Posted To Ellen Brown’s Public Banking Forum 04/03/2020

The merging of the FED and Treasury is of course stealth domination which is what we already have now. Government debt is a side show that MMTers, who have the mechanics of money creation correct, obsess about when the real problem is aggregate private/personal debt….and the only way that will be resolved and we will become free instead of enslaved is a modern debt jubilee, a monthly ($1000/mo.) universal dividend, a 50% discount/rebate price and monetary policy at the point of retail sale and a 100% tax on any revenue a business may garner because they inflated their prices when seeing a lot more money coming into the system (despite the fact that such policies will save every enterprise the significant costs of all transfer taxes for welfare, unemployment insurance and social security which become redundant when everyone, whether they work or not, has a middle class income guaranteed.

Response To A Poster On RWER Blog

GH:  Craig, your question is rhetorical.You’re not really interested in why we are not all proselytising for monetary gifting. You know what you think and it’s a long time since you listened to any counter-argument.

Me:  I will listen to any argument/theory that adds to the list of policy solutions I have advocated here that the new monetary and financial paradigm of Direct and Reciprocal Monetary Gifting accomplishes.

Virtually everyone here is engaged only in rhetoric. Several times I have asked for posters here to give their specific policies. Nothing but crickets. Instead of complaining about how arduous a nomadic existence is, how the rains haven’t come, the game is scarce and the lions that lurk are increasingly hungry this name dropping debating society should be looking to discover that if you put seeds in the ground and corral a male and female bovine your world is turned upside down in incredibly beneficial ways. In other words think paradigmatically.

So please do not lecture me about being rhetorical. Ya know what I mean?

NR:  I still think Mr. Edward Ross makes some very valid points about the age-old practice of a needy “STATE” shoveling” printed & stamped coinage {plus borrowed money in the form of the glorified I.O.U’s; known as bonds, bills, debentures & notes} at any problem that cannot be solved otherwise. And he does so with a trenchant wit. ‘Monetary gifting” was once called “Prairie freigeld” back in the 1930’s when the social credit government of Alberta started printing the attractively designed stuff, as “social dividends”. But when their pulp ‘n paper product was proscribed as not acceptable as legal ‘coin of the realm’, it suffered the same fate as Confederate dollars during Reconstruction. But, rest assured that Ralph Hawtrey, Keynes & several other chaps from the Cambridge Mathematical Tripos & British Actuarial Society, whom you may not respect very much, were quite gentle in their debunking of the rather temperamental Major Douglas’ s opus magnum.
“Major Douglas’s monetary theories are about as useful as a misprint in a multiplication table”, said M. Hawtrey. Not to mention the Major’s rather curious misunderstanding about Say’s ‘law of markets’ embodied in the “A + B theorem”. That one can be easily ‘offed’ by a couple of Venn Diagrams’. Thank you for your patience. My critique is intended only as a didactic argument which I hope benefits all; In the old German academic sense of “erklarung”.

Me:  Hawtrey did not understand money at all and was rebutted quite thoroughly by Douglas. Keynes actually plagiarized Douglas by simply restating one of his major points and claiming it as his own. How convenient and covert it was that the Canadian federal government declared Alberta’s monetary gifts ultra vires.

I’m not a social crediter by the way. Social crediters are stuck in classical ideas of equilibrium, I’m not, as all of what I advocate aligns with what Steve Keen has written regarding the financial instability hypothesis of Minsky with the exception that he, who even though he has correctly complained that an economist can get his PhD in economics without taking so much as a rudimentary course in accounting, still does not recognize the fact that the entirety of the economy is embedded in an accounting cycle that invalidates the quantity theory of money and the velocity of its circulation.

Your Telos and Technos is a quite good philosophical book. However, like virtually every present tome on economics its ideas and abstractions need the focus on present time reality that the garden variety accountant, mostly unaware of the underlying economic significances he deals with every day, could bring to it.

DT:  Craig, you and Norman are here saying some interesting stuff, but as a “jonny come lately” Englishman who can only imagine the history you North Americans are talking about, I would appreciate a few references. For example, I know about Venn diagrams, Norman, but apart from the fact that Douglas has been accused of misunderstanding Say’s Law, not in what way. I didn’t know about the ‘ultra vires’ as against the suggested logical put-down, Craig, but I do know that the financial instability Minsky wrote about and Keen simulates is what happens when one uses PID control logic to achieve an equilibrium, and uses D corrections to avoid danger faster than one uses I feedback to re-correct one’s aims. This is standard chaos theory, applied to (representing) financial entrepreneurs shuffling nominal investments to make monetary profits. I do recognise as fact your bit about the entirety of the economy, but that only explains the error in the theories, not the chaotic implications of the facts.

