Fw: Can "Printing" Money Save Economies? The Answer, Yes, and No....
----- Forwarded Message ----- From: robert searle <[email protected]> To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> Sent: Monday, 26 September 2011, 12:54 Subject: Can "Printing" Monye Save Economies? If for whatever reasons governments cannot pay off their debts one way of achieving economic stability is to "print" it en masse!! This is not ofcourse a good debt concellation/reduction plan (!) as it could lead to serious inflation, or even hyperinflation.....but it can work..if not too much money is created by governments. Something like this could ultimately save the Euro if it occurs on a large enough scale. In pre-revolutionary America colonists found it very difficult to raise funds in the various States they created. So, they resorted to the printing press. Quite often this worked but not always (ref. Ellen Brown/Web of Debt). Infact, the American War of Independence was funded by printing money. This money was known as the Continentals but it ultimately lead to serious inflation. However, it is claimed that the Brits had been "flooding" the money supply with fake copies. The same claim was also made about the Assignats created during the French Revolution (ref. Zarlenga, and his key book on money). The American Civil War was funded by Lincoln with his Greenbacks notes created by the then existing government. This did not lead serious inflation as far as we know...The Russian Revolution was largely funded in a like manner though there is some talk about some capital being borrowed by private foreign commercial banks. It appears too that Hitlers miracle economic "revolution" leading to WII was due to simply printing money but with strong price controls in place on many products. Apparently, the same goes for the funding of the Vietnam War when President Johnson admitted that it could not be financed by taxation because the war was so unpopular .......This is a big subject, and no doubt other examples have not been included here (notably Zimbabwe!!). There are a number of articles about Hitler "printing" money on the internet along with the Vietnam War (plus the Assignats, Greenbacks, et cetera, et cetera). As far as I understand it governments cannot legally create money electronically en direct into the economy. However, it is not fully clear whether they can still print it "legally". To very limitedextent this occurs but if huge amounts were to be involved this might require somekind of legal arrangement. This is still subject to research. http://www.google.co.uk/#pq=hitler+and+monetary+reform&hl=en&sugexp=tsh&cp=1... http://www.google.co.uk/#pq=hitler+prints+money&hl=en&sugexp=tsh&cp=40&gs_id...
Please, excuse, and some of the text is partial and misleading. This objection should not be taken in an ad hominen intent. The British had at least one printing press operating on a ship in the New York harbor busily counterfeiting the Continentals and then putting them into circulation. So no, the Continental Congress's use of the Continentals did not produce inflation, but the British counterfeiting operation did. Dys-information regarding monetary practices and history is a well established tactic and it usually arrives in the form of Pop-economics funded by the banking cartel to preserve their monopolistic franchise. Brown is a popular and clear example of this process. The differences between the monetary policies of the US Union as compared to the monetary policies of the Southern Confederacy is a much better example. Generally Zarlenga's book can serve as an antidote. I believe that Abba Lerner did extensive research into the details of the economics of the US Confederacy which as a confederacy was not even a sovereignty based process, and actually close to the present EMU process. So much for looking into history to find more than a simple reflection of present presumptions. Regarding the "legality" of sovereign governments printing their own currency it is actually the standard, except that we have been led to believe that it is the franchise of privately owned banking cartel is the only "real" and accepted process, which is straight away false. No, it is not a legitimate subject of research, unless the details of MMT are declared by conflation and misrepresentation to be falsified, or if the intent is to sustain the privatized franchise or to re-invent MMT under a different branding. Zimbabwe is frequently pulled out as a bad example of the use of the sovereign use of currency, while simultaneously ignoring the massive incompetence and self dealing of that government. If there is an interest in a different slant on the hyper-inflation hyper-ventilation try this article. http://www.economics.arawakcity.org/node/233 While I appreciate in principle the P2P model deeply, it has to involve some level of rigorous discourse and examination. Despite the popularity of Ellen Brown, her material continues to play to a strategy of persuasion rather than analysis based upon informing facts, practices, and history. I did a close review of her "Money As Debt" for the AMI at one point and it is primarily a product of persuasion, not scientific in any serious sense. Her personal history was that previously she, as an attorney, specialized in writing briefs. That process boils down to picking a conclusion and a few key premises and then finding precedents which appear to validate the targeted conclusions. It is a rhetorical process to win an argument, and has little to do with on the ground history of facts. At one point Randall Wray offered to tutor Brown when she passed through Kansas City. Mo. promoting her book and self. She declined by not responding at all. This is how default paradigms get reproduced in an seemingly endless process. Tadit On Mon, 26 Sep 2011 08:07:04 -0400, robert searle <[email protected]> wrote:
----- Forwarded Message ----- From: robert searle <[email protected]> To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> Sent: Monday, 26 September 2011, 12:54 Subject: Can "Printing" Monye Save Economies?
