Comments on: A few thoughts about the limitations of government http://www.creditwritedowns.com/2009/11/a-few-thoughts-about-the-limitations-of-government.html a finance news and opinion site Sun, 21 Mar 2010 18:21:48 +0000 hourly 1 By: A more in-depth description of how elites maintain status quo ante - Credit Writedownshttp://www.creditwritedowns.com/2009/11/a-few-thoughts-about-the-limitations-of-government.html#comment-9851 A more in-depth description of how elites maintain status quo ante - Credit Writedowns Mon, 08 Feb 2010 15:23:24 +0000 http://www.creditwritedowns.com/2009/11/a-few-thoughts-about-the-limitations-of-government.html#comment-9851 [...] two posts in the past on this: A brief philosophical argument about the role of government and A few thoughts about the limitations of government. My general take in slogan form is “limited government with an eye to the specific needs of the [...] [...] two posts in the past on this: A brief philosophical argument about the role of government and A few thoughts about the limitations of government. My general take in slogan form is “limited government with an eye to the specific needs of the [...]

]]> By: Pathttp://www.creditwritedowns.com/2009/11/a-few-thoughts-about-the-limitations-of-government.html#comment-9499 Pat Fri, 29 Jan 2010 07:24:51 +0000 http://www.creditwritedowns.com/2009/11/a-few-thoughts-about-the-limitations-of-government.html#comment-9499 Never are there any polls between government employees and private employees as to employee benefits, incomes, pensions, etc., and in a nation that operates by information, this would be expected to be one of the first polls done - for government effectiveness as well as to ascertain how well government performs for private citizens, or for small and medium size businesses, the bulk of resources for government and without force, the usual source of income for government through taxation.<br>When government hoards what little funds there are in taxes, and depends upon lifetime employment to maintain that status, it leaves little space for productivity to operate, or to provide for national growth. Hoarding in any industry has always led to the monopolization of benefits and inevitably to an oligarchy reserve by the few but forced upon the many. Enslavement is no way to run a country, even for government officials. From a power perspective, it can be nothing but an abuse of power - for democracies. Never are there any polls between government employees and private employees as to employee benefits, incomes, pensions, etc., and in a nation that operates by information, this would be expected to be one of the first polls done – for government effectiveness as well as to ascertain how well government performs for private citizens, or for small and medium size businesses, the bulk of resources for government and without force, the usual source of income for government through taxation.
When government hoards what little funds there are in taxes, and depends upon lifetime employment to maintain that status, it leaves little space for productivity to operate, or to provide for national growth. Hoarding in any industry has always led to the monopolization of benefits and inevitably to an oligarchy reserve by the few but forced upon the many. Enslavement is no way to run a country, even for government officials. From a power perspective, it can be nothing but an abuse of power – for democracies.

]]> By: James Galbraith: How financial stability creates instability - Credit Writedownshttp://www.creditwritedowns.com/2009/11/a-few-thoughts-about-the-limitations-of-government.html#comment-7553 James Galbraith: How financial stability creates instability - Credit Writedowns Thu, 17 Dec 2009 19:34:11 +0000 http://www.creditwritedowns.com/2009/11/a-few-thoughts-about-the-limitations-of-government.html#comment-7553 [...] As for the present day, Galbraith talks about government as the cushion between us and Depression. I see this as an accurate view. Whether this is the advisable way forward (i.e. should we take the pain now?), depends on your view on government’s role in the economy. I believe that citizens’ witnessing yet more crony capitalism in this depressionary environment will almost certainly induce ‘big government revulsion’ and lead to a relapse. See my post “A few thoughts about the limitations of government.” [...] [...] As for the present day, Galbraith talks about government as the cushion between us and Depression. I see this as an accurate view. Whether this is the advisable way forward (i.e. should we take the pain now?), depends on your view on government’s role in the economy. I believe that citizens’ witnessing yet more crony capitalism in this depressionary environment will almost certainly induce ‘big government revulsion’ and lead to a relapse. See my post “A few thoughts about the limitations of government.” [...]

]]> By: Galbraith: Financial stability creates instability | The Big Picturehttp://www.creditwritedowns.com/2009/11/a-few-thoughts-about-the-limitations-of-government.html#comment-7552 Galbraith: Financial stability creates instability | The Big Picture Thu, 17 Dec 2009 19:31:34 +0000 http://www.creditwritedowns.com/2009/11/a-few-thoughts-about-the-limitations-of-government.html#comment-7552 [...] As for the present day, Galbraith talks about government as the cushion between us and Depression. I see this as an accurate view. Whether this is the advisable way forward (i.e. should we take the pain now?), depends on your view on government’s role in the economy. I believe that witnessing yet more crony capitalism in this depressionary environment will almost certainly induce ‘big government revulsion’ and lead to an recessionary relapse. See my post “A few thoughts about the limitations of government.” [...] [...] As for the present day, Galbraith talks about government as the cushion between us and Depression. I see this as an accurate view. Whether this is the advisable way forward (i.e. should we take the pain now?), depends on your view on government’s role in the economy. I believe that witnessing yet more crony capitalism in this depressionary environment will almost certainly induce ‘big government revulsion’ and lead to an recessionary relapse. See my post “A few thoughts about the limitations of government.” [...]

