The Unz Review • An Alternative Media Selection$
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 Radhika Desai Archive
Beyond the Dollar
Creditocracy: A Geopolitical Economy
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • B
Show CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeThanksLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Thanks, LOL, or Troll with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used three times during any eight hour period.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments

Introduction

As President Biden continues his predecessor’s New Cold War on China, it is clear that the pandemic has vastly accelerated the on-gong shift in the international balance of power, away from the US and towards China. For former US Treasury Secretary, Lawrence Summers, it was likely a ‘hinge of history’: ‘[i]f the 21st century turns out to be an Asian century as the 20th was an American one, the pandemic may well be remembered as the turning point’. It would erase 9/11 and 2008 from memory and rank alongside ‘the 1914 assassination of the Archduke, the 1929 stock market crash, or the 1938 Munich Conference’ (Summers 2020).

However, Professor Summers misses the point. The twentieth century, from our point of view, was actually more an attempted American Century than an accomplished one (Desai 2013) and the shift away from it is looking more certain and decisive than the ‘ifs’ in his assessment let on. The pandemic is less a hinge than an acceleration of the decline of US power based on financialised neoliberal capitalism (Desai 2020a). The structure of world domination that the US had sought to foist on the world in recent decades is breaking down. The US never succeeded; the structure was too unstable and volatile to work. Therefore, one cannot blame the pandemic for reversing even its limited successes. The reversal is rooted in a geopolitical economic earthquake whose rumblings date back decades. They have loosened more and more countries from the contradictory and crisis-prone structures of US domination.

The core of all international power structures of the ‘capitalist mode of foreign relations’ (Van der Pijl 2014) lies in the international monetary system – what James Steuart called ‘the money of the world’ in 1767, referring to the means by which countries settle their trade or financial imbalances among one another. The domination the US sought to exert was no different. At its heart lay the dollar-denominated international financial system that we call the Dollar Creditocracy. It has undergirded the dollar’s world role since the early 1970s and its unravelling leads the denouement of US power.

The financial commentariat is already expressing foreboding of the dollar’s coming doom. ‘The decline of the U.S. dollar could happen at “warp speed”’, warns Market Watch, while Reuters reports more sedately on how ‘King dollar’s decline ripples across the globe’. While set-tos between dollar boosters and gloomsters have long been a feature of the crises that have regularly punctuated the dollar system, what was remarkable is how many are changing sides. Benjamin Cohen (2020) warned of the end of the dollar’s ‘exorbitant privilege’ and Stephen Roach (2020) warned of a 35 percent drop in the dollar index over the coming two to three years. Although some boosters such as Barry Eichengreen (2020) stuck to their guns, they were clearly low on ammunition, unable to find solace in anything other than lack of alternatives.

Such commentators sense that doom lies ahead. However, they are far from explaining why. Cohen blamed it on Trump’s disastrous pandemic management, added to his tendency to weaponise the dollar, and Roach blames it on increased US borrowing. However, these explanations, like most commentary on the dollar’s world role, is tangled in that combination of wishful thinking and wager that one of us identified as the international financial intermediation hypothesis (IFIH) (Hudson 1972/2003). It emerged from the difficulties that ended the dollar’s link to gold in 1971 to conjure up a new basis for the dollar’s world role. By making the so-very-clever argument that the US was no ordinary indebted country but the world’s banker and that its deficits were loans to the world, a public service the world should accept gratefully by lifting capital controls and deregulating finance, this interpretation attempts to normalise the transformation of the US economy from super creditor to super debtor. However, it was never more than a barely adequate fig-leaf.

Our purpose in this article is to cut through this interpretation. Despite its faults, it dominates our understanding of the dollar system. In its place we reveal one that is theoretically sound and accords with the historical record, a geopolitical economy (Desai 2013) of the international monetary system of modern capitalism. We begin with a theoretical outline of how money operates under capitalism. We then consider how capitalism needs world money and, at the same time, makes its stable functioning difficult. We then go on to trace the fundamental instability of the modern international monetary systems based on national currencies of dominant countries, from the gold standard to the current volatile and predatory dollar-centred system, and their close connection to short-term and speculative as opposed to long-term and productive finance. We conclude by discussing of the key instabilities of the dollar system and the paths that various countries and international organizations are already taking to move beyond its destructive logics.

Money Under Capitalism

No other notion sets back our understanding of money than that money is a commodity. Money is an ancient social institution that put capitalism in a bind: The essentially public character of money is pitted against capitalism’s urge to privatise, control and commodify it. However, success in doing so only lays the basis for crisis. Karl Polanyi, following the Marxist sociology of Ferdinand Tönnies, called money a fictitious commodity (Desai, 2020b).

Unlike commodities, Marx noted, money has no ‘natural’ price, no real cost of production (Marx, [1894] 1981: 478). Precious metal coinage was the earliest of the attempts to commodify money. Marx hit the nail on the head when he observed that

For coin, the road from the mint is also the path to the melting pot… In the course of circulation, coins wear down … The weight of gold fixed upon as the standard of prices diverges from the weight which serves as the circulating medium… The history of these difficulties constitutes the history of the coinage throughout the Middle Ages and in modern times down to the eighteenth century. (Marx, 1867/1977: 222)

The acceptance of coins relied not on the precious metal they contained, but on minting by a sovereign authority that undertook to exchange them for the right quantity of the metal. ‘[A]s coin, gold becomes completely divorced from the substance of its value. Relatively valueless objects, therefore, such as paper notes, can serve as coins in the place of gold’. The coin therefore is always ‘capable of being replaced by valueless symbols of itself’ (Marx 1867/1977, pp. 223-4, 225-6).

Moreover, as Pierre Vilar points out, capitalism requires that money not be too much like a commodity. If it were, it would be punishingly deflationary: ‘if a single stable monetary system existed, a perpetual fall in prices would have continually discouraged producers and sellers, for whom the prospect of increases is the best stimulus.’ (Vilar, 1976: 11). That is also why John Maynard Keynes pointed out that there were only two periods in history when metallic money functioned tolerably well: the Elizabethan and Victorian ages, when the supply of precious metals was sufficiently plentiful. Even then, other devices were needed to forestall deflationary consequences (Keynes, 1980: 30).

We must therefore understand money as an historical institution, created by human societies and changing as social forms change. Capitalism has changed money in a very distinctive fashion, seeking to force it into the mould of a commodity. Such an endeavour could never be entirely successful, but the effort did transform money in critical ways. Two elements are important here.

First, all money is debt, whether issued by states or owed by households and firms to private creditors. Repayment extinguishes the debt owed to private creditors. State-issued notes and coins constitute an accounting liability on government balance sheets. We have already seen the fate of the earliest attempt to commodify money and reduce state control over it by making a commodity the material bearer of money, usually a precious metal such as gold or silver: the social and political character of money showed through in the very exercise. Though governments were liable to exchange notes and coins for gold and such exchange discharged the debt, most holders never demanded gold. Since the mid-twentieth century, governments have largely ceased offering gold in exchange. This has freed governments to fund their expenditures with paper debt, as the United States did during its Civil War with its greenbacks.

While gold coinage or convertibility did not last as ways of commodifying money, two others ways persist in the new situation of fiat or government-backed money. First, in the private financial sector, the originally social and political debt relations became exchange relations. Second, through a self-denying ordinance, capitalist states limited their own issue of money, permitting private credit a greater role than public debt in issuing money.

The second element of capitalism’s transformation of money relates to how debt is managed. The earliest human societies managed debt for social stability by holding both parties to the social relation of debt co-responsible when debts could not be paid. In the ancient Near East, such management included jubilees: at regular intervals these celebrations extinguished all debts, freeing debtors to make new beginnings with ‘Clean Slates’, maintaining social cohesion and economic stability by cancelling unpayable debt (Hudson 2018 and 2020).

Only in Roman times did debt become a relation of pure contractual exchange, making it inescapable. Five centuries of civil wars were fought to reverse forfeiture of collateral, land and liberty, wars that led to the fall of Rome. Once debt was contracted, the debtor had to pay it without regard to adverse personal and social consequences. Creditors bore no responsibility for having made loans that could not be paid, often at interest rates as high as 42 percent. With mounting compound interest unmoored from real growth rates and the ability to pay, debts inevitably mounted to unsustainable levels and racked Rome with recurrent and politically destabilizing debt crises.

Since Roman times, creditors have forced debtors who could not repay to forfeit their assets through foreclosure or forced sale. Though the medieval age recognised the ills of debt in its injunctions against usury, capitalism resurrected this aspect of Roman law. To be sure, the tyranny of creditors was sometimes vanquished by powerful debtors: Philip IV of France destroyed his creditors, the Knights Templar and Edward III of Britain defaulted against Italian banks, bankrupting them. Overall, however, the creditor interest has asserted itself repeatedly. In the post-Civil War US, it imposed a deflation that led to widespread farm bankruptcies, impoverishing farmers in an infamous monetary deflation. This was repeated in the Great Depression of the 1930s, by President Obama after 2009, as well as by the IMF and its Structural Adjustment Programmes in the developing world in the 1980s and 1990s.

Enforcing the legal fiction of debt as an exchange relation was the necessary condition for commodifying paper money. The sufficient condition involved capitalist states imposing on themselves a monetary self-abnegation when it came to issuing money. Government-created money never needs to be paid back, and does not expand the power of private creditors. So, when governments began limiting their own issuance of money and even borrowing form private creditors, they left the overwhelming amount of money creation as a source of profits for private creditors, banks and financial institutions and founded veritable creditocracies, by backing their financial interest with political power. Such arrangements were already being made in the earliest years of capitalism, when private creditors made their pacts with states hungry for funds to fight wars. Lenders ensured that states did not tax them but borrowed from them (Ingham, 1984, 48-9, 99-100) and states often settled war loans by giving creditors monopolies, such as the East and West India Companies, South Sea Company and the Bank of England.

This is how capitalist states have used their power to create, preserve and extend that of their financial sectors, including over themselves. There is a cost to this. Leaving the issuance of the overwhelming amount of money in circulation to competing profit-seeking private creditors makes them touts and pushers of debt and their activities regularly lead to crises, followed by state bailouts and new financial regulation.

World Money, World Creditocracy

We are now ready to approach the question of how these national monetary orders of capitalism relate to one another internationally. One key contradiction has powered the history of world money under capitalism. On the one hand, money is created by states or those delegated and controlled by them. On the other, there can be no world state under capitalism, and thus no world money. When dominant states nevertheless seek to foist their currency on the world as world money, they add new layers of contradictions and volatilities to the already unstable logic inherent in the geopolitical economy of capitalism (Desai 2013), the ‘relations between [its] producing states’ as Marx once put it (Marx, 1858/1973, 886).

Dominant states and their capitalists seek to externalise onto other states or territories the consequences of their capitalism’s contradictions, such as excess commodities and capital, or the need for cheap labour and raw materials. These efforts victimize subordinated economies, but make rivals of states that are able to contest this domination. When the latter happens, there are confrontations – diplomatic, economic or even military – like those between Britain and her nineteenth century rivals, such as Germany. The result then was a Thirty Years’ Crisis (1914-45), including two world wars and a Great Depression. Today, we are witnessing rising tensions between the US and countries like China and Russia. The struggles resulting from international victimization, rivalries and resistance prevent any world state from being formed, also preventing stable world money.

That is why all major critical writers on the subject, from Marx through Keynes to Polanyi, distinguished the understanding of national currencies from the distinctly different arrangements world monies have needed. That is also why the gold-sterling standard before the First World War and the dollar-centred system since the Second World War have been inherently unstable arrangements, the latter even more than the former. National states posing as world states offer their national currency as world money, and use force to integrate the world economy though their goal of a seamless realm of its acceptance has not and could not be realised , thanks to the inherent instabilities of capitalism’s geopolitical economy (Desai 2013 and 2020b).

The key to understanding the world monetary systems based on the national currencies of the dominant capitalist countries is that they are primarily financial systems: private credit forms the battering ram of their international projection as world money. International monetary systems have, therefore, been the financial systems of particular countries. Governed by central banks that in most countries represent the interests of the financial sector, they generate vastly more private debt than public money. The results have been international rentier elites and world creditocracies, first centred on sterling and then the dollar. Their power extends through networks of institutions offering private credit to the world’s households, firms and governments and dealing in financial assets, such as stocks, bonds and other securities and their derivatives, especially for real estate and natural resources. The network is ultimately protected by the international power of that state. The 1950s and 60s constituted an exception to this when the United States supplied gold and exports to other countries. (Much of the gold was simply a return of the flight capital that had come to the United States in the 1930s.)

These arrangements have shaped the world’s trade and production patterns in the interest of financial classes, seeking to lock in the world balance of power. Other countries became satellites of the dominant economies, buying their surpluses and monopoly goods, and opening their capital markets. Open capital markets let dominant-country capitalists own and control their most lucrative sectors, especially those involved in primary commodities and public-infrastructure monopolies, earning higher returns on their capital than they would enjoy at home. They also let dominant nations’ financial houses speculate in the asset markets – for stocks, bonds, real-estate etc. – of the satellite countries, profiting while the going is good and leaving the country’s government to clean up the financial and economic mess after the inevitable financial crisis strikes. Whether such countries are colonies or formally independent countries, their freedom to do otherwise is severely curtailed. A great deal of this is achieved by backing compliant satellite oligarchies, often by overt military force and covert operations.

As the core instrumentality of domination, creditocracies are intricately enmeshed in international conflict. Major shifts in the international balance of power are expressed in parallel shifts in international monetary systems and the domestic financial systems on which they rest. Each international monetary system has rested on an inherently unstable financial system. Of course, this is precisely what is hidden by the dominant discourses about them.

The Gold Standard, 1870–1914: Gold or Empire?

In popular myth, the international gold standard (c 1870 to 1914) was a pervasive, stable and beneficial arrangement, automatically adjusting the gold value of the world’s currencies upward or downward as economies improved or deteriorated. Only the First World War ended it.

These myths have been busted in recent times by those who argue that the post-1971 dollar system is just the contemporary version of that system. The new account clarified that it was not a gold standard but a gold-sterling standard, that it was not automatic but managed, and that though sterling was predominant, there were other ‘key currencies’, such as the French franc or the German mark. Such revisions served the purpose: to cast flattering light on the dollar system. Unsurprisingly, they refrained from saying anything about the sterling system’s less flattering parts, its imperial basis, instability and dysfunctionality for working classes and subordination of colonies.

What was the sterling system really and how did it emerge? In medieval times, gold and silver coins circulated together and, with the development of capitalism, this system was progressively transformed. In Britain, silver was driven out and bank notes came into increasing use to supplement gold in circulation. The inflationary financing of the Napoleonic Wars led, eventually, to the 1844 Bank Charter Act. It limited the notes the Bank of England and other banks could issue to a conservative ratio of the Bank’s gold reserves. This British gold standard became international when other countries began pegging their currencies to gold in the 1870s (De Cecco 1984, p. 2). Sterling was only the most widely used such currency.

Britain’s commitment to gold is storied, and colonies, such as British India, were dragooned into the sterling standard at considerable disadvantage to them. Other countries’ commitment and motivations varied. While gold appreciated, some countries, such as the oligarchical primary commodity exporters, Austria-Hungary and Russia, remained with depreciating silver (ibid., pp. 51-2). And the countries which adopted the gold standard did so for varied reasons: to escape the depreciation of silver, to obtain credit, or, in the case of industrial challengers like Germany, to gain international acceptability for their own currency as part of a drive to expand market share (ibid., ch. 3) and challenge Britain’s control over international financial flows.

The gold-sterling standard was not automatic but highly managed. The Bank of England managed the value of sterling and gold outflows by raising or lowering the interest rate. The mechanism worked simply because of London’s short-term lending through British financial institutions. They simply left more of their deposits in London when interest rates went up. Other countries, particularly Britain’s productively superior challengers whose financial system was geared to long-term lending for production, did not have financial systems with such hair trigger mechanisms ensuring short term in- and out-flows. They had to accumulate considerable gold reserves to defend the gold value of their currencies. More generally, governments and central banks decided how to balance transmitting the disciplinary effects of international price movements to their domestic economies and protecting them from the same movements (Polanyi 1944). When such choices proved too difficult, governments could also go off the gold peg.

However, the gold standard system was not only a managed sterling standard that had to contend with other key currencies and domestic considerations, it was also imperial, unstable and economically dysfunctional.

While the gold peg made sterling internationally acceptable, the British Empire’s financial flows actually underwrote it, permitting the system to work with a comparatively tiny gold reserve. The empire was able to furnish liquidity by financing trade and investment in its white settler colonies and the US with surpluses squeezed out of its non-settler colonies, chiefly British India (Desai 2018, Patnaik, 2017, Saul 1960 and De Cecco 1984). While geopolitically motivated deposits from countries like Greece or Japan helped, as did those of Britain’s own increasingly powerful joint-stock banks, India’s contribution was indispensable (Saul 1960, 6; De Cecco 1984, 36-8, 122-26).

The sterling standard’s imperial character did not, however, protect it from the instability of the wider system. This instability arose because, Marcello De Cecco pointed out, the world economy was not a Ricardian one, seamlessly unified and ruled by the currency of its most powerful country, but a Listian geopolitical economy of competing and struggling national states and economies (De Cecco 1984, p. 13). The gold standard era was in fact witness to acute industrial and imperial competition as new industrial powers rose to challenge Britain’s pre-eminence and led, as is well known, to the First World War (Hobsbawm 1987). How could the sterling system remain unaffected?

Countries that successfully industrialised behind protectionist walls adopted the gold standard not to subordinate themselves to its discipline but to challenge Britain’s sterling system as they had challenged her control over the world market. The challengers had, moreover, radically different financial systems that could not prompt inflows and outflows through small interest rate changes and hoarded gold to defend their currencies’ gold value. As they did so, ‘the Bank of England found to its chagrin that when it raised the bank rate gold did not flow in as easily’ and it had to raise the rate much higher. The adverse ‘effects on the economy became substantial, and they were noticed by the public and by the financial and political class’ (De Cecco 2009, 126). This ensured that the sterling system was weakening well before war broke out in August 1914.

This was the context in which US policy and business elites began refining their foreign policy objectives. Rather than merely seeking an ‘open door’, they now sought to ‘topple and replace British business interests as the managing component of the world economy’ (Parrini 1969, 1). They sought to do this not by acquiring a territorial empire but by replacing sterling and London with the dollar and New York as the world money and financial centre respectively, and presiding over an open world economy.

Dollar boosters have encouraged the belief that the sterling and dollar systems are the acme of financial sophistication. Nothing could be farther from the truth if financial sophistication be said to consist fostering economic dynamism. Quite simply, the sterling standard operated in the declining part of the world capitalist system while a completely contrasting one prevailed in the vigorously rising part, consisting of the contender nations, such as Germany, the US and Japan.

The sterling system combined short-term speculative and rentier activity with long-term investment abroad, chiefly in Britain’s settler colonies and the US. There it aided their industrialization. British investors were passively earning only low interest while borrower capitalists in these countries reaped high profits (Hilferding 1910/1981) even as British industry began its still un-reversed relative decline (Gamble 1994, Ingham 1984). The sterling system also ruined nominally independent non-Western countries, such as Persia and Egypt. Only Britain’s non-settler colonies permitted sterling’s paramountcy in the face of industrial decline. They absorbed Britain’s increasingly uncompetitive exports, generated export surpluses that compensated for Britain’s growing trade deficit while increasing Britain’s capital exports. They constituted the system’s famished foundation (Patnaik and Patnaik 2016).

The Central European (Mitteleuropäisch), particularly the German system, by contrast, used a three-way coordination between governments, banks and industrial firms to prioritise industrial expansion. Most contemporary observers considered the latter superior (Hudson 2010, Hilferding 1910/1981 and Desai 2020c).

Finally, we may note that the sterling system’s gold link relied on another luxury, a politically quiescent working class on whom the burden of high interest rates and unemployment could be imposed to maintain the gold value of sterling. It would not survive the coming era of working class empowerment (Eichengreen 1992).

In sum, the sterling standard, the benchmark against which the dollar system is usually compared, was not only managed but also unstable, dysfunctional and already in crisis well before the war broke out in 1914. It relied on quiescent working classes and colonies, both conditions that would cease to obtain in the decades to come. That was the chief reason why it would not be resurrected in the interwar decades, try as British authorities might.

The Thirty Years’ Crisis, 1914–1945

The sterling system’s inherent instability showed how impossible it was for a national currency, even one at the helm of the greatest empire ever, to serve as world money. New arrangements were clearly needed. However, the Great War transformed international finance in an unexpected manner. The US Government, pursuing its ambition to replace Britain at the centre of world money and finance, emerged as the overwhelming world creditor because of the loans made to the Allies to fight the war.

In pursuit of its ambitions, the US had already started moving away from its more productively focused financial system by adopting English commercial banking principles. It established the Federal Reserve in late 1913, becoming the last major country to acquire a central bank. The next step was US entry into the Great War. The nation’s banks had exhausted their ability to finance exports to the warring allies, leading the US government to step in.

The war had already brought the US economy out of a depression. It now proceeded to transform the US from a great debtor to the worlds’ creditor, and hence arbiter of the peace that followed. In single-minded pursuit of its ambitions the US government undermined its English and French allies, and ultimately its own economy and corporations.

The key was the US insistence that Britain, France and other Allies pay the debts they had incurred to fight the war. This demand led the Allies, in turn, to demand reparations from defeated Germany. Many US corporate leaders saw the dangers inherent in demands for repayment of such unpayable debt, used as it had been for destruction, not production, and called for at least a partial cancellation. The British also reminded the US of their forgiveness of Austrian debts owed them after the Napoleonic wars. Keynes, mindful of limits both on war-weary Europe’s ability to pay and on the US’s ability to absorb the exports such repayment would prompt, called for a ‘general bonfire’ of the ‘vast paper entanglements’ (Keynes 1919, 283). However, US Government demands for payment prevailed. This accomplished two things. First, governmentalized international finance displaced the private financial flows over which sterling had presided. Second, the creditor orientated principle that all debts must be paid, regardless of how socially destabilizing the consequences were, was established in inter-governmental finance just as in private finance.

World growth and stability were sacrificed to these inter-governmental creditor claims. Satisfying such large creditor demands of a single government led debtor countries to pay by subjecting their economies to austerity. Allied governments and their central banks siphoned off economic surpluses to pay debts owed to the US Government, a sum far in excess of what they owed to America’s private bankers.

The US government for its part was chiefly concerned with its own world power, and pursued objectives quite distinct from those of Wall Street. This became clear when, in 1931, President Herbert Hoover announced a moratorium on US Inter-Ally debt demands. This led to one on German reparations and stock markets jumped throughout the world. The resulting restoration of foreign-exchange stability more than repaid the United States for the loss of the nominal $250 million sum of foregone debt service. Suspension of the government’s claims had a salutary initial effect on private international finance capital.

US interwar financial actions were also implicated in the crash of 1929 and the Great Depression. Given that its demands for debt repayment and reparations were unsound, the US had to organise a veritable financial merry-go-round to keep them going as long as they did: Germany paid reparations to the European allies, who paid their war debts to the US – and its banks, in turn, lent to Germany, chiefly to German municipalities. The US Federal Reserve maintained low interest rates through an early form of Quantitative Easing to encourage this circular flow, and to help the British put the pound back on gold. However, a side effect of low US interest rates was leveraged speculation in the US stock market, which rose even faster as foreign lending slowed. The US raised interest rates to tame it, triggering the crash of 1929. The already slowing economy, ultimately due to the undermining of the very markets on which the US relied to keep its war-bloated economy expanding, careened into the Great Depression. Lacking protected colonial markets, the US was its worst sufferer.

Advocates of US Hegemony (such as Kindleberger 1973) bemoan the US’s ‘failure’ to provide international leadership in the interwar period. What they do not understand is that the US’s pursuit of world power was necessarily a zero sum game. The last thing Roosevelt and his advisors wanted was the kind of internationalist leadership or even world recovery that would rehabilitate British, French and other European economies, enabling their governments to act as equals. The US aimed to subordinate foreign interests to its creditor claims, while escalating America’s protective tariffs and quotas to make it harder for these governments to repay. The Roosevelt administration justified its actions with the rationale that freeing Europe from having to pay its war debts to the United States would simply leave its governments with more money to re-arm and threaten the world once more with war. In reality, US actions from Versailles onwards were already making the Second World War inevitable.

Seeing it as a ‘second chance’ to pursue its goals, the US Government organized its intervention in the Second World War much the same way, tempered here and there by a lesson or two of the disastrous inter-war experience. In 1944-45 it tried to absorb the Sterling and Franc areas into its own dollar-centered financial system, based once again on inter-governmental debts. Once more, success eluded it.

Bretton Woods: US Altruism or Imperialism? 1945–1949

In 1944, with the war’s end imminent, planning for the post-war international order got under way. The US sought to use the Bretton Woods negotiations to revive its plans for world domination by securing the dollar’s position as world money. The first aim was to limit the potential power of rivals, pre-eminently British sterling and Keynes’s proposals for bancor. US officials used US creditor power, re-charged by the Second World War and by the capital that had fled Europe for the United States since the 1930s, as a lever to pry open foreign markets for US exporters and investors. Finally, they ensured that the newly formed institutions of international economic governance, chiefly the IMF and the World Bank, were designed to impose free trade and financial flows, both of which were expected to benefit US business.

However, these arrangements could not be imposed on other capitalist economies, weakened by war. They could not withstand the rigors of free trade and capital movements and the resulting debility would increase the attractions of Communism, which had, in any case, removed vast territories and populations from the ambit of capitalism. Nevertheless, soon after 1945 much of the infrastructure for US plans was, if not operational, in place.

To bring pressure on Britain, the US abruptly stopped loans to Britain through wartime Lend-Lease as soon as hostilities ended. The US used negotiations over the repayment of the $20 billion debt Britain already had incurred to secure three aims: take over what remained of British overseas assets, private and public, by obliging Britain to sell them off to pay Lend Lease credit; to pry open Britain’s Imperial Preference system; and to secure British support for the design of the IMF and the World Bank.