If for whatever reasons governments cannot pay off their debts one way of achieving economic stability is to "print" it en masse!! This is not ofcourse a good debt concellation/reduction plan (!) as it could lead to serious inflation, or even hyperinflation.....but it can work..if not too much money is created by governments. Something like this could ultimately save the Euro if it occurs on a large enough scale.
In pre-revolutionary America colonists found it very difficult to raise funds in the various States they created. So, they resorted to the printing press. Quite often this worked but not always (ref. Ellen Brown/Web of Debt). Infact, the American War of Independence was funded by printing money. This money was known as the Continentals but it ultimately lead to serious inflation. However, it is claimed that the Brits had been "flooding" the money supply with fake copies. The same claim was also made about the Assignats created during the French Revolution (ref. Zarlenga, and his key book on money). The American Civil War was funded by Lincoln with his Greenbacks notes created by the then existing government. This did not lead serious inflation as far as we know...The Russian Revolution was largely funded in a like manner though there is some talk about some capital being borrowed by private foreign commercial banks.
It appears too that Hitlers miracle economic "revolution" leading to WII was due to simply printing money but with strong price controls in place on many products. Apparently, the same goes for the funding of the Vietnam War when President Johnson admitted that it could not be financed by taxation because the war was so unpopular .......This is a big subject, and no doubt other examples have not been included here (notably Zimbabwe!!).
There are a number of articles about Hitler "printing" money on the internet along with the Vietnam War (plus the Assignats, Greenbacks, et cetera, et cetera). As far as I understand it governments cannot legally create money electronically en direct into the economy. However, it is not fully clear whether they can still print it "legally". To very limitedextent this occurs but if huge amounts were to be involved this might require somekind of legal arrangement. This is still subject to research.
http://www.google.co.uk/#pq=hitler+and+monetary+reform&hl=en&sugexp=tsh&cp=1...
http://www.google.co.uk/#pq=hitler+prints+money&hl=en&sugexp=tsh&cp=40&gs_id...
your making a serious accusation here, what evidence do you have that Ellen Brown does not simply disagree, but is actually funded for disinformation by the banking cartel ? In fact, all the evidence is that they would hate her book, which is an argument for the sovereign creation of money and against debt-based currency creation, the attacks against anyone who disagrees, such as Krugman, Stiglizt, Brown etc .. gives the impression that MMT behaves more like a cult than to engage in open and peer-based debate .. Michel On Mon, Sep 26, 2011 at 7:55 PM, <[email protected]> wrote:
Please, excuse, and some of the text is partial and misleading. This objection should not be taken in an ad hominen intent. The British had at least one printing press operating on a ship in the New York harbor busily counterfeiting the Continentals and then putting them into circulation. So no, the Continental Congress's use of the Continentals did not produce inflation, but the British counterfeiting operation did. Dys-information regarding monetary practices and history is a well established tactic and it usually arrives in the form of Pop-economics funded by the banking cartel to preserve their monopolistic franchise. Brown is a popular and clear example of this process. The differences between the monetary policies of the US Union as compared to the monetary policies of the Southern Confederacy is a much better example. Generally Zarlenga's book can serve as an antidote. I believe that Abba Lerner did extensive research into the details of the economics of the US Confederacy which as a confederacy was not even a sovereignty based process, and actually close to the present EMU process. So much for looking into history to find more than a simple reflection of present presumptions.
Regarding the "legality" of sovereign governments printing their own currency it is actually the standard, except that we have been led to believe that it is the franchise of privately owned banking cartel is the only "real" and accepted process, which is straight away false. No, it is not a legitimate subject of research, unless the details of MMT are declared by conflation and misrepresentation to be falsified, or if the intent is to sustain the privatized franchise or to re-invent MMT under a different branding. Zimbabwe is frequently pulled out as a bad example of the use of the sovereign use of currency, while simultaneously ignoring the massive incompetence and self dealing of that government. If there is an interest in a different slant on the hyper-inflation hyper-ventilation try this article.
http://www.economics.arawakcity.org/node/233
While I appreciate in principle the P2P model deeply, it has to involve some level of rigorous discourse and examination. Despite the popularity of Ellen Brown, her material continues to play to a strategy of persuasion rather than analysis based upon informing facts, practices, and history. I did a close review of her "Money As Debt" for the AMI at one point and it is primarily a product of persuasion, not scientific in any serious sense. Her personal history was that previously she, as an attorney, specialized in writing briefs. That process boils down to picking a conclusion and a few key premises and then finding precedents which appear to validate the targeted conclusions. It is a rhetorical process to win an argument, and has little to do with on the ground history of facts. At one point Randall Wray offered to tutor Brown when she passed through Kansas City. Mo. promoting her book and self. She declined by not responding at all. This is how default paradigms get reproduced in an seemingly endless process.
