State Owned Banks: Fixing the Economy by Ellen Hodgson Brown

Ellen Hodgson Brown explains the rationale behind state owned banks. Due to the collapsing credit bubble which in turned popped the housing bubble, leading to recession, and perhaps, economic depression, there is not enough money and credit to keep the economy running. Three possible solutions are that the federal government issue debt-free money directly, that communities create alternate or community complementary currencies, or that a state create its own state owned bank, similar to the Bank of North Dakota. For example, a state owned bank in Michigan could provide credit to the state itself for infrastructure projects, help provide the capital for local banks, so they could in turn provide low interest loans to home owners, small and medium sized businesses, and students. In addition, a state owned bank could be used to help fund state expenses during tough times by providing loans. A major advantage of a state owned bank is that the state could borrow money from the bank at zero interest, for projects, saving between 50% and 100% of the cost of the project, since there would be no interest burden when repaying the loan. For Michigan, California, Florida, and other states looking to solve their economic problems, the state owned bank model, and the Bank of North Dakota in particular, should be studied in depth, as such a bank could provide the credit needed within that state economy during depressions and other tough economic times. Thanks to Local Future for producing this video.

Category:

News & Politics

Tags:

• bank
• banking
• state
• owned
• money
• credit
• debt
• North
• Dakota
• NorthDakota
• recession
• depression
• economy
• deflation
• Ellen
• Hodgson
• Brown
• economics
• documentary
• educational
• Michigan
• inflation

[Warzoooooo]

It seems like Ellen does not understand the basic of the economy. Money is not the economy, it's the resources that makes the economy. So if you just dump alot of money in the market, money will loose value and soo ppl will not be able to buy anything again. But mean while, while money is made easily available ppl will do foolish things with them, and spend them quickly and the economy will be in even worse shape.

[newculture]

@Warzoooooo -- There are many ways to look at the economy. At the moment, it is spending. People are spending less than in 2006, less than in 2007, less than in 2008, less than in 2009, and every month they are spending less, as a whole.

Money must be spent to be earned by businesses, state and local governments, and, ultimately, by people again.

Her proposal is to increase spending when the people are unwilling, or unable to do so. I invite you to listen again.

[Warzoooooo]

@newculture But increased spending is not the cure for the economy. That's the reason why its bad. As with physic, there is also only one rule that apply for economy. Its not the spending that makes the economy, its the production. But with wastfull spending there is no room for productivity.

There is no use in earning money if they do not buy you anything. Ask anyone in zimbabwe. They tried to create money to get ppl spending, and look at where they are now.

[newculture]

@Warzoooooo The economy is bad because the entire economic model is unsustainable. It would take a different economic model to prevent it from getting bad like this.

Ellen is proposing that people be put to productive use, building wind turbines or solar panels or weatherizing homes or growing food or anything that is productive.

With out the spending, there is no possible way for people to earn the money to live.

[patarbab]

Sounds like a secessionist plan

[newculture]

@patarbab LOL, that's pretty funny, I've never thought of North Dakotans as "secessionists", lol. Keep in mind that the federal government only reserves the right to make coins, "to coin money". Since it says nothing about "issuing credit", this is a state's right.

[RAMB0IV]

@TheSwissRepublic

The monetary system is far from perfect. Money should be only a means of exchange not a product what benefits the banks. There wouldn't be any crisis if we would reform the money system. When the entire system is based on debt the system will become eventually unsustainable because of the rising interest. As the amount spent on interest rises so do taxes. It's a huge pyramid scam where the big banks keep growing at the expense of others.

[RAMB0IV]

@Warzoooooo

Has it occurred to you that the people actually form the government? That's why people all over the world should revolt and demand new set of rules, because the ones we have right now are not working. Politicians care about money and in their idiocy and greed they try to please the bankers.

I understand what you are saying with no welfare, but in modern urban condition it is impossible for everyone to get a job. Without job you cannot get money, without money no food, no roof.

[Warzoooooo]

@RAMB0IV Govt like to make the voters think they can get something for nothing. While that is impossible, you can give if you steal from others. And the best way of stealing is through inflation, as only 1 in a million understands how that works. So chance to get caught is slim to non. And in many western countries politicians have an enormous wage, that they like to keep. As they could not find a job that well paid in the private market. If there were savings, money would not have to be printed

[RAMB0IV]

@Warzoooooo

Why is the government worse option to print money than the private banks? Everyone tries this ridiculous argument, that if governments issue money they will cause hyperinflation! All you basically do is change the printer and save money. There is no reason to assume that government would do worse than the speculating bankers.

[Warzoooooo]

@RAMB0IV Govt. would spend even faster if they didn't have to account the spending to a credit account. So even though the problems would not be the exact same, the total problems for the society would still remain.

Banks now they get bailed out, because ppl vote for politicians that promise to redistribute wealth.

[Warzoooooo]

@RAMB0IV The problem is not that banks are privet, but that they are allowed to do things other ppl are not allowed to do, that is create money from thin air.

Profit comes from making more than you put in. In order to survive, any specie have to make "profit" by getting more energy from the food they eat than it takes to get that food. In the economy, before the time of over trust in govt. the most common way to make profit was actually thing ppl were willing to pay for.

[RAMB0IV]

@Warzoooooo

You forget that the government doesn't control the banks at the moment. The banks are their own entities and do what they please. Banks job is to make profit and profit cannot be made without someones loss and usually banks get too greedy and need to get bailed out.

I don't see this scenario happening if the government controlled it's own money. The bankers take risks because they know that they will get bailed out if something goes wrong. Current system is horrible for the people

[Warzoooooo]

@RAMB0IV Govt dont care about growth. Otherwise they would not tax creative ppl, and subsidise failing companies. Look at europe yes, where it is politicians bailing out the banks, not the free market. They can still retrieve their bonus because politicians keep feeding the taxpayers money, in hop for growth.

A video that explains difference between govt jobs and market jobs.

search for "Government Spending Doesn't Create Jobs"

[RAMB0IV]

@Warzoooooo

Governments interest is growth, true growth. You cannot get real growth from creating bubbles. Banks are not accountable for anyone, just look at Europe today, we are bailing out banks who created the crisis and the people have to pay the bill. No banker has been fired over this, they have gotten huge bonuses instead.

The problem is corruption. According to a study banks are responsible for 60 - 70% for all the campaign support for politicians in Europe, probably more in USA.

[Warzoooooo]

@RAMB0IV Govt if any have all the reason to distorting the market. As thats what makes ppl ask for govt help. At which point highly paid bureaucratic jobbs are created for highly paid politicians friends.

If govt didnt get bonuses from the housebubble, why did they make the foundation for the bubble then?

Bankers can only not get fired if govt secure them with other ppls money. Banks are accountable to the govt. and the govt has proven their way of making money. Govt care about re-election!!!