LPACTV: The Constitutionality of the National Bank

[Hadith03]

Bringing a Knife to a Gun Fight. YOU'RE DEAD

.

BRING A BANK TO A BANK FIGHT

.

[bosstrav]

Wow, what a bunch of elitist propaganda. The only president to pay off the national debt a traitor? what bullshit. Jackson was one of the biggest patriots in US history. End the Fed

[fallfly1]

wow man! what a revision of history! do you work for obama?

[Zamolxx]

Fiat money is not essential for large countries, nor is it always used. An economy may function on credit money which is not fiat money, such as United States paper currency during periods prior to 1862, before the first United States Notes were created and declared by the government to be legal tender.

[Tressco]

"It is well enough that people of the nation do not understand our banking and monetary system, for if they did, I believe there would be a revolution before tomorrow morning."

- Henry Ford

"The issue which has swept down the centuries and which will have to be fought sooner or later is the people versus the banks."

- Lord Acton

[Zamolxx]

Our problem is, that the state apparatus is undermined by oligarchs and private interests have too much influence on the currencies. Competition is productive, monopolies are not, quite the opposite, that's why the market requires government intervention, I'm not a libertarian nor am I a central planner. I favor an progressive social liberal technocracy, and I advocate universal healthcare and universal employment along side the right to bare arms, only rifles ang guns ONLY WITH...

[Zamolxx]

... a high standard of education! And when I say guns, I mean pistols no automated and no smgs.

[Zamolxx]

If/after the crisis when the world adopts the international hamiltonian credit system, money can be issued without interest.

[daniel987878]

If LPAC is so concerned about people in positions of power helping their banking cronies in regional banks why advocate a national bank which is the ultimate power for government to be corrupt with? Marx also proposed the creation of a national central bank in the communist manifesto.

[daniel987878]

A national bank is no good. The best system IMO is one where no commercial bank or agency of government can expand the money supply. If the money supply is fixed at an arbitrary level new lending can only emerge from savings. These savings will not go into malinvestment (derivatives, etc) because depositors stand to lose. Money in this instance will only be directed toward productive activities.

[Zamolxx]

For the US to stay above this crisis needs a national bank. LaRouche explained what needs to be done with the poison of the federal reserve, and eliminate gambling debt. Investments in infrastructure, agriculture and industry cannot be made by savings, but by a credit system. The nominal interest rate has to be 4%, the money supply must reflect in the real growth of an economy, and the state can engage investments with long term fixed 1-2% interest rate.

[daniel987878]

The current system doesnt allow the accumulation of savings because economic policy is oriented towards offshoring and competing along minimal labor costs. Therefore insufficient domestic income due to lack of domestic production means insufficient funds to support investment. In the current system we need inflation by expanding credit to sustain an economy which is constantly contracting its internal monetary base from the trade deficits.

[daniel987878]

The nominal interest rate has to be determined by the individuals involved in a competitive market place whereby the interest rate is set according to the demand/supply of capital.

The money supply must be fixed as it is only a unit of account. Focusing on money is missing the point. The focus needs to be on productivity, competition, sustainability, innovation, living standards, the greater good, cooperation, etc...

[Zamolxx]

You won't have competition alongside globalization and free trade. Fractious reserve banking is not the same as the hamiltonian concept of a national bank. Lincoln developed the USA under a national bank, and that development was outstanding. Every country should have a national bank, that will ensure the sovereignty of the people's over the interests of oligarchical financeers. The EU central bank is the enemy of the countries of Europe.

[daniel987878]

The best way to deal with the monetary issue is to neutralise it. Prohibit the creation of money by anyone. The money stock should be maintained but not altered.

A national bank doesnt ensure a people sovereignty it ensures that the government has alot of power. The central government planners will be hard pressed to best decide the optimal investment policy or other related functions of such a bank. Too few people are making decisions for the many and also too much power can corrupt.

[daniel987878]

The system you propose is better than what is currently in place around the world but it is not optimal.

Under this national bank system maybe the international oligarchs would be threatened but in order for the greater good to prevail power needs to be in the individuals hands and not government bureaucrats.

You can have competition with globalised free trade it is actually the best arrangement. It aint working now because of fiat money.

I agree all central banks are the enemy.

[Zamolxx]

For countries in the third world, free trade is a death sentence for autohtone production, and for jobs. Look at Mexico, look at what happened to their farmers as a result of the free trade deal between them and the US. Globalization is imperialism, and I'm tired of that my country suffered a lot from Otoman, Russian, German, and now EU imperialism. The states are no longer sovereign especially under the monetarist financial system. 90% of all central banks work independent of government.

[daniel987878]

Globalisation isn't the problem. The problem is managed trade (NAFTA, WTO) which supports corporatism. Africa is raped by international corporations that are financed by the banking cartel connected to the central banks. With this cheap money the corporations control the governments in these poor countries, keep people marginalised and obstruct any competitive productive forces by enforcing barriers to entry. The answer is free trade and competition not central planning/banking.

[Zamolxx]

Free trade was the problem in the colonial age and still is a problem. I'm against supernational institutions, like NAFTA and WTO. Trade between states must be regulated by governments between each other. Great people like Solon, Plato, Marcus Aurelius and others tried to change plutocracies with republics and fought for the right of decision of the masses in the voting process. Why go back? Why support monetarism?

[daniel987878]

You support monetarism by proposing a national bank and I'm against it when I say that no entitiy or person should create money. Kill the money issue, take power away from speculators, manipulators and governments.

You need regulations though. You need to regulate a marketplace so that the basis of competition is productive and sustainable. These regulations should be minimal and focus on things where the market fails like environmental management.

[Zamolxx]

I take it from this post that you're an environmentalist anarcho-capitalist. If this is the case, than we view things differently and use different measurements for common "values". I salute you for your comments and good intention ;)

[daniel987878]

Im not environmentalist but obviously the environment needs to be managed like any other resource in order to maintain it. Im not anarcho because I believe in Government but only limited/small government. Let the gov do what it is good at and let the marketplace do what it best performs also. I am a capitalist though which means that people should have the right to privately own things.

Its been good talking to you too, have a nice day.