Tadit
On Mon, 26 Sep 2011 08:07:04 -0400, robert searle <[email protected]> wrote:
----- Forwarded Message ----- From: robert searle <[email protected]> To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> Sent: Monday, 26 September 2011, 12:54 Subject: Can "Printing" Monye Save Economies?
If for whatever reasons governments cannot pay off their debts one way of achieving economic stability is to "print" it en masse!! This is not ofcourse a good debt concellation/reduction plan (!) as it could lead to serious inflation, or even hyperinflation.....but it can work..if not too much money is created by governments. Something like this could ultimately save the Euro if it occurs on a large enough scale.
In pre-revolutionary America colonists found it very difficult to raise funds in the various States they created. So, they resorted to the printing press. Quite often this worked but not always (ref. Ellen Brown/Web of Debt). Infact, the American War of Independence was funded by printing money. This money was known as the Continentals but it ultimately lead to serious inflation. However, it is claimed that the Brits had been "flooding" the money supply with fake copies. The same claim was also made about the Assignats created during the French Revolution (ref. Zarlenga, and his key book on money). The American Civil War was funded by Lincoln with his Greenbacks notes created by the then existing government. This did not lead serious inflation as far as we know...The Russian Revolution was largely funded in a like manner though there is some talk about some capital being borrowed by private foreign commercial banks.
It appears too that Hitlers miracle economic "revolution" leading to WII was due to simply printing money but with strong price controls in place on many products. Apparently, the same goes for the funding of the Vietnam War when President Johnson admitted that it could not be financed by taxation because the war was so unpopular .......This is a big subject, and no doubt other examples have not been included here (notably Zimbabwe!!).
There are a number of articles about Hitler "printing" money on the internet along with the Vietnam War (plus the Assignats, Greenbacks, et cetera, et cetera). As far as I understand it governments cannot legally create money electronically en direct into the economy. However, it is not fully clear whether they can still print it "legally". To very limitedextent this occurs but if huge amounts were to be involved this might require somekind of legal arrangement. This is still subject to research.
http://www.google.co.uk/#pq=hitler+and+monetary+reform&hl=en&sugexp=tsh&cp=1...
http://www.google.co.uk/#pq=hitler+prints+money&hl=en&sugexp=tsh&cp=40&gs_id...
_______________________________________________ P2P Foundation - Mailing list http://www.p2pfoundation.net https://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation
-- P2P Foundation: http://p2pfoundation.net - http://blog.p2pfoundation.net Connect: http://p2pfoundation.ning.com; Discuss: http://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation Updates: http://del.icio.us/mbauwens; http://friendfeed.com/mbauwens; http://twitter.com/mbauwens; http://www.facebook.com/mbauwens
Michel, I will dig up my review of her book and send it to you. Meanwhile, consider Jaimie Walton's review at http://www.monetary.org/review-of-ellen-browns-the-web-of-debt/2010/12 Walton's criticism is close to my analysis. Yes, this a serious process Walton's analysis is a tight analysis and it is posted by the American Monetary Institute, which is well outside of the MMT zone. Once you have Walton's article come back and we can discuss it. It may take awhile to understand that it is neo-classical economics which is a cult. Looking from the outside it is easy to understand how MMT might be considered to be a cult. However, in exploring MMT/functional finance you will find that its standards of discourse are on a par with the best of scientific discourses. I will respond more fully to your concerns. To the ordinary citizen her material may seem provocative and vaguely progressive, and it is not, particularly not in a close analysis. \\ when you are ready I will respond further. Tadit On Mon, 26 Sep 2011 13:00:39 -0400, Michel Bauwens <[email protected]> wrote:
your making a serious accusation here, what evidence do you have that Ellen Brown does not simply disagree, but is actually funded for disinformation by the banking cartel ?
In fact, all the evidence is that they would hate her book, which is an argument for the sovereign creation of money and against debt-based currency creation,
the attacks against anyone who disagrees, such as Krugman, Stiglizt, Brown etc .. gives the impression that MMT behaves more like a cult than to engage in open and peer-based debate ..