Me:  The instability/chaos comes from the monopolistic onlyness of the monetary and financial paradigm, and allowing private finance to maintain that paradigm is the height of idiocy. There are plenty of legitimate private financial services that can aggregate and find investment for prior-ly created money and savings, but money creation is not one of them

Money creation either as debt or as monetary gifting must become a public utility guided by the supreme ethical concept of grace as in love in action and its applicable monetary, financial and economic policies. Anything less is folly and/or non-confront.

Helio-centrism and the discovery of the ellipse ended the unstable anomalies of Ptolemaic cosmology and the policy of a 50% discount/rebate at retail sale and the concept of monetary grace as in gifting will end financial instability.

The New Monetary Paradigm Exposed By The Corona Virus

Money is non-neutral. The current MONOPOLISTIC paradigm of money creation, Debt ONLY, is WAAAAYY non-neutral. A universal dividend and the 50% discount/rebate price and monetary policy at retail sale, the latter of which is the very expression of the new monetary and financial paradigm of Direct and Reciprocal Monetary Gifting, resolves seeming unresolvable opposite economic realities, universally benefits and unites seeming opposite economic and political constituencies and ironically could enable both a bottom up consumer and top down fiscal means of navigating man made climate change.

Why in the hell don’t all of you have your hair on fire advocating for it, especially in view of the fact that the corona virus has recently shown the efficacy of fiscal and direct monetary gifting???

Thread on Public Banking Forum About The Difference Between Suggested Crisis Reforms and the Need For Paradigm Change

AT:  But the point is this! Many Trump supporters, especially the anti-war Q followers, are talking about federalizing the Fed…and that being a good thing. This is really a teaching moment!!!

Me:  The problem is, nationalizing the FED is probably leaping from the frying pan into the fire. It’s a further consolidation of power and into a class of people who are at least as unethical as the financiers, namely the pols. Make no mistake….politics is about power. And this is why the real solution lies at the paradigm concept level….not just the reform or structural one. Power, profit and control are the watch words of the current monetary and financial paradigm of Debt Only and of the current zeitgeist of power. Monetary grace as in gifting is the new monetary and financial paradigm, and grace as in love in personal action/systemic policy is the emergent realization of the new zeitgeist.

EB:  Yes agreed, Steve H., Steve Mnuchin isn’t necessarily the guy we want in charge. But it’s still a promising development, one we can work with and capitalize on. Here are questions I just asked one of our advisory board members who is a professor and lawyer. If anyone here knows the answers, great!

One thing I don’t understand are those SPVs the Fed and Treasury just set up. $400K plus in ESF funds from the Treasury will give the Treasury the power to draw on $4T in credit from the Fed, correct? I assume that will be interest free, since the Fed rebates its profits to the Treasury. For how long? Can the Treasury keep rolling the loans over? Can the $4T be used not just for loans to insolvent companies but for purchases, e.g. for stock? Does that mean the Treasury will own stock in big companies, maybe even a controlling interest? The money will wind up as reserves on the books of the banks from which the assets have been purchased. Can those reserves then be spent into the economy? Are the SPVs in effect acting as banks (or shadow banks), borrowing $9 for every dollar in capital or collateral from the ESF? Can the ESF get wiped out if all the loans go bad? Will the taxpayers have to replenish it? Can they be on the hook for more than the $400K plus already in the fund? It looks to me as if the Treasury Secretary (an unelected bureaucrat) is calling the shots, since the Treasury will own the SPVs. Can he use it for whatever he chooses? Does Jerome Powell have to approve what the money is used for? I wouldn’t think so. It looks like the SPVs will just become the equivalent of the primary dealers that can do business with the Fed and borrow from it at 0.25%, yes?
Me:  The questions to ask are:

