161 replies to this topic

[Br Cornelius]

acidhead, on 30 September 2012 - 08:14 AM, said:

yes.. and I'm also okay with them going bankrupt if loans aren't repaid

That is where we would differ then. I believe that the money supply should be free of interest - but banks should be able to lend money at interest. I do not however believe that they should be able to lend money on a fractional basis (that is create money by creating debt).

And I couldn't disagree with banks going to the wall if they made bad loans - but that is hardly relevant to a discussion of the Gold Standard.

Br Cornelius

Edited by Br Cornelius, 30 September 2012 - 08:21 AM.

[Mr Right Wing]

Br Cornelius, on 30 September 2012 - 08:19 AM, said:

That is where we would differ then. I believe that the money supply should be free of interest - but banks should be able to lend money at interest. I do not however believe that they should be able to lend money on a fractional basis (that is create money by creating debt).

And I couldn't disagree with banks going to the wall if they made bad loans - but that is hardly relevant to a discussion of the Gold Standard.

Br Cornelius

I could fix the economic problems in 5 mins -
1. Create a new state bank.
2. Have a new round of quantitive easing but hand all the new money to the state bank.
3. The state bank buys the debts of other banks.
4. The state bank goes bust wiping the debt out.

Not exactly rocket science.

[Karlis]

Mr Right Wing, on 30 September 2012 - 12:04 PM, said:

I could fix the economic problems in 5 mins -
1. Create a new state bank.
2. Have a new round of quantitive easing but hand all the new money to the state bank.
3. The state bank buys the debts of other banks.
4. The state bank goes bust wiping the debt out.

Not exactly rocket science.

What is *the Rule* in coining money, in the US Constitution?

[Little Fish]

Mr Right Wing, on 30 September 2012 - 12:04 PM, said:

I could fix the economic problems in 5 mins -
1. Create a new state bank.
2. Have a new round of quantitive easing but hand all the new money to the state bank.
3. The state bank buys the debts of other banks.
4. The state bank goes bust wiping the debt out.

Not exactly rocket science.

why don't you just let the private banks go bust instead. and create a state bank (or federal bank controlled by congress) at the same time.

why should a public institution "buy" the debt of private companies? where is the incentive for them NOT to create the same mess again?

Edited by Little Fish, 30 September 2012 - 12:58 PM.

[Karlis]

Little Fish, on 30 September 2012 - 12:54 PM, said:

why don't you just let the private banks go bust instead. and create a state bank (or federal bank controlled by congress) at the same time.

why should a public institution "buy" the debt of private companies? where is the incentive for them NOT to create the same mess again?

As I see it, the following suggestion could possibly (???) be the aim of the *Money Controllers* to collapse the world financial system, with the aim of introducing a "New Global Money System".

Quote

Have a new round of quantitive easing but hand all the new money to the state bank.

Result? A new "World Order" controls Global Finance?

Just a thought,
Karlis

[Br Cornelius]

Karlis, on 30 September 2012 - 01:28 PM, said:

As I see it, the following suggestion could possibly (???) be the aim of the *Money Controllers* to collapse the world financial system, with the aim of introducing a "New Global Money System".

Result? A new "World Order" controls Global Finance?

Just a thought,
Karlis

Just to play the devils advocate - what is intrinsically wrong with a single global currency system - afterall it is the instabilities in international trade brought about by multiple competing currencies which have caused the current problems. Also, though they may not realise it, the Gold standard flunkies are advocating exactly the same thing

Br Cornelius

[Karlis]

Br Cornelius, on 30 September 2012 - 02:10 PM, said:

Just to play the devils advocate - what is intrinsically wrong with a single global currency system - ...




.... Also, though they may not realise it, the Gold standard flunkies are advocating exactly the same thing

Br Cornelius

Nothing wrong with that, imo; *if* human nature to control power is not involved in the equation.

[Mr Right Wing]

Little Fish, on 30 September 2012 - 12:54 PM, said:

1. why don't you just let the private banks go bust instead.
2. create a state bank (or federal bank controlled by congress) at the same time.
3. why should a public institution "buy" the debt of private companies.
4. where is the incentive for them NOT to create the same mess again?

1. What would happen to the finances in business accounts? It would cause the worse recession in history.
2. Banks need free enterprise to generate maximum profits and government meddling to be kept at its minimum.
3. The state bank is just a temporary measure. Its created to aborb bank debts then ceases trading. As such all debt is made to disappear.
4. PLCs such as banks are subject to an external audit once a year. Auditors check no corrupt has gone on, they put in place the controls to prevent corruption and they assess risks of failure. It is very difficult for dodgy, risky practices to slip past the auditors unless the auditors arent up to their jobs or the government is applying pressure to them to make them turn a blind eye.

[Mr Right Wing]

Karlis, on 30 September 2012 - 12:52 PM, said:

What is *the Rule* in coining money, in the US Constitution?

I dont know I live in the UK and we are allowed to quantitive ease here.

[Karlis]

Mr Right Wing, on 30 September 2012 - 02:41 PM, said:

I dont know I live in the UK and we are allowed to quantitive ease here.

The USA Constitution *originally* made it clear as to how money was created by the Government.


The Congress shall have Power ...

To coin Money, regulate the Value thereof, and of foreign Coin, and fix the Standard of Weights and Measures;
Source

In other words -- the government, *not banks* were given authority to mint money.

[questionmark]

Karlis, on 30 September 2012 - 03:05 PM, said:

The USA Constitution *originally* made it clear as to how money was created by the Government.


The Congress shall have Power ...

To coin Money, regulate the Value thereof, and of foreign Coin, and fix the Standard of Weights and Measures;
Source

In other words -- the government, *not banks* were given authority to mint money.

And the government can delegate the tasks to whomever it chooses.

[Karlis]

questionmark, on 30 September 2012 - 03:12 PM, said:

And the government can delegate the tasks to whomever it chooses.

Your source/s for that comment?

[questionmark]

Karlis, on 30 September 2012 - 03:28 PM, said:

Your source/s for that comment?

Every law you know. The constitution says nowhere that the government cannot outsource its tasks, and has done so from road building to defense. The only limit is the legislative where the laws have to be made by elected representatives. The rest is quite irrelevant who does it as long as it is under the authority and supervision of the government. Money is no different.

[Karlis]

questionmark, on 30 September 2012 - 03:32 PM, said:

Every law you know. The constitution says nowhere that the government cannot outsource its tasks, and has done so from road building to defense. The only limit is the legislative where the laws have to be made by elected representatives. The rest is quite irrelevant who does it as long as it is under the authority and supervision of the government. Money is no different.

Questionmark, I am not a student of the US Constitution, so I hope someone else will come forward to answer your post.

Regards,
Karlis

[questionmark]

Karlis, on 30 September 2012 - 03:38 PM, said:

Questionmark, I am not a student of the US Constitution, so I hope someone else will come forward to answer your post.

Regards,
Karlis

I hope so too, but if you have been listening to Ron Paul it is no wonder that you think that the government is prohibited from delegating its tasks.