Michel
On Mon, Sep 26, 2011 at 7:55 PM, <[email protected]> wrote:
Please, excuse, and some of the text is partial and misleading. This objection should not be taken in an ad hominen intent. The British had at least one printing press operating on a ship in the New York harbor busily counterfeiting the Continentals and then putting them into circulation. So no, the Continental Congress's use of the Continentals did not produce inflation, but the British counterfeiting operation did. Dys-information regarding monetary practices and history is a well established tactic and it usually arrives in the form of Pop-economics funded by the banking cartel to preserve their monopolistic franchise. Brown is a popular and clear example of this process. The differences between the monetary policies of the US Union as compared to the monetary policies of the Southern Confederacy is a much better example. Generally Zarlenga's book can serve as an antidote. I believe that Abba Lerner did extensive research into the details of the economics of the US Confederacy which as a confederacy was not even a sovereignty based process, and actually close to the present EMU process. So much for looking into history to find more than a simple reflection of present presumptions.
Regarding the "legality" of sovereign governments printing their own currency it is actually the standard, except that we have been led to believe that it is the franchise of privately owned banking cartel is the only "real" and accepted process, which is straight away false. No, it is not a legitimate subject of research, unless the details of MMT are declared by conflation and misrepresentation to be falsified, or if the intent is to sustain the privatized franchise or to re-invent MMT under a different branding. Zimbabwe is frequently pulled out as a bad example of the use of the sovereign use of currency, while simultaneously ignoring the massive incompetence and self dealing of that government. If there is an interest in a different slant on the hyper-inflation hyper-ventilation try this article.
http://www.economics.arawakcity.org/node/233
While I appreciate in principle the P2P model deeply, it has to involve some level of rigorous discourse and examination. Despite the popularity of Ellen Brown, her material continues to play to a strategy of persuasion rather than analysis based upon informing facts, practices, and history. I did a close review of her "Money As Debt" for the AMI at one point and it is primarily a product of persuasion, not scientific in any serious sense. Her personal history was that previously she, as an attorney, specialized in writing briefs. That process boils down to picking a conclusion and a few key premises and then finding precedents which appear to validate the targeted conclusions. It is a rhetorical process to win an argument, and has little to do with on the ground history of facts. At one point Randall Wray offered to tutor Brown when she passed through Kansas City. Mo. promoting her book and self. She declined by not responding at all. This is how default paradigms get reproduced in an seemingly endless process.
Tadit
On Mon, 26 Sep 2011 08:07:04 -0400, robert searle <[email protected]> wrote:
----- Forwarded Message ----- From: robert searle <[email protected]> To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> Sent: Monday, 26 September 2011, 12:54 Subject: Can "Printing" Monye Save Economies?
If for whatever reasons governments cannot pay off their debts one way of achieving economic stability is to "print" it en masse!! This is
not
ofcourse a good debt concellation/reduction plan (!) as it could lead to serious inflation, or even hyperinflation.....but it can work..if not too much money is created by governments. Something like this could ultimately save the Euro if it occurs on a large enough scale.
In pre-revolutionary America colonists found it very difficult to raise funds in the various States they created. So, they resorted to the printing press. Quite often this worked but not always (ref. Ellen Brown/Web of Debt). Infact, the American War of Independence was funded by printing money. This money was known as the Continentals but it ultimately lead to serious inflation. However, it is claimed that the Brits had been "flooding" the money supply with fake copies. The same claim was also made about the Assignats created during the French Revolution (ref. Zarlenga, and his key book on money). The American Civil War was funded by Lincoln with his Greenbacks notes created by the then existing government. This did not lead serious inflation as far as we know...The Russian Revolution was largely funded in a like manner though there is some talk about some capital being borrowed by private foreign commercial banks.
It appears too that Hitlers miracle economic "revolution" leading to WII was due to simply printing money but with strong price controls in place on many products. Apparently, the same goes for the funding of the Vietnam War when President Johnson admitted that it could not be financed by taxation because the war was so unpopular .......This is a big subject, and no doubt other examples have not been included here (notably Zimbabwe!!).
There are a number of articles about Hitler "printing" money on the internet along with the Vietnam War (plus the Assignats, Greenbacks, et cetera, et cetera). As far as I understand it governments cannot legally create money electronically en direct into the economy. However, it is not fully clear whether they can still print it "legally". To very limitedextent this occurs but if huge amounts were to be involved this might require somekind of legal arrangement. This is still subject to research.
http://www.google.co.uk/#pq=hitler+and+monetary+reform&hl=en&sugexp=tsh&cp=1...
http://www.google.co.uk/#pq=hitler+prints+money&hl=en&sugexp=tsh&cp=40&gs_id...
