iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Featuring fresh takes and real-time analysis from HuffPost's signature lineup of contributors
Ellen Brown

Ellen Brown

Posted: July 23, 2010 10:45 AM

Why the U.S. Need Not Fear a Sovereign Debt Crisis: Unlike Greece, It Is Actually Sovereign

What's Your Reaction:

Last week, a Chinese rating agency downgraded U.S. debt from triple A and number one globally, to "double A with a negative outlook" and only 13th worldwide. The downgrade renewed fears that the sovereign debt crisis that began in Greece will soon reach America. That is the concern, but the U.S. is distinguished from Greece in that its debt is denominated in its own currency, over which it has sovereign control. The government can simply print the money it needs or borrow from a central bank that prints it. We should not let deficit hawks and short sellers dissuade the government from pursuing that obvious expedient.

We did not hear much about "sovereign debt" until early this year when Greece hit the skids. Investment adviser Martin Weiss wrote in a February 24 newsletter:

On October 8, Greece's benchmark 10-year bond was stable and rising. Then, suddenly and without warning, global investors dumped their Greek bonds with unprecedented fury, driving its market value into a death spiral.


Likewise, Portugal's 10-year government bond reached a peak on December 1, 2009, less than three months ago. It has also started to plunge virtually nonstop.

The reason: A new contagion of fear about sovereign debt! Indeed, both governments are so deep in debt, investors worry that default is not only possible -- it is now likely!

So said the media, but note that Greece and Portugal were doing remarkably well only three months earlier. Then, "suddenly and without warning," global investors furiously dumped their bonds. Why? Weiss and other commentators blamed a sudden "contagion of fear about sovereign debt." But as Bill Murphy, another prolific newsletter writer, reiterates, "Price action makes market commentary." The pundits look at what just happened in the market and then dream up some plausible theory to explain it. What President Franklin Roosevelt said of politics, however, may also be true of markets: "Nothing happens by accident. If it happens, you can bet it was planned that way."

That the collapse of Greece's sovereign debt may actually have been planned was suggested in a Wall Street Journal article in February, in which Susan Pullian and co-authors reported:

Some heavyweight hedge funds have launched large bearish bets against the euro in moves that are reminiscent of the trading action at the height of the U.S. financial crisis.


The big bets are emerging amid gatherings such as an exclusive 'idea dinner' earlier this month that included hedge-fund titans SAC Capital Advisors LP and Soros Fund Management LLC.

[...]

There is nothing improper about hedge funds jumping on the same trade unless it is deemed by regulators to be collusion. Regulators haven't suggested that any trading has been improper.

Regulators hadn't suggested it yet; but on the same day that the story was published, the antitrust division of the U.S. Justice Department sent letters to a number of hedge funds attending the dinner, warning them not to destroy any trading records involving market bets on the euro.

Represented at the dinner was the hedge fund of George Soros, who was instrumental in collapsing the British pound in 1992 by heavy short-selling. Soros was quoted as warning that if the European Union did not fix its finances, "the euro may fall apart." Was it really a warning? Or was it the sort of rumor designed to make the euro fall apart? A concerted attack on the euro, beginning with its weakest link, the Greek bond, could bring down that currency just as short selling had brought down the pound.

These sorts of rumors have not been confined to the Greek bond and the euro. In The Financial Times, Niall Ferguson wrote an article titled "A Greek Crisis Is Coming to America," in which he warned:

It began in Athens. It is spreading to Lisbon and Madrid. But it would be a grave mistake to assume that the sovereign debt crisis that is unfolding will remain confined to the weaker eurozone economies.

America, he maintained, would suffer a sovereign debt crisis as well, and this would happen sooner than expected.

The International Monetary Fund recently published estimates of the fiscal adjustments developed economies would need to make to restore fiscal stability over the decade ahead. Worst were Japan and the UK (a fiscal tightening of 13 per cent of GDP). Then came Ireland, Spain and Greece (9 per cent). And in sixth place? Step forward America, which would need to tighten fiscal policy by 8.8 per cent of GDP to satisfy the IMF.

The catch is that the U.S. does not need to satisfy the IMF.

"Sovereign debt" Is an Oxymoron

America cannot actually suffer from a sovereign debt crisis. Why? Because it has no sovereign debt. As Wikipedia explains:

A sovereign bond is a bond issued by a national government. The term usually refers to bonds issued in foreign currencies, while bonds issued by national governments in the country's own currency are referred to as government bonds. The total amount owed to the holders of the sovereign bonds is called sovereign debt.