Under existing colonial and Imperial Preference arrangements, Britain had effectively frozen nearly $10 billion in sterling deposits of major exporters such as India or Egypt in London to ensure they would be spent on British exports through preferential tariff arrangements. The US wanted to open up British and Europe’s colonial raw-materials resources and markets for US corporations so that the blocked sterling credits could be spent on US exports instead of being limited to British products.

The US aim was to gain US access to world markets, a precondition for achieving full employment at home. To this end, the US pressure on Britain through the loan negotiations enlisted it in a common front against Europe. In the immediate post-war period, the effect was to concentrate in US Government hands most of the major decisions regarding which countries could borrow how much and on what conditions.

Finally, the US targeted proposals for an alternative to a US dollar-denominated, creditor-oriented international financial system. John Maynard Keynes proposed a multilateral International Clearing Union to settle international payments in a new multilaterally created currency, the ‘bancor,’ whose value would be determined by a price index of 30 widely traded commodities. The proposal was designed to eliminate persistent trade and financial imbalances by putting pressure for adjustment on creditor economies (mainly the United States) as well as debtor economies, by charging interest on positive as well as negative balances, and by wiping out the excess accumulations when they failed to find a counterpart in the ability of debtor countries to pay. Keynes’s scheme also underlined creditor nations’ obligation to make debts payable by importing goods from debtor countries and taking steps to improve their productive capacity. These proposals rested on Keynes’s critique of German reparations and Inter-Ally debt excesses of the 1920s and his acute awareness that a dollar system would subject Britain, with her declining industry and imminent loss of empire, to practically colonial pressures.

US designs for the IMF and the World Bank, the two institutions of international economic governance to emerge from the Bretton Woods conference, involved ensuring that their lending would be conditional. Conditions would include refraining from enacting protective tariffs or quotas, or erecting financial barriers such as competitive devaluation, multiple exchange rates, bilateral clearing agreements or blocked funds beyond a brief transition period.

Post-war European determination to expand the productive base and reduce balance of payment pressures converted what would have been an even greater US trade surplus into the great post-war expansion of US corporate investment in Europe. US corporations bought foreign companies and set up production facilities near markets and cheaper labour. As foreign earnings became an increasingly large proportion of US international profits, US corporations appeared to thrive. However, this investment outflow heralded the great US investment outflow to China and its Asian neighbours after 1990 that, while keeping down US consumer prices, shifted industrialization away from the United States itself.

Given US export surpluses at the time, US foreign investment seemed almost the only way to recycle its export earnings as international liquidity. While some US economists worried about shifting industrial production abroad, politicians on both sides of the Atlantic thought it would provide the basis for a stable equilibrium.

However, this was not the kind of equilibrium that Keynes had proposed. His ideas would have formally ended the financial monopoly of the single payments-surplus nation and its currency, precisely what US officials desired. By using the US’s post-war economic and financial weight, and by promising to back the dollar with gold, the US ensured the rejection of Keynes’s plan. That left the world with no alternative to the US dollar. Even so, the rest of the world was in no mood to swallow this bitter pill and the US had to promise to continue backing the dollar with gold at $35 an oz. When the war ended in 1945, the United States held about $20 billion in gold, accounting for 59 per cent of world gold reserves and these reserves only grew when, amid the dollar shortage, the Europeans were forced to pay for much needed US imports with gold. Europe lost gold rapidly to the US Treasury. US holdings rose by $4.3 billion by 1948, and by 1949 its gold stock reached an all-time high of $24.8 billion, reflecting an inflow of nearly $5 billion since the end of the war. France lost 60 percent of its gold and foreign exchange reserves during 1946-47, and Sweden’s reserves fell by 75 percent. Over the next two decades, however, the tables would turn dramatically.

The Golden Age: Creditocracy in Abeyance, 1945–1971

Ideas about US hegemony that emerged in the 1970s (e.g. Kindleberger 1973; Gilpin 1971. For a fuller discussion see Desai 2013, 124-137) retrospectively designated the 1950s and 1960s as a period when the US had been hegemonic, reluctantly accepting the burdens of world leadership and permitting the dollar to serve as the world’s currency. However, the US was neither reluctant nor successful. Having nursed the ambition to emulate Britain’s erstwhile dominance over a world economy mostly open to it, and squandered its opportunities to realise it after the First World War, it was determined to succeed at this ‘Second Chance’. However, despite the considerable power it wielded, circumstances were not propitious.

Though at Bretton Woods the US succeeded in preventing the emergence of any alternative to the dollar in international payments, it had to promise to back it with gold and it did not succeed in preventing capital controls, considerable state intervention in economies and financial regulation. Given the fragile state of war-torn allied economies, insisting on free markets, trade and capital flows, as the State Department under Cordell Hull wished to, would have been tantamount to handing them over to Communism. With the stabilization and extension (to Eastern Europe and China) of the Communist World and decolonised countries pursuing state-directed development, these compulsions made for the most dirigiste period ever witnessed since the beginnings of capitalism. Little wonder then that it was characterised by heavily regulated financial systems focused on productive expansion, with capital controls and low interest rates. The result was the ‘golden age,’ the most sustained period of growth the world had witnessed.

In such a dirigiste, far from open, world economy, defeating alternatives to the dollar could only have been a Pyrrhic victory. The dollar did not preside over a world-girding financial system but only served to settle imbalances between central banks, apexes of their respective, heavily regulated and closed financial systems. Without an empire, in a world of national economies all seeking growth and therefore investment, the US was in no position to export capital. Early on, with the US running an export surplus and sucking in the world’s dollars, there were shortages of the means of international payment. After 1958, when European currencies became convertible and could serve in international payments, practically overnight, the dollar shortage turned into a dollar glut.

Robert Triffin (1961) knew why. Unable to export substantial capital, US current account deficits due to its military expenditures in Korea and Vietnam became the way the US furnished the world with dollars. This method was subject to the Triffin Dilemma: deficits were necessary to provide liquidity but lowered the dollar’s value. After 1958, when major European currencies became convertible, the US’s vast gold hoard was drained down so quickly that by 1961 there was not enough to back dollars in circulation given that US law required 20 percent of the paper currency in circulation to be backed by gold. The US has to persuade its allies to pool their gold to retain the dollar’s gold peg.

Over the next decade, the dollar lurched from crisis to crisis and exhausted all expedients for dealing with the situation. Kennedy dealt with it by claiming that there was no objective problem, only one of confidence. Johnson, for his part, ended domestic gold convertibility engaged in ‘special transactions’, and persuaded allies to repay war and Marshall Plan debts early, buy more US military supplies, make advance payments on them, hold their surplus dollars in non-convertible US treasury bills and, not least, agree to a de facto embargo on US gold sales.

Having exhausted all expedients, knowing that restoring the dollar’s gold value would require punishing economic measures at home, Nixon abandoned convertibility in August 1971. Just over twenty-seven years after the US scuttled Keynes’ plan at Bretton Woods to install the dollar as world money, the US had failed and all it had to show for it was the loss of its enviable gold reserves.

The Re-emergence of Creditocracy: 1971 to 2008

By the early twenty-first century, the dollar was well into its second, even more volatile and destructive career, now reinforced by the rhetoric of Clinton’s ‘globalization’ and Bush’s ‘empire.’ New discourses proposed to regard the 1971 closing of the gold window as a masterful move, at one stroke unburdening the US from backing the dollar with gold while leaving the dollar’s preeminent position intact, perhaps even enhancing it in a veritable new ‘Bretton Woods II’ (Dooley et al 2005).

One has to cut through the fog of these discourses to retrieve the real history of the dollar after 1971. Initially, it took the form of a dollar-Treasury Bill standard (Hudson 1972). As the US continued to run its current account deficits, US Treasury securities per force became the ‘safe’ asset that foreign central banks could hold their surplus dollars in, instead of demanding gold. However, neither it, not the other measures the US now took, could prevent the dollar’s slide.

The US scuttled the Committee of Twenty negotiations to reform the international monetary system on a more equitable and less asymmetric basis when it concluded agreements with OPEC to recycle their oil surpluses in US and allied banks (Williamson 1977, xi), lifting capital controls to facilitate this. However, this too appeared incapable of halting the dollar’s slide. On the one hand, unimpressed Europeans took the first step towards European monetary integration by creating the ‘snake’ mechanism to place limits on fluctuations of member currencies in terms of one another. On the other, US and allied banks, stuffed to the gills with petrodollars and unable to lend in a stagnating West, went on a Third World lending spree, aided by the World Bank where less credit worthy nations were concerned. The result was a veritable ‘magic liquidity machine’ (Calleo 1982, 138) that triggered a new bout of Third World industrial deepening boding ill for US ambitions.

The dollar’s decline became precipitous, sending the price of gold up to over$800 an ounce around 1980. Clearly amid stagflation and negative interest rates of the 1970s, US Treasuries were not attractive. Only after the new Chairman of the Federal Reserve, Paul Volcker, permitted rates to rise as high as necessary – to 20 percent at one point – to stabilize the dollar did the new arrangement stabilise. The Japanese now became the major holders of US treasury bills. High interest was not the only cost: Volcker also reinforced the tendency of US industry to achieve competitiveness at the expense of workers even as Japanese manufacturers’ access to US markets marked the beginning of the rapid deindustrialization of the US that is still ongoing. It mirrors that of Britain in the gold standard period.

The punishing Volcker Shock recession of the early 1980s did push interest rates down from their stratospheric heights, though they remained historically high throughout the 1980s and 1990s in order to attract the funds needed to finance high US government deficits. By 1982, they triggered the Third World Debt Crisis as Mexico, Brazil and Argentina warned of impending default. The US, aided by the IMF and the World Bank, swung into action. In the first major post-war assertion of creditor interests, they enforced the rule that governments never go bankrupt (since they can always tax their citizens). The debt restructurings that followed ensured that by the end of the 1980s, Brazil and Argentina were each paying an enormous 45% interest rate on their dollar-denominated bonds (held mainly by their own kleptocratic elites).

Meanwhile, astronomical interest rates had sent the dollar to unsustainable heights and the 1985 Plaza Accord between the key currency countries was necessary to ensure that its inevitable decline was relatively orderly. The US had to put its financial house in order by closing its deficits in the late 1980s and early 1990s. This did not prevent the dollar from hitting another nadir as the euro emerged as a new rival. The defects of the Euro’s architecture should not draw attention away from the Europeans’ intention to withdraw their mutual transactions from the dollar system, much like the countries today concluding bi- and multilateral agreements to sidestep the dollar are doing. And, like the stronger European currencies it brought together, the euro is also used in international payments farther afield.

However, by the late 1980s, financial deregulation picked up pace and started the regressive transformation of the US financial system. During the gold standard era, it had resembled the productive German ‘finance capital’ model. After a brief and disastrous flirtation with the speculative UK model that culminated in the Crash of 1929, Depression era banking regulation, such as the famous Glass Steagall Act, turned it into one of the most regulated of financial systems. So the US financial system remained until the 1980s when it set off once again on the deregulatory path to ever more resemble the UK’s archaic, predatory, speculative and short-term finance model.

In this form, it was finally ready to expand the supply of assets – denominated in US dollars or in currencies easily convertible into US dollar – for private holders such that this private financial demand for the dollar would counteract the Triffin Dilemma downward pressure on the dollar that continued thanks to the US’s infamous twin – government and current account – deficits. This demand was many times greater than central banks’ demand for dollars as reserves. The resulting rise in financial activity in most counties was analysed as ‘financialization’ (Krippner 2005) though most scholars neither disaggregated the phenomena to examine particulars – agents, assets, flows and regulatory environment – of each discrete financialization, nor analysed their usually intimate connection with the requirements of the dollar system. Ever greater US budget, trade and current account deficits now became fixtures on the scene, but the volumes of international financial flows necessary to undergird the dollar was many times greater.

These processes accelerated with the 1987 appointment of Wall Street lobbyist Alan Greenspan as Chairman of the Federal Reserve. Under his supervision, an even stronger speculative financial dynamic was introduced into the dollar-centred system (Fleckenstein 2008). From here on, it would be undergirded by the ‘Greenspan put’, a promise by the US Federal Reserve to rescue the US financial sector from the inevitable losses as bubbles burst chiefly by monetizing aid through lowered interest rates and, since 2008, Quantitative Easing. Essentially, it involved giving financial institutions good money for their bad ‘toxic’ assets so they could recover from their losses and re-build their balance sheets. This promise has been solemnly kept by all Greenspan’s successors to this day.

In the US economy as a whole, financial engineering replaced industrial engineering. Wealth was decreasingly made by building new means of production and hiring labour to produce new goods and services to sell at a profit. Instead, money was made purely by buying and selling financial securities and real estate. This is fundamentally contradictory because financial activities constrict and strangulate production even as they prey upon the very incomes it generates. This is the fundamental logic behind the regular financial and asset market bubbles and crashes and shrinking productive base of our time.

By the mid-1990s these bubbles and crashes, essentially dollar-denominated financializations necessary to sustain the dollar’s international acceptability, were getting ever larger, more volatile and dangerous. They were aided by the Clinton administrations’ crusade, supported by the IMF and the World Bank, against capital controls worldwide, to bring even more countries into the dragnet of the dollar creditocracy.

Each bubble culminated in a resounding crash: financial crises became more frequent, touching first world (Sweden, Britain), transition (Russia) and developing countries (Mexico, India) alike. A culmination of sorts was reached in the 1997-8 East Asian Financial crisis. Thereafter, it was the turn of the already developing bubble in US stocks, particularly high technology stocks, which burst in 2000. That was followed by the housing and credit bubbles which burst in 2008.

World Money Beyond Creditocracy

The dollar-centred world financial and monetary system of recent decades relies on short-term speculation, with the Federal Reserve financial engineering asset market bubbles. The effect is to increase inequality among nations and classes and undermining economies instead of building them up. The system is anti-labour, imposing austerity policies to squeeze out rising debt service from working populations. This ‘austerity’ and the adjustment imposed on debtor countries are designed to preserve the financial gains of creditors. Unlike productive activities, financial activities involve a zero-sum game. Gains can only be made by some when corresponding losses and suffering are imposed on the indebted wage-earning population, small business and debtor countries.

The inherent contradictions of the system and the conflicts it generates have been maturing over the decades and they are now rapidly unravelling the dollar creditocracy.

Let us deal with the contradictions first. The sheer scale of money creation – already stratospherically high amid the Quantitative Easing after 2008, it reached astronomic proportions amid the pandemic – threatens the dollar’s value. Ever since easy monetary policy became necessary after the dot com bubble burst in 2000, the dollar’s value has fallen captive to two competing imperatives: the financial sector’s need for plentiful, cheap or outright free liquidity to finance leveraged speculation in asset markets with ever thinning margins, and the need to limit liquidity to boost the dollar’s value. Pandemic liquidity issuance is sending asset markets soaring past even the unprecedented heights reached in the past decades. Instead of halting or bursting them at a sufficiently safe early stage, the Federal Reserve has been encouraging their inflation through its low interest rate policies and by buying bonds of all kinds, including government, junk and corporate bonds. The question is how long it can continue inflating its balance sheet without the government doing something to expand the rapidly shrinking productive base of US from which alone these assets gain their value. One only need add that such an expansion of the productive base in the difficult circumstances of the US economy will require such a radical about-turn from neoliberalism that it is practically impossible in present circumstances given the Federal Reserve and the incoming Biden administration’s commitment to the neoliberal policy paradigm.

Meanwhile Federal Reserve liquidity issuance has transformed ‘[t]he long, long bull market since 2009 … into a fully-fledged epic bubble … [f]eaturing extreme overvaluation, explosive price increases, frenzied issuance, and hysterically speculative investor behaviour’ and rivalling ‘the South Sea bubble, 1929, and 2000’ (Foroohar 2021, quoting investment strategist Jeremy Grantham). The crash is only a matter of time and circumstance. When it comes, the Federal Reserve will face two equally unpalatable choices. It may react by letting the financial system that is invested in stocks go down, which will bring down the dollar creditocracy with it, or it can prop up the financial system to the tune of more trillions of liquidity, making the system’s contradictions more acute. It is no wonder. The oceans of liquidity this creditor-oriented system has created has only burdened working people, small business and governments everywhere with debt that only provides creditors with a means to control them and weakens productive systems rather than setting them free and strengthening economies with productive investment.

To these contradictions, we add the conflicts the system generates, expanding the ranks of the system’s rivals and victims. Since 2008, major international financial institutions have become more national, reducing foreign monies flowing into the dollar system and helping counteract the Triffin Dilemma, part of the reason the Federal Reserve has had to support asset prices and expand its balance sheet so massively.

The system is, moreover, exposing weaker economies without adequate capital controls to politically unsustainable levels of currency volatility, as most acutely revealed by Turkey today.

These countries are seeking alternative sources of finance and payments systems.

Further, the dollar system could function so long as it maintained a semblance of neutrality. However, in recent decades, its legal regime and payments system have been weaponized by increasingly aggressive US diplomacy to favour its own corporations one-sidedly (Wolf 2014) and to further US foreign policy goals questioned even by allies, such as the sanctions against Iran. This is beginning to make rivals and victims such as Russia and Iran, and even long-standing allies such as Western European countries and substantial US Treasury holders, including China, wary.

Finally, in the context of the present crisis, the Federal Reserve has clearly crossed another line. After 2008, it released torrents of liquidity to save the financial sector both within and beyond the US. However, in recent months it has provided the same to US non-financial corporations, including buying the junk bonds of debt-ridden “zombie” companies undermining any pretence of being even the whole US economy’s impartial central bank, let alone the world’s (Bair and Goodman 2021, Brenner 2020, Foroohar 2020).

Emerging Alternatives

Other countries are seeking three types of ways out. First, Russia, the EU and China are building alternative international payments systems in the form of SPFS, INSTEX and CIPS respectively as well as domestic ones such as China’s Union Pay, Russia’s Mir Pay, India’s RuPay and Brazil’s ELO. These are, further, being coordinated internationally (Losev 2019). These rapidly expanding systems, based on other currencies, will increasingly replace the need for international transaction to be routed through the US-controlled dollar system.

Second, many countries, particularly those targeted by or rejecting US diktats, are actively pursuing the de-dollarization of their payments, prices and financial systems (Kuznetsov and Ivanova 2018) and choosing to trade with other countries in each other’s currencies in order to avoid the rigged dollar system, while Sino-Russian monetary and financial cooperation is widening even further. These practices constitute a reversion to means of settling balance-of-payments deficits that were used in the inter-war period, when sterling’s role had shrunk and the dollar was giving the initial demonstration of its incapacity for a world role.

Third, the BRICS New Development Bank and Contingency Reserve Arrangement and, particularly, China’s international financial initiatives increasingly constitute an alternative source of finance with advantages the dollar system simply does not have. China’s Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank, Belt and Road Initiative and other financial initiatives are based on the principle of long-term patient capital making productive investment in a cooperative spirit that preserves the policy-autonomy of recipient countries. This contrasts sharply with the dollar creditocracy that, over past decades, has provided only short-term fickle capital for largely financial investment in an aggressive system that constrains policy, is loaded in favour of creditors and is willing to wage conventional and hybrid wars against countries seeking to exit the system. With the expansion of the AIIB and the BRI, and planning to extend membership of the NDB to regional partners of the BRICS countries (Lissovolik 2019), these initiatives are demonstrating their attractiveness to ever more countries.

Finally, though opinion is divided on whether the recent EU fiscal deal will resurrect the euro as a rival to the dollar, it continues to subtract the Eurozone from the dollar payments system. Amid the pandemic, de-dollarization can only accelerate further, making the dollar system and more exclusively a US affair. Even the dollar’s traditional boosters have had to admit that its end is near (Cohen 2020, for example).

The urge to escape from the predatory dollar creditocracy is strong, and the alternatives are today mostly China-centred. This is because, as in the period before 1914, the breakaway or challenge has to be led by countries whose financial systems are public utilities, focusing on financing production. Today, China’s financial system is the most powerful such system, and it has enough international currency reserves to withstand speculative attacks by raiders or hostile powers.

Only such an alternative is in a position to create credit that enables economies to grow, in contrast to being the means of impoverishing them through debts that neither finance production (out of which they can be repaid) nor can be repaid out of existing trade and investment trends without impoverishing the debtor.

This basic difference in financial philosophy is generating powerful pressures toward the creation of a multilateral, multicurrency world. The contradictory dollar creditocracy is surviving only by lending debtor countries more money to pay and remain solvent. That only increases their debt, prolonging the period during which debtors must acquiesce in political and commercial ‘conditionalities’ laid down by the powers that maintain and protect the dollar creditocracy: the US, the IMF and associated institutions plying their financial diplomacy of privatization sell-offs, anti-labour policies, pro-US trade favouritism and general impoverishment .

How exactly the contradiction of the dollar creditocracy and the conflicts it has generated will play out, and with what results, remains something of an open question. Today’s fracturing world economy and New Cold War certainly make Keynes’s ideas of a bancor and the International Clearing Union impractical on a world or universal scale. However, in the hands of a China-Russia-Iran centred bloc, perhaps expanding to include other European and Third World countries seeking to avoid debt deflation and austerity à la Greece or Argentina, its principles can be adapted to the needs of a less universal and partial, though still large, bloc.

Such a bloc is likely to use the most expedient measures first. Gold is the path of least resistance and de facto expedient in such a transition. It has the virtue of being a widely demanded asset not taking the form of debt to the reserve-currency government. At the same time, there is the long-standing difficulty of using a commodity whose price fluctuates with fluctuating production costs and demand conditions. These difficulties, along with the limits of gold supply, mean that any transition away from the dollar creditocracy will need other expedients, chief among which will be government holdings of the securities of allied governments. These mutual balances, extended as necessary through swap agreements, could become the basis for the new international reserve system.

These expedients will still need to be supplemented by a solution to the most fundamental problem for any stable and non-polarizing international monetary reform. It is the problem that Keynes emphasized in his 1944 proposals for bancor: in a world of unevenly developed productive capacities, some countries may run prolonged payments surpluses and become large net creditors, while other countries accumulate payments deficits.

To prevent such imbalances, Keynes proposed a system that would generate pressures on creditor nations to provide debtors with the means to pay, essentially by purchasing imports of their goods and services. These pressures included not only the interest charged on positive balances but also the threat that if disequilibrium persisted to a serious degree, the build-up of credits and debts should simply be wiped out. Either way, imposing austerity on debtor countries, undermining the world’s aggregate productive capacity, was the option avoided.

These systemic incentives were directed at the long-term stabilization of the system in which productively superior creditor nations (such as China) help build up the economies of their debtors and customer countries so as to create a balanced circulation of goods and services. That possibility is contained, for instance, in the Belt and Road Initiative, creating ports and transport infrastructure, and China’s other overseas investment and financing operations creating a foundation for mutual regional prosperity.

To be workable, such a system must expand bilateral balances into a truly region-wide bank, empowered to create its own money to finance this overall development. That would create long-term, patient and productive credit in a system of mutual gain. That expansionary international credit system, like the one Keynes sought to devise, is what the Eurozone failed to create for its member-nation governments.

The result has been to fracture between northern creditor nations and the debt-strapped southern and Western periphery, the so-called PIIGS (Portugal, Ireland, Italy, Greece and Spain).

Neither the United States nor its dollar-area satellites are likely to approve of such a region-wide financial entity. The US will not join any system that it cannot dominate and veto, and refuses to submit to decisions reached by what may be thought of as a democracy of nations. If it persists in this mode, it can only watch the demise of its contradictory dollar creditocracy and the rise of alternative systems fostering productive expansion elsewhere.

References

Bair, Sheila and Lawrence Goodman. 2021. ‘Corporate Debt ‘Relief’ Is an Economic Dud’. Wall Street Journal, January 7. https://www.wsj.com/ articles/corporate-debt-relief-is-an-economic-dud-11609975810

Brenner, Robert. 2020. ‘Escalating Plunder’. New Left Review, 123, MayJune, pp. 5–22.

Calleo, David P. 1982. The Imperious Economy. Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press.

Cohen, Benjamin. 2020. ‘The Pandemic is Shaking the Dollar’s Supremacy’. Project Syndicate. 19 May 2020.

De Cecco, M. 1984, The International Gold Standard: Money and Empire, 2nd edn, London: Pinter.

De Cecco, M. 2009. From Monopoly to Oligopoly: Lessons from the Pre-1914 Experience’ in E Helliener and J. Kirshner (eds) The Future of the Dollar. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.

Desai, Radhika. 2013. Geopolitical Economy: After US Hegemony, Globalization and Empire. London: Pluto.

Desai, Radhika. 2018.‘John Maynard Pangloss: Indian Currency and Finance in Imperial Context’ in Sheila Dow, Jesper Jespersen & Geoff Tily (eds), The General Theory and Keynes for the 21st Century, Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing Ltd, 2018, pages 116–131.

Desai, Radhika. 2020a. ‘The Unexpected Reckoning: Coronavirus and Capitalism’. Canadian Dimension. 17 March. https:// canadiandimension.com/articles/view/the-unexpected-reckoningcoronavirus-and-capitalism

Desai, Radhika, 2020b. ‘Commodified Money and Crustacean Nations’ in Radhika Desai and Kari Polanyi Levitt (eds) Karl Polanyi for the Twenty-First Century, Manchester: Manchester University Press, Geopolitical Economy Series.

Desai, Radhika. 2020c. ‘Finance Capital and Contemporary Financialization’ in Judith Dellheim and Frieder Otto Wolff (eds), Rudolf Hilferding – Reclaiming the legacy A ‘provocateur’ for R. Luxemburg and many others. London: Palgrave Macmillan, 2020.