_______________________________________________ P2P Foundation - Mailing list http://www.p2pfoundation.net https://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation
I'll check it out, but I only have read pieces of Ellen's work ... On Tue, Sep 27, 2011 at 12:53 AM, <[email protected]> wrote:
Michel, I will dig up my review of her book and send it to you. Meanwhile, consider Jaimie Walton's review at http://www.monetary.org/review-of-ellen-browns-the-web-of-debt/2010/12
Walton's criticism is close to my analysis. Yes, this a serious process Walton's analysis is a tight analysis and it is posted by the American Monetary Institute, which is well outside of the MMT zone. Once you have Walton's article come back and we can discuss it. It may take awhile to understand that it is neo-classical economics which is a cult. Looking from the outside it is easy to understand how MMT might be considered to be a cult. However, in exploring MMT/functional finance you will find that its standards of discourse are on a par with the best of scientific discourses. I will respond more fully to your concerns. To the ordinary citizen her material may seem provocative and vaguely progressive, and it is not, particularly not in a close analysis. \\
when you are ready I will respond further. Tadit
On Mon, 26 Sep 2011 13:00:39 -0400, Michel Bauwens <[email protected]> wrote:
your making a serious accusation here, what evidence do you have that Ellen Brown does not simply disagree, but is actually funded for disinformation by the banking cartel ?
In fact, all the evidence is that they would hate her book, which is an argument for the sovereign creation of money and against debt-based currency creation,
the attacks against anyone who disagrees, such as Krugman, Stiglizt, Brown etc .. gives the impression that MMT behaves more like a cult than to engage in open and peer-based debate ..
Michel
On Mon, Sep 26, 2011 at 7:55 PM, <[email protected]> wrote:
Please, excuse, and some of the text is partial and misleading. This objection should not be taken in an ad hominen intent. The British had at least one printing press operating on a ship in the New York harbor busily counterfeiting the Continentals and then putting them into circulation. So no, the Continental Congress's use of the Continentals did not produce inflation, but the British counterfeiting operation did. Dys-information regarding monetary practices and history is a well established tactic and it usually arrives in the form of Pop-economics funded by the banking cartel to preserve their monopolistic franchise. Brown is a popular and clear example of this process. The differences between the monetary policies of the US Union as compared to the monetary policies of the Southern Confederacy is a much better example. Generally Zarlenga's book can serve as an antidote. I believe that Abba Lerner did extensive research into the details of the economics of the US Confederacy which as a confederacy was not even a sovereignty based process, and actually close to the present EMU process. So much for looking into history to find more than a simple reflection of present presumptions.
Regarding the "legality" of sovereign governments printing their own currency it is actually the standard, except that we have been led to believe that it is the franchise of privately owned banking cartel is the only "real" and accepted process, which is straight away false. No, it is not a legitimate subject of research, unless the details of MMT are declared by conflation and misrepresentation to be falsified, or if the intent is to sustain the privatized franchise or to re-invent MMT under a different branding. Zimbabwe is frequently pulled out as a bad example of the use of the sovereign use of currency, while simultaneously ignoring the massive incompetence and self dealing of that government. If there is an interest in a different slant on the hyper-inflation hyper-ventilation try this article.
http://www.economics.arawakcity.org/node/233
While I appreciate in principle the P2P model deeply, it has to involve some level of rigorous discourse and examination. Despite the popularity of Ellen Brown, her material continues to play to a strategy of persuasion rather than analysis based upon informing facts, practices, and history. I did a close review of her "Money As Debt" for the AMI at one point and it is primarily a product of persuasion, not scientific in any serious sense. Her personal history was that previously she, as an attorney, specialized in writing briefs. That process boils down to picking a conclusion and a few key premises and then finding precedents which appear to validate the targeted conclusions. It is a rhetorical process to win an argument, and has little to do with on the ground history of facts. At one point Randall Wray offered to tutor Brown when she passed through Kansas City. Mo. promoting her book and self. She declined by not responding at all. This is how default paradigms get reproduced in an seemingly endless process.
Tadit
On Mon, 26 Sep 2011 08:07:04 -0400, robert searle <[email protected]> wrote:
----- Forwarded Message ----- From: robert searle <[email protected]> To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> Sent: Monday, 26 September 2011, 12:54 Subject: Can "Printing" Monye Save Economies?
If for whatever reasons governments cannot pay off their debts one way of achieving economic stability is to "print" it en masse!! This is
not
ofcourse a good debt concellation/reduction plan (!) as it could lead to serious inflation, or even hyperinflation.....but it can work..if not too much money is created by governments. Something like this could ultimately save the Euro if it occurs on a large enough scale.