Damon Vrabel, of the Council on Renewal in Seattle, concludes:

The sovereign debt crisis... is a fabrication of the Ivy League, Wall Street and erudite periodicals like the Financial Times of London.. It seems ridiculous to point this out, but sovereign debt implies sovereignty. Right? Well, if countries are sovereign, then how could they be required to be in debt to private banking institutions? How could they be so easily attacked by the likes of George Soros, JP Morgan Chase and Goldman Sachs? Why would they be subjugated to the whims of auctions and traders? A true sovereign is in debt to nobody...

Unlike Greece and other EU members, which are forbidden to issue their own currencies or borrow from their own central banks, the U.S. government can solve its debt crisis by the simple expedient of either printing the money it needs directly, or borrowing it from its own central bank which prints the money. The current term of art for this maneuver is "quantitative easing," and Ferguson says it is what has so far "stood between the US and larger bond yields" -- that, and China's massive purchases of U.S. Treasuries. Both are winding down now, he warns, renewing the hazard of a sovereign debt crisis.

"Explosions of public debt hurt economies..." Ferguson contends, "by raising fears of default and/or currency depreciation ahead of actual inflation, [pushing] up real interest rates."

Market jitters may be a hazard, but if the U.S. finds itself with government bonds and no buyers, it will no doubt resort to quantitative easing again, just as it has in the past -- not necessarily overtly, but by buying bonds through offshore entities, swapping government debt for agency debt, and other sleights of hand. The mechanics may vary, but so long as "Helicopter Ben" is at the helm, dollars are liable to appear as needed.

Hyperinflation: A Bogus Threat Today

Proposals to solve government budget crises by simply issuing the necessary funds, whether as currency or as bonds, invariably meet with dire warnings that the result will be hyperinflation. But before an economy can be threatened with hyperinflation, it has to pass through simple inflation; and today the world is struggling with deflation. The U.S. money supply has been shrinking at an unprecedented rate. In a May 26 article in The Financial Times titled "US Money Supply Plunges at 1930s Pace as Obama Eyes Fresh Stimulus," Ambrose Evans-Pritchard observed:

The stock of money fell from $14.2 trillion to $13.9 trillion in the three months to April, amounting to an annual rate of contraction of 9.6pc. The assets of institutional money market funds fell at a 37pc rate, the sharpest drop ever.

So long as workers are out of work and resources are sitting idle, as they are today, money can be added to the money supply without driving prices up. Price inflation results when "demand" (money) increases faster than "supply" (goods and services). If the new money is used to create new goods and services, prices will remain stable. That is where "quantitative easing" has gone astray today: the money has not been directed into creating goods, services and jobs but has been steered into the coffers of the banks, cleaning up their balance sheets and providing them with cheap credit that they have not deigned to pass on to the productive economy.

Our forefathers described the government they were creating as a "common wealth," ensuring life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness for its people. Implied in that vision was an opportunity for employment for anyone wanting to work, as well as essential social services for the population. All of that can be provided by a government that claims sovereignty over its money supply.

A true sovereign need not indebt itself to private banks but can simply issue the money it needs. That is what the American colonists did, in the innovative paper money system that allowed them to flourish for a century before King George forbade them to issue their own scrip prompting the American Revolution. It is also what Abraham Lincoln did, foiling the Wall Street bankers who would have trapped the North in debt slavery through the exigencies of war. And it is what China itself did successfully for decades, before it succumbed to globalization. China got the idea from Abraham Lincoln through his admirer Sun Yat-sen; and Lincoln took his cue from the American colonists, our forebears. We need to reclaim our sovereign right as a nation to fund the common wealth they envisioned without begging from foreign creditors or entangling the government in debt.

 
 
 

Follow Ellen Brown on Twitter: www.twitter.com/ellenhbrown

 
 
  • Comments
  • 105
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2  Next ›  Last »  (2 total)
11:24 PM on 07/27/2010
Ellen, thank you for yet another great piece. It's great to see the many responses it has invoked, even though many are uninformed. If only everyone would take a look at your book!

To see whatt it is all about, go to http://www.webofdebt.com/
06:34 PM on 07/27/2010
I think the first step to waking people up to what is really going on is *making* the Federal Reserve change its name.

It shouldn't be allowed to be called 'Federal' anything, which obviously implies that its part of/endorsed by our government.