Dooley, M., D. Folkerts-Landau and P. Garber. 2005. ‘Interest Rates, Exchange Rates and International Adjustment’, NBER Working Paper No. 11771. First published as “Living with Bretton Woods II”, Deutsche Bank Global Markets Research, Sep. 2005.

Eichengreen, Barry. 2020. ‘Dollar Sensationalism’. Project Syndicate. 12 August. https://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/dollar-declineexaggerated-by-barry-eichengreen-2020–07

Eichengreen, Barry. 1992. Golden Fetters: The Gold Standard and the Great Depression, 1919–1939. Oxford UP.

Fleckenstein, William A. 2008. Greenspan’s Bubbles: The Age of Ignorance at the Federal Reserve. New York: McGraw-Hill.

Foroohar, Rana. 2020. ‘How Coronavirus became a corporate credit run’. Financial Times. 15 March.

Foroohar, Rana. 2021. ‘Why investors shrugged off the Capitol riots’. Financial Times. 10 January. https://www.ft.com/content/86c930432127-4618-8ae1-2195e6a70c29

Gilpin, Robert. 1971. “The Politics of Transnational Economic Relations.” International Organization 25 (3) (July 1): 398–419.

Hilferding, Rudolf. 1910/1981. Finance Capital: A Study of the Latest Phase of Capitalist Development. Edited with an Introduction by Tom Bottomore, Tr. Morris Watnick and Sam Gordon, London: Routledge.

Hudson, Michael. 1972/2003. Super Imperialism: The Origin and Fundamentals of U.S. World Dominance. 2nd ed. London: Pluto Press.

Hudson, Michael. 2010. “From Marx to Goldman Sachs: The Fictions of Fictitious Capital and the Financialization of Industry”. Critique 38/3, July.

Hudson, Michael. 2015. Killing the Host: How Financial Parasites and Debt Bondage Destroy the Global Economy. New York: Counterpunch.

Hudson, Michael. 2018. …and forgive them their debts: Lending, Foreclosure and Redemption From Bronze Age Finance to the Jubilee Year. Dresden: ISLET Verlag.

Hudson, Michael. 2020. ‘Debt, Land and Money: From Polanyi to the New Economic Archeology’ in Radhika Desai and Kari Polanyi Levitt (eds) Karl Polanyi for the Twenty-First Century, Manchester: Manchester University Press, Geopolitical Economy Series.

Ingham, Geoffrey. 1984. Capitalism Divided? The City and Industry in British Social Development. London: Macmillan.

Keynes, John Maynard. 1980. The Collected Writings of John Maynard Keynes Vol XXV: Activities 1940–1944. London: Macmillan and Cambridge University Press.

Keynes, John Maynard. 1930, A Treatise on Money, London: Macmillan.

Kindleberger, Charles P. 1973. The World in Depression, 1929–1939. History of the World Economy in the Twentieth Century v. 4. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.

Krippner, Greta R. 2005. ‘The Financialization of the American Economy’, Socioeconomic Review, vol. 3, pp. 173–208.

Kuznetsov, Aleksei and Kristina Ivanova. 2018. De-dollariztion in the EAEU Member States: Key Trends and Prospects. Valdai Paper #83, Valdai Club, March.

Lissovolik, Yaroslav. 2019. ‘New Members for BRICS New Development Bank?’ Valdai Club. 11 July. https://valdaiclub.com/a/highlights/ new-members-for-brics-new-development-bank/

Losev, Alexander. 2019. ‘BRICS Pay – Single Payment System of the BRICs Countries’, 5 March. Valdai Club. https://valdaiclub.com/a/ highlights/brics-pay-single-payment-system-of-the-brics/

Krugman, P. (2012) New York Times, blog, 16 November 16, accessed 18 March 2014 at http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/11/16/ secular-stagnation-coalmines-bubbles-and-larry-summers/?_ php=true&_type=blogs&_r=0.

Marx, Karl. 1859/1973. Grundrisse. London: Penguin.

Marx, Karl. 1867/1977. Capital (Vol. I). London: Penguin.

McKinsey Global Institute. 2017. New Dynamics of Financial Globalization.

Milanovic, Branko. 2005. World Apart: Measuring International and Global Inequality. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

Patnaik, Utsa. (2017), ‘Revisiting the “drain”, or transfers from India to Britain in the context of global diffusion of capitalism’, in S. Chakrabarti and U. Patnaik(eds), Agrarian and Other Histories: Essays for Binay Bhushan Chaudhuri, New Delhi: Tulika.

Patnaik, Utsa and Prabhat Patnaik. 2016. A Theory of Imperialism. New York: Columbia University Press.

Piketty, Thomas. 2014. Capital in the Twenty-First Century. Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press.

Roach, Stephen. 2020. ‘The Covid Shock to the Dollar’. Project Syndicate. 23 June.

Saul, S. B. 1960. Studies in British Overseas Trade. Liverpool: Liverpool University Press.

Shaxon, Nicholas. 20111. Treasure Islands. London: Vintage.

Stiglitz, Joseph. 2009. Report of the Commission of Experts of the President of the United Nations General Assembly on Reforms of the International Monetary and Financial System. New York. United Nations.

Summers, Larry. 2020. ‘Covid-19 looks like a hinge in history’. Financial Times, 14 May. https://www.ft.com/content/de643ae8-9527-11ea899a-f62a20d54625

Triffin, Robert. 1961. Gold and the Dollar Crisis; the Future of Convertibility. Rev. ed. A Yale paperbound Y-39. New Haven: Yale University Press.

Van der Pijl. 2014. The Discipline of Western Supremacy. London: Pluto.

Vilar, Pierre. 1976. A History of Gold and Money, 1450 to 1920. New Left Books: London.

Williamson, John. 1977. The Failure of World Monetary Reform, 1971–74. Sunbury-on-Thames: Nelson.

Wolf, Martin. 2014. ‘Holdouts give vultures a bad name’. Financial Times. September 2.

(Republished from Valdai Discussion Club by permission of author or representative)
 
Hide 193 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
    []
  1. Tom Verso says:

    Academic BS
    Why I dropped out of college and became a bricklayer.

    A typical academic analysis.

    Completely devoid of individuals responsible for the economy.

    The whole Creditocracy thing is not an act of god or some natural phenomenon. It has been systematically created by individuals who benefit from the system.

    There can be no change unless and until those individuals are confronted by name.

    Hudson always writes in metaphor language when it comes to identifying the personal causes of the economic woes of the working class. He uses terms the ‘elite’, ‘oligarchs’ 1%er, etc.

    The decisions of the Federal Reserve are presented as ‘The Fed’. The question is who makes those decisions and who benefits and who controls the Federal Government that allows ‘The Fed’ to run roughshod over the working class?

    But, when you start calling out individuals and repeatedly and relentlessly detailing their pernicious behavior … well that is a revolutionary act.

    When you get serious about challenging the oligarchs by name and educating the masses about who they are and what they do … that’s revolutionary not academic discourse.

    Instead of talking about ‘The Fed’, I would be interested in reading some detailed analysis of Larry Fink and Blackrock, and how he affects the working class economy.

    What are the implication for American working class when Fink enters into partnership with the Chinese Construction Bank? That Bank financed the construction of 18,000 miles of high speed train lines in China. Is Fink going to funnel US money to them, while the US hasn’t a single mile?

    What is the role of ‘The Fed’ and the Federal Government in facilitating that enormous transfer of American capital to China instead of investing it in America?

    What are the implication for the American working class of Fink buying up American residential property and Bill Gates buying up farm land.

    Why is our government sanguine in these deals?

    But, no Hudson et al will just tisk tisk about “The Fed”, “the Oligarchs”, the 1%ers, etc.

    Well at least he took a break from his most recent favorite topic … what advanced 21st century economic policymakers can learn from 2nd millennia BC Mesopotamia.

  2. bayviking says:

    Somebody in the Treasury and Federal Reserve better wake up to the realities Hudson is explaining. Not just for our sake, but for a better world all around. Criminal racksteering, ultimately expressed by military invasions by the USA must cease. Productive activity must be increased, without the records environmental destructive path we are on. It’s a tall, but necessary policy shift.

    • Replies: @profnasty
  3. The sooner the dollar is dead and the US with it the better for all concerned.

    • Agree: Truth Vigilante
    • Replies: @moi
    , @Dale
  4. Here we go again, the usual suspects responsible in exile.

    Only in Roman times did debt become a relation of pure contractual exchange, making it inescapable. Five centuries of civil wars were fought to reverse forfeiture of collateral, land and liberty, wars that led to the fall of Rome. Once debt was contracted, the debtor had to pay it without regard to adverse personal and social consequences. Creditors bore no responsibility for having made loans that could not be paid, often at interest rates as high as 42 percent.

    And the exilieties control the system today too.

    International monetary systems have, therefore, been the financial systems of particular countries. Governed by central banks that in most countries represent the interests of the financial sector, they generate vastly more private debt than public money. The results have been international rentier elites and world creditocracies.

  5. @Tom Verso

    Are you a Capitalist or just a capitalist? It’s Blackrock’s capital, isn’t it? And where does individual responsibility enter into the scheme of things when Capitalism is the issue.

    • Replies: @profnasty
  6. I read about 20% of it and gave up. Too much gibberish for anyone whose brain hasn’t been marinated in economic nonsense.

    The entire world is in economic trouble chiefly due to economists. As the whores for the bankers, they make up stuff but can’t prove a damned thing. Even after some economic meltdown, the economists argue among themselves for why it happened.

    The bankers hire economists to invent the rationale for whatever it is they want to do. It gives the bankers plausible deniability when things head south, but they knew it would and so did the economists. They use each other to write papers and invent policies guaranteed to cause the public to foot the bill when the SHTF.

    The world would be better off without these bullshit artists.

    • Troll: emersonreturn
  7. @Tom Verso

    No less, why should common crooks, and thieves not be named, when they interact with public interests. The comment is valid, it affects the general state of shysters at labour here on unz.

    Hudson was a cowardly career “economist” and probably cannot better that in his retirement. He lacks the courage? If “accounting”, “accountability” means nothing, then only insiders can steer their greed, the peak of their “winning”. There are a zillion ways to cook the books, any system stops short of being a path to stability if there is parasitic invasion. So the arithmetic of Hudson and partners is idle, lacking any context within reality.

    China, the realm of China does not one better. There seems not to be a planetary plan on inventorying assets versus liabilities, thus there can be no meaningful denominator to help allow fluid interaction based on it as a standard. AI, not as used now(and priding themselves in it), the Wall Street abracadabra to confuse and dull the rest of civilization, but as weighting assets versus liabilities and building a system that works in the long run on top of it. “Money” in the narrowest of it’s definitions is, as an addendum to the above, flawed. It does not include a time line, and a variable to express, population in all of it’s facets between others.

    All the cheating, layers and layers of it, is very well, but it hampers any real progress, and as things go, even dumps the planet into reverse. What Kahneman(Jewish by all means) spins out at book length, “Noise”, is intended to manipulate, with the result(between others) of what i call “derivatives” versus “net progress”.

  8. Lussier says:

    Only in Roman times did debt become a relation of pure contractual exchange, making it inescapable. Five centuries of civil wars were fought to reverse forfeiture of collateral, land and liberty, wars that led to the fall of Rome. Once debt was contracted, the debtor had to pay it without regard to adverse personal and social consequences.

    ..As the system slipped away into counterfeiting and inflation, to circumvent and forestall ruin.

    I have a drawer of Roman Fouree’s, some still bearing the silver wash to varying degree’s, but ALL bearing the same cut/test marks, where an ancient intended recipient uncovered the deception they had been targeted for.

    The Constantinian miniature coinage, again, acted as a warning long before ‘deficits don’t matter’ became a nonsensical plague upon our own generations, not so long ago.. The tiny, base-metal rump coinage, for which we no longer even have a record of the Roman denominational terms, had to be weighed out in mass quantities and assembled in pouches, reminiscent of the ‘wheelbarrow currency’ later to afflict so-called ‘modern’ man.

    This tiny inflationary coinage, entirely of base metal, is emblazoned with Roman slogans proclaiming the fruits of conquest over various subject peoples, and promises of “FEL TEMP REPARATIO’ – “good times are here again”, confirming the cautionary warning that history repeats..

    Btw, you are probably my favorite Unz author, please disregard some of the mean or derogatory comments by the peanut gallery, I enjoy your articles.

    • Thanks: CelestiaQuesta
  9. Realist says:
    @RoatanBill

    The entire world is in economic trouble chiefly due to economists.

    Economics is like reading tea leaves…just not as accurate.

    • Agree: RoatanBill, moi
    • Replies: @animalogic
  10. LP5 says:

    Guns and butter, a tough choice with a variant predating guns.

    Prior generations learned to despise the fuggin’ Fuggers, even as they were replaced by different grifters like the Medici and so many others.

  11. Jim H says:

    This essay by Radhika Desai and the venerable Michael Hudson exemplifies 19th century ‘narrative economics,’ in which the authors seek to convince the reader by applying logic to a long list of disconnected historical events, that their brilliant subjective interpretation explains it all.

    Unfortunately, the narrative logic here is barely even coherent.

    Desai and Hudson quote — of all people — Karl Marx to the effect that ‘the weight of gold fixed upon as the standard of prices diverges from the weight which serves as the circulating medium’ because of — wait for it — coin wear. AH HA HA HA.

    I burst out laughing at this absurd, ahistorical claim. Coin wear, easily measured with a scale if of concern, was a vanishingly minor issue with metallic coinage, compared to governments themselves (such as the Roman Empire) intentionally and radically debasing coins’ gold or silver content.

    Helpfully making my own point for me, Desai and Hudson proceed — thousands of droning words later, after most readers will have nodded off — to admit that ‘Gold is the path of least resistance and de facto expedient in such a transition [away from the dollar].’

    Thanks, gents! Glad we’ve finally solved that vexing coin wear problem, what with e-payments supplanting jingling pockets.

    More seriously, though, Desai and Hudson repeatedly conflate currency (the medium of exchange) with payments systems, as if the two are largely interchangeable. They aren’t.

    And thus, after a disastrous half century experiment with exclusively fiat, debt-backed currencies which have generated the most disastrous bubble in human history, the authors propose no solution to the problem of establishing a stable means of exchange as we pick up the pieces from the forthcoming wreckage.

    As they said, ‘gold is the path of least resistance.’ As for decentralized finance (‘defi’) which proposes simply to disintermediate the exploitative, hegemonic institutions which Desai and Hudson so deplore, the authors utter nary a peep.

    If this were an undergrad economics thesis, I’d award a generous gentleman’s C. Nice try, lads.

    • Thanks: Schuetze
    • Replies: @bayviking
    , @obwandiyag
  12. bayviking says:
    @Jim H

    What was not stated was that a healthy economy is a virtuous cycle of production and consumption. Interest and rent are two costs which have nothing to do with production or consumption.
    The authors are saying money in any system of exchange is not really the equivalent of a real commodity, which is derived from real production, and that’s OK.
    If costs such as interest charges and rent become too burdensome for a country to continue to be productive competitively, something must be done. Those debts must be forgiven.
    In America today, that remains an option for businesses, but not for individuals, particularly if they have a job, no matter how poor the pay. As Picketty proved debt growth consistently exceeds economic growth, so the system is unsustainable. The Bankers solution is to impose austerity and receive full compensation, insolvency or death be damned.
    This consistent outcome in Western economies is because most debt is issued by private interests, unlike China which issues public debt and simply writes off failures without imposing austerity on the working public.
    Their solution, debt forgiveness, was long a part of the US economy, but BushII cancelled most personal bankruptcy.

    • Replies: @RobinG
    , @Rubicon
  13. I personally would like a little deflation.

    I mean, in the 60s, a regular, old, little savings account got you 10% interest. Can you believe it? 10%!! For a savings account!

    Now, what do you get. A tenth of a percent?

    So now with them stoking up the inflation, for god knows what reason, there goes the value of our lifetime savings, slowly exsanguinating value like an ol’ cowboy shot in the gut.

    So here’s to the deflations and may its tribe increase.

    • Replies: @dumbass
  14. @Jim H

    A. Michael Hudson is smarter than you.

    B. He knows history. You don’t.

    C. Look up “clipping and shaving.”

    D. Karl Marx is right about the intrinsic value of money. A Benjamin ain’t worth doodly-squat (a technical economic term).

    • Agree: St-Germain
    • LOL: KeltCindy
    • Replies: @anon
  15. @RoatanBill

    Totally useless.

    I tried for a long time to make sense of it thinking that the Ph.D. actually meant something.

    Finally gave up.

    LOL

    • Replies: @RoatanBill
  16. @Ralph B. Seymour

    PhD does mean something -> Piled Higher & Deeper in many cases.

    If someone has a doctorate in real science, math or engineering, that’s an accomplishment. A doctorate in the social sciences or humanities is just recognition of perfectly regurgitating the bullshit the professors excreted.

    • Agree: Realist
    • Replies: @Mj
    , @animalogic
  17. VICB3 says:
    @RoatanBill

    Read the whole thing. (Degrees in Economics and History. Masters in International Business.)

    Tried to read past the obvious socialist/one world leanings of the authors to get to the essentials.

    Very short take-away: Complexity leads to ever increasing complexity leads to collapse. Tainter as applied to economies.

    Human greed and stupidity are constants in all this.

    Best to keep things simple:

    -Emphasis productive industries over non-productive financial games.

    -Protect those industries from predators. (Ex. private equity groups, leveraged by-outs, stock buy backs, mergers and so forth.)

    -Encourage exports by manufacturing things the whole world wants to buy. Win-Win deals in other words.

    -Make the profits from the exports tax free.

    -Don’t make ruinous loans to foreign countries in order to gain some sort of advantage.

    -Encourage a high savings rate with genuine and tax free interest earnings not debased by inflation.

    -Encourage true long term investment and reinvestment in productive capital goods and factories.

    -Discourage any and all short term speculation and weird financial games.

    -Don’t have a central bank.

    -Have a sound currency backed by precious metals. Insist on payment in same. For fucks sake, don’t debase yours.

    -Stay the hell out of other people’s wars and foreign intrigues. Mind your own damned business. Stay neutral.

    -Don’t deficit spend.

    -Don’t go around starting wars.

    -If you must fight a war, then don’t punish the loser.

    -Don’t let your vanity lead you around.

    -Keep it simple Stupid.

    That’s pretty much it. We can quibble over some of the details.

    Just a thought.

    VicB3

  18. @VICB3

    I’ll buy into everything you wrote. Makes sense.

    If you can condense Hudson’s windbag prose down to less than 250 words, then you should be writing articles.

    • Agree: moi, Robert Bruce
  19. anon[302] • Disclaimer says:
    @obwandiyag

    I am still trying to get past the concept of commenting on an article just to bloviate on how much you detest it. There are a lot of articles that I dont have any interest in, and dont comment on. The urge to insult, or complain that it contains too much info for the pea brain commenter, I do not comprehend.

    Hudson is not someone I agree with 100%, but I dont have to agree with anyone 100%.

    This site is devolved into a club of big-bellied Fuds, who are catered to as they serially assail law enforcement. Why not create special forums only for these Fuds, somewhat like the Audacious Epigone threads restricted to them, instead of driving away interesting contributors like Hudson?

  20. Alana says:

    “China’s Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank, Belt and Road Initiative and other financial initiatives are based on the principle of long-term patient capital making productive investment in a cooperative spirit that preserves the policy-autonomy of recipient countries.”

    Really? I thought China’s investments were based on the principle of getting a nation to over-indebt itself on projects it couldn’t quite afford (or didn’t break even) but which rewarded the countries rulers in some way (politically or financially); then swooping in after the loan defaults, to take control of the assett, and get political power benefits like proxy control of the country’s UN vote etc.

    “This contrasts sharply with the dollar creditocracy that, over past decades, has provided only short-term fickle capital for largely financial investment in an aggressive system that constrains policy, is loaded in favour of creditors and is willing to wage conventional and hybrid wars against countries seeking to exit the system.”

    That doesn’t sound so bad now does it. But hey, what do I know?

    • Replies: @VICB3
  21. dumbass says:
    @obwandiyag

    Sorry, as a kid I had a savings passbook that paid 5% interest. You must be talking early eighties CD rates.

    • Replies: @LP5
  22. VICB3 says:
    @Alana

    China could SEIZE land from tiny Montenegro for failing to repay $1 billion ‘Belt and Road’ loan for 270-mile road to nowhere – of which only a handful of miles was ever built

    http://www.stationgossip.com/2021/07/china-could-seize-land-from-tiny.html

    Once I refereed to Mainland Chinese as nothing but Cheats*, Cheapskates and Dog Eaters.

    I got flamed for it of course, called a racist and all that. (It’s not; it’s cultural bias. There’s a difference. And the Hawaiian word for Chinese is Pake, meaning cheap. And that tells you volumes.)

    But like it or not, different cultures have different traits**, and some things don’t change. Here, have a bit of history from the Tea and Opium Trade era:

    https://www.americanheritage.com/fair-honorable-and-legitimate-trade

    https://duckduckgo.com/?q=canton+trade+system&t=ffab&ia=web

    The point here is that while the Belt and Road sounds like a good idea – win-win deals and all that – there’s probably an ulterior motive somewhere along the line, and the Chinese think that Westerners and everybody else are too stupid to notice.

    Maybe they’re dreaming of something out of David Wingrove’s Chung Kuo novels: https://davidwingrove.com/series/chung-kuo/

    It’s the sort of imperialist thinking that works until it fails and everybody gets tired of them.

    And now they’re going into Afghanistan. Grave of Empires.

    Hummm.

    Just a thought.

    VicB3

    *Not all of them to be sure: https://duckduckgo.com/?q=HOWQUA+MERCHANT&t=ffab&ia=web
    Also https://www.sothebys.com/en/articles/china-trade-paintings-what-the-portrait-of-howqua-reveals-about-history

    The honest Chinese merchants made a ton of money for themselves and others, win-win all around and everybody sought them out. No packing the tea chests with dirt or that sort of thing with these guys.

    **Americans can be brash, obnoxious and overbearing. They also tend to come in like they own the place. They can be nice about it, but they do it just the same. Also their fatal flaw is that they want to be liked.

    • Troll: d dan
    • Replies: @Alana
    , @Anonymous
  23. Money is not a problem to be solved. It is the system of pricing in international trade to be solved.
    That has to be solved.

    • Replies: @m___
  24. Mj says:
    @RoatanBill

    You must have found those doctorate-level courses in econometrics too easy.

  25. m___ says:
    @Zarathustra

    Indeed, the value of things, time, populations, planetarily, so as to account for them and facilitate meaningful exchanges and long term stability.

    As to some other comments to the point(China, Chinese). The Chinese bring nothing new to the table.

    As to Hudson et al.: spinning, spinning dizzy. Still tend to believe that Hudson sees his world as an island, and the vast seas as none of his concern, supremely elitist. He cannot get away from his peers that, admittedly spit him out, and maneuvered him into an uncomfortable position. He cannot get over his cravings for recognition from his caste to deconstruct conventional burger and dogs parlay onto the public. His tendency to see his work as a word-count.

    • Replies: @Ann Nonny Mouse
  26. [i]f the 21st century turns out to be an Asian century as the 20th was an American one, the pandemic may well be remembered as the turning point’.

    That a respiratory virus that has a .3% IFR of the old and co-morbid has become a “turning point” is the actual turning point. The post-WW2 Baby Boom is hitting its 60s and 70s–still dangerous years despite modern medicine, for what modern medicine is worth–that’s your excess deaths.

    I think the turning point was the Trump administration, when the statists decided voting should never again be allowed to change the government. So a crisis had to be manufactured and mail-in ballots legitimized to oust an increasingly popular and maverick President, who threatened the Establishment with re-industrialization and closed borders. One Billion Americans is what the financial elite are counting on to uphold their funny money.

    Soft times make soft people and we have a soft, stupid political and financial class. They are short-term oriented and greedy. Now, they face a rival in capitalist China, a people every bit as smart and driven as them, and ruthlessly nationalistic, and who don’t waste time fretting over the negro and the transgender. All the US elites know to do is add money and keep stirring, and import more serfs for the tax farm. It can’t go on forever, so it won’t.

    • Agree: Fred777, Montefrío, TTSSYF
  27. RobinG says:
    @bayviking

    “the pseudoscience of economics”
    Yes, and heartfelt thanks for saying this.

    “interest charges and rent become too burdensome”
    It’s always about the rent, but never any mention of prop. tax. “Home ownership” is long considered a metric of success, but if you don’t pay the tax [year after year forever and always rising], the gov’t. will snatch it away from you. You can outright own a shirt or a frying pan. Real property, never.

    • Replies: @m___
    , @bayviking
  28. Tony Hall says:
    @Tom Verso

    I share some of your views Tom Verso. I include quite a bit about Larry Fink’s BlackRock, which seems now to be acting these days as the main active agent of the The Federal Reserve Bank of New York, in “Lockdowns, Coronavirus, and Banks: Following the Money.”

    https://www.unz.com/article/lockdowns-coronavirus-and-banks-following-the-money-2/

    Its a long piece. I hope you enjoy it.

    • Replies: @Tom Verso
  29. LP5 says:
    @dumbass

    Banks paid 5%
    S&Ls paid 5 1/4%
    In those pre-Deregulation days, that rate was by law, with the extra 1/4% to encourage home lending, among other services.

    • Replies: @TGD
  30. Tom Verso says:
    @Tony Hall

    Thank you. Great read!

    • Replies: @Tony Hall
  31. Tony Hall says:
    @Tom Verso

    Thank you Tom Verso for a your speedy and generous response. Since you liked the essay, maybe might you consider writing a review here of comparable weight to one you wrote on the essay by Radhika Desai and Michael Hudson. I had to argue hard with Ron Unz to get it in. He initially rejected it. Actually pretty much all my major submissions to Unz Review have faced initial rejection and harsh exchanges with the founder, editor and Chief Executive of the site.