In pre-revolutionary America colonists found it very difficult to raise funds in the various States they created. So, they resorted to the printing press. Quite often this worked but not always (ref. Ellen Brown/Web of Debt). Infact, the American War of Independence was funded by printing money. This money was known as the Continentals but it ultimately lead to serious inflation. However, it is claimed that the Brits had been "flooding" the money supply with fake copies. The same claim was also made about the Assignats created during the French Revolution (ref. Zarlenga, and his key book on money). The American Civil War was funded by Lincoln with his Greenbacks notes created by the then existing government. This did not lead serious inflation as far as we know...The Russian Revolution was largely funded in a like manner though there is some talk about some capital being borrowed by private foreign commercial banks.
It appears too that Hitlers miracle economic "revolution" leading to WII was due to simply printing money but with strong price controls in place on many products. Apparently, the same goes for the funding of the Vietnam War when President Johnson admitted that it could not be financed by taxation because the war was so unpopular .......This is a big subject, and no doubt other examples have not been included here (notably Zimbabwe!!).
There are a number of articles about Hitler "printing" money on the internet along with the Vietnam War (plus the Assignats, Greenbacks, et cetera, et cetera). As far as I understand it governments cannot legally create money electronically en direct into the economy. However, it is not fully clear whether they can still print it "legally". To very limitedextent this occurs but if huge amounts were to be involved this might require somekind of legal arrangement. This is still subject to research.
http://www.google.co.uk/#pq=hitler+and+monetary+reform&hl=en&sugexp=tsh&cp=1...
http://www.google.co.uk/#pq=hitler+prints+money&hl=en&sugexp=tsh&cp=40&gs_id...
_______________________________________________ P2P Foundation - Mailing list http://www.p2pfoundation.net https://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation
_______________________________________________ P2P Foundation - Mailing list http://www.p2pfoundation.net https://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation
-- P2P Foundation: http://p2pfoundation.net - http://blog.p2pfoundation.net Connect: http://p2pfoundation.ning.com; Discuss: http://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation Updates: http://del.icio.us/mbauwens; http://friendfeed.com/mbauwens; http://twitter.com/mbauwens; http://www.facebook.com/mbauwens
On Monday, September 26, 2011 10:53:35 am [email protected] wrote:
Michel, I will dig up my review of her book and send it to you. Meanwhile, consider Jaimie Walton's review at http://www.monetary.org/review-of-ellen-browns-the-web-of-debt/2010/12
Walton's criticism is close to my analysis. Yes, this a serious process Walton's analysis is a tight analysis and it is posted by the American Monetary Institute, which is well outside of the MMT zone. Once you have Walton's article come back and we can discuss it. It may take awhile to understand that it is neo-classical economics which is a cult. Looking from the outside it is easy to understand how MMT might be considered to be a cult. However, in exploring MMT/functional finance you will find that its standards of discourse are on a par with the best of scientific discourses. I will respond more fully to your concerns. To the ordinary citizen her material may seem provocative and vaguely progressive, and it is not, particularly not in a close analysis. \\
when you are ready I will respond further. Tadit
Hmmm... does your definition of 'tight' analysis mean 'done with clenched sphincter' by any chance? Jamie's review seems kind of bullshit to me. EB: The spiraling debt trap that has subjected financially-strapped people to usurious interest charges for the use of something the lenders never had to lend is a fraud on the borrowers. JW: Brown is clearly saying here it is banks lending “the use of something the lenders never had to lend” which “is a fraud” because people are made to think they’re borrowing money that’s there to be lent. I read this to mean that the interest is the fraud, not the lending. And sure enough, Ellen is quoted again to say just this: EB: What is wrong with the current system is not that money is advanced as credit against the borrower’s promise to repay but that the interest on this advance accrues to private banks that gave up nothing of their own to earn it. JW: Notice Brown has shifted her definition of the problem from the “fraud” itself to the interest on the “fraud”. The reviewer puts this in a section titled "Brown’s incredible U-turn", as if she were contradicting herself. Seems more a case of Jamie not being able to understand English. Just prior to that he uses some curious abbreviated quoting: JW: Brown turns around and starts ‘justifying’ the present unsustainable (and unjust) debt-based money system, telling us it: “… would be sorely missed if banks could no longer engage in it.” [p. 403] Doesn't that read like Ellen is concerned about the banks ability to continue financial rape? What she's talking about in the full paragraph is that people would sorely miss the ability to use credit under a 100% reserve scheme and that the state could issue credit cards. JW: But her flawed argument misses the point entirely: it turns our government into a banker, the ‘owner’ of our indebtedness, but does nothing to change the ill effects caused by a debt-based money system. It's been a while since I read the book, but I think the idea is that having any interest go to government, where it can be used for public benefit, is better than giving it to known parasites. Then he goes on to say that Aristotle was smart because he knew money is an abstract social construct, but Ellen is stupid because she treats money in various, abstract ways. Here's how I read them: 1) A unit of exchange value - Let's trade things! 2) A record of exchange - Let's go meta and trade the trades! 3) Credit - We'll let people get some things when they don't have things. Jamie thinks these are contradictory, but hey, that's what abstraction will do for you. What's funny is that he only accepts the first as valid. The abstract unit of value concept is the original sin of money, a bit of brain damage that no form of currency can ever repair. To equate dissimilar things is simply a lie of convenience and will always cause problems. --Karl
robert searle wrote:
it can work..if not too much money is created by governments.