Ideas for a new name??
12:02 PM on 07/27/2010
Respectfully, missing from this article is an understanding of 'the basics". The US population borrows through the government for one basic reason: we do not produce enough MATERIAL GOODS to satisfy our wants and needs. Americans who are on net "productive" do not produce enough food, fuel,TV's, gold for ones "grill", and to provide for both themselves and the "non-productive" members of us society. We borrow SO THAT we may import the basic necessities we no longer make.

When China lends to us, it does so to get a return it will spend on African tantalum and Iranian oil. The dollar is not a hard currency. It is "backed" ONLY by our sterling reputation. If we default, the dollar becomes worthless internationally, and here is the important point. A US plumber may be able to use dollars to buy a US grown chicken. However, he will no longer be able to use dollars to buy non-us made copper pipe made of non-us mined copper or non-us made PVC made from non-US made oil. He goes out of business. So would our military: our ENTIRE military is built of foreign milled and mined steel, copper, oil. The net effect would be MASSIVE inflation of everything not made here INCLUDING raw minerals, chemicals, and materials.

The most fundamental definition of "sovereign" is that none can assail. No king or cop can stop you. If the dollar defaults, our "sovereignty" goes with it.
photo
HUFFPOST BLOGGER
Ellen Brown
author Web of Debt; chrm Public Banking Institute
05:20 PM on 07/27/2010
I'm not talking about defaulting. I'm talking about paying -- in dollars. We've never defaulted. We always pay for the bonds -- in dollars. But then we roll them over into more bonds. We don't need to roll them over. The debt is in dollars and the U.S. government should be the sovereign issuer of U.S. dollars. It should be but it isn't; the privately-owned Federal Reserve and the nation's many private banks are. As Thomas Edison said:

"If the Nation can issue a dollar bond it can issue a dollar bill. The element that makes the bond good makes the bill good also. The difference between the bond and the bill is that the bond lets the money broker collect twice the amount of the bond and an additional 20%. Whereas the currency, the honest sort provided by the Constitution pays nobody but those who contribute in some useful way. It is absurd to say our Country can issue bonds and cannot issue currency. Both are promises to pay, but one fattens the usurer and the other helps the People."
06:48 PM on 07/27/2010
Thanks for responding! Again, and respectfully, I believe you are missing the basic point. Money is worthless: we value it only for what it can buy. Example: Today, I owe you 10 dollars and with that ten dollars you can buy 2 chickens. If I don't repay you until Monday, I'll owe you $15 (ie, 3 chickens).

On Saturday, I whip out my laser copier and photocopy until I have 30 dollars (ie, I am the Fed). On monday I pay you $15 dollars. However, the chicken rancher is on to my scheme and raises his price to $15/clucker to reflect my "inflationary monetary policy". I'm better off: now I have no debt. The chicken rancher doesn't care either way. But I have robbed you. What I owed you was not little slips of green paper, but a certain measure of purchasing power.

I would get to play this trick exactly once. After that once nobody would lend me any more money. OR they would insist on lending me dollars only for repayment in chickens (ie, gold or oil). If I'm self sufficient, I'm fine with that. But, as the United States, I am not fine because I produce less than I need to feed, clothe, house my family and THAT is why I'm borrowing. Help me out here: poke holes in this!
09:44 PM on 07/26/2010
Nice article, Ellen. Certain parts of Congressman McFadden's speech always ring in my head, though:

"Mr. Chairman, we have in this Country one of the most corrupt institutions
the world has ever known. I refer to the Federal Reserve Board and the
Federal Reserve Banks, hereinafter called the Fed. The Fed has cheated the
Government of these United States and the people of the United States out of
enough money to pay the Nation's debt. The depredations and iniquities of
the Fed has cost enough money to pay the National debt several times over.
This evil institution has impoverished and ruined the people of these
United States, has bankrupted itself, and has practically bankrupted our
Government."

"Some people who think that the Federal Reserve Banks are United States
Government institutions. They are private monopolies which prey upon the
people of these United States for the benefit of themselves and their
foreign customers; foreign and domestic speculators and swindlers; and rich
and predatory money lender."

"In that dark crew of financial pirates there are
those who would cut a man's throat to get a dollar out of his pocket; . . . "

"These twelve private credit monopolies were deceitfully and disloyally
foisted upon this Country by the bankers who came here from Europe and
repaid us our hospitality by undermining our American institutions."
04:14 PM on 07/26/2010
Another brilliant article by Ellen. There is absolutely no reason why the US should borrow money when the Constitution says we have the right to create it.
12:04 PM on 07/27/2010
Can you please fill me in why an Indian steel company (Mittal), a Japanese electronics firm, or a Saudi Oil sheik would accept dollars in payment for their products if we collapse the dollar through money printing?

