Group items tagged

The end is not far away

The public interest must prevail over the interest individual, the fair sharing of the wealth created by the world of work override the power of  money.

“The press freedom, its  honor and independence againt the power of the State, the power of money and foreign influences.” That is what turns further orders on the press in 1944. Yet that is what is now in danger. The Resistance was calling for “an effective opportunity for all French children to benefit from the most developed education”, without discrimination, yet the reforms proposed in 2008 go against this project. Young teachers, which actions I support, were up to refuse to apply them and they saw their wages cut as a punishment. They were outraged, have “disobeyed” and found these reforms too far from the ideal of the republican school, too much in the service of Page 3 the money society and not enough developing the creative and critical thinking. It is just the base of the social conquests of the Resistance which is now in question (2)

No one seems to have pointed out that the original example given is actually wrong. (I've stumbled on this looking for something else, but had to comment.) The second balance sheet should still show $1000 as both the total assets and liabilities. The "deposit creation multiplier" idea referred to is the theoretical maximum aggregate balance sheet of the banking sector, if there is more than one bank and they all lend to each other and only each other. Its double counting, but that's allowed in the calculation of M4 money supply, but isn't allowed on any particular bank balance sheet (which is why the example is so wrong).

promisory notes

promisory notes

As an ardent supporter of Ron Paul, I must acknowledge Paul Krugman's point about getting inflation wrong, at least in the years since the crash. He is right that there were many outspoken critics of monetary expansion at the time, including Paul and Schiff, who predicted massive inflation around the corner. But there are two further points to be made about Austrian Economics in general.First, there were at the time and continue to be Austrians who correctly anticipated the strong deflationary pressures we actually ended up facing. Mike Shedlock, for example, is concerned much more with contracting aggregate credit than expanding monetary base.Second, Austrians are unanimous on a much bigger point: that we are still in the middle of this crisis. We reject any suggestion that a recovery is underway or that any underlying structural problems have actually been resolved. As such, we have yet to confront the worst consequences of the crisis and once we do, some of the outcomes Paul and Schiff predict could come into play.Austrians also agree that while the monetary expansion may not have yet caused massive inflation, it has managed to keep incumbent banks in power. Money printing is thus seen as maintaining the status quo. Rather than the mighty banks falling and being replaced by smaller, fairer banks, they remain entrenched. This populist angst towards money printing - as a tool of the establishment - currently holds more sway than concern about rampant inflation.

A lot of it was spent on bailing out US banks and that money is still there, as well as money funnelled into well connected corporations within the US. Already in the UK inflation is going out of control because of QE in this country, why should the US expect to be any different? What will happen when the US’s banks begin lending those trillions they are sitting on?

prefer ron paul /austrian economics view of life, but if you take on fiat debts worth trillions… you can’t solve the problem by cutting spending and having people suffer for this, this is not right, this type of debt should be canceled first (at least most of it)

The modern banking system manufactures money out of nothing

The Krugman Solution: "Take the line of credit and fix the house. Yes, your monthly costs will go up a bit, but once the house is fixed you can cut back slightly on non-essentials, get a raise or a different job where you'll make some extra money. and eventually pay off the line of credit."

I rapporten Where does money come from? fra den britiske tænketank New Economics Foundation kritiseres den foretrukne fortælling fra bankerne om indlånet som begivenheden, der muliggør udlånene og pengeskabelsen. Det er typisk omvendt, påpeger tænketanken og andre med den. Som den tidligere bankøkonom, viceafdelingschef i Den Internationale Valutafond Michael Kumhof: »Det, der i virkeligheden sker, er præcis det modsatte. Og jeg har selv gjort det, jeg er bankmand, jeg ved, hvordan det fungerer, og du kan læse det på mange centralbankers hjemmesider – når bankerne siger til sig selv: ’Økonomien ser godt ud, vi er optimistiske, nu yder vi lån’, så behøver de ikke vente på, at nogen indsætter penge. For når de opretter et lån, skaber de et indestående. Bare sådan. Banker skaber penge ud af den blå luft.« Altså: Ydelse af et lån betyder alene, at der åbnes to kolonner i bankens computer: Én som siger, at kunden nu har X kr., og én som siger, at banken nu har en fordring hos denne kunde på X kr. Kundens nye virtuelle penge kan samtidig være grundlaget for et nyt udlån, noteret på næste kundes konto. Den første kunde har ret til at hæve alle sine penge, samtidig med at disse står opført på den anden kundes konto. Bankpenge kan – som udtrykt af den store amerikanske økonom John Kenneth Galbraith – være to steder på én gang. Mindst.

Kravchenko also became more and more obsessed with the inequalities of the Western world, and wrote a sequel to “I Chose Freedom” that was titled, significantly, “I Chose Justice.” He devoted himself to finding less exploitative forms of collectivization and wound up in Bolivia, where he squandered all his money trying to organize poor farmers. Crushed by this failure, he withdrew into private life and shot himself in 1966 at his home in New York.