If the humans composing our governments were not so cowardly, we could have been issuing our own currency from the beginning and never gone into debt AT ALL. There is no reason for groups of people to enter into debt when they have all the Labor value they can commit toward each other as 'taxes' to achieve their 'public' goals. Debt can easily avoidable by *groups* of people if they can structure a reliable and usable way to exchange commitments. By what authority do the Private Banksters issue currency, and why has almost every city, state, nation on Earth relinquished that authority? Do we really believe corporations will have incentives to not over-issue? They don't even *print* the money anyway, they only *issue* it electronically. Issuance is a matter of holding down the 0- key after some non-0 digit. Gaaarrrr! The lack of careful thought and reconsideration of why we our drowning in debt is maddening for those of us that can see this is an insanely unfortunate and yet simultaneously unnecessary problem.
Patrick, I think that you have pretty much pegged it. Perhaps it also is an incentive to be at the brutal end of the process. A currency which is based upon assets, issued on a non-debt basis does not guarantee that individuals wobn't get into debt to someone or some bank. iIt just means thatLike I keep telling everyone I can, all of this heinous nonsense is TOTALLY Un-Necessary, though extremely convenient for those with the franchise to print money to serve their private interests. In the US it happened in 1913 US Fed Reserve and in 1886 SP vs Santa Clara. Tadit n Mon, 26 Sep 2011 16:33:00 -0400, Patrick Anderson <[email protected]> wrote:
robert searle wrote:
it can work..if not too much money is created by governments.
If the humans composing our governments were not so cowardly, we could have been issuing our own currency from the beginning and never gone into debt AT ALL.
There is no reason for groups of people to enter into debt when they have all the Labor value they can commit toward each other as 'taxes' to achieve their 'public' goals.
Debt can easily avoidable by *groups* of people if they can structure a reliable and usable way to exchange commitments.
By what authority do the Private Banksters issue currency, and why has almost every city, state, nation on Earth relinquished that authority?
Do we really believe corporations will have incentives to not over-issue?
They don't even *print* the money anyway, they only *issue* it electronically.
Issuance is a matter of holding down the 0- key after some non-0 digit.
Gaaarrrr! The lack of careful thought and reconsideration of why we our drowning in debt is maddening for those of us that can see this is an insanely unfortunate and yet simultaneously unnecessary problem.
_______________________________________________ P2P Foundation - Mailing list http://www.p2pfoundation.net https://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation
On Mon, Sep 26, 2011 at 6:07 AM, robert searle <[email protected]> wrote:
Subject: Can "Printing" Monye Save Economies?
If for whatever reasons governments cannot pay off their debts one way of achieving economic stability is to "print" it en masse!! This is not ofcourse a good debt concellation/reduction plan (!) as it could lead to serious inflation, or even hyperinflation.....but it can work..if not too much money is created by governments.
No, this would ONLY work if the basic values of the United States were still sound and ahead of the world (which, don't forget(!), is what *makes* the value on those pieces of paper). That was true 200 years ago when the American ideals were still ahead of the world, but after the unaddressed near-genocide of the Native People's here, the sell-out of American values (and land resources) to Chrematistics, along with the general forgetfulness of Americans of their roots (like most now have, esp. after the 60's), it does not have much solvancy except in a few niches like this, but unfortunately, it appears that the head of this body (i.e. the federal government) is *completely ignorant* of the desires of the creative classes(!). This is a serious problem. We shouldn't have to be doing this underground. And every American who's paying rent is paying into a system of destruction, or neglecting to use the tools in place to reform it. There needs to be a total re-vamping of property law, for example. The Native People's, who still suffer, mostly invisibly, on the "reservations" the US Gov't confined them to decades ago should have right of way across any land of the America's. Etc. Etc. Seriously, if people allow a government of the people, for the people, and by the people to fall into neglect, then it's value will continue to go crap. mark
Your response does make any sense..... RS. From: Mark Janssen <[email protected]> To: robert searle <[email protected]>; P2P Foundation mailing list <[email protected]> Sent: Tuesday, 27 September 2011, 0:18 Subject: Re: [P2P-F] Fw: Can "Printing" Money Save Economies? The Answer, Yes, and No.... On Mon, Sep 26, 2011 at 6:07 AM, robert searle <[email protected]> wrote:
Subject: Can "Printing" Monye Save Economies?
