Ernie – “The banks and the Fed got the government to deregulate finance” This is a myth spread by banks and the government. I urge you to speak to someone from a small investment firm and ask them what has happened to regulation over the last 10-20 years.
There is more regulation than ever and the only ones that can afford the compliance costs are your JP Morgans and Goldman Sachs
“paid for Congress and signed by the bought and paid for president.” – If the government had limited funds, do you think they could afford to police the baking sector? Do you think they would be able to enforce draconian regulations? Of course not, so no bank would be interested in lobbying them because there would be nothing the politician could do to help them. They may as well lobby me for all the power they had.
“We the people need to retake control of money and finance, otherwise we will just continue as debt slaves to the banks.” – I agree 100%. But it is not correct to merely state “banks”. we should be specific and say money centre banks ie the banks that deal directly with the Fed, they are the problem. Your local neighbourhood bank is part of the solution.
” Government is the only tool to do that. ” – Ernie, let me break it down for you again.
Why do the banks lobby government? – Because the government can change the environment in their favour
How is government able to change the environment? – Because they have the resources to pass laws and to enforce said laws
Where do they get their resources from? – They borrow money from the central banks.
What do the central banks gain from lending the government money? – The biggest loans possible. Nothing borrows more money than a government, therefore nothing pays as much interest as the taxpayer.
How can you limit the resources of government? – Take away their ability to borrow money in the name of the people. Stop central banks from being able to monetise government debt.
Do we need a government? – Absolutely
Where would it get its money from? – Taxes
How would you stop the corruption of government? – Take away its ability to get into debt. if a government is not able to borrow, it will not be paying interest which means it would not be profitable to lend it money. Which means it will cease to be a target to lobbyists as the government would only have the money to finance essential services. ie the legal system and defense.
Or you could say I am completely wrong, you could say the system is fundamentally sound, you could say it is wise to place our freedoms in the hands of a few hundred people and that it is wise to hope that they will do the right thing, that they will pass the “right” regulations and that they will police said regulations in a fair way and in a way that will not bankrupt a nation.
I suppose you could say that but personally I do not think you would be putting in solid foundations that would led to a society free from government corruption. I prefer to put my “faith” in solid principles rather than relying on the hoped “fairness” of a few hundred people.
Its a nice thought and arguably, in a perfect world the way to go, but history has shown time and time again that the more concentrated power becomes the less free the people become.
You only have to go back to Hoxha in Albania. The guy was in power until 1985. Here was a guy that believed in the power of his people, here was a guy that believed in the superiority of his country, here is a guy that wanted to fight corruption wherever he saw it, here was a guy that believed in equality, here was a guy that believed the prosperity of an individual was down to the efforts of society, here was a guy that switched the nations electricity off at 10pm everyday because he believed everyone should be in bed so they be fresh for work the next day, here was a guy that was paranoid about his country being attacked by foreigners and look where that led.
Full employment, poverty for the masses while senior management level employees had all the trappings of a capitalist like society and where people were frightened to voice their opinions against him in case they were labelled unpatriotic and imprisoned without charge for being potential terrorists.
Here was a guy that believed he was doing what was best for society and it led to people living in terror and poverty. To use a cliche, the road to hell is paved with good intentions
In short I think it is stupid to give total power to a tiny group of people and expect the power not to go their head.
“minimum-government-because-government-is-intrinsically-evil meme” – Again, I do not believe government is evil, I simply believe that people, all of us, are corruptible in one way or another so to give a tiny political elite access to unlimited power & money through the Federal Reserve is asking for trouble. Surely you do not disagree with this? ie that giving unlimited power to a tiny elite is going to lead to fascism?