]]> By: Cebeshttp://www.creditwritedowns.com/2009/11/a-few-thoughts-about-the-limitations-of-government.html#comment-7674 Cebes Sun, 13 Dec 2009 01:57:26 +0000 http://www.creditwritedowns.com/2009/11/a-few-thoughts-about-the-limitations-of-government.html#comment-7674 Debt financing is not the only way to fund budgets. The Colonists used Scrip, Abraham Lincoln used interest free Greenbacks, JFK attempted to use interest free Silver Certificates. <br><br>Nations become victims of the Ponzi scheme for the reasons you mention, it's the popular and profitable thing to do in the short run. However, no nation needs a central bank charging it interest on fiat money. Governments can generate fiat money absent the central bank and reap the benefits of debt free currency. Inflation during the period 1862-65 was primarily a function of war, and most of the inflation was due to currency created by the Confederacy. Today, inflation can be avoided by regulating fractional reserve lending and tying the supply of money to accepted growth ratios. Debt can be monetized when redeemed debt instruments are not rolled over as is current practice, but instead liquidated so that all that remains is the original amount of liquidity, rather than it plus the debt instruments.<br><br>There is a way out, we just need to be creative, and courageous enough to challenge the bond and stock holders of the worlds central banks. They rely upon interest on fiat money to sustain their plutacracy. Debt financing is not the only way to fund budgets. The Colonists used Scrip, Abraham Lincoln used interest free Greenbacks, JFK attempted to use interest free Silver Certificates.

Nations become victims of the Ponzi scheme for the reasons you mention, it's the popular and profitable thing to do in the short run. However, no nation needs a central bank charging it interest on fiat money. Governments can generate fiat money absent the central bank and reap the benefits of debt free currency. Inflation during the period 1862-65 was primarily a function of war, and most of the inflation was due to currency created by the Confederacy. Today, inflation can be avoided by regulating fractional reserve lending and tying the supply of money to accepted growth ratios. Debt can be monetized when redeemed debt instruments are not rolled over as is current practice, but instead liquidated so that all that remains is the original amount of liquidity, rather than it plus the debt instruments.

There is a way out, we just need to be creative, and courageous enough to challenge the bond and stock holders of the worlds central banks. They rely upon interest on fiat money to sustain their plutacracy.

]]> By: Cebeshttp://www.creditwritedowns.com/2009/11/a-few-thoughts-about-the-limitations-of-government.html#comment-7415 Cebes Sat, 12 Dec 2009 18:57:26 +0000 http://www.creditwritedowns.com/2009/11/a-few-thoughts-about-the-limitations-of-government.html#comment-7415 Debt financing is not the only way to fund budgets. The Colonists used Scrip, Abraham Lincoln used interest free Greenbacks, JFK attempted to use interest free Silver Certificates. <br><br>Nations become victims of the Ponzi scheme for the reasons you mention, it's the popular and profitable thing to do in the short run. However, no nation needs a central bank charging it interest on fiat money. Governments can generate fiat money absent the central bank and reap the benefits of debt free currency. Inflation during the period 1862-65 was primarily a function of war, and most of the inflation was due to currency created by the Confederacy. Today, inflation can be avoided by regulating fractional reserve lending and tying the supply of money to accepted growth ratios. Debt can be monetized when redeemed debt instruments are not rolled over as is current practice, but instead liquidated so that all that remains is the original amount of liquidity, rather than it plus the debt instruments.<br><br>There is a way out, we just need to be creative, and courageous enough to challenge the bond and stock holders of the worlds central banks. They rely upon interest on fiat money to sustain their plutacracy. Debt financing is not the only way to fund budgets. The Colonists used Scrip, Abraham Lincoln used interest free Greenbacks, JFK attempted to use interest free Silver Certificates.

Nations become victims of the Ponzi scheme for the reasons you mention, it's the popular and profitable thing to do in the short run. However, no nation needs a central bank charging it interest on fiat money. Governments can generate fiat money absent the central bank and reap the benefits of debt free currency. Inflation during the period 1862-65 was primarily a function of war, and most of the inflation was due to currency created by the Confederacy. Today, inflation can be avoided by regulating fractional reserve lending and tying the supply of money to accepted growth ratios. Debt can be monetized when redeemed debt instruments are not rolled over as is current practice, but instead liquidated so that all that remains is the original amount of liquidity, rather than it plus the debt instruments.

There is a way out, we just need to be creative, and courageous enough to challenge the bond and stock holders of the worlds central banks. They rely upon interest on fiat money to sustain their plutacracy.