If for whatever reasons governments cannot pay off their debts one way of achieving economic stability is to "print" it en masse!! This is not ofcourse a good debt concellation/reduction plan (!) as it could lead to serious inflation, or even hyperinflation.....but it can work..if not too much money is created by governments.
No, this would ONLY work if the basic values of the United States were still sound and ahead of the world (which, don't forget(!), is what *makes* the value on those pieces of paper). That was true 200 years ago when the American ideals were still ahead of the world, but after the unaddressed near-genocide of the Native People's here, the sell-out of American values (and land resources) to Chrematistics, along with the general forgetfulness of Americans of their roots (like most now have, esp. after the 60's), it does not have much solvancy except in a few niches like this, but unfortunately, it appears that the head of this body (i.e. the federal government) is *completely ignorant* of the desires of the creative classes(!). This is a serious problem. We shouldn't have to be doing this underground. And every American who's paying rent is paying into a system of destruction, or neglecting to use the tools in place to reform it. There needs to be a total re-vamping of property law, for example. The Native People's, who still suffer, mostly invisibly, on the "reservations" the US Gov't confined them to decades ago should have right of way across any land of the America's. Etc. Etc. Seriously, if people allow a government of the people, for the people, and by the people to fall into neglect, then it's value will continue to go crap. mark
The comment which I wrote here should say Your response does NOT make any sense. The problem with myself is that I tend to write very fast on the computer. One habit which is to my discredit to a limited extent is the "eliding" of words. In effect, sometimes I miss out important, and "unimportant" words on occasion. I will try my best not to allow it to happen again but I cannot guarantee it... To err is human.. Shakespeare. RS. ________________________________ From: robert searle <[email protected]> To: Mark Janssen <[email protected]>; "[email protected]" <[email protected]> Sent: Tuesday, 27 September 2011, 11:03 Subject: Re: [P2P-F] Fw: Can "Printing" Money Save Economies? The Answer, Yes, and No.... Your response does make any sense..... RS. ________________________________ From: Mark Janssen <[email protected]> To: robert searle <[email protected]>; P2P Foundation mailing list <[email protected]> Sent: Tuesday, 27 September 2011, 0:18 Subject: Re: [P2P-F] Fw: Can "Printing" Money Save Economies? The Answer, Yes, and No.... On Mon, Sep 26, 2011 at 6:07 AM, robert searle <[email protected]> wrote:
Subject: Can "Printing" Monye Save Economies?
If for whatever reasons governments cannot pay off their debts one way of achieving economic stability is to "print" it en masse!! This is not ofcourse a good debt concellation/reduction plan (!) as it could lead to serious inflation, or even hyperinflation.....but it can work..if not too much money is created by governments.
No, this would ONLY work if the basic values of the United States were still sound and ahead of the world (which, don't forget(!), is what *makes* the value on those pieces of paper). That was true 200 years ago when the American ideals were still ahead of the world, but after the unaddressed near-genocide of the Native People's here, the sell-out of American values (and land resources) to Chrematistics, along with the general forgetfulness of Americans of their roots (like most now have, esp. after the 60's), it does not have much solvancy except in a few niches like this, but unfortunately, it appears that the head of this body (i.e. the federal government) is *completely ignorant* of the desires of the creative classes(!). This is a serious problem. We shouldn't have to be doing this underground. And every American who's paying rent is paying into a system of destruction, or neglecting to use the tools in place to reform it. There needs to be a total re-vamping of property law, for example. The Native People's, who still suffer, mostly invisibly, on the "reservations" the US Gov't confined them to decades ago should have right of way across any land of the America's. Etc. Etc. Seriously, if people allow a government of the people, for the people, and by the people to fall into neglect, then it's value will continue to go crap. mark _______________________________________________ P2P Foundation - Mailing list http://www.p2pfoundation.net https://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation
participants (6)
-
ideasinc＠ee.net -
Karl Robillard -
Mark Janssen -
Michel Bauwens -
Patrick Anderson -
robert searle