JimH-
Why does this system (of debt-based money) keep compounding on itself in exponential fashion? Steve Keen completely ducked this one...
Jim, I answered it. My source: Steve Keen's other lectures. He explains it in detail there. However you have to have an open mind to truly understand it. If you already have the "must create enough money to cover interest payments" belief system locked in place, your mind will reject the evidence - just like the neoclassical folks have rejected everything Steve Keen has to say. They aren't stupid, but their entire life education precludes them from even considering his concepts.
The good news is, once you get it, you will wonder how you missed it in the first place.
The fact that I am involved in finance for a small business may have helped, actually. Watching the P&L statements come by every month, and then watching the balance sheets, you start to understand instinctively how the flows (P&L) and the stocks (balance sheet) cannot really be mixed. They do affect one another, but a stock is a stock (it just sits there, unchanging), and a flow is a flow (it varies every month). And you need to manage both.
In this case, you use your flow (P&L) to slowly pay off the principal & interest on your stock (balance sheet loan liability). Flow through the P&L is the key to making your interest payments.
You can have a $200k loan liability, $50k in the bank in assets, and making your payments are no problem as long as your cash flow is enough to make the $5k monthly payments. There is no need to have "$200k + interest" sitting around on the balance sheet to service your debt.
Same thing if you borrow money for a house. You don't need to have $300k + $30k in interest in the bank to be able to repay your $300k loan. You just need an extra $3k/month in salary flow and you're good.
Example: to enable $1M in annual flows, our company needs only $50k in working capital. (Ok, we need more, but it is possible to operate on that little). We aren't going bankrupt. We are profitable. From a "system" point of view, our capital needs ($50k) are completely dwarfed by our flow through our P&L of $1M. In a real sense, $50k of "fiat money created cash" enables $1M of annual flow. If we had to borrow that $50k to enable our $1M of flow, do you think we could make the payments? It would be easy. Trivial. Our $1M flow vastly exceeds our required $50k money stock - its a 20:1 ratio.
That's business. Most businesses have a much larger cash flow over a much smaller working capital base. Capital base was borrowed into existence, but the interest payments for that borrowed capital base are easily repaid from the rapid flows (10:1, 20:1) across the P&L statements of those companies.
Same is true for households. Paycheck-to-paycheck America may have $5k in the bank, but they make $50k per year (i.e. $4100/month). $5k in created-bank-credit "enables" maintaining the household on that income of $50k per year. Another 10:1 ratio. With such ratios, its quite possible to make interest payments on $5k.
Writ large, "the system" doesn't require that much in working capital to run. Demand deposits (checking accounts) are 1.19 trillion, while total bank credit (total bank loans outstanding) is 11 trillion. And this 1.19 trillion in borrowed working capital enables (provides liquidity for) a GDP of 17 trillion.
Flows make payments. Not stocks. If Keen were here, that's what he'd tell you.