]]> By: scott6http://www.creditwritedowns.com/2009/11/a-few-thoughts-about-the-limitations-of-government.html#comment-7245 scott6 Wed, 25 Nov 2009 23:07:40 +0000 http://www.creditwritedowns.com/2009/11/a-few-thoughts-about-the-limitations-of-government.html#comment-7245 Just coming from the anti-fed camp, your analysis is all and well, but please acknowledge the difference from an explicit tax like sales tax and payroll taxes from an implicit tax like inflation. One we understand, and one we have trouble comprehending, hence increased distrust. It does not help feeling powerless against deficit spending and inflation when we still can understand voting for a .01 percent increase in the sales tax to pay for a homeless shelter or a bond issue to build a bridge which are usually placed on our local ballots. One's our decision and one is not. Just coming from the anti-fed camp, your analysis is all and well, but please acknowledge the difference from an explicit tax like sales tax and payroll taxes from an implicit tax like inflation. One we understand, and one we have trouble comprehending, hence increased distrust. It does not help feeling powerless against deficit spending and inflation when we still can understand voting for a .01 percent increase in the sales tax to pay for a homeless shelter or a bond issue to build a bridge which are usually placed on our local ballots. One's our decision and one is not.

]]> By: demandsidehttp://www.creditwritedowns.com/2009/11/a-few-thoughts-about-the-limitations-of-government.html#comment-7230 demandside Mon, 23 Nov 2009 17:49:57 +0000 http://www.creditwritedowns.com/2009/11/a-few-thoughts-about-the-limitations-of-government.html#comment-7230 It seems to me that government needs to be big in the sense of control and structure markets, big in scope, but not necessarily big in bureaucracy. One of the examples might be the Consumer Financial Protection Agency, which describes the type of products that can be sold and bought and perhaps the conditions. This seems likely to have a very much small staff requirement than an intrusive super-regulator looking at all the books and practices and so on.<br><br>Structuring markets in other ways, like, for example, getting the too big to fails back down to a size that is susceptible to market discipline is a bigness that is not an intrusiveness, and is much more amenable to healthy economics. It seems to me that government needs to be big in the sense of control and structure markets, big in scope, but not necessarily big in bureaucracy. One of the examples might be the Consumer Financial Protection Agency, which describes the type of products that can be sold and bought and perhaps the conditions. This seems likely to have a very much small staff requirement than an intrusive super-regulator looking at all the books and practices and so on.

Structuring markets in other ways, like, for example, getting the too big to fails back down to a size that is susceptible to market discipline is a bigness that is not an intrusiveness, and is much more amenable to healthy economics.

]]> By: Sobershttp://www.creditwritedowns.com/2009/11/a-few-thoughts-about-the-limitations-of-government.html#comment-7229 Sobers Mon, 23 Nov 2009 17:15:41 +0000 http://www.creditwritedowns.com/2009/11/a-few-thoughts-about-the-limitations-of-government.html#comment-7229 You in the USA are discovering, like we in Europe have done in the past, what happens when the majority can vote for spending they will not have to pay for. We in Europe are now in the situation that no govt will EVER reduce the role of the State because it cannot get the majority of votes neccessary to do so. There are too many people attached to the State teat. You in America may not be past the point of no return, but you're getting closer all the time.<br><br>The irony is that, just as if you indulge a child now, you set them up for failure in later life, the current profligacy will result in penury for the mass population at some later point. Electorates cannot continue to vote themselves more and more public spending indefinitely. At some point the debts get so large they cannot be repaid, the currency is debauched or destroyed and the population impoverished. <br><br>It's Ponzi type scheme - as long as you can shovel the debt in at one end, the standard of living can be maintained at the other. If the debt source fails the house of cards falls. Such a ruin can take decades, even a century or more. You could live your entire life and not see it fall. But I suspect the end is approaching for several countries, the USA and the UK being prime candidates, with Japan not far behind, due to its high debt level and declining population. You in the USA are discovering, like we in Europe have done in the past, what happens when the majority can vote for spending they will not have to pay for. We in Europe are now in the situation that no govt will EVER reduce the role of the State because it cannot get the majority of votes neccessary to do so. There are too many people attached to the State teat. You in America may not be past the point of no return, but you're getting closer all the time.

The irony is that, just as if you indulge a child now, you set them up for failure in later life, the current profligacy will result in penury for the mass population at some later point. Electorates cannot continue to vote themselves more and more public spending indefinitely. At some point the debts get so large they cannot be repaid, the currency is debauched or destroyed and the population impoverished.

It's Ponzi type scheme – as long as you can shovel the debt in at one end, the standard of living can be maintained at the other. If the debt source fails the house of cards falls. Such a ruin can take decades, even a century or more. You could live your entire life and not see it fall. But I suspect the end is approaching for several countries, the USA and the UK being prime candidates, with Japan not far behind, due to its high debt level and declining population.

]]>