If not, then please explain how exactly we will get along without those products, and countless other everyone relies but which no US manufacturer actually manufactures.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
joebhed
Greenback Revolutionist
11:30 PM on 07/27/2010
Would you please explain what you mean by money printing.
The only thing that should give the $US "currency" abroad is the very strength of its real national economy.
We do not print money to satisfy oil sheiks.
We create money for the purpose of providing the circulating medium that our national economy needs in order to facilitate the means for exchanging the goods and services among the producers and consumers - that's what a money system should be doing.
I hope you're not trying to imply that the government's money creation would be in addition to any other money creation.
There is no need for anyone except the government to provide for the national circulating medium.
The question becomes how to establish a standard for the internal use of the country that will serve to maintain a proper quantity of the nation's money so as to be non-inflationary and non-deflationary, hopefully near full-employment..
Economic stability and general price stability in this country is what will ensure the stability of the $US in global commerce.
Ask the IMF or the BIS.
01:13 PM on 07/26/2010
The med country all are victim to teh latest welfare propgra, for Germany. Once teh cold war ended and Germany was expected to be weaned from the support of the west it received prior, it had to come up with a new vein to tap as any leech does. The answer was the Euro. The Pesata, Lira, Drachma and Punt were victims to a need to propo up teh Deutschemark artificially again.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
06:06 PM on 07/25/2010
The one word Ms Brown hasn't mentioned in her article is the word Gold, or more precisely precious metals.

When more countries dump their US cash holdings for precious metals, watch out, inflation will quickly turn into hyper inflation. Many of the banks in the US who depend on low precious metals prices will find themselves in a worst situation than the financial crisis we saw in 2008. JP Morgan for instance shorted Gold when it was at around 900$/ounce.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
joebhed
Greenback Revolutionist
04:04 PM on 07/26/2010
You're right, I think.
Ellen didn't mention gold.
Gold is inconsequential as related to currency and monetary sovereignty.
Nobody cares who is shorting gold and who isn't.
Unless it's in your book.
So what.
Who cares?
12:07 PM on 07/27/2010
Agreed. Gold will never again be a real currency. There are only two "hard currencies" in the global future. One is the current set-up: Fiat currency of a super-power, or a "market basket". The other is the circumstance the gold-bugs look towards. But in those circumstances, the "hard currency" will be bullets. Perhaps augmented by toilet paper and the little liquor bottles you get off the airplane.
04:22 PM on 07/25/2010
I have read this theory before but then
Why does the government tax at all?
Why are small businesses foundering over payroll tax, several people tell me they can't meet these payments every quarter is a crisis?
Why not lower everyones rate to the 15% that Buffet pays. or even lower for the poor?
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Leonardo Beeson
09:55 PM on 07/25/2010
Because if you've hijacked the government you still need to keep the population under control and submission, and what better way than through poverty, ignorance and despair? A hopeless individual struggling to meet ends day will focus no further than paying bills and meeting mortgage payments. Some (most actually, but I don't want to seem melodramatic) can only focus in taking food to the table tonight, least worry about tax and financial reforms in Congress.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
joebhed
Greenback Revolutionist
08:42 AM on 07/26/2010
The GUV has about $4T annual budget, but cannot create $4T in new money without causing inflation.
The total amount that the government can create each year debt-free must be balanced by growth in the economy.
With a $13 T economy and 2.5 percent growth, the GUV can only add $325Billion in new money.
In addition, the GUV can create money to pay off maturing public debt instruments without causing inflation, because the bond represents monies previously created - the GUV is just paying it off without creating another debt.
So, VOILA ! , there goes the so-called, international-banker-invented, sovereign debt crisis.
It's actually a pretty good deal for the people, if you think about it.

The truth is that the government can reduce the tax burden for its normal expenditures on an ongoing basis (+/- $350 Billion), plus it can reduce the entire existing interest burden on government debt along with the maturity of those debts - which I believe are about $450 Billion today.
And that would be annually.

