill your needs you need to stock up on all things that you require as they will be harder to get. If the economy is in a decline this will amplify over time, so holding big amounts of money is going to effectively harm you.
However if you are specialized as an agent of the financial sector of the market and have no other needs than money, you will not stock up on goods but money instead (which is a little schizophrenic.
If you look at the US car market:
Cars are mass produced and usually sold with the key to the final owner (take and drive). A different approach would be the European philosophy (starting to produce the car for the private end owner once the deal is signed, which requires highly optimized logistics; it is the norm in the Eu for private purchase to wait a couple of weeks for your new car, but not with company cars, which are often also produced in excess (amounting to an excess rate of 30%of the total production, which forms a stock for this market branch)) or the Japanese/SE Asian philosophy (Excess production is generally avoided, as an economic principal of the key actors in this market)
Now we have the US with a high stock of cars, but the general economy is perceived as bad, by private and corporate customers.
People now loose the trust in "valuables" such as cars are. Luxury cars decline over cheap cars that fulfill basic needs. An inflexibility of the market which is embedded in it deeply made it's services useless to the customer.
Sales went down about 40%.
Even if the management was bad (for decades) with the US automotive big players, it already is hard for less flexible manufacturers such as in the EU to feather that. SE Asia proves to be the winner.
The Economist labels an article about Canada
"
Canada's stalled economy
The humbling of Detroit North".
Cars are a big deal to the Canadian economy.
Would I invest in Canadian $? No.
Money is given out by the central banks of the currency.
There is no other way to destroy or create it other than either printing more money (de facto devaluation), or changing to a different system (de facto revaluation).
If the money market is free (which it never completely is; at times political influences are not only big; In the past countries like for example Austria did not have a free money market but traded the "Schilling" in a fixed ratio with the German "Mark"), Money can be concentrated or dispersed.
It makes sense for the individual to have a big bank account when the economy is healthy, because you can trust the financial system to provide you with ways to easily trade your money for goods and vice versa.
If the economy is in a bad shape, the opposite is true;
To fulfill your needs you need to stock up on all things that you require as they will be harder to get. If the economy is in a decline this will amplify over time, so holding big amounts of money is going to effectively harm you.
However if you are specialized as an agent of the financial sector of the market and have no other needs than money, you will not stock up on goods but money instead (which is a little schizophrenic.
If you look at the US car market:
Cars are mass produced and usually sold with the key to the final owner (take and drive). A different approach would be the European philosophy (starting to produce the car for the private end owner once the deal is signed, which requires highly optimized logistics; it is the norm in the Eu for private purchase to wait a couple of weeks for your new car, but not with company cars, which are often also produced in excess (amounting to an excess rate of 30%of the total production, which forms a stock for this market branch)) or the Japanese/SE Asian philosophy (Excess production is generally avoided, as an economic principal of the key actors in this market)
Now we have the US with a high stock of cars, but the general economy is perceived as bad, by private and corporate customers.
People now loose the trust in "valuables" such as cars are. Luxury cars decline over cheap cars that fulfill basic needs. An inflexibility of the market which is embedded in it deeply made it's services useless to the customer.
Sales went down about 40%.
Even if the management was bad (for decades) with the US automotive big players, it already is hard for less flexible manufacturers such as in the EU to feather that. SE Asia proves to be the winner.
The Economist has an article about about Canada, labeled
"
Canada's stalled economy
The humbling of Detroit North".
Cars are a big deal to the Canadian economy.
Would I invest in Canadian $? No.
[Had a page long explanation why typed up, but it got eaten. Sorry, but I won't write it again.
To make things short: Investing money only pays the relative growth of the market you invest in. If you take Chinas numbers with a little salt, you are generally left with a plus of 8-6% of which you need to subtract 50% as maintenance costs if your investment is medium sized and more than it pays if it's little.
Compared to taking your money to the local bank you have a plus of effectively zero as they aren't stupid either. That means that the 3 out of hundred people who win the lottery will gain some 15% interest and the others will fall effectively behind compared to regular conditions. I have seen this happen a lot of time and how people practically expect to earn money doing this is beyond me.
Adding to that there is always a risk. All those People who invested in Iceland, because it was OMG interests there, just barely avoided simply loosing their complete savings at once.]