    • Replies: @Tom Verso
  32. Alana says:
    @VICB3

    I didn’t give all the details because I assumed everyone already knew. But the Chinese MO I described (gaining political power as a result of un-payable Belt & Road loans) has already been done in Africa many times, and also in some pacific island nations, I believe.
    In the end, this will be part of their process to retake Taiwan: as they tighten a military and economic noose around Taiwan’s neck, they will call in their proxy votes from Africa and elsewhere, at the UN, to block all protest motions.

    • Agree: TKK
    • Troll: d dan
  33. Yee says:

    Alana,

    “swooping in after the loan defaults, to take control of the assett, and get political power benefits like proxy control of the country’s UN vote etc”

    So it’s better their countries has no roads, power plants, ports, railways, at all? Why China want to take control of assets that cannot even break-even? It’s not like you can pack up the infrastructures and move them somewhere else, they stay in those countries for everyone to use.

    In any case, if that’s the evil plan, you are welcomed to play it on China. China also has foreign invested infrastructures (expressways and high-speed rails that I know of, haven’t checked all others). Of course, there’re also laws to regulate the operations of all infrastructures including foreign owned ones. I don’t see how the evil plans you suggest can work.

    As for UN votes, China is a permanent member of the UN security council with veto power, the only voting power that counts in the UN. China can veto anything we don’t like. It’s a sick joke that some poor little country has any “political power” on international stage… Any country that has a diplomatic relation with China has already accepted that there’s only one China in the world, Taiwan is part of China, and PRC is the official government of China. Otherwise, no diplomatic relation, they can have diplomatic relations with Taiwan – official name is Republic of China, which also including mainland and Taiwan island.

    May I suggest you comment on something you know about?

    • Agree: KeltCindy, d dan
    • Replies: @Alana
  34. @Lussier

    “Btw, you are probably my favorite Unz author, please disregard some of the mean or derogatory comments by the peanut gallery, I enjoy your articles.”
    I second that motion.
    Thank you Dr Hudson for this excellent overview of money & finance over the centuries.

  35. @Realist

    “Economics is like reading tea leaves…just not as accurate.”
    Agreed — but with the proviso that the history of economics is on firmer ground.

    • Replies: @Mulga Mumblebrain
  36. @RoatanBill

    “A doctorate in the social sciences or humanities is just recognition of perfectly regurgitating the bullshit the professors excreted.”
    Maybe — maybe not.

    • Replies: @RoatanBill
  37. Tom Verso says:
    @Tony Hall

    “… you might consider writing a review … I had to argue hard with Ron Unz to get it in…”

    I always wondered what the process of “submitting an essay” entailed?

    How do you communicate with the editor?
    File formate, etc.

    • Replies: @Tony Hall
  38. KeltCindy says:
    @Alana

    China is not the U.S., Alana.

    What you’re describing is a strategy the U.S. would develop and employ.

    What I never understood about the U.S. is: When executing it’s “foreign policy,” (and by “foreign policy” I’m mainly referring to the unnecessary wars, coup d’etats, sanctions, embargoes and the coercive imposition of its economic/military interests that passes for “diplomacy), where does it think the victims go…?

    They don’t disappear.

    Smart countries are nothing like the U.S.

  39. @animalogic

    What a brilliant reply.

    So full of information and deep thinking.

    • Replies: @animalogic
  40. Tony Hall says:
    @Tom Verso

    Hi Tom Verso;

    If you E-mail me I will send you Ron Unz’s E-mail. You can reach me at [email protected].

    A good way to communicate with Ron Unz is just by doing exactly what we are doing right here. As far as I can see, Mr. Unz takes great interest in the comments and often dips in into the exchanges. I suspect he may comment through assumed names as well. I think he works closely with other commenters who he depends on to flag certain issues. Since its all his web site from conception to implementation, he’s free to do or not do what he likes. I believe he uses that imperative in creative and sometimes surprising ways.

    As I see it and I think as Mr. Unz sees it as well, the free ranging, extensive and often witty, irreverent and erudite comments section constitutes one of the Unz Review’s highest achievements. Your own commentary on the writing of economists was a very effective and clever contribution suggesting that, in the case of the article and author you highlighted, the emperor lacks clothes.

    I’d be pleased to see one of your essays appear on this site. Any way you cut it, Unz Review remains a monument to the wonders of free and uncensored publication in very dangerous times. How does it survive the lobby’s silencing ire? Your guess is as good as mine.

    I encourage you to persevere and write and publish at Unz and elsewhere. Are you the Tom Verso at Academia.edu? Can you point me at some links to your stuff? Cheers, AJH

    • Thanks: John Fisher
  41. @Tom Verso

    Come, come, Tom. Any investigation of Fink, the ‘Fed’ and the money printers would be irredeemably ‘antisemitic’. Might even land the investigators in gaol.

  42. @animalogic

    Economics was created in order to make astrology appear to be a hard science in comparison.

    • LOL: PetrOldSack
  43. @Alana

    You are definitely a racist, but whether an imbecile or just brainwashed, or both, is harder to discern.
    China does NOT act as you mendaciously assert. It often re-negotiates loans, or forgives debt.In contrast, the USA, that blood-sucking predator, through the organs of the Washington Consensus, the IMF., World Bank, WTO etc, often forecloses on poor countries in loan arrears, forcing Structural Adjustment Policies on the country, forcing savage cuts to public health, education, infrastructure etc, and dictating privatisations, where Western corporations buy up the target state public assets at fire-sale prices. Most particularly in the 80s when the US raised interest rates so high that numerous countries were forced into default. Just read ‘The Economic Hitmen’ for the details.

    • Troll: TKK
    • Replies: @Alana
  44. @Tom Verso

    I skimmed the first couple of paragraphs, saw this was going to be a long story, and skipped to “World Money Beyond Creditocracy”. That’s how to read.

    • Agree: Matthew Kelly
  45. m___ says:
    @RobinG

    So much in evidence: tax making laughing stock of ownership. Still this is but one of the elements in the context of economics that makes it digestible only to ignorants. The system works because the surplus population is ignorant, whether some M. Hudson spins or not.

  46. onebornfree says: • Website

    A surprisingly good ,fairly detailed general summary of the sorry tale of recent worldwide monetary history to date, although, due to the authors pro-state bias (and, therefore, blindness) it manages to completely ignore “the elephant in the room”, I.e. the very state itself.

    The unspoken assumption of the entire piece is that states/governments/central banks _should_ “manage” and control money issuance; this assumption dominates despite the fact that the entire article amounts to a recounting of the long history of the state’s complete and utter failure to be in anyway a reliable manager/controller of _any_ form of currency, commodity backed or otherwise.

    Of course, because of the authors own pro- state bias, and the (of course!) unquestioned assumption that “we need” governments & central banks to control currency issuance, they are entirely unable to see this, and go on to fantasize about some sort of supposedly “new remedy” arrangement whereby (tah-dah!)a state (or states) band together to create a new state controlled money issuance system to replace the existing state and central bank run system- as if _that_ would make any real difference!😂

    “Government is a disease masquerading as its own cure” Robert LeFevere

    “Everything government touches turns to crap” Ringo Starr

    “The kind of man who wants the government to adopt and enforce his ideas is always the kind of man whose ideas are idiotic” H.L.Mencken

    “Regards”, onebornfree

    • Agree: RoatanBill
  47. hillaire says:

    Yes yes, very sad, schlomo and his yankee satrap have produce far too much expensive unsellable land-fill, pollution and second rate war machines and the demand is dropping in the west .. not even infinity immigration and credit cards for cannibals and child soldiers can save them…

    The credentialed imbecilia in their ivory towers have run out of con’s and weasel word games to work on the rubes, so many cohens, so many burghs so many ugly and childless women…. so many lies…

    The financialist engineered and astro turfed vassal state in chinky land has gone rogue and national socialist, having decided to take over the only shitty market left for the said land-fill.. leaving the yankee puppets and central banking chicken swinger dynasties crying in their chicken soup…

    The only solution ( for razor sharp intellects such as this), a global fire sale and kleptocratic free for all…. then inject the plebs and exterminate them …

    good one… it seems to be working..

    • Thanks: CelestiaQuesta
    • LOL: John Fisher
    • Replies: @John Fisher
    , @PetrOldSack
  48. Schuetze says:

    That is the history of your money, goyim. Jews do not control the banks any more than they control Hollywood. Those jews aren’t the droids you are are looking for. Now move along.

  49. onebornfree says: • Website

    “The financial commentariat is already expressing foreboding of the dollar’s coming doom. ‘The decline of the U.S. dollar could happen at “warp speed”’, warns Market Watch, while Reuters reports more sedately on how ‘King dollar’s decline ripples across the globe’. ”

    True, ‘The decline of the U.S. dollar _could_ happen at “warp speed”, _but_, it could just as easily not decline at warp speed at all , and instead take its own sweet time. 😎

    Heck, even “worse”, it might not happen at all and might actually _increase_ in value relative to other fiat currencies, or even in relation to commodities, even to gold! 😂

    This just in : A Real World Fact:

    Due to the inherent, underlying anarchic nature of all markets, there is no way to reliably and consistently predict the economic and financial future. People who are “investing” in a supposedly “sure thing” ( e.g. the total collapse of the $US within their own lifetime), are not investing at all, but speculating.

    Even worse, many of them are speculating with money they cannot afford to lose, should their “sure thing” bet prove to be wrong.

    And so it goes…..

    See: “How To Safely Profit In Stocks, Gold, Crypto’s etc., Despite An Unknowable Economic Future”:
    https://onebornfreesfinancialsafetyreports.blogspot.com/2016/11/speculations-got-money-you-can-afford.html?m=1

    Regards, onebornfree

    • Thanks: CelestiaQuesta
  50. profnasty says:
    @bayviking

    Is the dollar still relevant?
    In order to pass a law through çongress, it must first pass through Committee. Committees are controlled by the two parties. Congressman gain committee spots by financial support of the party. The party comes around with it’s hand out. No tickee, no shirtee.
    Get it? Congress is just one big whore house. Any law MUST be introduced by financial support of members ‘johns’. Most Reps are ‘three hole’ congressmen. But wait, there’s more.
    It’s so easy to take foreign contributions. Even an Israeli could do it. So the world is awash in dollars, any of which can find it’s way into Congressional pockets. Is it any wonder American workers are shat upon? (i.e. $600/wk Convid bonus. Throw the dog a bone.)
    The grabbing hands grab all they can
    All for themselves, after all
    Everything counts in large amounts.
    It’s a competitive world.
    (cit. needed)

    • Thanks: John Fisher
    • Replies: @bayviking
  51. profnasty says:
    @Rev. Spooner

    Actually it’s not Blackrock’s capital, it’s yours. Which is to say, your children must repay the Blackrock ‘discount window’ loan. The Fed window prints money, at Congress’ direction. You co-sign for a loan. Blackrock gets the money.
    Payment due monthly- forever.
    Good luck America.
    You’re gonna need it.

  52. profnasty says:

    Comments has had Israel shills since like, forever. Now we have China shills!
    As Buckwheat would say,
    “Amaaaazing”.

  53. @hillaire

    I’m not sure if you have it entirely correct, hillaire, especially the parts about running out of cons (just wait for the space alien invasion) and China going rogue (maybe, but then again, maybe not).

    But the way you stated it was so clever and pleasing to read that I gave you an LOL and use this reply to say THANKS. Every line in your comment is a gem.

  54. I only read bits and pieces of the article and skimmed through the other sections.

    To the extent I did read it, Desai and Hudson have not given the Gold Standard (or, more precisely and Gold/Silver/Monetary metal standard as it was for much of recorded history), their dues.

    The fact is, a classical gold standard (as a opposed to the bastardised versions that existed between the wars and post Bretton Woods), has ALWAYS worked demonstrably better than ANY other system ever employed.

    In the words of some who are infinitely more knowledgeable [of gold’s role as a monetary metal] than the authors of this article:

    ‘A gold standard is the ideal monetary system for those who create wealth through ingenuity, entrepreneurship and hard work.
    Gold standards are disfavoured by those who do not create wealth but instead seek to extract wealth from others through inflation, inside information and market manipulation.’ ….
    …. Jim Rickards (The Death of Money).

    And ….

    ‘Because gold is honest money, it is disliked by dishonest men’.
    …. Former Congressman Dr Ron Paul.

  55. Rdm says:

    Only in Roman times did debt become a relation of pure contractual exchange, making it inescapable. Five centuries of civil wars were fought to reverse forfeiture of collateral, land and liberty, wars that led to the fall of Rome. Once debt was contracted, the debtor had to pay it without regard to adverse personal and social consequences.

    Capitalism works as long as you are winning. Once you lose, you’d go apeshit and start a war. It’s a matter of survival versus the ideology.

    • Replies: @PetrOldSack
  56. @Tom Verso

    Article makes no acknowledgment of the institution of 90% Agricultural Parity at the beginning of World War II….which thus made the dollar real as regards relationship to labor production of essential commodities….which was the policy that ultimately solved the Great Depression and created the Post War Boom until the law was killed in 1952.

    Equitable trade requires first supporting labor at home, starting with raw material producers such that the nation does not become a source of cheap materials (as no nation should)

    This one page will explain: Equitable Trade

    http://www.normeconomics.org/trade_norm.pdf

    • Thanks: Matthew Kelly
  57. What’s coming down the digital pipeline will be anything but fiat money. As of January 7 20121, those faces on current US currency were slave owning white Supremacists and domestic terrorists who should be removed off money and replaced with former black slaves and hoodrats such as Harriet Tubman, George Floyd, and magic negro’s Oprah Whimpy, Snoop Dog and other white hating niggaz to remind whitey that they are now black owned slaves.
    The new Million dollar bill with have ‘In BLM We Trust’.
    Bow to your new master whitey.

    • Replies: @Resartus
  58. bayviking says:
    @RobinG

    Increased property taxation is Hudson’s solution.

    Property taxes support local governments, especially schools, so they cannot be eliminated without some other source of income. Schools are vital to real long term productivity.

    California capped it, primarily intending to protect the elderly, who do not live forever. But the unintended consequence became the largest beneficiaries of the law are Corporations, which can live forever. Conservative Courts awarded that Prop 13 benefit to Corporations, as part of a more than hundred year campaign to provide Corporations the same rights as human beings. Thus, property taxes on the Bank of America building cannot be raised more than 1% a year in perpetuity.

    • Replies: @RoatanBill
  59. bayviking says:
    @profnasty

    A Princeton Study confirms your description of our hopelessly corrupt system. Examination of 2000 pieces of legislation, when checking who benefits from the legislation, only major donors. The study essentially proves we live in an Oligarchy, our Democracy is just a myth perpetuated by phony elections full of phony promises.

    https://scholar.princeton.edu/sites/default/files/mgilens/files/gilens_and_page_2014_-testing_theories_of_american_politics.doc.pdf

    • Thanks: profnasty
  60. @Lussier

    I’m no economic buff, but I can appreciate detailed economic analysis from those who are. I only wish I knew more about investing and economics. I feel I’m watching market manipulation in real time at a Ponzi Convention run by Sheckleberg and Company.

    • Replies: @HdC
  61. Resartus says:
    @CelestiaQuesta

    Bow to your new master whitey.

    White Liberals will use blacks as a weapon against those that disagree…
    but be under no illusion, that white Liberals will give their power up to them….

  62. TGD says:
    @LP5

    Banks paid 5%
    S&Ls paid 5 1/4%

    What decade are you referring to? In the 1950s and up through the 1960s, banks paid 3% interest on passbook savings and S&Ls paid 3.25%. Those were very good rates of interest and encouraged savings. Mortgages were 6% and you had to put 25% down.

    The USA was an industrial economy back then and people’s savings were used to expand production.

  63. @bayviking

    There should be no such thing as property tax. Local gov’t should provide far fewer services to reduce the amount of money they need. Some cities have outsourced almost all their services to private contractors that get paid for services rendered.

    For example : All schools should be private and funded by the parents of children attending. There wouldn’t be any school boards to ram their favorite political agenda down parent’s throats. Water and sewer service should be metered and paid for by what’s used. Street maintenance should come from a tax on fuel or mileage in the case of an electric vehicle. Welfare should be completely shut down so the phony religious and charitable organizations are forced to take up the slack to keep their tax exempt status or go out of business. Street cops should be fired since they’re useless in fighting crime.

    • Disagree: bayviking
    • Replies: @Resartus
    , @bayviking
  64. @Rdm

    A beauty, to the core.

  65. @hillaire

    Derivatives(toxic) exceed the net benefit(negative). The short term is no high-brow supreme opportunism apparently, not even for the “chickens” swimming in their own soup.

  66. Anonymous[298] • Disclaimer says:
    @VICB3

    You left out two things in that list that should have been included, Americans are arrogant and stupid doubt it just read most of the replies, where most wouldn’t know the difference between a dollar and a sixpence not to mention a financial system.

  67. anon[136] • Disclaimer says:

    Watch closely growth of transactions using the alternatives to SWIFT .

    without SWIFT domination of transactions – dollar quickly loses beaucoup value

  68. Anonymous[295] • Disclaimer says:
    @Tom Verso

    Yes, Nixon “closed the gold window”. It was not that the US broke the Bretton Woods agreement. The United States is not agreement capable and have been this way for a long time.

  69. Resartus says:
    @RoatanBill

    Welfare should be completely shut down so the phony religious and charitable organizations are forced to take up the slack to keep their tax exempt status or go out of business.

    Welfare and other benefits/services were put in place to force Churches and Charities out of the system… Make as many as possible reliant on the Government…..

    Reported in the 90s when the big call to reduce the deficit was going on,
    if you got rid of everything but Welfare and Military, you would have less deficit
    but still couldn’t pay the debt down….

    Lots of spending from D.C. needs to stop, but most have been saying that for 30 years….

    • Replies: @RoatanBill
  70. @m___

    I’m surprised that you say China brings nothing new to the table when economically China is skyrocketing while US plummets.

    • Replies: @PetrOldSack
  71. If by free trade means producing best goods and services for the optimum prices then China will win out without exception, American military might notwithstanding. It won’t bode too well for the West!

  72. Resartus says:

    I’m surprised that you say China brings nothing new to the table when economically China is skyrocketing while US plummets.

    The relevant term there is “NEW”…….
    Most everything China is setting their table with,
    is from somewhere else….

    Most of their military equipment is upgrades of Russian stuff,
    done with stolen tech from the US and other countries…

    All China has is a huge low wage work force…..
    Without all of the Diversity the rest of the world is dealing with,
    their government can do lots and not have to work through that mess….

    • Replies: @Ann Nonny Mouse
  73. @Resartus

    How many tent cities have they got? How many Chinese with lifelong debt paying for their education? How many can’t afford to go to hospital? How many get shot in the streets?

    Somewhere else? That from America?

    How come Americans have shorter life expectancy than Cubans? Exceptional?

    • Agree: Truth Vigilante
    • Replies: @Resartus
  74. Pablo says:

    That sleazy, slimy, scumbag Larry Summers. Calling the pandemic a “turning point’ is disgusting. The pandemic, the COVID Lockdown, whatever you want to call it, is really a smokescreen for what REALLY happened. The Central Bankers, enabled by the Political Wh#re Class in Washington D.C. crashed the Economy with their money printing and their deficit spending. They looted the Taxpayer. So of course, they want to cover u that unpleasant fact. A lot of people need to be arrested for their crimes.

    • Agree: Robert Bruce
  75. Tjoe says:

    As about 97% of money is “made” by issuance of debt (the principle), where is the money to pay the interest “made”? It’s not.

    Think about it, over the life of a house loan more than 1/3 is paid in interest and during the first half of the loan terms may be more than 1/2 (like paying a 30 year off in 15).

    As debt goes up, how will the interest be paid when there is no money source…..aka equity money?

    Make a Us Treasury Dollar equal to a Fed Reserve Note, for all public and private debts, by law.

  76. @Resartus

    There are numerous welfare programs at the city, state and federal levels. The cities and/or states could shut down their welfare programs leaving only the fed gov level. Once the mostly local programs to hand out ‘free stuff’ are gone, the religious and charity frauds in those areas would have nowhere to hide if they don’t pick up the slack.

    The mechanism should be to reduce benefits monthly over a one or two year period to get to zero while informing the baby factories that this is their new normal. The time delay for full implementation would allow the moochers to feel the pain slowly to allow their primitive minds to adjust. A list of cities and states providing generous welfare benefits along with the bus routes to those destinations should accompany each reduced check.

    The moochers would either have to figure out how to support themselves or move to an area not smart enough to cut them off. Either way, the taxpayers in the area are no longer footing the bill. The freeloaders are also the ones with time on their hands to commit crimes, so the crime rate should go down as well. In a state where the citizenry is allowed to be armed without gov’t permission, anyone considering making crime their new source of funds should meet their just rewards.

  77. Anon[401] • Disclaimer says:

    Great article as always. Ellen Brown had some good warnings about gold though.

    Conditions are ripe for repeat of 1970s stagflation and 2008 debt crisis
    https://www.theguardian.com/business/2021/jul/02/1970s-stagflation-2008-debt-crisis-global-economy

    Quotes are unrelated to this article. I just enjoy them.

    “I react pragmatically. Where the market works, I’m for that. Where the government is necessary,
    I’m for that. I’m deeply suspicious of somebody who says, “I’m in favor of privatization,” or,
    “I’m deeply in favor of public ownership.” I’m in favor of whatever works in the particular case.”
    ~John Kenneth Galbraith

    “The study of money, above all other fields in economics, is one in which complexity is used to disguise truth or to evade truth, not to reveal it. The process by which banks create money is so simple the mind is repelled.”
    ~John Kenneth Galbraith

    • Thanks: Nancy
  78. Dale says:

    Although I suspect my political and economic policies are diametrically opposed (Austrians are the only game in town w/r/t monetary issues) I think the authors have a good grasp on the current geopolitical distortions plaguing our world. Fiat money allows the dominant country to pull forward consumption, and the result is always devastating when the bill comes due.

    On the other hand, steady deflation is an imaginary bogeyman. Does the fact that a television/phone/laptop with greater capabilities will be available a year from now stop current purchases? Maybe for a few, but not the majority. I think the ignorance regarding historical debt jubilees to be the weakest part of the article. The Jubilee were telegraphed decades in advance, allowing for recalibration of interest rates.

    • Agree: John Fisher
  79. nsa says:

    “beyond the dollar”
    Dollar? Oh, you must be referring to the north american shekel.

  80. Dale says:

    “ China’s Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank, Belt and Road Initiative and other financial initiatives are based on the principle of long-term patient capital making productive investment in a cooperative spirit that preserves the policy-autonomy of recipient countries.”

    No. The massive malinvestment inside China, including highway bridges that collapse after a decade to 50 story apartment buildings that are completely empty, is going to prevent China from becoming a middle class country for another century.

    Socialism does not scale. It is great at a familial level, and genocidal at a national level. Hundreds of millions of Chinese citizens will die because of the socialist policies their government is pursuing.

    • Thanks: John Fisher
    • Troll: d dan
  81. Dale says:
    @Proximaking

    I would consider this comment extreme trolling. The United States has contributed more to the advancement of liberalism than any other country in history.

    Socialists are ignorant of history, so your comment is understandable as uninformed bullshit.

    • LOL: John Fisher
  82. Alana says:
    @Mulga Mumblebrain

    You are definitely a bigot, and probably a racist, because you’ve taken immediate recourse to that ad hominem without giving any evidence, but whether that is from the poverty of your intellect, or as an indoctrinated knee jerk reaction, or both, is harder to discern.

    China does not act as I mendaciously assert, apparently, but no attempt to deal in actual cases is necessary, because you’ve already pushed your intellectual boat out by using the word mendacious, and that’s just like the capstone of your argument.

    Anyway, let’s then just drone on about the USA, because that’s what you’re really interested in attacking. You like a red herring fallacy, and if you think I support the US, it’s a nice Tu Quoque.

    Listen: don’t use my post as an excuse to go off on another of your hobby horses. I know it’s hard for your grasshopper mind, but next time, control it and stay on topic, and try by rational.

    • Agree: TKK
    • Replies: @TKK
  83. Resartus says:
    @Ann Nonny Mouse

    How come Americans have shorter life expectancy than Cubans? Exceptional?

    I don’t use the term exceptional as a whole… Individuals, on occasion…
    Mainly because Cuban’s lives are controlled from the time they are conceived…..
    Then again, more Cuban’s come to America in a year, than have left the US in
    it’s entire existence….

    How many tent cities have they got?

    Don’t know about tents, but China has built 5 or 6 major population centers with enough apartments etc to house 10’s of thousands, with not a single person occupying them…..
    How many towns/villages did China move to make room for the huge dam, which in operation
    barely 20 years is believed ready to collapse….

    What China focuses on is the whole, while the US (well used to) focus on the individual…..

    • Replies: @Mulga Mumblebrain
  84. Resartus says:
    @RoatanBill

    There are numerous welfare programs at the city, state and federal levels.

    Mostly funded by the Federal Budget…..
    Most programs are pushed by D.C., which after a couple years dumps the financing on the states…

    For decades have said, those programs should be run by Federal Employees, then D.C. will have no choice but to continue funding, which in most cases the cost is 3-5 times the initial estimate….

  85. Alana says:
    @Yee

    Yee,

    May I suggest that you try not to waste my time by making contradictory and pointless objections? Your points are so nonsensical it’s hardly worth responding.

    “So it’s better their countries has (sic) no roads, power plants, ports, railways, at all?”. You can take your straw man and shove it where the sun don’t shine.

    “Why (sic, ‘would’ omitted) China want to take control of assets that cannot even break-even?” You need to go look up cost/benefit analysis. I’ve already given you the benefit.

    “Of course, there’re also laws to regulate the operations of all infrastructures including foreign owned ones.” It’s unclear here whether you are referring to laws in China that control it’s external investments, or laws in the developing countries that control foreign investment into that country. You probably aren’t even clear in your own mind. But anyway, I refer you clutching your precious pieces of paper, to China’s comment on the Hong Kong return agreement: “It’s a historical document”, i.e. non-binding.

