I don't have the time nor eloquence in my writing to be able to address all of your post. But will offer a little.

"As for the Central Banks buying bonds - that is simply how they control the supply of money."

That is the way they attempt to control the supply of money, but the money supply does not have to be controlled. If they quit trying to control it the market would step in and do what is needed. It seems to me you are assuming the way the system currently is, is the only way it could be. Central banks attempt to control the supply of money to maintain somewhat constant prices. And fail miserably. But if they quit controlling it prices would adjust to the money supply. Deflation caused by improvement in manufacturing efficiencies would cause prices to slowly fall over time. Money would be come more valuable and buy more. But the FED tries to make the currency buy 2% less each year. I think part of your trouble understanding where OldMcdonald is coming from is your mindset that the way the monetary system is run is the only way it could be run. There are other ways, and other ways will be required to address our problems. The current ways are failing.

Does this apply to next years loans or stock portfolio? Of course not. This applies when finally it is learned by the powers that be that the current system is an unsustainable system (I actually think they already know it, just will not admit) and a new system is implemented.

So again, I think you are looking at what is in the here and now and OldMcdonald and I are looking at what the future might (or as I believe, has to) hold when the current system fails. When will it fail? Who knows. Like you said it is a chaotic system. When the system gets to a critical state, any number of rather minor disruptions could trigger the avalanche. The trigger will not be the cause (just as Lehmans was not the cause of the financial crisis) but it may get blamed. The cause will be the many years of a monetary system based on the issuance of  debt for money and the miracle of compound interest. The system can last a long time but not indefinitely before compound growth catches up with it. When debt is being created faster than money to pay the debts plus interest off, eventually the growth of money supply has to take on the appearance of a hockey stick in chart form for the interest on the debt to be serviced. Zero percent interest helps slow the process, but not everyone pays zero percent. I know I do not. The basic monetary system we are using has a finite life. We have this system, not because it is the best, but because it is the best for monied interests (namely the banking system) to siphon off seigniorage from the populace. It is a system designed by bankers for the benefit of bankers. Most "money" is created by debt. By loans. In fractional reserve banking most of the money "loaned" out did not exists before the loan was made. It was created out of nothing. But you already knew this. There are other systems beside fractional reserve systems. But the other systems are not as lucrative for the people that currently create what most of us spend as money. Not a lucrative for the banking system. But I'm pretty sure you also knew this.

I believe OldMcdonald and I think some day there will be a different system implemented, or at least a reset to the current system so it can go again for a while. I gather from your posts you believe nothing will ever be different than what we currently have as far as the FED and their attempts at control of money supply. It is hard to reconcile thought processes when there are fundamental differences in beliefs of what is possible or probable.

I'm way beyond my ability to effectively convey through words what I'm trying to say. The above may not have made much sense.

John