Minnesota has a finacial solution!

13 posts / 0 new
Last post
Thomas Hedin's picture
Thomas Hedin
Status: Platinum Member (Offline)
Joined: Jan 28 2009
Posts: 815
Minnesota has a finacial solution!

Another installment straight from monetary architech himself!

 

 part 1

 part 2

 part 3

 

It takes awhile to watch all three but it's worth the watch.

mcafeejs's picture
mcafeejs
Status: Bronze Member (Offline)
Joined: Sep 22 2008
Posts: 34
Re: Minnesota has a finacial solution!

Great idea. Thanks for sharing.  He doesn't mention that adding to the money supply is inflationary but in theory the increase in efficiency with the project should be deflationary enough to provide price stability.  Regardless it certainly is better than the boom - bust fraud system currently in place.

DrKrbyLuv's picture
DrKrbyLuv
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Aug 10 2008
Posts: 1995
Re: Minnesota has a finacial solution!

Thomas Hedin - haven't seen you around for awhile, good to see you back.  This is a great idea, we talked about this before.  Do you know what the status of the bill is?

mcafeejs said:

He doesn't mention that adding to the money supply is inflationary but in theory the increase in efficiency with the project should be deflationary enough to provide price stability. 

Heres what Ellen Brown (Web of Debt) said: 

The argument against this creative approach is that it would be inflationary, but would it? Inflation results when "demand" (money) increases faster than "supply" (goods and services); and in this case goods and services would be increasing along with the money available to spend, keeping the money supply in balance and prices stable. In fact, it is the lending of money created out of thin air that is inflationary, because banks create the principal but not the interest necessary to pay back their loans. Additional loans must therefore continually be taken out just to service the "money" (or debt) that is already in the money supply; and this newly-created money goes into the pockets of middlemen rather than contributing to the productivity of the community. "Demand" (money) thus goes up without a corresponding increase in "supply," creating price inflation.

Interesting stuff!

Larry

EndGamePlayer's picture
EndGamePlayer
Status: Platinum Member (Offline)
Joined: Sep 2 2008
Posts: 546
Not that nut

I like the creation of asset money and then he talks about the transit system this is suppose to fund first - That is just NUTZ.

I think we have bigger bears to wrestle. . like energy for farming when the oil runs out. What's a personal transit system going to do? take us to food?

He should have stopped on Part 2

EGP

crazyhorse's picture
crazyhorse
Status: Bronze Member (Offline)
Joined: Nov 16 2008
Posts: 56
Re: Minnesota has a financial solution

I agree that this proposed system is very interesting.  It does seem to be a bit inflationary to me.  What would stop some local officials who desire constant job growth from building multi-lane superhighways along county roads?  I think it could work if there were limits to what standards one could design to given a roadways classification (traffic flow) and how often a stretch of road or bridge could be worked on.  Building material prices would still rise substantially, though.

Being from the transportation field myself, there are a few particulars that probably need ironed out.  The bill calls for creation of the money for the project from the winning Contractor's low bid.  How do the engineers and planning people get paid?  If the amount of the project for construction is monetized only, there would be no money for engineering/planning or real estate purchases.  Would this created money account for utility reimbursement for moving their facilities?  On most all construction projects there are unanticipated expenses that occur in the field that the Contractor would need reimbursed for (change orders).  The Minnesota bill does not address how those costs would be covered.

I agree with EndGamePlayer that the intelligent transportation system is a poison pill in this legislation.  I watched the short cgi video of the proposed system and immediately had the following questions: 

What happens when one of the pods breaks down?  There doesn't seem to be a system in place for rerouting traffic.

What happens when someone under the influence throws up/soils/vandalizes one of the pods.  It looks like you don't have a choice in which pod you get to ride in as its first come first served.

If someone wanted this to succeed, the pilot project would have been a run of the mill simple roadway section or bridge.  The pod shuttle service is a pipe dream.

Thomas Hedin's picture
Thomas Hedin
Status: Platinum Member (Offline)
Joined: Jan 28 2009
Posts: 815
Re: Minnesota has a finacial solution!

Thomas Hedin - haven't seen you around for awhile, good to see you back.  This is a great idea, we talked about this before.  Do you know what the status of the bill is?

Yeah I've been getting ready to launch my radio show(this sunday) and start selling the Byron's new book 'Modern Money Secrets". 

The status of the bill is...it's just sitting there because the house and senate are out of session.  We didn't push for it to go into hearings because it still lacks the support and if they kill it then we don't have a bill to work off of.  If you want to check out my new website(it's completely in the birthing stage) go to http://www.themoneytalkshow.com

Heres what Ellen Brown (Web of Debt) said: 

The argument against this creative approach is that it would be inflationary, but would it? Inflation results when "demand" (money) increases faster than "supply" (goods and services); and in this case goods and services would be increasing along with the money available to spend, keeping the money supply in balance and prices stable. In fact, it is the lending of money created out of thin air that is inflationary, because banks create the principal but not the interest necessary to pay back their loans. Additional loans must therefore continually be taken out just to service the "money" (or debt) that is already in the money supply; and this newly-created money goes into the pockets of middlemen rather than contributing to the productivity of the community. "Demand" (money) thus goes up without a corresponding increase in "supply," creating price inflation.