    As for the UN, and boy am I getting bored with your puerile commenting by now, you need to go away and learn about how voting blocks work in the UN. You need to understand optics and general sentiment. You need to understand that the Security Council is just one part of a complex political machine, not the single determining factor in the equation.

    • Troll: d dan
  86. Alana says:

    Yee,

    May I suggest that you try not to waste my time by making contradictory and pointless objections? Your points are so nonsensical it’s hardly worth responding.

    “So it’s better their countries has (sic) no roads, power plants, ports, railways, at all?”. You can take your straw man and shove it where the sun don’t shine.

    “Why (sic ‘would’ omitted) China want to take control of assets that cannot even break-even?” You need to go look up cost/benefit analysis. I’ve already given you the benefit. If you want to refute this, you have to show that the benefit isn’t worth the cost.

    “Of course, there’re also laws to regulate the operations of all infrastructures including foreign owned ones.” It’s unclear here whether you are referring to laws in China that control it’s external investments, or laws in the developing countries that control foreign investment into that country. You probably aren’t even clear in your own little mind. But anyway, I refer you, clutching your precious pieces of paper, to China’s comment on the Hong Kong return agreement: “It’s a historical document”, i.e. non-binding and can be ignored. Or as Stalin said “How many divisions have they got?”.

    As for the UN, and boy am I getting bored with your puerile commenting by now, you need to go away and learn about how voting blocks work in the UN. You need to understand optics and general sentiment. You need to understand that the Security Council is just one part of a complex political machine, not the single determining factor in the equation.

    • Troll: d dan
  87. This is what will happen to the USD and it’s current status.An amalgamated and new currency, the Amero will suddenly be unveiled to the whole world. It’s creation is a finished product, already printed in 10, 20, 50 and 100 notes, massive stores exist in the vaults of major banking institutions throughout the US. Just as the dollar was taken off the gold standard in 1973, the value of this new currency will fall precipitously however will bounce right back as the USD did. Again, this amalgamation of three countries, Mexico, USA and Canada will for a time be an uncomfortable fit mainly due to the fact that the peso is approximately fourteen to one USD. The entire process was concieved of and promulgated by the North American monetary union, well over a decade ago.

    The value of an Amero is almost a holy trinity, and begins with Mexico, representing the first third of a new face value based on blood, sweat and tears of Mexicans (they know all about hard work), the second part or one third, USA representing high tech Ag and the maritime architecture that can deliver foodstuffs, not to mention safety on the high seas (US Navy) , and last but not least Canada, her third is oil backed guarantee(s) where geld once rested as a true foundation for all fiat monies. Her officialdom will release oil stores derived from tar-sands onto the world spot market, whenever and wherever needed. Secondly, in the event of regional or world war, Canada will provide all the petroleum energy and related spinoff products (pharmaceuticals, plastics, infrastructure materiel (road tars) necessary to keep our triad of countries and Amero safe from disruption and or destruction of the OPEC consortium of countries, includes Iran, Iraq and Libya.

    The success of the Amero will depend on two important elements. First, a North/South American alliance based on total economic and cultural integration (we are half way there already) combined with an almost logistical-political approach that engenders peaceful coexistence with an almost Orwellian appearance of our eastern counterpart, “Oceania” comprised of China, Russia and SCO nationals into one massive formidable force- on many levels. The second element, an enormous pipeline from Alaska will need to be constructed to pump Huge amounts of fresh water delivered continuously into the deserts of California and Northern Mexico. This strategy will fulfill an urgent request by the Chinese CCP to double US grain and other Ag products exports to the Chinese people. The US will tack on a surcharge to the grain that ensures a minimum wage and generous medical benefits to all agricultural laborers.

    This Amero plan averts a collapse of global fiat currencies and more importantly major war(s). Lastly, the only alternative is to rigorously enforce the micro-tax of 0.1% on ALL electronic commerce, be they credit card, ATM, international, interstate or between banks and their customers in the east or western. As we all know too well, the bankers won’t even broach the subject of an international treaty for a worldwide micro-tax, so the Amero is the only remaining solution. Warning! drop your prejudices and sovereignty concerns or we all face total extermination by Atomic warfare. The choice must be made now!

    • Replies: @Mulga Mumblebrain
  88. Thim says:

    Bizarro world, Americans, Brits, Chinese, Germans exist, and some amorphous unnamed group called “banks”.

    Who are these banks? How many of them were there at Versailles, dictating terms? Oh, I get it Hudson, they were the “Americans”.

  89. Thirty Year’s Crisis? How about Second Thirty Years’ War. The First Thirty Year’s War killed, percentagewise, far more people.

  90. TKK says:
    @Alana

    Just block Mumblebrain. It is just pro China hammering with no nuance. She/He/It throws in some Jew Commiseration so people will read.

    I think it is actually Godfree Roberts.

    It consistently strikes me as bizarre when people on this site praise China so lavishly. I can appreciate their efficiency at high speed rail, WeChat and Dim Sum without pretending like they are not a rapacious, creativity killing, authoritarian nightmare.

    No one here has traveled in Sub Sahara Africa and Indonesia, as I have, and seen how they are building a “hospital” that looks like a Denver Urgent Care in exchange for mineral rights in perpetuity. They think Wall Street, Black Rock and Larry Fink are parasites?

    Little League compared to the economic demon that is the CCP’s ruling elite.

    • Agree: Alana
  91. @anon

    but there are criticisms here of Hudson that makes sense, like Tom Verso’s
    then there is Realists’ condensation that is very useful, helps to simply Hudson.

    those 2 I list are valuable relatively on this issue right here and now

  92. @TKK

    And you and your invertebrate ilk are just Western supremacist racist shit-scared that a better country, better system and better people are outdoing the crumbling sewer that is the USA, and its minions in the West. China builds hospitals in the poor world, while the West closes them through Structural Adjustment Programs, or bombs them to rubble in yet another genocidal aggression. THAT is why the majority world supports China and loathes Western thugs like you.

  93. @elmerfudzie

    ‘Oil-backed guarantee..’ of omnicide through runaway climate destabilisation. Why Amero? Why not ‘Diablo’? They are the same. The only strength the USA has left is in the field of violence, genocide and destruction.

  94. @Resartus

    ‘….believed ready to collapse’, only by racist, imbecile, malignant baboons. Just sayin’.

  95. Angiekens says:
    @anon

    At least you can comment.

  96. Smith says:

    As always interesting article, but the usual commenters always fail back to the Gold standard, muh fiat money, muh China-US yadda yadda.

    There shouldn’t be a single nation/organization that controls the world’s supply of money, whether it be USA or China or whatever.

    Every nation should be able to able to print their money as long as the people need it, because money is supposed to help the people, and not any specific nation.

    This common sense is almost always lost between the nationalist and ideological internet fisticuff.

  97. @TKK

    No country is squeaky clean and China’s social crediting system and other authoritarian aspects are indeed a concern.

    That said, on a RELATIVE BASIS, China is by FAR more of a capitalistic Free Market Economy than the USSA (United Socialist States of America).
    China has far lower corporate and personal income tax rates, lower state and local taxes, its businesses are not pummelled into submission by a crushing regulatory framework.
    China is not hobbling small and medium sized businesses (the engine of employment growth), by imposing lockdowns of ‘non-essential’ businesses that are bankrupting a good many of them.

    China is firing on ALL CYLINDERS while the Anglo-Zionist Empire is paying people to stay at home and subsidising other businesses to keep their doors shut. (All for the sake of a contrived NON-EXISTENT pandemic).

    WAKE UP all you fools that have been jabbed with experimental mRNA toxins, you’ve all been had.

    [MORE]

    Utilising any objective metric you choose, Covid-19 has much LOWER MORTALITY* than the seasonal flu.
    (*That’s assuming that one doesn’t engage in Medical Fraud and statistical chicanery like the U.S/U.K and a few other places that count deaths WITH Covid as being deaths FROM Covid – when it is evident that said death was caused by other comorbidities like late stage cancer, stroke, heart disease etc).

    At some time in the near future, these governments will pull the plug on those welfare handouts, and there will be NO JOB waiting for the masses to go back to.
    The bulk of you ignorant face mask muzzling Socialist Distancers will be dependent on a few crumbs of welfare from your Socialist American government – who will own a significant chunk of the means of production.

    You will Own Nothing and you will be Happy – they will decree, and all of you will submissively follow.

    The fact of the matter is that the bulk of the world’s nations have signed on to China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) and many of the remainder are scrambling to sign on.

    That’s because China engages in WIN-WIN trade relationships with the other countries that have CLEARLY SHOWN to yield demonstrable improvements. (ie: better health outcomes, longer life spans for the citizens, massive infrastructure improvements and exponential increases in GDP).

    This is in contrast to the raping and pillaging of the resources of these 3rd world countries by the Anglo-Zionist Empire which had left a legacy of two centuries of death and despair.

    TKK, you, Alana and a few others are living in fantasy land as far as some of your beliefs are concerned.
    You should apologise to Mulga for your infantile and asinine comments which highlight your inability to grasp that the U.S economy/military/stock market and financial system is a house of cards and will soon collapse.
    When the U.S dollar loses its reserve currency status (as it inevitably will in the not too distant future – expedited by the profligacy of endless ‘money printing’), the U.S will sink into a bottomless abyss from which it will never extricate itself.

    For the sake of humanity and those peoples that have felt the brunt of genocidal U.S foreign policy misadventures in pursuit of Israeli hegemonic aspirations, let’s hope that time comes soon.

    • Replies: @Smith
  98. Smith says:
    @Truth Vigilante

    The collapse of the US hegemony and octopus-financial system would do the world much good.

    Unfortunately, many seeks to keep it alive, mostly the billionaires.

  99. @Ralph B. Seymour

    The speaker is just another dreamer. He offers no solution, just pie in the sky hopes.

    The freaks currently in the ascendancy will fall by the wayside once the currency funding them crumbles. That’s coming. The people leading the charge to have every abomination regarded as normal and healthy are all folks with an education based on fantasy ideas. It’s why I’m so down on the humanities and social sciences. They are the breeding ground for nonsense ideas with no basis in reality or provable facts.

    What the controllers are trying to implement is being done with massive debt that can never be repaid. When the currency system collapses, and it will, is when rationality and natural law will reassert itself as there’s no other option. The freaks haven’t the skills required to feed the world, house and clothe the population. Their illogical protestations will fall on deaf ears when survival, living or dying, becomes the most important issue.

    I’m an anarchist because government is the highest form of evil in the world. It spawned fiat currency and from that all the world’s ills followed. I’m an atheist because religion teaches people to believe instead of teaching them to think. Religion taught people to believe in nonsense at their very core and that allowed gov’t to flourish.

  100. Yee says:

    Alana,

    You only need to watch how many times the UN tried to condemn Israel but vetoed by the US to understand how voting in the UN works. I haven’t seen countries as aggressive on international stage as the US and Israel have been facing any difficulties in the UN.

    In any case, I failed to see how owning assets in a foreign country gives you poliical power. Quite the contrary, assets in foreign countries are vulnerable to confiscation. India even has a law to confiscate foreign assets in time of war.

    As for “China’s comment on the Hong Kong return agreement: “It’s a historical document”,”

    Very true. It wasn’t a law, it wasn’t even a treaty with UK. China has sovereignty over Hongkong, that’s enough to settle the issue.

  101. @RoatanBill

    Looks like I got caught dreaming; time to up my game. Roatan Bill has edged me out in cynicism!

    I thought the video was pretty darn insightful, but maybe it’s old hat at this point: “Most still don’t realize the magnitude of what’s been done to them.”

    Anyway, I have taken the liberty to post your thoughts (with attribution) on a few other sites.

    • Replies: @RoatanBill
  102. Mefobills says:
    @RoatanBill

    I’m an anarchist because government is the highest form of evil in the world. It spawned fiat currency and from that all the world’s ills followed.

    All money is fiat.

    The first money came from the Temples as an extension of the barley ledger. The Temples allowed gold by weight to be balanced against barley grains, hence “grains of gold.” Gold was tithed as jewelry to the Temples, especially when people died. Gold was easily found on the surface in alluvial planes, and since it was shiny, it was initially used as jewelry.

    Gold traded long distance for things that the local economies could not produce, or did not have in their soil.

    Egypt had a fairly advanced money system, where gold hoops were both money and jewelry. Gold hoops traded external to the Egyptian economy, while internal to the economy they used clay shards.

    The shards would be annotated with how much of your grain was in the silos. As the grain was eaten by mice and bugs, your money was decremented. This was the first demurrage money system. Is it no wonder that Egyptians revered cats, especially as they could kill rats and mice?

    The Temples and God Kings were the first creators of money, and it was ledger money from the very beginning, with physical gold as a manifestation of the ledger.

    The only question that matters is how you train, select, and control your hierarchy – especially for the money power.

    The fact of the matter is that mankind has two way (person to person) and three way relations. The third party is always a form of government, or law, or arbitrator, etc.

    False ideology can always be reduced down to expose its contradictions. Marxism assumes that there is a proletariat of labor, i.e. world plumbers unite! Or, Somalian labor is the same as Scandinavian labor. Anarchists assume that man’s relations are two way, and that absent the third party, things will just sort of magically work out ok.

    • Replies: @RoatanBill
  103. @Ralph B. Seymour

    Is that your video? Are you the speaker or the script writer?

    What the speaker says is in large part true, but isn’t relevant. Trying to change the 1st world’s direction at this late stage isn’t realistic by trying to bring back the old time culture. There are simply too many freaks in too many powerful position at the moment to have any such movement gain traction. The freaks like their power and aren’t going to relinquish it voluntarily.

    First there has to be a societal collapse. That will bring on massive violence starting in the cities and expanding outwards. No place on the planet with any significant population will be spared although some places will be better than others. The decent working people all over the world will realize they’ve been betrayed by TPTsB; lots of them in the US have weaponry. The political class and their enablers will become targets with everything from verbal to actual ammunition depending on location. The US will be ground zero and is one reason I decided to leave.

    The reaction from the world’s police and military, with the preponderance of capable weaponry, will decide the future. My suspicion is there will be military dictatorships just to try to regain some calm while working towards a restart of society. The world’s money will be decided upon, possibly different in jurisdictions and that alone will signal an honest desire to jettison what has clearly failed or keep beating a dead horse.

    The next decade or two are all downhill because there aren’t any honest ‘leaders’ anywhere in the world and the populations won’t listen to some no name even if he/she has the best intentions.

    • Replies: @Ralph B. Seymour
  104. @RoatanBill

    No, it’s not my video. I just thought it was interesting.

    For the record, I agree with you. We are heading into some chaos that won’t be replaced by nirvana. Frankly, it’s so bad I don’t relish contemplating it.

    Push is coming to shove.

    • Replies: @RoatanBill
  105. @Mefobills

    Given that your first sentence is wrong, I wasn’t expecting too much from the rest.

    Gold, silver and other commodities are real money. Gold and silver are simply the most convenient forms.

    The labor and expense to mine gold and silver give the metals their intrinsic value. Printing a $100 bill of fiat costs almost nothing and therefore represents its true value of almost nothing.

    National currencies should be eliminated. The metals producers should get together and coin “money” for circulation denominated in the WEIGHT of metal. A gold coin could be struck with 100 stamped into its face denoting 100 grams, for example.

    Prices of everything would be set as G:S:C so a typical widget would cost 945:50:0 meaning 945 grams of gold, 50 grams of silver and no grams of copper. The units could actually be whatever could be agreed upon. No one would care if the gold was minted in the US, Russia, or on mars.

    This would eliminate currency arbitrage, exchange rates, central banks and would mean that government is out of the “money” business. Price inflation would be a market force, not the whim of some banking cabal. Deficit spending with central banks monetizing the debt would be impossible. Wars would be less likely as now they need to be paid for in cash G:S:C, not thin air “currency”.

    Credit card companies could store all the metal an individual or company owns and we can all use plastic as a convenience with the option to withdraw any part of OUR metal any time we want. No more fractional reserve banking.

    • Replies: @Mefobills
  106. @Ralph B. Seymour

    Where are you posting my comments? I’d like to know what other subversive sites I might want to visit.

  107. Corrupt says:

    The world tires of underwriting the U.S. At some point they will decide that they don’t want to pay for our inflation (sorry, I meant MMT) and use other currencies and and precious metals as their national reserves. At that point, the U.S. will be in a world of hurt. It is a good time to begin collecting other assets since the dollar will end up worthless.

  108. Mefobills says:
    @RoatanBill

    Gold, silver and other commodities are real money. Gold and silver are simply the most convenient forms.

    Money is an abstraction created by man; it was created once civilization and law was sufficiently advanced.

    Saying that Gold and Silver and commodity is money, is like saying math is metal. It is a ridiculous statement at variance with the facts.

    This is why false ideology can be reduced to an absurdity. You are clinging to an absurdity that rational people can easily see through.

    When the first gold coin got its legal King’s stamp, it was fiat. For thousands of years, humans have confused the “commodity” of money with its legal function, and you are not helpful.

    If the “legal” authorities abuse their money power, that is separate question on whether or not gold or precious metals, or cowry shells or whatever is money.

    National currencies should be eliminated. The metals producers should get together and coin “money” for circulation denominated in the WEIGHT of metal

    Money’s true nature is law, and a nation’s law cannot extend past its borders. You are arguing for some sort of “international finance system” with metal producers ganging together as a cabal to then set the metal price.

    Our (((friends))) set the metal exchange rate between east and west on their caravan routes. They arbitraged the exchange rate as a form of usury. They took their sordid gain typically at the bosporous crossing where Constantinople/Istanbul is now. This is why Rome moved EAST, as it adopted precious metals after the second Punic War.

    When Rome got its start under King Numa, it used bronze disks, the paper of the day. Rome got its start with an advanced idea of what money is, and Rome died when it regressed. Rome also allowed Oligarchy to arise, especially when it monetized precious metals from the “owner” class who had excess Jewelry to melt down to make coinage.

    The article by Hudson is wonky, but if you read it closely, it is gamesmanship on international trade where things go wrong; and why? Because there is no international body as a third person to call foul or strike. For example, during the Gold fractional reserve era, Mercantile nations would sell their excess goods thus draining their trade partners of gold. Bank credit rode on top in a 10:1 ratio, which would then collapse the deficit trade partner into depression.

    There are only a few cases in monetary history where gold or precious metals worked, and the most recent was the gold trading standard from Bretton Woods up until Nixon’s closing of gold window in 1971.

    In the gold trading standard, goods flow between nations was marked by gold flow, and if trade got out of balance, the deficit country would have to lower exchange rates relative to gold.

    Keynes Bancor would have worked even better than the gold trading standard.. Money’s true nature is law.

    • Replies: @Truth Vigilante
  109. I see that you’re a statist at heart.

    Money is an abstraction. However, if I exchange a gram of gold for a widget, there is no abstraction there. It’s a barter, goods for goods. That’s why I used G:S:C as the form of money in WEIGHT of metal. No dollars, Euros, Yen, etc. When coined with a numerically stamped weight of metal, that coin can function as real money. In a truly free market where there is no coercion involved, the value of all goods is market based, including the precious metals, no gov’t or bullshit law needed.

    The rest of your reply is worthless.

    • Replies: @Mefobills
  110. @RoatanBill

    I haven’t posted in a while, but when I did it was

    https://jamesfetzer.org/

    https://aim4truth.org/

    This site is the best in my opinion:

    https://americans4innovation.blogspot.com/

  111. Mefobills says:
    @RoatanBill

    I’m a realist at heart.

    All of life is hierarchy, even down to the cellular level.

    Anarchist are in denial that there is hierarchy, and somehow think that things will just work out magically.

    Gold especially is magic, you know – because it doesn’t rust and is shiny.

    In a truly free market where there is no coercion involved, the value of all goods is market based, including the precious metals, no gov’t or bullshit law needed.

    That is more wishful thinking, and has no connection whatever to mankind’s history… it can never exist.

    Your free markets and anarchy have been tried in recent history, especially in Africa – where young toughs ride around in their Technical Pickups chasing the finest tail, and doing whatever they want. They use force to get their way.

    This suggestion that humans can hold hands and sing kumbaya and have free-dumb markets is shit-tier drivel. Law = Force. Money = Law.

  112. @Mefobills

    You wrote:

    All money is fiat ….. and ….. Money is an abstraction created by man.

    WRONG on both counts.

    Fiat money by definition, is money backed by nothing. It is money that has no intrinsic value and that has no real world practical utility.

    Gold and silver have intrinsic value and have countless real world uses.

    You went on to come up with the following infantile and absurd analogy:

    Saying that Gold and Silver and commodity is money, is like saying math is metal

    The best money is something that is desirable for its scarcity, but not so scarce as to be near impossible to locate and extract from the Earth.
    It must have the properties of durability, divisibility, fungibility, ease of portability and be impervious to the ravages of nature (won’t rust and remains untarnished even if it’s been at the bottom of the sea for millennia).

    Gold and silver fit the bill perfectly. As mediums of exchange that can be trusted to maintain their integrity, they have no equal.

    Different civilisations, independently of one another, came to the same conclusion that Gold and Silver (and copper for lower denomination coinage), should be money.

    I won’t waste any more time in dissecting your nonsensical arguments as to why gold and silver are inappropriate forms of money.
    Suffice to say, your smears are straight from the Zionist Dominated Usury Cartel of Bankers playbook, used to indoctrinate the masses that unchecked creation of backed-by-nothing paper money (or the digital equivalent) is good for the common man.

    Of course, anyone with even half a brain knows it isn’t. It’s good for THE RULING ELITE only – as they can print to their hearts content and dole it out between themselves.

    They can’t ‘print’ gold and silver and that’s why they hate it.

    So quit with your disinfo campaign – we can see through it. Tell your Zio-handlers that it’s not working.

    • Replies: @Smith
    , @Mefobills
    , @Mefobills
  113. Smith says:
    @Truth Vigilante

    Who determines the value of gold and silver?

    • Replies: @Truth Vigilante
  114. @Smith

    You wrote:

    Who determines the value of gold and silver?

    Well, in the short term (as in right now), both metals are being manipulated [and kept artificially underpriced through the ‘paper’ futures market] by the Zionist Dominated Cartel of Usury Bankers that control the western financial system.

    You see, said nefarious entities have a vested interest in keeping the value of the USD propped up and the price of gold down.
    There is [in an unmanipulated market], an inverse correlation between the USD and the price of gold.
    When market participants anticipate that there are too many USD around (or Euros or Yen etc), they dump them and exchange them for gold. Hence as one goes up, the other goes down.

    In the days of the classical gold standard, banknotes were redeemable in gold.

    The bottom of this US $20 Gold Certificate banknote reads: ‘Twenty Dollars in GOLD payable to the bearer on demand’.

    No country could risk printing too many banknotes in excess of their gold reserves, because if someone got wind of the disparity there would be a rush to exchange their paper money for REAL money. (ie: gold).

    And so it proved to be in the late 1960’s as the French and Germans started dumping their USD for gold, thus depleting U.S gold holdings significantly. (Fort Knox has not been audited since 1974 and the U.S government has steadfastly refused to conduct another audit. Many speculate that the U.S has vastly less gold than it claims to possess, if any).

    Accordingly, Nixon was forced to suspend the post Bretton Woods Gold standard, or risk the complete depletion of U.S gold holdings to zero.

    So, to address your original question, the MARKET decides what the price of gold and silver should be through the process of supply and demand like any other commodity.

    Historical Example: The Spanish discovered huge quantities of gold and silver in the Americas and flooded Europe with it in the 16th century.

    End Result: Although the collective output of the Europe was more or less the same throughout that century (allowing for marginal increases in productivity as new marginally more efficient processes and discoveries were introduced in manufacturing and agriculture), all of a sudden there was more ‘money’ in the form of gold and silver to purchase said fixed output.

    Therefore, prices of said items for sale adjusted upwards, of their own accord through market forces, to reflect more ‘money’ chasing this fixed quantity of goods.

    Fast forward to the present, and look what Trump alone did in ONE YEAR to the U.S M1 money supply:

    M1 = (broadly speaking) Notes and coins in circulation incl. demand deposits, cheque and savings account deposits.

    Biden has continued on in a similar vein with reckless spending, quantitative easing and copious money printing.

    Basically, a SH!T LOAD of paper money creating a huge imbalance between the supply of currency and goods and services available to purchase.

    Only ONE possible outcome from this = Inflationary Depression.

    (NOTE: When the USD loses its reserve currency status this will escalate to hyperinflation).

    With that in mind, all the smart money is already piling into gold (and silver), and when the manipulation of the precious metals markets ends, and IT WILL SURELY END (it is largely dependent on the USD having Reserve currency status), the price of gold and silver will go to the moon and the U.S economy and society will turn into a Mad Max post apocalyptic film set.

    What I have just foretold is no fantasy – there is historical precedent.

    Timeline: August 1971 – Nixon suspends the redeemability of USD for gold. At that time Gold = USD $ 35/oz.

    This immediately sets off a stampede to unload USD for gold.

    By January 1980, Gold = USD $ 850 / oz (approx. a 25 fold increase).

    This time around the Federal Reserve has printed/digitally created orders of magnitude more USD than in the 1970’s so gold’s trajectory is sure to be into the stratosphere and beyond.

    • Replies: @Smith
    , @Mefobills
  115. Resartus says:

    Who determines the value of gold and silver?

    Once heard, the only value anything has, is what some fool is willing to give you for it……

    • Replies: @Smith
  116. Smith says:
    @Truth Vigilante

    I’m not gonna read all that for such a simple question.

    • Replies: @Truth Vigilante
  117. @RoatanBill

    SARS-CoV-2 is not novel… there is no pandemic.. there are no variants.


  118. Mefobills says:
    @Truth Vigilante

    WRONG on both counts.

    Fiat money by definition, is money backed by nothing. It is money that has no intrinsic value and that has no real world practical utility.

    Go back and re-read the thread for comprehension. I get it that demoralized people get all butt hurt when their world view is upended.

