Power of Story
Send a Tweet        
- Advertisement -

Share on Google Plus Share on Twitter 3 Share on Facebook Share on LinkedIn Share on PInterest 1 Share on Fark! 1 Share on Reddit 2 Share on StumbleUpon 1 Tell A Friend 1 (9 Shares)  

Printer Friendly Page Save As Favorite View Favorites (# of views)   74 comments, 3 series
OpEdNews Op Eds

The Flip Side of Debt Free Money

By   Follow Me on Twitter     Message Scott Baker     Permalink
      (Page 1 of 4 pages)
Related Topic(s): ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; (more...) ; ; ; , Add Tags  (less...) Add to My Group(s)

Well Said 4   Must Read 3   Supported 2  
View Ratings | Rate It

opednews.com Headlined to H4 7/15/14

Become a Fan
  (81 fans)

Is there a Money Tree? Does it need nurturing?
(Image by Global Economic Intersection)
  Permission   Details   DMCA
- Advertisement -
p>

Reprinted from econintersect.com

Randy Wray's article - Debt-Free Money: A Non-Sequitur in Search of A Policy - which I can't help thinking was at least partly inspired by a monetary reform offline email conversation we had for a few days before this first came out on the New Economic Perspectives blog - points out the main shortcomings of debt-free money from the U.K's Positive Money group and the American Monetary Institute here in the U.S. (though he doesn't name this second NGO).

- Advertisement -

Follow up:

He and Ann Pettifor are right to worry that credit will be so constrained if restricted to what banks actually have on deposit (in which case, it might rightly not be called "credit" at all, but just lending-what-you-have) that growth would be throttled before it started.

He is also right to worry about over-centralization and about a Monetary Authority (as the AMI calls it) turning out to be either

- Advertisement -
  • (A) Just the Federal Reserve by another name; or

  • (B) A truly independent body so immune to outside pressure that it does not provide the economy with funds even when they are needed.

I don't know which is worse, though I suspect Wray, who believes the Fed is part of government already, would say B.

There are, however, other options which allow for true government issuance of money, yet are also independent of out-of-thin-air credit-money creation by banks, but with restrictions to prevent the destabilizing excesses that recur over and over, and lately each resulting in a larger crisis than the last (e.g. the S&L crisis was smaller than the 2008 credit crisis, etc. going backwards).

To set the stage, let's stipulate three virtues of any economic system:

  1. Simplicity - this may seem strange to economists, who seem to live for complexity, but if we are ever to sell this to the public that elects its political leaders, it must be based on simple principles that most will understand.
  2. Decentralization - As Wray points out, the central government or even a special committee can't anticipate overall monetary needs of the economy. And even the perception that the new Monetary Authority is holding back productivity would stir resentment.
  3. Redundancy - some flexibility is needed to change sources of money, or credit, which Greenbackers like me, Stephen Zarlenga, Ellen Brown, Bill Still, etc. maintain is not the same thing, and Wray and MMT do not.

We have a trillion dollar output gap right now, according to the CBO, and we've had it since 2008. One can quibble over exact figures, but that misses the larger point. The banks are not producing money, so government must fill the gap. Wray and the Modern Monetary Theory folks and Greenbackers agree on that much.

- Advertisement -

I am a Greenbacker in the model of president Lincoln. Lincoln introduced the first federal form of paper money, the first Legal tender, in fact. It was $450m in 3 installments (1862-1863), a form of debt-free money. Yes, originally it was supposed to be redeemable in gold, but in reality that never happened, and by the end of its circulation (Treasury burned the last $239m in 1996), it was not even considered applicable to the national debt, according to the Treasury's own Debt Report, Table III:

That's why the government debt didn't decrease by $239m when the stock was burned. It was as if that money never existed. Talk about government waste!

But the important point is that government did, could, and does issue debt-free money all the time. Coins are an example. Stamps are another, though for limited uses. Neither of these can ever "run out" save for the lack of metal or paper in the world.

Next Page  1  |  2  |  3  |  4

 

- Advertisement -

Well Said 4   Must Read 3   Supported 2  
View Ratings | Rate It

http://newthinking.blogspot.com/

Scott Baker is a Managing Editor & The Economics Editor at Opednews, and a blogger for Huffington Post, Daily Kos, and Global Economic Intersection.

His anthology of updated Opednews articles "America is Not Broke" was published by Tayen Lane Publishing (March, 2015) and may be found here:
http://www.americaisnotbroke.net/

Scott is a former President of Common Ground-NYC (http://commongroundnyc.org/), a Geoist/Georgist activist group. He has written dozens of articles for (more...)
 

Share on Google Plus Submit to Twitter Add this Page to Facebook! Share on LinkedIn Pin It! Add this Page to Fark! Submit to Reddit Submit to Stumble Upon



Go To Commenting
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this website or its editors.

Follow Me on Twitter

Contact AuthorContact Author Contact EditorContact Editor Author PageView Authors' Articles
- Advertisement -

Most Popular Articles by this Author:     (View All Most Popular Articles by this Author)

Obama Explains the FEMA Camps

Was Malaysian Flight MH370 Landed Safely in Afghanistan?

Let the Sun Shine on a State Bank in Florida

Batman, The Dark Knight Rises...and Occupy Wall Street Falls

The Least Productive People in the World

Detroit is Not Broke!