I'm sorry but I feel that Ellen Brown is wrong about the cause of price inflation.

Please watch this two part video Byron and I put together.

 part 1

 part 2

 

Have I missed anything good on this website?

 

 

DrKrbyLuv's picture
DrKrbyLuv
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Aug 10 2008
Posts: 1995
Re: Minnesota has a finacial solution!

EndGamePlayer & crazyhorse,

I agree, if the program is good, why limit to "Transportation" projects?  Let me take a stab at answering, I'm sure Thomas will be able to correct any mistakes that I might make.  You may remember the bridge that collapsed in Minnesota alerted the state to the fact that many of it's bridges were no longer safe.  They decided to fix the bridges through legislation but ultimately, could not afford the program - the bill was vetoed.

There was great concern in Minnesota because studies indicated their bridges and roads were becoming unsafe.  Byron Dale, and his group, stepped forward with a plan to fund the work while reducing taxes.  This opportunity, as I see it, is the proverbial "foot in the door," if this bill goes through as written, rest assured it's success will go viral both in scope and number of states adopting such programs.

EndGamePlayer said:  How do the engineers and planning people get paid?  If the amount of the project for construction is monetized only, there would be no money for engineering/planning or real estate purchases.  Would this created money account for utility reimbursement for moving their facilities?  On most all construction projects there are unanticipated expenses that occur in the field that the Contractor would need reimbursed for (change orders).  The Minnesota bill does not address how those costs would be covered.

My understanding is that they will have two approaches available.  First, they may break a project into multiple contracts with bidding on the various aspects such as design, construction, demolition, iron workers, electricians, etc.  They may also take "design & build" bids that may partner designers with contractors, etc, for a delivered price.

Change orders are unfortunately, a way of life in large projects.  I suspect that they would use a state guardians office to review all change orders and to fund them as needed.

Larry

EndGamePlayer's picture
EndGamePlayer
Status: Platinum Member (Offline)
Joined: Sep 2 2008
Posts: 546
Asset Money instead of Debt Money

IF asset money could be implemented - of course, why should it be used on a grand public transportation scheme? That would have to be a last resort to fund - so many other areas need the asset dollars!

Why not use it for national health care, or social programs that put people back to work or education of welfare recipients, or how about programs for disabled and challenged? or help to disadvantaged kids? How about making all homes in the U.S. energy efficient - regardless of income? Same for public buildings.

There are 100s of programs -  like funding state parks (they too would be "held in trust for the people") libraries, fire departments, police, public schools, local sources of wind, solar energy and bike transportation and locally produced food to secure out nation food system. We need to get ready for the future - not pad this guy's pockets.

Pilot that program Govenor!

EGP

Thomas Hedin's picture
Thomas Hedin
Status: Platinum Member (Offline)
Joined: Jan 28 2009
Posts: 815
Re: Minnesota has a finacial solution!

The reason we feel it should be limited to transportation projects is because we lack any interest in making any single person rich and everyone can benifit from an upgraded transportation system.  Plus the constitution states that the congress shall Coin(create) the money and provide for post roads.  How about we stick to the constitution and combine the two?

 

In other words, if we only SPENT (we only lend money into circulation right now) money into circulation for war, all we would have is perpetual war.  Or if we only spent it in on creating food only the food producers(mainly big corporate farms) would get the benifit.  Or if we spent it in on prisons then what kind of a police state are we going to live in?  I've never been to jail, but I can pretty much assure you that I wouldn't enjoy being in jail/prison. 

If we spend it in through transportation, the money is spent in uniformly throughout the state to the producers of the roads (road workers) where they could spend it into circulation throughout the state benifiting everyone.  It also gets spent into the people who actually drive our economy.  Another thing people don't realize about the scope of our bill is that it is going to upgrade our roads with the most modern technology that the mind can think of.  We are using a transportation system that is easily 75 years behind the times. 

The question if we are going to spend money into circulation how would we do it where it benifits everyone and harms no one? 

 

 

When it comes to change orders, buffer funds(could also be called maintenance funding) could just be written into the contract.  Then after that money was spent a new project ID would be created along with the new money, and terms of that contract.  Creating a contract for funding is a fairly simple process.

 

crazyhorse's picture
crazyhorse
Status: Bronze Member (Offline)
Joined: Nov 16 2008
Posts: 56
Re: Minnesota has a finacial solution!

Plus the constitution states that the congress shall Coin(create) the money and provide for post roads.  How about we stick to the constitution and combine the two?