    I already explained how gold as money came into being, and it was against a ledger. It got its value as an accounting trick relative to barley. There is your intrinsic value.

    Go back and re-read about the gold coin era. Gold coins were fiat money.

    For much of the gold coin era, gold coins were held to either one cow or tow cows of “intrinsic value.” This was done by consecrating gold to the vaults or by government recalling coins and then re-minting (to put coins back into circulation). The coins were recalled with head taxes, or they were demonetized by government.

    People believe all kinds of crap that are refuted by history. Why? Because they were not taught properly in the first place.

    • Replies: @Truth Vigilante
  119. Mefobills says:
    @Truth Vigilante

    Historical Example: The Spanish discovered huge quantities of gold and silver in the Americas and flooded Europe with it in the 16th century.

    And then Spain had inflation, and they stopped making things. Why? Because they thought that Gold or silver was money, so they “imported” goods and services.

    Spain then disappeared from the world scene as a powerful country.

    This sort of “gold is real money” BS has real world consequences, as the example of Spain illustrates.

    Real wealth is the making of goods and services, and is marked by a monetary unit, and said unit can made of anything. There is nothing intrinsic… intrinsic as relates to money, is a load of crap.

    England’s Talley Stick era had a money unit made of wood, that could not be counterfeited, and the people were so productive a single wage earner could afford a family of four on about 6 months of labor.

    The question nobody is asking is “how should the money power be legally codified?” Obviously, “private market money” has failed.

    • Agree: Smith, HdC
  120. Mefobills says:
    @Truth Vigilante

    So quit with your disinfo campaign – we can see through it. Tell your Zio-handlers that it’s not working.

    You are a practical retard.

    The protocols talk about how “gold has been very good to us.”

    The “sterling system” that Hudson talks about in the article flew right over your head.

    London (the square mile) would control the price of silver and gold, yet England had no gold or silver in her lands.

    Here it is:

    International monetary systems have, therefore, been the financial systems of particular countries. Governed by central banks that in most countries represent the interests of the financial sector, they generate vastly more private debt than public money. The results have been international rentier elites and world creditocracies, first centred on sterling and then the dollar. Their power extends through networks of institutions offering private credit to the world’s households, firms and governments and dealing in financial assets, such as stocks, bonds and other securities and their derivatives, especially for real estate and natural resources. The network is ultimately protected by the international power of that state.

    Gold or “sterling” Silver cannot flex to the S shape of any economy, especially as the economy ebbs and flows with the seasons. Harvest season especially needs money to extinguish the transfer of farm goods. If there is no money to price farm goods, then said goods lie fallow in the fields, like during the great depression.

    So, what happens is our (((friends))) create private credit to fulfill the needs of a normal economy. Then they create schemes to recall y0ur gold in exchange for their credit, where their credit is good for gold.

    Gold bugs are annoying and stupid, and are falling right into their (((hands))).

    Mefobills is a play on words: (Metallurgical Research Corporation )

    These were bills of credit issued into the economy because Germany had no gold. Hitler and Reinhardt were tweaking the nose of the “international jew” and his gold as money… metal research.

    You accuse a died in the wool Nazi like me of being a Zio, yet you are the fool who is playing into Zion’s hands. You are not a Truth Vigilante, you are a confused shill.

  121. @Smith

    Simple questions can often have complex answers that require a historical context for some perspective.

    If that was too difficult for you to absorb, put the baseball back on the TV.
    Go back to memorising Mickey Mantle’s batting average and continue living by that maxim that has served you well throughout your unremarkable life so far:

    ‘IGNORANCE IS BLISS’.

    • Replies: @Smith
  122. @Mefobills

    MefoBullSh*t writes:

    ‘People believe all kinds of crap that are refuted by history. Why? Because they were not taught properly in the first place.’

    And you are the PRIME example of said individual that was not taught properly.

    I’d be flattering you if I were to say you’re an ignorant fool in relation to the history of the monetary metals.

    You persist with juvenile statements like:

    ‘Gold coins were fiat money.’

    Fiat Money = Money deemed to have value by DECREE.

    [MORE]

    Absent the decree, Fiat money has NO UTILITY.

    No coin made of ANY METAL can be classified as fiat because any coin, whether it be composed of copper,nickel, zinc or whatever, requires an element that has REAL WORLD utility in countless applications.
    Said metal is valued by society and billions are invested by mining conglomerates each year in pursuit of discovering and then extracting said metal from the ground.

    By DEFINITION, it cannot thus be fiat.

    Gold coins are made of GOLD and thus have utility. It is used in jewellery, dental fillings, used in electronics and aerospace and countless other applications.

    Because it is also a Monetary metal and used by central banks as a reserve holding, this has entailed that it is valued at a premium to what it would be if it was an industrial metal only.
    Absent this monetary desirability, Gold would be trading at less than the present value of USD $1800 /oz and at a lower price it would be used in a LOT more industrial applications than it presently is (where it’s not currently commercially viable to utilise such an expensive input).

    You’re as thick as two bricks MefoBullSh*t.

    I suggest you exit stage right before you further embarrass yourself.

    I’ll leave you with the following timeless words:

    We see that nations, differing in language, religion and habits …. have during a period of 4000 years, agreed in one respect; that gold and silver have, uninterruptedly to this day, continued to be the universal currency of the commercial and civilised world.
    …. Albert Gallatin – Treasury Secretary under Thomas Jefferson.

    • Replies: @Mefobills
  123. Mefobills says:

    We see that nations, differing in language, religion and habits …. have during a period of 4000 years, agreed in one respect; that gold and silver have, uninterruptedly to this day, continued to be the universal currency of the commercial and civilised world.

    You are repeating what I already stated, because you lack comprehension.

    The original use for gold was to trade long distance. Other nations settled on gold and later silver as the unit of account to settle their ledgers.

    The gold trading standard from Bretton Woods to 1971 worked OK, as it settled international trade.

    Internal to an economy, gold doesn’t work – the S shaped curve problem. It is also depressionary, which is why Rome fell into the dark ages, which were the greatest depression. Gold was consecrated to the vaults and was not liberated until the fourth crusades.

    People like you the blah blah about gold and intrinsic value are useful idiots for our ((Friends)) who like to coral people into dialectics.

    Private bank credit fails (FIAT MONEY!) fails, so lets go to gold – it is our god.

    The third option, and the reason why NSDAP Germany was attacked, was because Germany had sovereign lawful money. Germany also traded long distance through her trading banks, which were goods for goods (barter) type operations, and hence bypassed the sterling zone (precious metal) international banksters.

    ___________Germany’s most unforgivable crime before the Second World War was her attempt to extricate her economic power from the world’s trading system and to create her own exchange mechanism which would deny world finance its opportunity to profit.___________ quote by Churchill.

    http://www.renegadetribune.com/winston-churchill-germanys-unforgivable-crime/?doing_wp_cron=1626202896.7809829711914062500000

    Here is more BS by you that needs to be refuted:

    By DEFINITION, it (gold intrinsic blah blah) cannot thus be fiat.

    Debased coins circulated at par value did they not? Clipped coins circulated at par value. Why? Because they had the King’s stamp, and hence were redeemed for taxes, and were FIAT MONEY. Fiat means faith in the law, that the coins will be redeemed.

    Gold bugs emit shit-tier drivel, and confuse normies about the fabric of reality.

    When King Edward kicked the Jews out, they were allowed to take their gold coins with them, because they can be melted down and re-used in their new host country.

    • Replies: @Anon
  124. Nancy says:

    Charles Hugh Smith has something to say (maybe there’s hope?) The pendelum that has swung to the extreme of the top 10% owning 90% of the productive capital, will inevitably swing to the other extreme… starting now?
    https://www.oftwominds.com/blogjuly21/50-trillion7-21.html

  125. Anon[203] • Disclaimer says:
    @Mefobills

    Gold isn’t money, but it is a monetary institution. What the gold bugs miss is that you can’t develop an economy of highly developed public infrastructure, intricate cities and complex large buildings with advanced architecture, sophisticated professions and advanced research and development … on barter. Anything that takes time, so that the payoff in productivity/development/advancement requires rationalization of production and consumption, to support efforts before being finished, can’t be done by barter/gold. Money is required. Barter applies to just a tiny part of the economy.

    If gold really were money, just like an economy with no public infrastructure, an economy run on gold/commodity money, with no credit, would operate at a very primitive level. Stone age.

    So that’s the simple reason, gold isn’t money because you can’t run the economy on barter. Money has always been credit. Gold as an institution supported credit, by applying discipline to lenders so they wouldn’t over do it. It didn’t work perfectly, but it was useful. Unfortunately, the deflationary character of gold also mitigates against its use. The destabilizing effects of international flows of gold (rent seeking) that interfere with sovereign monetary and fiscal policies is also a major defect.

    Comprehension or attainment of the advanced engineering economy requires that money is credit, not gold.

    • Replies: @Mefobills
  126. Smith says:
    @Truth Vigilante

    No, there’s a simple answer for it.

    You choose to say a whole load of nothing in order to deflect it.

  127. Mefobills says:
    @Anon

    Comprehension or attainment of the advanced engineering economy requires that money is credit, not gold.

    Yes, that’s true. An economy is complex with lots of moving parts. It also has a time factor, which ‘credit’ fulfills. Credit has a future attribute.

    If money is created against a debt instrument, it is credit. The credit is pulled out of the economy in the future to pay the past (debt instrument).

    If money is created debt free by government, it is still credit. The Credit is seigniorage against the existing money supply, and is paid by inflation, or by demanding labor, goods, etc.

    Debt free money is one of those cases where you have to think about it carefully.

    Gold, when used post Bretton Woods, until 71, was not credit.

    It was an accounting device which accounted for goods flow between nations. If goods flow became unbalanced, say a mercantile nation was exporting in excess, then the “accounting” would then signal to do an exchange rate adjustment between creditor (exporting) and debtor (importing) nations.

    Gold when it is stuffed in the reserve loop of a bank, and is used as an “asset” for backing up credit loans, is potential future credit. Mostly it is deactivated and sits, as potential to back up a defaulting loan.

    Schacht’s (NSDAP Economy) trading banks were credit and debts, where said credits/debt would extinguish once goods flowed between nations. There was an ongoing balance of credit/debt, basically a jubilee at every transaction, where creditors (or debtors) would proclaim their credit/debt relation complete. There was no gold flow, yet complex economies were able to operate.

    Hamilton’s first report on Manufactures discusses American Credit flowing in industry, which was a pointed comment about how it wasn’t a gold economy, and that the America’s did not need to operate with gold. The revolutionary war was about BOE trying to make the colonials use BOE bank credit and gold.

    • Replies: @Chris Moore
    , @Anon
  128. Smith says:
    @Resartus

    So one day one kilogram of gold costs 10 cows.
    The next day it costs 20 cows.
    And the next 5 cows.

    Yeah, who would work in such a market. This is essential what the “stock market” is, gambling.

    • Replies: @Resartus
  129. Mefobills says:
    @Truth Vigilante

    Fiat Money = Money deemed to have value by DECREE

    no.. Fiat is faith in the law. If there is a decree, it is by law. Fiat means faith, and you are emitting more BS to confuse normies; mostly you are confused yourself.

    When Germany “decreed” they would no longer be bimetal, and then demonetized silver, she went into a deep depression. This then made the holders of “gold” able to buy more goods and services.

    During a depression, the producers of perishable goods, will especially lower their prices to acquire the shiny gold coin, which does not rust or perish.

    In effect, Gold is usurious if not controlled properly.

    I’d be flattering you if I were to say you’re an ignorant fool in relation to the history of the monetary metals.

    You are a gas-bag who has an inflated sense of self-worth, and are using your gas to gas-light UNZ readers.

    • Replies: @Truth Vigilante
  130. @Mefobills

    The economically and monetarily illiterate persist with the reference to us as Gold ‘bugs’ – implying some relationship to insects.

    I am no ‘bug’. I am a Gold REALIST and recognise gold’s historical role and the role it will CONTINUE to play in monetary matters.

    It would be more accurate to refer to the Zio-aligned advocates of endlessly creatable Fiat money like yourself as the ‘bugs’ or ‘insects’, seeing as your understanding of the role of monetary metals is akin to primitive life forms.

    Those like you MefoBullSh*t, that are acting in the capacity of useful idiots, continue to peddle the Zio-inspired propaganda belittling gold.

    Let’s watch this 1 min exchange between the most economically literate Congressman in the history of the Republic (Dr Ron Paul) and the representative of the Zionist Dominated Usury Banking Cartel (the Jewish Ben Bernanke – who sounds uncannily like Mefo in the way he denigrates gold):

    Mefo, your bleating about someone using their gas to gas-light Unz readers is fooling no one.

    The UR readership are a well informed bunch and the bulk of them are in my corner (pro Ron Paul, pro sound money and by implication pro-Gold).

    You, and a few ignorant clowns in the comments section (many of whom are likely sayanim trolling on behalf of the Zio-puppeteers), are the only ones spruiking on behalf of endless creation of fiat money that invariably leads to runaway inflation and societal collapse.

    (Which is exactly what the Zio-miscreants want – so they can roll up once the dust has settled and purchase all the assets at cents on the dollar, exactly as they did in the immediate aftermath of post Weimar Germany).

    Now listen up, and get an education on the ACTUAL state of affairs in the world today.

    The world’s largest gold producer is China and has been for the better part of the last two decades. It’s annual production is around 400 tonnes.

    By law, NOT one (1) gram is allowed to be exported. The Chinese government has legislated that it all stays in China where it is held by their central bank.

    IN ADDITION to its domestic output, China is gobbling up every ounce it can purchase from mining output of other countries – most of which is coming in through Hong Kong.
    Russia too, a major gold producer, forbids the export of its gold mining and is accumulating tonnage at a phenomenal rate.

    Bottom Line: It matters not whether one is a Gold REALIST like me or Fiat Money Insect like yourself. At the end of the day, the Sino-Russian super hegemon is preparing for the collapse of the Fiat money system, as western countries (the U.S being the chief offender), prints it way into a hyperinflationary bottomless abyss.

    At a time of their choosing, after confidence is lost in Fiat currencies, the Chinese and Russians will announce a gold backed Yuan and Ruble, and these currencies will assume reserve currency status – taking over from the USD.

    The Chinese (and Russians) have some seriously smart people advising their leaders on monetary matters (as opposed to the simpletons and retards in the U.S like Janet Yellen and her predecessors), and they are putting their money where their mouth is (to the tune of trillions of dollars) in purchasing untold tonnage of gold.

    Keep on living in your fantasy world Mefo. You, like the residents of post 1923 Wemar Germany who invested their faith in endlessly printable worthless fiat currency, will be left destitute and penniless.

    As the saying goes: ‘Stupidity is its own reward’, and Mefo, you have it in spades.

    • Replies: @Mefobills
  131. Chris Moore says: • Website
    @Mefobills

    The revolutionary war was about BOE trying to make the colonials use BOE bank credit and gold.

    Is it fair to say the national government’s accumulation of silver and gold is, historically, the best means to transitioning dependents and would-be dependents (colonies) into their fiat money system — in other words, a central government needs a vast supply of precious metals for credibility, which gives them the authority to then print (hopefully unlimited) fiat currency?

    In the case of England, their overseas Empire gave them the initial authority at the point of a gun, but they recognized they’d ultimately need more credibility than pure force, and so they accumulated silver and gold as well to make their currency “sound,” even from the perspective of the colonized?

    • Replies: @Mefobills
  132. Resartus says:
    @Smith

    Yeah, who would work in such a market. This is essential what the “stock market” is, gambling.

    Well in 2008, gold had held at $300 to $500 or so for over a decade….
    Since, it has jumped to over $2000, back to just under $1100…
    Now back to nearly $1800…
    Can’t forget the mid-80s when the brothers (forget the name) ran silver up
    to $76…..didn’t turn out well for them in the end… but shows metals
    aren’t as stable as people would think/wish….

    So it’s essentially done what you said, will continue to do that….

    Heard stockmarket described as gambling, playing the lottery, even a sin……

  133. Mefobills says:
    @Chris Moore

    The BOE was the first private stock-owned debt spreading bank, to then put a government into public debts.

    The owners of the bank were the hidden controllers of the Crown. King George was maneuvered by the bank to restrict the Colonials from using colonial script.

    Colonial Script in turn was emitted as bills of credit. These Bills of Credit were used as domestic money, and hence much of the Colonial money supply was NOT GOLD.

    Typically Gold or Silver was used to balance external trade.

    Industrial Capitalism was invented in the Colonies, especially in Mass.Bay (Probably John Winthrop). Colonials were sitting around and had no money to make things they needed to live. The usual usurers were also around offering their small stocks of gold and silver at exorbitant interest rates. Winthrop told them to F-off, and created bills of credit, and forced merchants to accept Mass. Bills as money.

    The very first industrial capitalism economy directed bills of credit at the iron works in Mass Bay. The Mass Bay government forced people to accept Mass.Bills as the money, and they were good for taxes. The Americas got its start behind industrial capitalism, invented in Mass. Bay. China now operates a form of industrial capitalism. The U.S. transitioned to a Jewish/British form of finance capitalism by 1913.

    The English Empire, especially after the formation of BOE, would quietly issue debt instruments payable in gold or silver. In that way they sucked up the world’s gold and silver into an island country that had no gold or silver.

    The Colonial Money System was sound, especially Franklin’s system in Philadelphia Colony. They issued Bills of Credit, and a “little more” debt free money to pay the interest on the Bills of Credit. They also limited loans to 7 year periods, so the interest on land would not go exponential.

    Franklin opened his big mouth while in England, and explained why and how they had no unemployment in the Philadelphia Colony, and general prosperity. The agents of Mammon became alarmed, and the move toward war began.

    Gold and Silver have nothing to do whatever for a sound domestic economy. When Rome adopted precious metals, that was her undoing. Rome got its start with bronze disks, the paper of the day.

    External to an economy, gold and silver flow is OK, as other countries thought that money is metal, and not a legal abstraction. As long as your economy can export to recall the gold and silver you lost to imbalanced imports gold and silver is fine. Hudson calls gold “the peaceful metal” for that reason. But, it is only peaceful in the context of isolation to external trade.

    • Replies: @Chris Moore
  134. Anon[160] • Disclaimer says:
    @Mefobills

    “If money is created debt free by government, it is still credit. The Credit is seigniorage against the existing money supply, and is paid by inflation, or by demanding labor, goods, etc.

    Debt free money is one of those cases where you have to think about it carefully.”

    This is where the infrastructure aspect of money is crucial: the payoff from debt free money doesn’t have to be paid by inflation, or by demands on existing money supply or what ever. The payoff is in increased productivity, increased production, advanced technical development, resource creation. A higher level of trade and development. Debt free money/tax credits have to be used carefully, to not exceed capacity, to prevent inflation. A careful balancing act.

    The economy runs at a higher level of trade and development because of bridges, roads, ports, airports, schools, hospitals, education systems, health care systems (as infrastructure, not toll roads) that more than pays for the creation of those infrastructure components. And debt free money is one of those infrastructure components.

    Credit brings things forward,
    With gold there is no forward.

    • Replies: @Mefobills
  135. Mefobills says:
    @Truth Vigilante

    Keep on living in your fantasy world Mefo. You, like the residents of post 1923 Wemar Germany who invested their faith in endlessly printable worthless fiat currency, will be left destitute and penniless.

    You are a gas-bag and are gas-lighting the UNZ readers. You are probably a Lolbertarian, who read some Ayn Rand, and now you have a shiny bauble.

    The Wiemar hyperinflation was due to domestic private banks issuing deutschmarks bank credit money, not the central bank. New marks were issued by a shorting mechanism, where the shorts were backed up by international gold or dollars (typically).

    It took the Reichsbank to come under Govt. chancellorship control to reign in the hyperinflation.

    The hyperinflation was reigned in despite not having gold/silver which had been lost due to Versaille war debts.

    From 1933 to 1938 NSDAP economy boomed and had no great depression, despite not having much in the way of gold or silver.

    By the way, Ben Bernake has admitted that the FED created the great depression. Just because Bernanke is wrong, doesn’t make Paul right.

    The FED’s objective in the interwar years was to allow France and England (and Germany) to recall their gold lost to America in WW1. The FED artificially kept interest rates too low, so England and France could buy back their gold.

    You should stop digging the hole you have put yourself in, you are making yourself look like an idiot.

    Here is a good article on how the hyperinflation really began:

    https://www.wintersonnenwende.com/scriptorium/english/archives/articles/hyperinflation-e.html

  136. Mefobills says:
    @Anon

    The economy runs at a higher level of trade and development because of bridges, roads, ports, airports, schools, hospitals, education systems, health care systems (as infrastructure, not toll roads) that more than pays for the creation of those infrastructure components. And debt free money is one of those infrastructure components.

    Yes, and that is some advanced thinking on your part, unlike the gas-bag, gold-bug Truth Vigilante, who I have been debating.

    Franklin described the circular flow of debt free, as he observed it in the Philadelphia Colony.

    The loans on land would recall their former credit, to then extinguish. The bank would then re-spend some of it (not let it extinguish) as debt free into the commons, bridges, ports, roads, etc.

    This left behind improved infrastructure and productivity, while also allowing debtors to have enough money in the supply to pay the interest on their land loans. This is the real secret why the Colony had no unemployment, and to paraphrase Franklin, “was as close to heaven on earth as possible.” Franklin, of course, wrote about paper money, but cautioned that it should not be created in excess. (That law thing again.)

    The entire colonial project and the beginning of America was a Bill of Credit/Industrial Capitalism affair. It was a virtuous cycle of improved productivity and industrial capacity, while simultaneously lifting up labor value.

    People like Ron Paul are actually un-American as they are clinging to a Jewish/British Finance capitalism way of thinking, while simultaneously wrapping themselves in Patriot Garb.

    Ironically, NSDAP Germany had resurrected the American System, especially as it was codified by the Kaiser, as it had previously been transmitted to him by Frederick List.

    • Replies: @Truth Vigilante
  137. Chris Moore says: • Website
    @Mefobills

    The usual usurers were also around offering their small stocks of gold and silver at exorbitant interest rates. Winthrop told them to F-off, and created bills of credit, and forced merchants to accept Mass. Bills as money.

    Basically forced them to quite running to the usurers and have faith in the system being designed independent of usury built around what would become American ingenuity and hard work.

    But the Userers (in the Bible, Moses’ enemy, the Golden Calf parasites, and Jesus’ enemy, the Moneychangers) wormed their way back into control.

    Are they the smartest guys in the room because they have figured out a way to swindle the working class and even the elite nation builders and former pillars of society out of their labor, efforts and ingenuity, or are they simply the most elaborate, diabolical, silver-tounged grifters, parasites and killers who have figured out a way to project their own sins and parasitism onto those who know or are in danger of figuring out on a mass scale what they’re up to?

    We know what Moses did to them (execution) and why. We know what Jesus did to them (violently whipped them). This is when they made the decision to resort to assassination — to preemptively murder (using useful idiots to do the deed) before they were discovered and got the death penalty they so richly deserved and still do.

    • Agree: Mefobills
  138. bayviking says:
    @RoatanBill

    It is a fact that private Corporations charge more and deliver less in goods and services whenever there is a monopoly on those services, such as utilities, schools, parking meters, roads… why, because the CEO’s can pocket hundreds of millions for themselves and reward stockholders handsomely to make their stock attractive. In addition, for the same reason namely greed, employees in those private Corporations are treated much worse than employees in public organizations. Some people think that is a good idea, I don’t know why, because 70% of our economy is consumer spending and the second most important reason for why our economy is collapsing is because of the very effective war on labor unions the rich have waged against workers. The most important reason of coarse, is that most of our factories have been moved South or West.

    Our economy is a virtuous cycle of production (which creates new wealth) and consumption. The rich still get richer when the economy is booming, but not as fast as when they slash wages. So your statement that everything should be privatized is completely false. Everything will cost more. Workers have less money to spend. This is where we are at today. This is the way Abraham Lincoln puts it:

    “Labor is prior to, and independent of, capital. Capital is only the fruit of labor, and could never have existed if labor had not first existed. Labor is the superior of capital, and deserves much the higher consideration.”

    This is the way I put it sir, you are full of shit.

    • Replies: @RoatanBill
  139. @bayviking

    I’ve been an employer for decades and have always done it under a corporate name. You are conflating the huge corporations like Apple and Google with the average small business. The large corporations exist because the legal system is bought and paid for by them. The small business owner has the expense overhead of a corporation with all its reporting and rules but gets very little benefit under the law. The reason to have a corporation is to satisfy gov’t regulations and the banking and insurance sectors that won’t do business with you unless you have a corp.

    Unions were a good idea 100 years ago but are now just an extortion mechanism for a small segment of the population that’s unionized. Unions only work when the bulk of the population isn’t unionized so they can extract above average pay and benefits that the consuming public gets to pay for. If everyone were unionized, there would be no one left to take advantage of.

    Please note that none of what I wrote contains any reference to you directly. I’d like to know how taking a shot at me personally supports your ludicrous position.

  140. gatobart says:

    “The twentieth century, from our point of view, was actually more an attempted American Century than an accomplished one (Desai 2013) and the shift away from it is looking more certain and decisive than the ‘ifs’ in his assessment let on”

    I think that the way I put is the correct one and I am intrigued why this form is not more widely used: The U.S. (worldwide) empire wannabe.

  141. @Mefobills

    Me-Full-O-Bullsh*t writes:

    ‘People like Ron Paul are actually un-American as they are clinging to a Jewish/British Finance capitalism way of thinking’.

    Well there it is UR readers, this statement says everything you need to know about this disinfo peddler.

    There is NO Presidential candidate that the Zio-cabal have feared more post JFK than Dr Ron Paul.

    That’s because Ron Paul would’ve audited the Fed. Said audit would’ve exposed the financial chicanery and outright FRAUD of the Zionist Dominated Usury Banking Cartel (of which the Federal Reserve is an integral component).
    This would’ve caused a public outcry and demand for abolition of The Fed – which Ron Paul would’ve dutifully complied with.

