Re: Interest payment is not the problem
Thomas Hedin refers to debt-based currency and opposes it to ‘checking-account ‘money.
I’m not quite sure what you’re saying here. Are you trying to say that you disagree with me or agree with me on the fact that checking account money and currency are two totally and completely different things?
In fact government-created money, which includes both notes and coin and the reserves held by banks with the Fed, is in effect just as much debt-created as the rest of it.
I partially agree here, that the Fed notes printed by the government and the Coins are only moved into circulation as a debt, but where I disagree is that government creates money, because the government creates no money at all. The actual creation of money always involves an extension of credit by a private commerical bank.
The only money that is not debt-money is commodity money, whose value is exactly given by its intrinsic properties.
The only money that is not debt money is wealth money. Commodity money can either be debt money or wealth money. It all just depends on how it moves into circulation. If it is spent into circulation it would represent wealth. If it is loaned into ciculation it would represent debt.
The other point I would make about getting ‘the problem with money’ wrong, is that it puts the blame for current problems in the wrong place. If we think that a debt-based monetary system is fraudulent and self-destructive in itself, then we tend to think it is the government and ourselves (for believing them) who are at fault. In fact, the real culprits are a wealthy elite that have captured the banks and the corporations that are the beneficiaries of most loans (directly or indirectly), and have made a perfectly workable system into a tool for their own greed and recklessness.
Basically I agree.
If we want a system in which sophisticated goods and services continue to be produced, then there has to be some way in which future production potential can be ‘securitised’, whether in the non-specific form of money or in some more specific way involving multilateral barter.
How about we apply the benifits of barter to a medium of exchange?
If we are going to continue to use a money system, then we certainly will see the winding down of a lot of current debt – not because the money doesn’t exist, but because the debtors have no realistic chance of accessing it.
There is no question that the money does not exsist to pay off the debt. The idea that the debt can be paid is a complete lie.
Along with that, we need to ‘socialise’ banking in some (preferably decentralised) way that marries the issue of debt and money with real human welfare enhancement.
We can all clearly see that having money created as a debt gives the illusion of greater human proserity but real world life experience proves this to be untrue. A debt money system always drives increasing money shortages for the bulk of the people, and an ever decreasing standard of living. Though it’s true we may accumulate more pyhsical wealth, this only comes at the expense of the people going deeper into debt.
We do not need to socialise the banking system, what we need to do is switch the money system over to a wealth based money system that represents the peoples production with no debt. This would give the producers the benifits of their production without having to in time turn over everything they own to a fraudulent banking system.