[P2P-F] Why we can afford Climate Change...

[ideasinc at ee.net]

Robert et al,
	while Ann Pettifor is generally correct about how central banking works,  
she is wrong or omits a several important details. The privatized version  
of central banking under a fiat sovereign currency has only sort of served  
our collective and common needs and it is actually not very functional at  
all. As she describes it we have a "credit" based system. The use of the  
word "credit" is often used to mask the reality that "credit" is debt by  
another name.

	She also omits entirely describing the major difference between credit  
(debt) based money issued by a privatized banking system which issues  
credit as compared to the effects of currency issued debt-free by a  
sovereign government in the interest of sustaining and developing  
societal/sovereign infra-structure. Under the privatized issuance of debt  
based currency the privatized monetary system accumulates both the  
interest attached to currency as a credit and it makes back the entire  
principle as well. Adding together the compounded interest and the  
principle of the debt (aka credit). This makes the related debt to be  
HUGE!!! To provide this free rent on the franchise granted to privatized  
central banking, other than related overhead costs of operating a private  
bank and central banking system, those who sign onto the credit/debt  
issuance of currency units have to go out an essentially strip the economy  
and the commons of resources which by the fractional reserve and  
leveraging ends up being many times the original debt/credit. When a local  
or central government uses bonds to credit that currency it is acquiring  
debt to private investors including the banking issues this the related  
debt/credit. This result is very, very different under a sovereign, fiat,  
asset based currency process.

	She is quite right about the feeding credits into the demand side of the  
economic ledger IS how saving are established for the general population.  
Having the sovereign government go into credit/debt to develop  
infra-structure needs, is poor strategy compared to currency issued on a  
debt free basis. Credit issued as loans either to the central sovereign  
government or to corporations and private individuals (think "mortgages"  
as a contractual agreement of debt/credit. If currency is put into  
circulation on a debt-free basis by the sovereign government, the the  
private investors, including banks will not acquire the huge returns  
achieved for private interests by way of the debt basis of the issuance of  
currency. She does not distinguish her "supply-side" aka consumer demand  
side of the economy and supply side to the benefit of the privatized  
banking systems. This will make her presentation seems very much like  
"supply-side" economics, in service to plutocracy. This lack of  
distinction is problematic in the details of how the issuance of currency  
can serve the interests of the commons in many ways.
	
	Trusting banks to invest in the de-carbonization of our industrial  
cultures, under the private credit/debt basis of issuance, will cause  
those investments to go where the return on that investment will be  
highest. If a high private return on the "investment" is somehow  
guaranteed by the government, then the debt load will be higher, compared  
to what it would be under a process where the sovereign government acts as  
the primary steward of the commons and the currency credits are issued  
debt free.

	It is this sort of poorly informed jumble packaged along with very  
attractive objectives, ends up adding to the net public confusion of how  
monetary systems and a functional approach to fiscal policy could operate  
in the interests of the commons and toward sustainability.

	Ask questions here, if you don't understand some of these details. I will  
be happy to respond. The bottom line issue is that the commons and  
sustainability will be vastly better served by a fiat, asset based(aka  
debt/credit free) currency issued by a sovereign government. At least she  
has some content that points in the right direction, but then she also has  
significant content that ends being poorly informed and even likely to  
have a major net negative impact. There also seems to be no implied or  
actual analysis of how the globalized,centralized, privatized banking  
conventions have produced the current melt down. I half expected her to  
also advocate for further deregulation of the privatized currency commons.

as we go, Tadit Anderson

	







On Wed, 21 Sep 2011 07:27:05 -0400, robert searle <dharao4 at yahoo.co.uk>  
wrote:

>  People are at long last waking up....to a more intelligent approach to  
> financing......There is hope yet for humanity...!!
>   http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UMEsWxrnAY4
>  RS.