    [MORE]

    With the Fed gone, the ability of the Zio-cabal to digitally create trillions with a key stroke, and dole it out among their Zio cronies – like Goldman Sachs-of-Sh!t (on the pretence that it’s a bail out to save the financial system and the economy), would evaporate and the Zio-cabal would be mortally wounded.

    Ron Paul would’ve drastically reduced funding for the Zio-owned military industrial complex and brought home all the troops from the 900 bases in 130 countries:

    https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2011/sep/14/ron-paul/ron-paul-says-us-has-military-personnel-130-nation/

    More than that, Ron Paul is on the record as saying he would stop ‘Foreign Aid’ payments, saying that these payments are just ‘Money taken from poor people in rich countries being sent to rich people in poor countries’.

    In other words, most of the ‘aid’ never reaches those it’s intended for but goes to support the warlords and pro-U.S military dictatorship around the world.

    And, as far as U.S ‘foreign aid’ is concerned, take a guess which country is FAR out on top as the number one recipient in the last 50 years ?

    You guessed it – it’s the Apartheid Israeli state.

    Said foreign aid to Israel (courtesy of the U.S taxpayer) is used to purchase white phosphorous incendiaries and other munitions that mutilate and dismember Palestinian women and children.

    So, when Ron Paul said he’d stop foreign aid, this was a backhanded way of saying that he’d STOP SENDING BILLIONS TO THE ZIO GENOCIDERS.

    That’s why the Zio-cabal used the entirety of its resources to cheat Ron Paul in the primaries out of the Republican nomination for the 2012 Presidential election.

    ‘Me-Full-O-Bullsh!t’ (or whatever your pseudonym is), that you say these things about the greatest living American, the 21st reincarnation of Thomas Jefferson, none other than Dr Ron Paul, shows what a vile and despicable little rodent you are.

    No matter how you slice and dice it, anyone who is anti-Ron Paul is PRO ZIO-MALFEASANCE.

    ie: Zio perpetration of crimes like JFK, RFK, JFK Jr, MLK Jr murders, Zio perpetration of the USS Liberty incident, 9/11, 7/7 , genocide of the Palestinians and much, much more.

    That’s who you are Mefo – a craven coward of the worst kind.

    Notwithstanding that your comments are packed with untruths, you did include a snippet of fact with this:

    ‘Franklin, of course, wrote about paper money, but cautioned that it should not be created in excess’.

    And that sentence, in a nutshell, explains why paper money or any fiat equivalent, ALWAYS fails.

    A Gold Standard ensures FISCAL RESTRAINT – that’s why it is abandoned during times of war (so that uncontrolled war expenditures can be financed).

    Politicians cannot restrain themselves and always over-promise with lavish welfare initiatives, subsidies to corporate cronies, pie-in-the-sky infrastructure projects that are not commercially viable (like California’s Bullet train etc), and need to run the printing presses at maximum rpm to fund said promises.

    And so it proved to be during the Revolutionary War when the ‘Continental Currency’ was printed in such large quantity that it became worthless – hence the expression ‘Not Worth a Continental’.

    That pretty much sums up everything you’ve written Mefo – your words are not worth a Continental.

    And all the UR readership can see what a pitiful wretch of a man you are with those disgusting remarks about Dr Ron Paul.

    • Replies: @Mefobills
  142. Mefobills says:

    That’s because Ron Paul would’ve audited the Fed. Said audit would’ve exposed the financial chicanery and outright FRAUD of the Zionist Dominated Usury Banking Cartel (of which the Federal Reserve is an integral component).

    More gas-baggery from a gas bag.

    https://www.thoughtco.com/what-is-a-non-sequitur-1691437

    A non sequitur is a fallacy in which a conclusion does not follow logically from what preceded it. Also known as irrelevant reason and fallacy of the consequent.

    So what if Ron Paul would have audited the FED? Everybody who has a pulse knows that the FED is a cabal of private banking corporations.

    Ron Paul would have audited the FED and replaced it with what? Gold Buggery, for which the founding fathers fought a revolution.

    The Bank of England was draining the colonies of their gold and silver, and forced a deep depression. Ron Paul would have done the same, because he is monetarily retarded – like you.

    https://www.peakprosperity.com/forum-topic/hidden-history-according-to-benjamin-franklin-the-real-reason-for-the-revolutionary-war-has-been-hid-from-you/

    “The Colonies would gladly have borne the little tax on tea and other matters had it not been the poverty caused by the bad influence of the English bankers on the Parliament, which has caused in the Colonies hatred of England and the Revolutionary War.” – Benjamin Franklin

    Ron Paul would not have instituted sovereign legal money, as he doesn’t even know what it is.

    More from Franklin:
    _______________________

    We have no poor houses in the Colonies; and if we had some, there would be nobody to put in them, since there is, in the Colonies, not a single unemployed person, neither beggars nor tramps.” – Benjamin Franklin

    He was asked why the working class in the colonies were so prosperous.

    “That is simple. In the Colonies, we issue our own paper money. It is called ‘Colonial Scrip.’ We issue it in proper proportion to make the goods and pass easily from the producers to the consumers. In this manner, creating ourselves our own paper money, we control its purchasing power and we have no interest to pay to no one.” – Benjamin Franklin

  143. Mefobills says:
    @anon

    The urge to insult, or complain that it contains too much info for the pea brain commenter, I do not comprehend.

    The pea brain commentators come out in force every time UNZ publishes an article by Hudson.

    This article “beyond the dollar” is largely historically correct.

    A few quibbles, for example the BANCOR could be taken from an accumulation country and then given to a deficit country, especially if the accumulation country continued their mercantilism despite warnings.

    Those who are trying to derail the conversation with their own “pet theories” like gold -buggery, are not helpful and part of the FUD crowd. Lolbertarianism is especially dangerous, as it is a dialectic to ensnare the young and well-intentioned, into cul-de-sacs of false thought.

    This site is devolved into a club of big-bellied Fuds, who are catered to as they serially assail law enforcement.

    The FUDS come out in force whenever Hudson speaks truth to power.

  144. Mefobills says:
    @Truth Vigilante

    And so it proved to be during the Revolutionary War when the ‘Continental Currency’ was printed in such large quantity that it became worthless – hence the expression ‘Not Worth a Continental’.

    That pretty much sums up everything you’ve written Mefo – your words are not worth a Continental.

    You are a complete brainwashed idiot.

    Thomas Payne, “Let it be known that the continental is the cornerstone of our success.”

    In other words, without the Continental, the revolutionary war would not have been won. You are arguing against the key factor to winning the war.

    Lolbertarians are un-american and useful idiots in the war of ideas, as they spread FUD. It’s no accident that Libertarian movement is full of Jews, to then control the narrative.

    The Continental was debased by British counterfeiting. The British did their best to undermine the Continental, a little fact that Lolbertarian’s and other disinfo shills always omit.

    • Replies: @Truth Vigilante
  145. @anon

    It seems a lot of people are frustrated because they do not really understand economics. You practice economics like you practice medicine. Like it or not – both are needed – but not all are good. I dont agree with everything Mr Hudson says – but he is certainly one of the best out there. That is why the mainstream doesnt like him. To me he is like Jim Rogers is to finance.

  146. @Mefobills

    Mefo, every comment you make just further reinforces what an economically illiterate d!ickhead you are.

    Post JFK, there has never been a Presidential candidate that the Zio-cabal feared more than Dr Ron Paul.
    What’s more, there has never been a political ideology (Libertarianism) and an economic school of thought (Austrian Economics), that the Zio cabal have despised with every fibre of their being.

    That’s because Libertarianism and the application of the Austrian Economics would have solved the world’s financial issues and rendered the Zionist Dominated Usury Banking Cartel impotent.

    That you continue to defend the Usury Cartel of Bankers, is all the proof we need that you’re a Zio apologist.
    I suggest you STFU now as your cover has been blown. Ask your controllers in Herzliya to reassign you elsewhere because no one at UR wants to hear the nonsense you’re peddling.

    • Replies: @Smith
    , @Mefobills
  147. Smith says:
    @Truth Vigilante

    Austrian economy is what it leads to financialized system in the first place, considering its belief in the scarcity of money/goods = higher prices = good.

    • Replies: @Truth Vigilante
  148. Mefobills says:
    @Truth Vigilante

    I suggest you STFU now as your cover has been blown

    You have been shown wrong at every turn, yet your persist.

    This condition is known as demoralization. You cannot accept facts that run counter to the narrative that you have been taught. So, rather than accept known facts and adjust your position, you double down with ad-hominems, and suggest I STFU.

    Libertarianism is a bankrupt ideology, that leads to financialization as Smith explained to you in a few words. You are part of the problem, and not a Truth Vigilante. You are a disinfo shill.

    Ron Paul, your hero, is simply wrong – and you cannot accept it.

    Why don’t you man-up, grow a pair, and start thinking for yourself.

    Go back and re-read the thread and the comments I made, and look into the facts at hand. Not many people get the chance to make a course correction in life. Demoralized people generally aren’t worth my effort though, and my comments to you are instead are a warning to other readers about the dangers of libertarianism.

    • Replies: @Truth Vigilante
  149. Anon[317] • Disclaimer says:

    Libertarianism and Austrian economics are simply false opposition to the corporatocracy/wall st/finance capital rentierism. Austrianism is another form of rentierism.

    Libertarianism and Austrianism are designed to trap discontents that don’t know the truth, that want an alternative, because they see that governments have been captured by rentier finance powers.

    Austrianism is about as anti-labor as it gets.

    The real hope for discontents and the exploited masses is to get as much info of the type that Hudson, Keen, Black, Perelman, Haring et al and Mefobills, are presenting.

    Norbert Haring and Niall Douglas book: Economists and the Powerful Convenient Theories, Distorted Facts, Ample Rewards

    Some of the history behind creation of the false opposition economics is in the that book.

    • Replies: @Truth Vigilante
  150. @Smith

    You’re very much mistaken Smithy. Austrian Economics does NOT equate higher prices = good.

    On the contrary, the Austrian School advocates for LOWER PRICES = good.
    And on a classical gold standard (as per the 19th century), that’s exactly what happened. Refer below:

    The closest period in history we have that closely mimics what Austrian Economics is all about (ie: classical liberalism and Free Market economics), is the century leading up to the creation of the Federal Reserve in 1913.

    And that century yielded growth and retention of purchasing power of the USD/British pound/French franc (the major currencies of the world), the likes of which the world had never seen either before or since.

    (In fact, a dollar in 1900 had GREATER PURCHASING POWER than it had 100 years before in 1800 – the inverse of the 20th century where the USD lost 97% of its purchasing power).

    • Replies: @Smith
  151. @Anon

    The likes of Hudson, Keen, Black, Perelman, Haring and Niall Douglas are nobodies that will be long forgotten in the years to come (not that anyone of note is paying attention to them now).

    As for Mefo-BullSh*tter, did I read right ? After reading his nonsense, you had the audacity to stick up for this fool ?

    O.M.G, you have lost the plot. I assume you and Mefo are both advocating Modern Monetary Theory (MMT), or some such Socialist solution that’s sure to yield a Zimbabwean outcome.

    The two of you Keynesians had better stick to your day jobs – Marxist Activism, Lobbying for more Big Government/expansion of the Public Sector and further subsidies for your Zionist Corporate Crony pals.

    • Replies: @Anon
  152. @Mefobills

    BTW, I just got around to having a quick look at your disinfo video titled ‘Why Libertarianism is so dangerous ….’.

    I feared it would it would contain a lot of untruths and lack economic credibility.

    In the end, I was quite surprised. It turned out much, MUCH worse than I feared.
    To be honest, I only watched a couple of minutes and skimmed through the rest – it was that bad.
    It was rubbish from start to finish.

    Who is this non-entity and non-intellect that’s narrating this ? Is this the best you can do to smear Libertarianism ?

    If so, you’re on some pretty shaky ground.

    • Replies: @Mefobills
  153. Anon[317] • Disclaimer says:
    @Truth Vigilante

    No country on earth goes by Austrianism. No country will ever go by Austrianism.

    The fact that no one is doing Austrianism should tell you something. It can’t work, everyone knows it.

    • Replies: @Truth Vigilante
  154. Mefobills says:
    @Truth Vigilante

    The Video was to warn other people away from your kind, not to convert you.

    I’ve already demonstrated that you are demoralized, and beyond reason.

    You didn’t read Hudson’s article, or at least you didn’t comprehend it.

    Here is an important point from the article:

    The Central European (Mitteleuropäisch), particularly the German system, by contrast, used a three-way coordination between governments, banks and industrial firms to prioritise industrial expansion. Most contemporary observers considered the latter superior (Hudson 2010, Hilferding 1910/1981 and Desai 2020c).

    Finally, we may note that the sterling system’s gold link relied on another luxury, a politically quiescent working class on whom the burden of high interest rates and unemployment could be imposed to maintain the gold value of sterling.

    The founding of the U.S. was decidedly NOT LIBERTARIAN. It was industrial capitalism, and used bills of credit. The American System of Industrial Capitalism was transmitted to Germany, where it was taken up by the Kaiser, and then destroyed in WW1. Hitler resurrected the system in NSDAP Germany, where it was destroyed again by the Finance International in WW2.

    You are actually doing the bidding of Finance International as a brainwashed dupe. Gold internal to the economy was rejected by the Colonials as they used scrip and bills of credit. Hitler did the same thing. The bill of credit was called Mefobills and Oeffabills. Mefobills especially were aimed at the military and industrial sectors, while Oeffabills went toward improving roads and buildings and some industry.

    Gold flow internal to an economy is very Jewish, as it can be made usurious, and further “private bank credit” is made to ride on top of it, especially in fractional reserve. Guess who will be the hidden stock owners of “private bank credit?”

    In other words, Libertarians are incredibly naïve, and most are beyond reach due to their demoralized status. Once ensnared in the false ideology they become truuue believers. Even when confronted with actual historical facts, lolbertarian’s cling to their shibboleths. Continentals were counterfeited, something your Lolbertarian doctrine conveniently leaves out of account. This sort of leaving facts out of account is typical of false ideology.

    At least the guy in the video was able to grow a pair, man-up, and confront the inherent contradictions in the (((ideology))). You are doing the enemies work as a dupe.

  155. Smith says:
    @Truth Vigilante

    In fact, a dollar in 1900 had GREATER PURCHASING POWER than it had 100 years before in 1800 – the inverse of the 20th century where the USD lost 97% of its purchasing power).

    Same for a piece of gold.

    Under the Gold standard system and after adopting the fiat system, the price of gold still rises, do you know why that is?

    • Replies: @Truth Vigilante
  156. @Anon

    Yes Anon, the fact that Austrian Economics is not being practised by the major economies tells me a lot.

    It tells me that the Zionist Dominated Usury Banking Cartel is running the show and as long as they have useful idiots like you propagandising against Libertarianism and Austrian Economics, the status quo will continue ever onwards – and people like you will become more and more impoverished without realising you’re been exploited.

    Now put your face muzzle on, go back to your basement and start social distancing like your Zio masters have decreed – safe in the knowledge that you’ve had the two shots of toxic mRNA gene therapy jabs masquerading as vaccines.
    Assuming you don’t develop blood clots, or vaccine induced heart disease and drop dead in the interim, you’ll get your early onset dementia soon enough – just reward for a lack of critical thinking faculties (just like your pal Mefo-Bull-Sh*tter).

    • Replies: @Anon
  157. @Smith

    Yes Smithy, I’m well aware why gold rises.

    People who understand the role of gold as a monetary metal know that ONLY Gold is money.

    And, as Keynesians and advocates of MMT (like Mefo) pursue their endless creation of fiat money, those in the know dump their fiat paper currencies for something that, for the entirety of recorded history, has proven to maintain its purchasing power.

    And so it will prove to be the case once again as the world (and the U.S in particular), enters into an inflationary depression in the coming years.

    • Replies: @Smith
  158. Smith says:
    @Truth Vigilante

    If Gold is money, why don’t we just trade gold for goods?

    Why do we still translate the gold into paper, which rises every year?

    What’s the point then?

    Face it, the more you argue, the more you will find out every civilization switch from trading gold into silver/bronze coin and paper money.

    • Replies: @Anon
  159. Anon[291] • Disclaimer says:
    @Truth Vigilante

    I should add a few more authors: Minsky, Galbraith, Veblen, Patten, still being read and acted on, and to be acted on long into the future. And others, from the 1800’s like Clay, and Smith.

    Libertarianism has never been used by any government. It will never be used. It is an un-workable fantasy. No economy will ever follow Austrian economics. Likewise Libertarianism will never be implemented. You’re wasting you’re time! You have to admit that your fantasies have never been tried and never will be!

    How anyone can promote such a thing is telling, as it is just a dream.

    What presumptions about you have I made? None. Not one. What is it you know about me? Could I be an AI creation? Do you think you can win against the cloud? Do computers wear face masks? Do computers get blood clots? Do computers respond to provocations?

    Your fantasies have never been tried, and never will be, so they can’t logically be true. They have never existed, they have never been implemented, and never will be. Dream on.

    You can never win because you are promoting a fantasy that no one will use.

  160. Anon[291] • Disclaimer says:
    @Smith

    We know what happens when the money disappears: gold and barter do not pick up the slack, not even a tiny bit.

    This has occurred in history, and just recently also in India. The 500 and 1000 rupee notes were withdrawn from circulation, and the economy crashed. Gold (and India has a lot of gold) and barter did not pick up the slack. Of course it was done to try to promote plastic, so the credit card companies could rake off their cut. Large numbers of Indians did not have bank accounts, so at the time it was disasterous.

    That guy (?) doesn’t know truth, he doesn’t know what wealth is, as opposed to financial wealth. Gold is not money, and never has been. It is the institutional markings that are money.

  161. @Ann Nonny Mouse

    Thanks for assessing my comment.

    Economics(theories of economics), are not distinctively altered by China. Growth(acceleration and total growth of goods and services), not taking into account sufficiently and in a sophisticated way the population variable(population counts and migrations globally), seeing the world as in the classical conflictive interests model, not vying for global accountability of local powers, the neglect of accounting resources versus derivatives(resources&goods&people…) makes for a predictable ceiling.

    What the Chinese have done better is ironing out the mistakes of the West, their elites are smarter at streamlining, coordination, and decision making. Then the West really messed up these last half century. If it was not for the ignorance(forgivable by all means, as in China today) of the surplus population(“the public”) greed and partisan elitist policies would have been in broad daylight. Indeed the Chinese elites do one better in discretion and refined ruling.

    In the end China and the West are more of the same about missing “quality of desire”, goal setting, in the long term. There are other factors, this is a comment.

  162. Miro23 says:
    @RoatanBill

    What the controllers are trying to implement is being done with massive debt that can never be repaid. When the currency system collapses, and it will, is when rationality and natural law will reassert itself as there’s no other option.

    These situations usually collapse in inflation. The debts get paid back – but not in real terms.

    The problem is that the financiers who benefit so greatly from the present debt system also understand inflation/hyperinflation much better than the general public. For example, the Jewish financial elite of Weimar Germany made their biggest fortunes in the hyperinflation of the early 1920’s while the German middle class lost their property and were pauperized.

    The suggestion is that there is no such thing as automatic rationality, and if there’s a “natural law” it’s the law of power relations (whoever has the power makes the rules) with the diffuse power of a genuine democracy being very rare (Switzerland?). Western democracy is currently just a facade for a corrupt oligarchic elite.

    • Replies: @RoatanBill
  163. @Miro23

    I agree with your assessment completely.

    When the dollar loses its purchasing power is when the average person realizes they’re in trouble. It won’t take much to convince them that the finance types and politicians are to blame.

    I fully expect the eventual end of the US Fed Gov when the dollar turns into worthless paper. Between now and then, I’m certain there will be at least one war, more totalitarian lockdowns, more currency printing, essentially more of the same while the top of the pyramid squeezes the last ounce of value from the country. The US is being strip mined by the politicians and the swine in the finance industry. They won’t quit until there’s no way to continue.

    • Agree: RadicalCenter
  164. @Anon

    The authors you suggested are perrenial losers and the fact you chose Galbraith in particular, implies you’re clueless about economics.

    Here is the briefest of videos (1 min) that encapsulates the difference between the long discredited Keynesian economic school of thought (the one most of you are advocating) and the Austrian School:

    For those among you who want to learn from someone who is arguably the most high profile adherent to Austrian Economics in the world, you can’t do better than former Ron Paul 2008 Presidential campaign economic adviser Peter Schiff.
    The video below was from 2006, in advance of the 2008/09 GFC that saw the U.S housing market implode. Applying Austrian Economic theory, Peter Schiff articulated exactly how the U.S housing market would be decimated.
    You will learn more REAL WORLD economics from this video (and the reason why the U.S economy is a house of cards that is soon to crumble), than you have in your entire life:

  165. @Anon

    You wrote that:

    ‘Your fantasies have never been tried, and never will be, so they can’t logically be true. They have never existed, they have never been implemented, and never will be. Dream on.’

    You’re DEAD WRONG.

    Whilst we have never had a period in history where any economic school of thought has been practised in its purest form for the entirety of a lengthy test period (say at least 50 years), the 19th century comes close where Free Market Economics with limited government (the core principles of Austrian Economics), were the order of the day in the U.S and Great Britain.

    End Result: A spectacular period of growth and genuine increases in the standard of living for the vast majority of citizens, the likes of which the world has never seen either before or since.

    Let’s pick a more recent period of history.

    From August 1971 (when Nixon abandoned the Gold standard), to January 1980, the price of gold went from USD $35/0z to over USD $ 850 (approx a 25 fold increase).

    This happened in a period of high inflation and application of reckless fiscal and monetary policies pursued by various Presidents (ie: similar to what is advocated by the fiat money , print-till-you-drop Keynesians I’ve encountered here in the comments section of the UR).

    This corresponds to the period we’re experiencing right now – except that money printing and fiscal recklessness is now on STEROIDS. (ie: now it’s ORDERS OF MAGNITUDE WORSE than what occurred in the 1970’s).

    Anyway, getting back to the early 80’s, in the face of enormous opposition, Fed Chairman Paul Volcker pursued the ‘Austrian School’ policy of raising interest rates (the Fed Funds rate got up to 20% at one stage).

    Yes, there was a painful recession, zombie businesses went bust, the unemployment rate went through the roof* and there was a write-down of debt that should never have been loaned out in the first place.
    (* The uptick in unemployment was temporary. As the savings rate went up and speculation in other asset classes was brought to heel, money was now invested in productive enterprises and the U.S economy had a spectacular turnaround beginning from about mid-1983 onward. Massive growth rates and a tsunami of prosperity was the order of the day for the remainder of the 80’s).

    Volcker’s actions BROKE THE BACK of inflation and saved the USD (which had been in freefall throughout the 1970’s and lost more than half of its purchasing power as Keynesian policies – the sort advocated by that fool Galbraith – were enacted).

    Fast forward to the present: Unlike in the early 80’s when the U.S was a CREDITOR nation and the national debt was miniscule in comparison, the U.S is now the most profligate DEBTOR nation in the history of the world.

    No Fed Chairman would even contemplate raising the Fed Funds Rate to even 5% (let alone the 20% that Volcker did 40 years ago), because a 5% rate would collapse the economy – it would entail that something approaching HALF of all budgetary outlays would be spent on servicing the debt.

    So there it is. Volcker’s deeds are an ACTUAL example of Austrian Economics in practice. ie: increase interest rates, which breaks the back of inflation, encourages businesses and the general public to save in preference to reckless consumption.

    Low Rates = proliferation of business ventures that are unproductive, malinvestment by the trillions, and speculation in a variety of asset classes (eg: real estate, the NASDAQ, cryptocurrencies …. etc).

    This is all going to end VERY BADLY – especially for you fools/Marxists/Socialists/Keynesians that have NO COMPREHENSION of the role of monetary metals (Gold and Silver) in the financial system.

    • Replies: @Mefobills
    , @Anon
    , @Mefobills
  166. Anon[382] • Disclaimer says:

    No country has ever used Austrian or Libertarian economics, and never will, because you can’t field and provision a competent military using those ideas.

    It’s that simple. Anyone that tries Austrian of Libertarian economics is road kill, they will be taken over by countries that are using practical economics.

    Austrian and Libertarian economist discuss this, they admit it readily!

    Volcker wasn’t Austrian, as is obvious from his direct action in the system in which the economy and military was supported by non-Austrian economics, credit based finance, not gold. Gold was out of the system before Volcker came to the Fed. The interest rate story is a fake distraction. If most of the economy is operating on fiat credit finance, you can’t claim it’s Austrian.

    Did Volcker stop the fiat credit finance system? No! He was no Austrian. It was Minsky that saved the dollar, by explaining sectoral balances to policy makers.

    During the Volcker years, was the military financed using Austrianism? No! He was no Austrian economist. Remember he came from Wall street.

    That is why those fantasies have never been used, because they make competent military formation and provision impossible.

    Go ahead, create a military using Austrianism or Libertarianism, and take on some country. Fail. And that has been the case for centuries!

    You can’t run, create, provision the military on gold.

    The authors you condemn are still being read and appreciated and will be long into the future, while the gold bugs are road kill of history. The military makes it so.

    It is the military that killed Austrianism and Libertarianism.

    • Replies: @Truth Vigilante
  167. Anon[382] • Disclaimer says:

    And: if Austrianism advocates less government, how did Volcker decrease government? He didn’t!

    Volcker did not do anything Austrian. Did Volcker bring back Gold? No! Did Volcker decrease Wall street parasitism? No! Did Volcker do anything to to free markets from government? No! Austrians are anti-Fed. There was Volcker at the Fed, he could not possibly be Austrian.

  168. Mefobills says:

    This is all going to end VERY BADLY – especially for you fools/Marxists/Socialists/Keynesians that have NO COMPREHENSION of the role of monetary metals (Gold and Silver) in the financial system.