A t that point we could do two things:
1. Put an end to the the annual deficit-debt crybabying by the mass ignorati about things like sovereign debt-defaults.
2. Get the national economy onto a footing of meeting the ongoing needs of the people, while ending the system of debt-servitude which enables and promotes No. 1 .
It's called OUR national, permanent, sovereign money system.
Say the words.
The Money System Common.
02:04 PM on 07/25/2010
In a sovereign state, the government controls the central bank not the other way around. The fact that the U.S. Congress has to get permission from the Federal Reserve to audit the central bank function tells you that the Federal Reserve controls the U.S. and the U.S. is no long a sovereign state but an international financial network.In our constitution, the Congress manages the banking function, not the Federal Reserve. The battle by European states to regain control of their sovereign assets show that European countries are prepared to fight for their sovereignty. Remember Greece tried to warn the U.S. of the danger but we took no action. There is no such thing as a bank to big to fail unless it is a scheme that leverages another countries' assets or uses leverage that does not exist. AIG only had 20% asset exposure in the U.S. but leveraged 80% debt in international markets. Under what legal authority did Congress make us responsible for international debt that is not covered in a treaty? We need to conduct the same types of investigation that other countries are trying to conduct, including investigating Congress.
04:23 PM on 07/25/2010
this is new info, I didn't ever see this
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
joebhed
Greenback Revolutionist
08:44 AM on 07/26/2010
Very well said.
Thank you.
12:48 PM on 07/25/2010
Summary of the above: our debt doesn't matter because we really won't be paying it back. If we do pay it back, it will be with dollars that we specially create just for paying the debt. And, to make it even better, the entire world is foolish enough to keep loaning us resources and selling us stuff in exchange for this debt that we will never pay. Whoopee !! Let's spend more. Why isn't the government just buying us all houses and GM cars, since it will never have to pay for them?
04:24 PM on 07/25/2010
and why are we paying so much payroll tax?
it is hurting small business
09:14 PM on 07/25/2010
This is just being dumb while trying to be clever . Some people need to stop thinking superficially - in cliches - and go deep into the money issues . That's when the solutions - that are basically simple - become clear. A money supply is a strategic asset - like the army . The whole economy rides on it and can easily be damaged by it. If you can fully manipulate a country's money supply you can cause more damage than dropping bombs - eg Great Depression and 08 Crash .
America and World money supplies are basically in private hands....which are ruthless.
Proper Gov control and regulation is vital .Then the money can be directed into productivity...not financialisation, personal debt, foreign trade imbalances etc.
11:20 PM on 07/24/2010
Critics of this piece all obscure the fact that the US "federal reserve system" is privately owned - unconstitutionally.
This is the single most important fact about the US economy - but it isn't taught in university economics departments!
So long as it continues, and so long as all new money in the US economy continues to start as debt to banks, Americans will continue to be progressively enslaved - as is happening terrifyingly fast today.
State Banks are not a "new" idea - they were the reason for the original struggle over which the USA was founded, for goodness sake.
American need to know their own history! . . the British central bank tried to force Americans to "borrow" money from them - but they lost the war Britain started in order to enforce this.
But a later generation of banksters set up the "fed" - so now the enemy doing the exact same fraud on the American people is within the USA itself.
This is THE issue which the Tea Partiers should make their own - it's what the original Tea Party was about (not the Tea tax, which was a minor irritant).
It's politically impossible to change the fed directly - 2/3 of Congress couldn't even get it audited!!
So starting at State level has to be politically more feasible.
Demidan
2+2=5,(that's a Orwell reference you addlepate.)
09:07 PM on 07/24/2010
Japan owes 300% it's GNP and they are doing fine, what the hell is wrong with us? Oh, yeah the GOP needs a brain wax.
12:49 PM on 07/25/2010
Would you loan long-term money to the Japanese?
04:41 PM on 07/25/2010
most of the debt is to their own citizens, we can buy bonds at treasury direct,but even better would be if we could get a little higher rate from them and maybe a money market fund, or inflation protection
if we could participate we would have less fear of inflation
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
OSCPJ
Want it? Work 4 it. No 1 has ever drown in sweat.
04:46 PM on 07/25/2010
Japan. You don't know anything about Economics. Japan is the worst example. Clueless. Try and google Lost decade and realize it is two decades.
01:15 PM on 07/24/2010
dumping large amounts of cash on corporations and wealthy people causes problems
low interest rates cause money to go to developing countries where rates are higher, TheEconomist july 17 2020
excess cash can cause bubbles
traders can corner markets, as they drove up prices of wheat recently
Demidan
2+2=5,(that's a Orwell reference you addlepate.)
09:09 PM on 07/24/2010
There was no money use to drive up wheat prices, that was done by placing Will Call orders by the thousand and never buying. Get your facts straight.
04:26 PM on 07/25/2010
so money has nothing to do with bubbles?
04:26 PM on 07/25/2010
I have no money, so can I drive up prices?
tell me how
08:51 AM on 07/24/2010
Ellen, I still think your state-banks idea is an easier sell because we really need to get the pension funds out of the hedge funds if we want any stability. By investing in their own states where the ROI would be profit + taxes payed to the state. But as far as jobs are concerned private-sector jobs come from the creation of a market, in a Great Recession, because it's not really a business cycle event. A market = business plan + investors + paying customers. The government can create a market because it can predict the future by raising the tax on foreign oil in ten years, creates a US market today. Another way is the “Home Star” program that just passed the Senate in a bi-partisan manner which actually gives me hope that they understand how to create a market.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
joebhed
Greenback Revolutionist
08:53 AM on 07/26/2010
It IS an easier sell, but I'm glad that Ellen has ventured into the world that can make state banking a development tool that is leveraged with real money that bankers actually have, and not with creating more debts, even for the grand public purposes of the states.
For which I thank Ellen tremendously.
11:26 PM on 07/23/2010
That such utter nonsense can be sold as sound economic analysis is a testament to the gullibility and mush-mindedness of the public.

