In my tr-level Banking system private finance will not be able to leverage money only aggregate priorly earned and saved monies. Leaving private finance in control of the creation of money is incredibly stupid and anti-historical.

We already have a more than adequate definition of what wealth is. As we live in a monetary economy it is the things and services money can buy. If you had a discount to prices at retail that created price deflation and for every good or service actually purchased the discount was rebated back to the merchant who sold it….how could you possibly have price inflation??? Only orthodox dunces on both the left and right can’t/won’t see that. And for those who demand equilibrium in a numerical, orthodox and worshipful sense they just have to consider that more generalized saving by individuals and profit making by businesses translates into LESS need for and LESS actual financing by both. Debt is problematic especially when there is an inherent systemic scarcity of it produced moment to moment as there is now, and leads to the monopoly powers we see presently. Abundant incomes are in the individual’s control, and price deflation not only adds to individual purchasing power but pushes the vector of the economy toward money becoming a ticket for the distribution of production and helps downsize Finance as well. It’s all upside and would only possibly require tweaking regulation of interest rates on savings and hard headed underwriting standards.

*********************************************

Me:  I would agree with all of that. To refuse to act in an adult, responsible and ethical manner to regulate and control private finance despite their monopoly control of the money system, and despite the fact of the negative economic effects of a flaw in an accounting convention is stupid and irrational. The only thing more irrational is to not actually look at the data and consider their economic consequences at all like conservative/libertarian economists and their pundits do.

And we should ask ourselves the question: When are people better able to think rationally about the ecology….when they are pre-occupied and stressed with “making a living” in an onerous system, or when they have a relatively abundant income in a stable economy?