This brings up another question: Is this bill Constitutional?  The Constitution clearly states that the US Congress shall have the power to coin money and provide for post roads.  Is the monetizing of transportation projects considered creating "money" or bill of credit, and therefore delegated as a power only given to the federal government?  Section 10 of Article I in the Constitution states:

Section 10. No state shall enter into any treaty, alliance, or confederation; grant letters of marque and reprisal; coin money; emit bills of credit; make anything but gold and silver coin a tender in payment of debts; pass any bill of attainder, ex post facto law, or law impairing the obligation of contracts, or grant any title of nobility.

Please understand that I am not trying to criticize  the plan, (In fact I am pretty enthusiastic about it) just curious and asking questions.

 

Thomas Hedin's picture
Thomas Hedin
Status: Platinum Member (Offline)
Joined: Jan 28 2009
Posts: 815
Re: Minnesota has a finacial solution!

Crayzhorse,

I understand your concern and it is a very good question.

Is the bill constitutional?  Yes.....believe me we've done every last bit of research as to it's constitutionality.

Section 10 does apply to the states yes, and it bars them from coining money or emiting bills of credit BUT (and here is the key) we aren't having the state coin any money or emit and bills of credit.  The state of minnesota would regulate the state chartered banks(just like any other business) into creating money to fund the infrastructure. 

I do believe that this should be done at the federal level though.

DrKrbyLuv's picture
DrKrbyLuv
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Aug 10 2008
Posts: 1995
Re: Minnesota has a finacial solution!

crazyhorse said:  This brings up another question: Is this bill Constitutional?  The Constitution clearly states that the US Congress shall have the power to coin money and provide for post roads.  Is the monetizing of transportation projects considered creating "money" or bill of credit, and therefore delegated as a power only given to the federal government?

I can't comment on it myself, but I can tell you what Ellen Brown said about your concern:

But is it Constitutional?

These governments could create the money they needed because they were sovereign entities, but what about individual States governed by a federal Constitution? In the United States, the U.S. Constitution controls. But that august document says very little about the creation of money – so little that banks have stepped in and taken over the business by default. Here are the sole Constitutional provisions directly addressing the creation of money:

Article I, Section 8, Clause 5: The Congress shall have Power...To coin Money, regulate the Value thereof, and of foreign Coin, and fix the Standard of Weights and Measures.

Article I, Section 10, Clause 1: No State shall...coin Money; emit Bills of Credit; make any Thing but gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debt.

Congress has been given the power to coin money, but minting coins is not the same thing as issuing paper money, checkbook money, accounting-entry money, or electronic money – the forms of money used most often today. Arguably, "to coin" money was an archaic way of saying "to create" money, but then what is to be made of the clause stating, "No state shall . . . make any Thing but gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debt"? "Coin" here clearly means precious metal coins, period.

That clause is interesting for another reason: when was the last time you heard of a State paying its debts in gold or silver coin? States routinely pay their debts with the bank-created accounting-entry money that now composes over 97 percent of the U.S. money supply (M3), and that form of money is omitted from the Constitution altogether. The States therefore violate the Constitution every day, something they must do if they are to pay their debts at all, since gold and silver coins are no longer in general circulation. The Constitution obviously needs to be amended to suit the times. Meanwhile, the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution (part of the Bill of Rights) provides:

X - Rights of the States under Constitution: The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

Creating checkbook money is not specifically delegated to the United States, so it must be delegated to the States, unless it is specifically prohibited to them. What about the provision that "No State shall . . . emit Bills of Credit"? According to "the 'Lectric Law Library," "bills of credit are declared to mean promissory notes . . . . Bills of credit may be defined to be paper issued and intended to circulate through the community for its ordinary purposes as money redeemable at a future day." Bills of credit are promises to pay later rather than what is being discussed here: checkbook money issued as "legal tender" – the sort of dollars banks issue every day when they make commercial loans. The Constitution does not say who is authorized to issue this sort of money – whether in paper, electronic or accounting-entry form – so under the Tenth Amendment, this right is reserved to the States and to the People.

As the credit crisis deepens and exposes the inability of the existing banking structure to meet the public's needs, creative funding plans similar to the proposed MTA could be popping up in communities around the country.

Larry

EndGamePlayer's picture
EndGamePlayer
Status: Platinum Member (Offline)
Joined: Sep 2 2008
Posts: 546
How would an individual Create Asset Money?

So if Asset Money can be "created" by a governmet (as in the MN video), how can an individual "create" asset money?

Wouldn't it be like- if I had a tomato seed I paid $1 for, and it grew into a plant that I harvested 100 tomatos & sold for $1 each - would that be asset money creation? Or, because the money had to come to me as a government printed dollar - is it not created money? Same goes for gold if I bought at $x and sold it at $4x, then is the result asset money creation?

So the basis of future survival in the future would then to be able to create asset money - or am I missing something? Can money not be created by each person via their skills, resources or information?

EGP

 

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Login or Register to post comments