Comments 1 - 22 of 22 Search these comments
Imagine the weight necessary to lug 50% of the silver to the bank for a loan.
Why governments can't balance their books - EVER!
Without a radical reform of the monetary system, deficit spending and accumulation of public debts will continue to accelerate regardless of who is in power. The problem is systemic.
After weeks of polarizing debates, the US Senate just passed Donald Trump’s “One Big Beautiful Bill Act” with opinions split almost evenly among those who want it to pass and those who believe that it will push the United States closer to its ultime bankruptcy. Elon Musk has been one of the most vocal opponents of the bill. Earlier this week, he posted the chart of US Federal Debt from 1900 through 2020 with the caption, “When are they going to flatten this curve?”
Well, I can offer a qualified answer to that question: NEVER. The qualification: unless you enact a radical reform of the monetary system. Under the prevailing monetary system, no government can give up escalating debts and deficit spending. ...
The monetary system, in fact, predetermines the outcome with certainty: conservatives AND socialists will descend along a similar trajectory to the system’s ultimate collapse. Government sector of the economy will gradually displace more and more private enterprise, the government’s role will expand, along with debts and deficit spending. All these symptoms stem from an obscure economic effect called the deflationary gap. ...
Today, in many of the “capitalist” nations, government spending accounts for almost half of the GDP and in some cases significantly more. In the UK, the mothership of capitalism, the government's share of GDP is 44%. In France it's over 58%.
In the United States, for over a century now we've been treated to periodic reruns of the “debt ceiling” Kabuki theatre. When public debt reaches the “debt ceiling,” free-spending socialists call for more government spending and a raising of the debt ceiling. The conservatives enjoy grandstanding about fiscal conservatism and balancing budgets, but regardless of which side controls the Presidency or the Congress, for over a century now the debt ceiling has been raised every time. The only exceptions have been periods when the ceiling was simply ignored and the public debt continued its accelerating upward trajectory...
Averting depressions and achieving economic growth necessitates government intervention and guarantees an accelerating rise in deficit spending with the corresponding rise in public debt regardless of whether we are talking about a “capitalist” or a “socialist” economy. This should be obvious, as the evolution of public debt in the U.S. illustrates...
There’s no point railing against “socialism” and dreaming about a small government, private capital utopia which doesn't, and cannot exist so long as our economies are based on fiat currencies with fractional reserve lending. Even if we start with zero public debt, the pursuit of economic growth will drag the whole system along the same trajectory to ruin.
SharkyP says
Imagine the weight necessary to lug 50% of the silver to the bank for a loan.
Most of the time it will simply be an electronic transfer of ownership.
So let's do away with fiat currencies and fractional reserve lending.
But, even if you have a silver standard, the government can still borrow. It can promise to pay back in silver or whatever the monetary standard is.
Interest payments from the government would actually get fulfilled in silver or not
I like the idea of a constitutional prohibition on government debt.
Maybe a constitutional amendment that increases the level of consensus to create a deficit of higher % GDP...
0% GDP Deficit: Congress standard rules
0-2% GDP Deficit: Congress requires 60% house and senate
2-4% GDP Deficit: Congress requires 75% house and senate
>4% GDP Deficit: Requires constitutional override, same requirements as passing a constitutional amendment
I like the idea of a constitutional prohibition on government debt.
Not only would we avoid interest payments, but by saving money on advance of projects, the government would earn interest. And there would be no possibility of government default.
DeficitHawk says
Maybe a constitutional amendment that increases the level of consensus to create a deficit of higher % GDP...
0% GDP Deficit: Congress standard rules
0-2% GDP Deficit: Congress requires 60% house and senate
2-4% GDP Deficit: Congress requires 75% house and senate
>4% GDP Deficit: Requires constitutional override, same requirements as passing a constitutional amendment
They'll just change the formula on how they count GDP.
Any country that’s willing to go balls to the wall on debt wins.
They'll just change the formula on how they count GDP.
Glock-n-Load says
Any country that’s willing to go balls to the wall on debt wins.
Such debt can also destroy a country.
Does anybody really want the government to collect more money than they spend ????
- Economy was very good in 1928 and 1929, so the stock market was rising rapidly.
- Lots of people borrowed money to invest in the stock market. Banks were happy to lower lending standards.
- Market crashed in Oct. 1929, and investors could not pay back the banks.
- Banks then could not pay their depositors.
- Consumers could not buy anything, since their bank deposits were gone.
- Businesses went bankrupt because consumers were gone, resulting in more bank loans defaulting.
- People who had real gold or silver metal then hid it because they did not trust banks.
- The value of real gold and silver metal kept rising because of its scarcity, encouraging more hiding.
- Roosevelt made it illegal for Americans to own gold, and required them to turn it over to the government for paper dollars.
The general clusterfuck continued until WWII gave an excuse for the government to open war supply factories and employ tons of people.
After WWII, America was just about the last industrialized country left standing, so the 1950's were great for American exports.
The FDIC was put in place to encourage people to trust banks, giving them assurances of "risk-free" interest, meaning that bank defaults would be covered by the public. So if banks make good loans, they win, and if they make bad loans, the public loses. Bankers liked it.
There was a decision made to completely decouple the US dollar from silver (1964) and gold (1971), so that that it had no real backing whatsoever. This freed up the Fed to print infinite amounts of money to cover deficit spending, resulting in an explosion of government debt, and continuous theft of money from the public via inflation.
Next step is probably the implosion of the dollar as the rest of the world realizes that the US will never pay back its bonds in full.
Let's say we go back to a system of silver by weight as money. The pound and the peso were both simply weights of silver originally. How can we avoid a repeat of the Great Depression? I think in a couple of ways:
- Elimination of the Federal Reserve so that interest rates are set by the market. High interest rates bring real money out of hiding even if they make it harder for people to borrow to start a business.
- Strict deposit lending standards with 50% of the loan amount on deposit in real silver, not stock. Private loans would be unrestricted though.
- Redefining banking to be storage of silver for a fee, or willful participation in lending risk in exchange for interest.
This would all slow down the economy relative to fiat money, poor lending standards, and pushing bank defaults onto the public. But we would have very stable growth rather than either the boom/bust cycle or inflation/government debt.