Call it sovereign debt, call it government debt, or call it a turkey that can fly--it is debt. If you print money to pay it off, you will debase your currency. Sooner or later, you will have inflation.

Look how Ms. Brown tries to justify this insane and reckless inflationary policy--by stating that we don't risk inflation as long as we have high unemployment. Well, a lot of us are working to change that situation, and with the blessing of heaven, maybe someday we'll reach that goal. And when we do, we'll still have the trillions in debt and their related interest payments, and no amount of increased tax revenue will stem the tide sufficient to service that debt. Therefore this magical "quantitative easing" will have to be employed, and the resulting inflation will not be pretty.

At the same time, Ms. Brown decries the actions of speculators. Speculators do what speculators do. If governments are so irresponsible as to set themselves up to be fleeced by these guys, it is the fault of the irresponsible government. And right now the US is setting itself up to be the world's chump. Lame, reality-denying economic "analysis" like Ms. Brown's here only contribute to the spirit of complacency that will contribute to our downfall.

Ms. Brown does well to compare us to Argentina.
02:16 AM on 07/24/2010
yes , who cares what ratings say , if you are a dead beat with no plan to pay, then consequences happen
most politicians, lefta and right are driving toward the cliff
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
joebhed
Greenback Revolutionist
07:45 AM on 07/24/2010
Let's not throw around meaningless jargon, like "debasing the currency",.
Heavens to Betsy! Run for the hills!
The bad, stupid government is, ummm.... debasing the currency!
From what?

Since we left the gold standard of exchange, there is no such thing, as their is no BASE-is for the value of the currency, except relative to other currencies.
We are free-floating the exchange rate - so WHERE is the basis for debasing?
Any beef on those bones?

If you're worried about the Trillions in government debt, and you should be, then why should the government borrow the people's money that it can simply pay into existence in a non-inflationary and debt-free manner?
It is the job, the duty and the sovereign right of the government to provide the circulating medium of exchange for goods and services of the national economy.
How it does that is up to the government.
We can keep on borrowing it, or not, as Ellen Brown suggests here.
The Constitution gives the people's government the right to create and control the value of the currency. That's what sovereignty is all about.

Were the government NOT so stupid as to set them up for speculative manipulation by the bond marketeers, they would begin immediately to set the laws to do what the Colonists and Lincoln did - Greenbacks are still good dollar-for-dollar money.

Claiming that substantive monetary reform contributes to complacency is a little of that 'whistling-past-the-graveyard, IMHO.
10:15 AM on 07/24/2010
"Debasing the currency" is not meaningless jargon. In fact it is quite specific. It means that too many dollars in circulation lowers the dollar's value. That no metal standard exists is not meaningful. A debased currency has lost value relative to goods and services, and it has lost value relative to other currencies.

Maybe you are too young to remember the seventies, when rampant inflation caused real wages to drop significantly. Those were tough times, but the economic polices embraced by the current administration, and celebrated by the likes of Ms. Brown, are much more exaggerated than those employed in the Carter years, so the effect is going to be worse, if we don't change course (and we probably won't).

Look for very high inflation, and very high interest rates to follow. Think it is hard to get a job now?
04:29 PM on 07/25/2010
I agree the govt should provide cash etc, but HOW they do that might be important