>>12203Haven't played that game and don't know the Nook character, so i'm just saying something about debt.From a materialist perspective debt is not a reasonable idea. It's a negative quantity and that makes no sense. You can't have less than zero of something.
Many people are being tricked to accept the concept of debt because they are being deceived by ideology that conflates the organic social relation-ship of owing somebody a favor with debt.
The system however is not operating like a human and it does treat debt like a negative quantity, which contradicts the very fabric of reality. This contradiction is cumulative and eventually it leads to a crisis, where the system either chooses a debt-jubilee. Or it goes to war to expand the system in order to find new means to paper over this contradiction. That is what the Roman empire did. But eventually it couldn't expand anymore, after that debt became one of the factors that lead to the collapse of the Roman empire.
One of the reasons why many Marxists want to create an economic system with labor-time and resource accounting instead of money is because that won't let you do negative quantities and then this problem never arises.
In theory you could do capitalism without debt too. You just have to gift people money to enable the creation of new capitalist companies. I guess you'd create multiple organizations that can gift money for this purpose and then you periodically cull the worst performing one that doesn't fund enough companies that become viable according to capitalist criteria (capital accumulation). Once you culled one, a new org gets chosen at random. I imagine you would not lack for applicants that want to have a go at shaking the magic money tree.
If you think this is retarded, keep in mind the limited goals of this thought experiment. Now lets look at the pitfalls. There would be fewer reasons for banks to lend money and big capital investors would be less attractive than free money from the magic money tree. Banks will be opposed to that because having a lot of debtors on a leash is a form of power, and big capital will be opposed because they want to be able to buy into new companies when they are still small. So making this politically viable in a bourgeois political system would be tricky.