Does any of this actually increase the amount of free and clear purchasing power in the hands of the individual and thus simultaneously increase systemic business revenue? Does it REVERSE the inevitable build up of personal and systemic debt and its servicing costs? Will it terminally end price and asset inflation by integrating price and asset DE-flation into profit making economic systems?
The monopoly monetary and financial paradigm is inherently dominating and de-stabilizing. No real progress will be made until the new paradigm is integrated into the system.
AT:  A movement in the correct direction is a good thing. It should be encouraged.
Me:  What right direction? A “reform” that still leaves the current monetary concept alone and the current bad actors still in the driving seat? Or a paradigm change that resolves the deepest problems of the economy and rejuvenates it for all agents?
AT:  And, the most important question:
Is this raising awareness of OUR monetary and banking system, that has been hijacked by a private cartel? Answer: Yes.
Me:  As has been shown before throughout history…which is worse a private cartel or a governmental one?
AT:  I have seen folks discussing nationalizing the Fed, and seeing it as a good thing, as I am seeing now. THAT’s a good thing.
Me:  Nationalizing the FED is a good thing because it affirms Occam’s Razor….but hoping and wishing that it is the solution to the paradigmatic problem which IS THE REAL AND UNDERLYING PROBLEM….won’t cut it.
AT:  Steve Hummel: Any WHY are you in our PUBLIC BANKING group? To support or subvert?
Me:  I’m here to integrate and elevate it conceptually and policy-wise from a systemic reform to a paradigm change.

Retail Sale: The Single Aggregative Point in the Entire Micro-economy, and Likely the Single Integrative Point Between The Micro and Macro Economies. Thus It Is the Perfect Point to Utilize the Direct (Credit) and Reciprocal (Debit) Nature of Double Entry Bookkeeping For Paradigm Changing Effect.

Retail sale is the treminal aggregative point for all costs and prices including profit. It is also the terminal expression point for all relevant economic factors, for instance inflation.

As it is where production becomes consumption it is also the terminal ending point of the entire actually productive/economic process for every consumer item and service. It is hence a potentially extremely powerful point for corrective problem resolving and/or beneficial policy effect.

True ending points are always powerful because they are also potential pivoting points and a 50% discount/rebate policy at retail sale pivots both backward/downward with ending costs and prices and reciprocally backwardly and upwardly to the merchant and hence benefits both producer and consumer. Discounts are credited and rebates are debited back to the merchant so he/she can be made whole on their overheads and margins of profit. Every agent benefits with increased purchasing power and potential business revenues.

 

Shout Out About The Book

Yes, a 50% discount to virtually every consumer/retail item and service which is rebated back to the merchant giving it to the consumer. This immediately doubles everyone’s earned income purchasing power and simultaneously not only terminally ends any possibility of inflation, but miraculously from an orthodox perspective, beneficially integrates price and asset DEFLATION into profit making economic systems. Of course, because the 1/10th have shown a propensity for trying to game this paradigm changing policy you’ll want to tax at a rate of 100% any price inflation that isn’t a result of empirically verifiable ADDITIONAL costs and if they object or persist then they will lose their 50% discount/rebate privileges. After such a policy, paired with a $1000/mo. universal dividend is implemented, additional costs will be very difficult to find considering all transfer taxes that businesses and individuals pay for welfare, unemployment insurance and social security will become redundant and can be cancelled. Personal and corporate income taxes can also be greatly reduced in the stabilized fiat money system the 50% discount/rebate policy enables. The potential for a discount/rebate monetary and pricing policy at retail sale IS the new insight/new tool of the new monetary and economic paradigm the same as was the invention of the telescope, moveable print and agriculture of past paradigm changes.

You can get the full (so far developed) program here: https://www.amazon.com/dp/B07PLNJLRN/ref=sr_1_1?keywords=wisdomics-Gracenomics&qid=1552358772&s=books&sr=1-1-catcorr

Don’t let this crisis, the just passed stimulus bill and the realization that our fiat money system can work to serve us instead of oppress us go unperceived.

Response To Paranoia About a Digital Currency On Public Banking Forum

A continuing universal dividend IS INDIVIDUALLY distributed monetary and financial power. The negative things you mention are POSSIBLE problems and can be avoided with the correct regulation. We already have a privately controlled digital debit card system which needs to be better regulated and made publicly administered. Unnecessary fears regarding the payment system play into the resistance to them by the financial elite banking system.

No one should ever consent to being chipped in return for a universal dividend because it is a completely irrelevant to the purpose of such a monetary and financial remedy, and suggesting it would probably be the beginning of a huge mass movement to prevent it.

This situation is an incredible opportunity to increase consciousness of the efficacy of integrating monetary gifting as the new paradigm concept into the monopolistically restricting current one of DEBT ONLY so let’s not blow that opportunity. A mass movement that would communicate the necessity of BOTH that long over due advance AND the admonishment against privacy and tyrannical stupidities like chipping is what we should be doing.