    Damn you (non truth shill) are some kind of autistic weirdo.

    You come onto an article written by Hudson, who has gone back into history and tracked the beginning of gold being used as money. Prior to gold being used as money, it was barley.

    Civilization formed around the growing of barley, because people were tired of hunting gathering. They wanted to farm and grow barley, get drunk and start screwing.

    Mises and other BS artists (like the shill Truth Vigilante) make pretend that gold somehow just magically appeared to mediate between battering humans.

    Gold bugs, Lolbertarians, and (((Mises))) leave out of account usury, the accumulations of debts, the rise of oligarchies and power centers. Their doctrine is a-priori, which means they make a theory and then look for evidence.

    Hudson and “classical economists” look at the history and evidence, and then develop a theory. Which is more honest?

    Austrian economics is JUNK ECONOMICS. Hudson has written a book: J is for Junk Economics.

    https://michael-hudson.com/2017/02/j-is-for-junk-economics-a-guide-to-reality-in-an-age-of-deception/

    “A Guide to Reality in an Age of Deception.” Mises and Lolbertarians are deception spreaders, as the doctrine cannot stand up to scrutiny. Austrian economic thought is a Jewish deception, a cul-de-sac, to disarm people and fill their mind with nonsense. Any sort of dialectic has two poles, and the poles for the Lolbertarians are “Fiat Money” vs “Gold.”

    Never mind that all money is fiat, gold included.

    It is MY TEAM, YOUR TEAM. It is simple pap for low IQ types.

    Life is not a dialectic, it has shades of grey. All money is fiat, the real question is whether or not the money power is legal and sovereign. This whole gold thing is a way to corral simple people into a dialectic.

    One bad thing about free speech, is that many “speakers” are free to spread nonsense out of alignment with reality.

  169. Mefobills says:
    @Truth Vigilante

    From August 1971 (when Nixon abandoned the Gold standard), to January 1980, the price of gold went from USD $35/0z to over USD $ 850 (approx a 25 fold increase).

    It was the trading gold standard. If you say “Gold Standard” nobody knows what the hell you are talking about. There have been many gold standards in history.

    After Bretton Woods, the TRADING GOLD STANDARD was adopted, where Gold flow was used as an accounting gimmick to then mark the flow of goods between nations.

    In the comment thread I have already addressed this.

    The TRADING GOLD STANDARD worked fined as it signaled to adjust national currencies. If trade got out of balance, there was an exchange rate adjustment as needed feedback to then rebalance the economy.

    It was the VIETNAM war funded with deficit spending that ultimately caused Nixon to exit the trading gold standard.

    If humans want to go to war, they will – despite any sort of romantic notions about how the shiny metal is god-like and can prevent man’s excesses.

    https://michael-hudson.com/books/super-imperialism-the-economic-strategy-of-american-empire/

    The U.S. had already transitioned to Atlantacism and “International Finance” by 1913.

  170. @Anon

    You’ve lost your marbles. Someone, quickly, call his nurse and make sure he takes his medication.

    You wrote:

    ‘Gold was out of the system before Volcker came to the Fed’.

    DEAD WRONG !!

    Gold was VERY MUCH in the system. Did you read what I wrote ?

    Gold had a TWENTY FIVE FOLD INCREASE in a little over 8 years leading up to 1980.

    WHY do you think that is ?

    Once Nixon ended the redemption of USD for gold, people started to DUMP the USD and Gold became the defacto reserve currency of the world.

    Volcker had to adopt the Austrian School remedy of radically raising the Fed Funds Rate to an unheard of TWENTY PERCENT to break the back of inflation – by offering an interest rate that would entice investors AWAY from gold and BACK into the USD.

    The USD was so much on the nose that a 10% rate was not enough to entice investors back, nor was 15%.
    Even at 20% the Fed was nervous that even this stratospheric rate would not be enough and that people would continue dumping USD.

    In the end it was a close run thing but the fact that Reagan was at the helm (a pro-business Republican who was viewed by the money markets as a better economic manager than his predecessors in light of his success with the California economy when he was Governor), may have been enough to tip the balance.

    As mentioned before, the closest thing to a system applying the Austrian Economic School of thought (which was, to all intents and purposes, the Free Market/Small Government unfettered capitalism as advocated by Adam Smith in his timeless book ‘The Wealth of Nations), was the U.S and British economies of the 19th century.

    And, these two countries were among the top two or three military powers on the planet.

    Your claim that the practising of Austrian Economics entails being unable to field a competent military is EVISCERATED on its face.

    How you could make such an ABSURD statement is beyond me. Of all the dumb things posted in the comments section of UR, that remark of yours has to be amongst the most juvenile and unscholarly.

    It’s all the more ridiculous when one considers that those countries that came closest to adopting the Austrian Economic principles have the highest growth rates, the soundest economies, the highest capital formation and the least debt (that’s because a Gold standard prevents reckless fiscal and monetary policy).

    Ipso facto, such a country will have the highest standard of living, the highest per capita GDP, and have REAL WEALTH to fund the best military forces on the planet.

    You have got things ARSE BACKWARDS my economically illiterate friend.

    You badly need a lesson in economics. I suggest you start here:

    http://www.hacer.org/pdf/Hazlitt00.pdf

    Once you’ve mastered that, you could move on to Murray Rothbard’s ‘Man, Economy and State’.

    Because, let’s face it, right now you are totally clueless.

    • Replies: @Anon
  171. @Mefobills

    Anon wrote some pretty dumb things so, not to be outdone, Me-Full-O-BullSh*t decides to up the ante with this comment:

    ‘All money is fiat, the real question is whether or not the money power is legal and sovereign.’

    What make Mefo’s remark all the more stupid is that I was gracious enough to explain the meaning of ‘Fiat Money’ before and yet, sudden onset dementia has kicked in and he’s once again forgotten.

    Once again for the dummies:

    [MORE]

    Fiat Money = Money by Decree (ie: currency WITHOUT the backing of a hard asset).

    The USD is backed by nothing more than the ‘Full Faith and Credit of the U.S government’ – which counts for nought since the U.S can’t be trusted to honour any obligation it has made and it has long since been technically insolvent.

    Over thousands of years, civilisations have trusted gold and silver so it made since that when paper currency was introduced as promissory notes exchangeable for a trusted and valuable commodity, that this commodity should be gold or silver.

    Now we know that copper also has value. Yes, much less than gold so at a current value of around US $ 9.40/kg, you’d need a hell of a lot more of it to back an equivalent dollar value of gold.
    One could choose crude oil to back one’s currency or say platinum of palladium (the latter which trades at a premium of over 40% to gold).

    Now, why is Palladium so expensive ? It is used in catalytic converters of the exhaust systems of internal combustion engine powered vehicles.

    Why not use other, cheaper metals for the purpose, you ask ?

    It’s because there is NO SUBSTITUTE that does the job as well. (Platinum was utilised for the same purpose in the past but has now been relegated).

    Similarly, Gold and Silver have INDUSTRIAL USES that make them valuable and thus they have INTRINSIC VALLUE !!

    ie: this INTRINSIC VALUE would still be there even if there was no decree that made a particular currency backed by a precious metal.

    For example, if you had one of these babies at the turn of the 20th century (a U.S Double Eagle $20 gold coin):

    you would still have just shy of an ounce of gold (worth around $20) even if the government of the day rescinded the DECREE and went off the gold standard.

    So, in a nutshell, ANY CURRENCY that is backed by a real, tangible commodity is, BY DEFINITION, not fiat.

    As for the other nonsense you wrote Mefo-Bull-Sh*tter, there are not enough hours in the day to address them all.

    Suffice to say, if you don’t understand the exceedingly simple definition of what ‘Fiat Money’ is, you certainly won’t grasp the more complex stuff.

    And please stop trying to deflect attention away from your Zio-affiliations.

    We ALL know that the Zionist Dominated Usury Cartel of Bankers OWN the Federal Reserve, and the Bank of England and either own of have a controlling interest in the ECB.

    I mean, we KNOW THIS – it is not in dispute.

    And, said central banks can ( AND DO) create endless quantities of digitally created USD, Euros, British pounds to bail out their Zionist corporate crony buddies (like Goldman Sachs-of-Sh*t) when they’re about to go bust from their reckless and profligate financial chicanery.

    Said trillions of digitally created money can be created ENDLESSLY – this is the perpetual money tree. (Or at least perpetual until the U.S loses its reserve currency status – which is nigh).

    The LAST THING IN THE WORLD the Zio-miscreants want is a gold or precious metals backed currency for one very simple reason.

    The reason is they CANNOT ENDLESSLY PRINT gold.

    Gold requires honest toil and real effort to first find and then be able to extract from the Earth in a commercially viable way.

    That’s why Ben Bernanke, Janet Yellen and EVERY Jewish Zionist central banker that ever lived absolutely SMEARS anyone who suggests we go back on a Gold standard – much like you Mefo.

    That’s because shills like you are doing the bidding of your Zio controllers.

    ALL the UR readership can see you for what you are.

    As Ron Paul says:

    ‘Gold is honest money – that’s why it’s hated by dishonest men’.

    And that statement pretty much sums you up Mefo.

    • Replies: @Mefobills
  172. @Mefobills

    Thank you for this needed truth so concentrated breaking it into pieces can help edify while disposing of lies and liars:

    (((Austrian economics))) is JUNK ECONOMICS.

    Hudson has written a book: J is for Junk Economics.

    https://michael-hudson.com/2017/02/j-is-for-junk-economics-a-guide-to-reality-in-an-age-of-deception/

    “A Guide to Reality in an Age of Deception.”

    Mises and Lolbertarians are deception spreaders, as the doctrine cannot stand up to scrutiny. Austrian economic thought is a Jewish deception, a cul-de-sac, to disarm people and fill their mind with nonsense.

    Any sort of dialectic has two poles, and the poles for the Lolbertarians are “Fiat Money” vs “Gold.”

    Never mind that all money is fiat, gold included.

    It is MY TEAM, YOUR TEAM. It is simple pap for low IQ types.

    • Thanks: Mefobills
  173. Anon[382] • Disclaimer says:
    @Truth Vigilante

    For goodness sake! Even commies change interest rates. When a commie banker raises interest rates do people say “look, they’re doing Austrianism now!” Of course not. Interest rates doesn’t mean a country is using Austrian economics.

    No secret, the Fed works for Wall Street. And always has. Wall st banks are principle shareholders of the Fed. Volcker was working directly for Wall street, in all his actions. Is that what Austrians want, that the Fed works for Wall street? Austrians don’t want any Fed.

    This is a good reason for anyone to be suspicious of Austrians, and advocates of Austrianism: A chief icon the Austrians are proud of, Volcker, was directly working for Wall street, while Austrians pretend that they are against the Fed and Wall street. The chief beneficiary of Volcker was Wall st. Total hypocrites. Imposters.

    Truth Vigilante is proud of Volcker, and so he’s directly supporting Volcker’s connection to Wall street, and the Fed, as Volcker was happily serving Wall st all the while. Bravo.

  174. Mefobills says:
    @Truth Vigilante

    What make Mefo’s remark all the more stupid is that I was gracious enough to explain the meaning of ‘Fiat Money’ before and yet, sudden onset dementia has kicked in and he’s once again forgotten.

    You didn’t read Radhika and Hudson’s article, and you haven’t read my comments. You are only interested in being a disinfo shill and spreading your Mises Lolbertarian nonsense.

    I defined FIAT earlier in the comment thread. Did you not read it? I also defined how Gold is fiat money.

    SPECIFICALLY, Gold was fiat from the very beginning, when it was balanced on a balance beam relative to barley. It was fiat (faith) in the fact the the Temple priest would accept gold in weight as law. In those days, the Temple Priesthood and the State worked together, as they had God-Kings. Gold as weight traded long distance between Kingdoms for goods, many of which were made by a “welfare class” as Temple workers. This welfare class would tend to be widowers, who who make blankets and goods. Anything that needed to be traded long distance was marked by gold weight.

    Later in history, when gold coins emerged, probably in Lydia, the King’s stamp conferred value to the coin. Debased coins circulated at par all the time, because they were good for taxes. Gold would be consecrated to the vaults to hold the gold value to one cow, or two cows. Cows were the basic unit of Gold for thousands of years.

    During the fourth crusades, gold was released from the vaults, over coming the dark ages. The money (gold) had been secreted away and became unused, and meanwhile the land had become enclosed into Latifundia. The dark ages were a feudal epoch defined by depressionary gold.

    I’m not fond of repeating myself for autistic idiots (that’s you Truth Vigilante), but instead my comments are aimed at others, who are not blinded by ideology and can see through the BS that you are peddling.

    There is a danger in that UNZ may not post intelligent writers like Hudson, and important pieces like this article, if it only attracts the two digit IQ crowd.

    The bulk of the commentariat are “cranks” as both Hudson and Keynes would call them.

    (Ooops… trigger alert, I used the word Keynes.)

    Note that Truth Vigilante is pretty quick to slam others using pressure tactics. Altogether it is not a good look for the UNZ comment page, especially if Ron wants to keep the comments at a high level.

    • Replies: @Truth Vigilante
  175. Mefobills says:
    @Truth Vigilante

    , the 19th century comes close where Free Market Economics with limited government (the core principles of Austrian Economics), were the order of the day in the U.S and Great Britain.

    So tedious picking through all the nonsense.

    First of all, there is no such thing as free markets. It is a made up term. All markets are man made creations and have “rules and laws” governing their behavior.

    The three types of markets are Elastic, Inelastic, and Mixed. The closest analog to free markets is the Elastic type, where price competition is available.

    Part of the disinfo of Lolbertarianism, is to confuse people with Free Market mantra. So, then you get things like Fukashima disasters. Nuclear power is inelastic, and hence has to be heavily regulated, or government owned. In-groups of self interested people form, to then pass hypnosis so they can take rents and unearned income. By closing off the mind with false doctrine, then the rent-seekers are free to pick pockets.

    Second of all the 19’th century in America was characterized by American System of Economy i.e. Industrial Capitalism, where state credit (not gold) channeled into industry and the commons. It was not free market.

    https://bibleandbookcenter.com/read/americas-protectionist-takeoff-1815-1914/

    The contribution of the American School of Political Economy (1848 to 1914) to America’s wildly successful industrial development has disappeared from today’s history books. American protectionists and technology theorists of the day were concerned with securing an economic competitive advantage and conversely, with offsetting the soil depletion of 19th century America’s plantation export agriculture. They also emphasized the positive effect of rising wage levels and living standards on the productivity that made the American economic takeoff possible. The American School’s “Economy of High Wages” doctrine stands in contrast to the ideology of free traders everywhere who accept low wages and existing productivity as permanent and unchanging “givens,” and who treat higher consumption, health and educational standards merely as deadweight costs. Free trade logic remains the buttress of today’s financial austerity policies imposed on debtor economies by the United States, the World Bank, and the International Monetary Fund. By contrast, the lessons of the American School of Political Economy can provide a more realistic and positive role model for other countries to emulate – what the United States itself has done, not what its condescending “free-trade” diplomats are telling them to do. The lesson is to adopt the protectionist policies of the late 19th and early 20th centuries that made America an economic superpower. Michael Hudson (Distinguished Professor of Economics, University of Missouri, Kansas City) is a frequent contributor to The Financial Times, Counterpunch, and Global Research.

  176. Russian or Chinese shill?

    You have been spouting this stuff about the dollar for decades. Nothing changes.

  177. @Mefobills

    Agreed – we should keep the comments in the UR at a high level.

    Therefore Mefo, it’s best you depart.

    Goodbye.

  178. Mefobills says:

    Therefore Mefo, it’s best you depart.

    You are truly demoralized:

    Definition of demoralize
    transitive verb

    1: to cause to turn aside or away from what is good or true or morally right : to corrupt the morals of
    2a: to weaken the morale of : DISCOURAGE, DISPIRIT
    were demoralized by the loss

    Below is Bezmenov describing the demoralization process (which is you Truth Vigilante). A demoralized person cannot take correction.

    You have been countered at every turn, and yet you persist. A rational person, when shown wrong, will adjust their position, or change course. Demoralized people are irrational… basically they are crazy.

    Why would Hudson want a Libertarian commenting on his article, when he considers Lolbertarianism as Junk Economics?

    The world that exists between your ears is a weird and crazy place. Truth Vigilante = Disinfo Shill

    • Replies: @Truth Vigilante
  179. Anon[178] • Disclaimer says:
    @Truth Vigilante

    Vigilante wrote: “In the end it was a close run thing but the fact that Reagan was at the helm (a pro-business Republican who was viewed by the money markets as a better economic manager than his predecessors in light of his success with the California economy when he was Governor), may have been enough to tip the balance.
    As mentioned before, the closest thing to a system applying the Austrian Economic School of thought (which was, to all intents and purposes, the Free Market/Small Government unfettered capitalism as advocated by Adam Smith in his timeless book ‘The Wealth of Nations), was the U.S and British economies of the 19th century.
    And, these two countries were among the top two or three military powers on the planet.” End quote.

    The California economy was one of the top beneficiaries of …. shocker, … Keynsianism! US government/military spending, expanding the national debt. Big government did it, not Reagan’s management, not Austrianism.
    As Adam Smith wrote, ‘the national debt will never be paid’ this contradicts Vigilante’s assertion, as the national debts of both the British Empire and the US were directly related to creation, fielding and provisioning of their militaries, using paper financing. The national debt Smith referred to was British, and is was military/war debt. ( There were no social welfare spending programs in those days.) It was not gold financed. Bravo Vigilante.

    The British deployed and provisioned their military in the Napoleonic wars using paper financing. Arguments about paying gold came after the war. The US deployed and provisioned their military in the civil war using paper finance. Arguments about paying gold came after the war. Those militaries were not fielded by gold, they were supported by credit well beyond their gold holdings ability to pay. Arguments about paying gold came after the wars. And those were in the golden years Austrians love.

    The economies of the US and Britain were far from the Austrian ideal in those times, as the advances in those economies were from credit formation well beyond the gold holdings. Aah the glory days Austrians look back to, the days when 3/4 of the population worked in back breaking agricultural labor, there were no child labor laws, life expectancy was ~40 years or less, TB stalked the land. The era of wild cat banking in the US was notorious for unsupported credit formation. The capital formation Vigilante boasts of was probably the railways. Not created on gold financing at all. The railways were notorious scams, huge grants of land, mineral, timber, water rights and others were given to the railroaders, and they still dragged their feet. Not a testament to Austrianism or laissez faire at all. The railways were not created by competitive capitalism.

    All the flack from Vigilante is saying, ‘over the target’ .

    • Replies: @Mefobills
  180. Mefobills says:
    @Anon

    The railways were notorious scams, huge grants of land, mineral, timber, water rights and others were given to the railroaders, and they still dragged their feet. Not a testament to Austrianism or laissez faire at all. The railways were not created by competitive capitalism.

    A ringside seat for the scamming that privateers did on the railroads: (One big scam was to trade worthless land on rail right-of-ways for productive timberland.)

    https://archive.org/details/triumphantpluto00pettrich (1870 to 1920)

    Pettigrew was constantly battling the agents of Mammon. Even though the Federal Government was involved for industrial policy, by giving away land grant favors – allowed Plutocracy to arise.

    The U.S continues to do the private/public game for infrastructure, despite the lessons of history showing privateering rent seekers doing a rake off.

    In Lolbertarian LOL LOL land, there is no such thing as Oligarchy.

    In Canada, from 38 to 71, the Bank of Canada was a Crown Bank, where the bank stock was fully owned by MOF (Ministry of Finance).

    Canada built a cross continental rail-road mostly corruption and graft free, using debt free money and long duration loans issued from BOC. The comparison of the rail roads between Canada and the U.S. could not be more stark.

    Note that Canada did not build up public debts during her sovereign money era. Lolbertarian’s don’t even know what legal sovereign money is, as they are mentally trapped in their false dialectic of FIAT vs Gold.

  181. Rubicon says:
    @bayviking

    We know it’s difficult to understand for many who haven’t followed Dr. Michael Hudson’s numerous articles.
    At present, he is regarded as the BEST ECONOMIST if not in the world, certainly in the Western World. For instance, Dr. Paul Craig Roberts, an economist and many others understand Dr.Hudson’s brilliance.

    Maybe a little background on Dr.Hudson would help some.
    Dr. Hudson was raised in a Marxist environment. His father was especially vocal against US Capitalism. That was several decades ago…..When Hudson went to universities, it was understood that he had a brilliant mind in the areas of FINANCE & economies ’round the world.

    After his university days, he was hired by some of the TOP US Financial Centers such as Chase Manhattan Bank. He constructed numerous methods for these companies to enlarge their profits all around the world. Applause, applause.
    But as he grew older, he could see that the growing power of US Capitalism was damaging nations, their governments, and citizens, alike.
    He was sought out in Canada to help that government to sort out their financial difficulties, but by then, “Capitalist Interests” had emerged there, and Hudson was defeated in his efforts.

    As the years have gone by, he was offered positions in many other nations, but he became keenly interested in the new economic concepts emanating from China. He sits on important Chinese boards while pointing the best way for China to grow economically……
    At the same time, he has lectures around the world with nations who are desperately trying to divorce themselves from the immense avarice and greed of the US system.

    We hope that helps a little.
    Sometimes, when we don’t understand a new concept/concepts, we should NOT criticize what a prized economist is saying, but to slowly read all of his articles/lectures. You can so that by going to his website: michael-hudson.com.

    • Replies: @Truth Vigilante
  182. @Mefobills

    Oh F.F.S, you’re still here Mefo !!

    We were all hoping you’d do the honourable thing and commit Seppuku – and/or take a double jab of the Astra-Obsceneca or J & J (Jenocide and Jenocide) vaxx, which would achieve the same outcome.

    The UR readership has had enough of your discredited Keynesian nonsense.

    So do the right thing and peddle your disinfo elsewhere.

    (BTW, it’s obvious you’re still seething over my comments that definitively demonstrate that the Zionist Cartel of Usury Central Bankers are advocating and implementing your crackpot economic formulae).

    OUCH …. I know that’s hurting !!

    • Replies: @Mefobills
  183. @Rubicon

    You wrote:

    ‘Michael Hudson …. is regarded as the BEST ECONOMIST if not in the world, certainly in the Western World’.

    What have you been smoking ? Clearly some potent and hallucinogenic stuff.
    Hudson is a non-entity peddling ideas influenced by his Marxist upbringing no doubt.

    Next thing you know you’ll be telling me that the imbecile Richard Wolff has something credible to offer:

    That 3 minute segment above is an excerpt from a longer interview where Peter Schiff pummels Wolff into the turf.

    With that in mind, here’s my challenge to you.

    If the Trotskyist Hudson is as good an economist as you say, let’s see him take on Peter Schiff in a debate and the topic will be Austrian Economics Vs whatever MMT/Keynesian voodoo economics Hudson is advocating.

    I know FOR A FACT that Peter Schiff will accept the challenge.

    The ball is in Hudson’s court. No GUTS, No GLORY. (I’m betting that Hudson will chicken out).

    Lastly Rubicon, I suggest you backtrack and cross back over the Rubicon from whence you came – before you stoop to the level of Mefo-Bull-Sh*tter.

    (I wouldn’t wish that on anyone).

    • Replies: @Mefobills
    , @Mefobills
  184. Mefobills says:
    @Truth Vigilante

    Truth,

    There is nothing that you have said or think that I “ouch over,” that is you being a legend in your own mind. You are a vigilante after all!

    You have already proven in your comments that you are unable to process new information and incorporate it into your worldview.

    In other words, you are crazy and demoralized.

    that definitively demonstrate that the Zionist Cartel of Usury Central Bankers are advocating and implementing your crackpot economic formulae).

    I just posted a graph (above) about the sovereign debt free era of Canada for crying out loud. That was not a gold era, and yet Canada did fine. It had Keynsian stimulus in the form of debt free spending, which went on to improve the commons (the Railroads among other things – including low cost college).

    The debt free also went on to form local economy and world class small business formation.

    It was the “agents of Mammon” and Zionist Cartel that destroyed the system by 1974, mostly by bribing parliament.

    I also already told you that I am a NAZI. Did you not read that and comprehend it? NSDAP economy was Zionist banking cartel in your twisted mind?

    Like I said earlier, you are actually crazy and believe your own BS.

    “Gold has been very good to us,” is in the Protocols you stupid ass. You are doing the bidding of the enemy as a dupe.

  185. Mefobills says:
    @Truth Vigilante

    If the Trotskyist Hudson is as good an economist as you say, let’s see him take on Peter Schiff in a debate and the topic will be Austrian Economics Vs whatever MMT/Keynesian voodoo economics Hudson is advocating.

    Hudson is not a Trotskyist, that is you pulling more crap out of your ass. Or rather, you and your Lolbertarian group of naval gazers have somehow “figured out something,” that has nothing to do with anything.

    Hudson is a classical economist, who happens to hold Trotysky’s papers, which happened to be bequeathed to him though his father. Classical economy in no way Bolshevik.

    You are also condemning the son for the sins of the father, an immoral stance on your part.

    Classical economy is actually much more closely aligned with the founding fathers of the U.S., Industrial Capitalism of Fascist Italy, Nationalist Japan, Kaiser’s Germany, and Hitler’s Germany.

    You are so full of crap that the world you look at is brown, and you cannot see colors, and things for what they are.

    Lolbertarianism is a Jewish dialectic to trap egoistic low IQ people and demoralize them. You are a prime example of the dangers of the ideology.

  186. Mefobills says:
    @Truth Vigilante

    the topic will be Austrian Economics Vs whatever MMT/Keynesian voodoo economics Hudson is advocating.

    I know FOR A FACT that Peter Schiff will accept the challenge.

    Jeez, what a TARD you are, and so tedious to counter.

    You don’t even know what Classical Economy is.

    MMT/Keynsian voodoo

    are typical Lolbertarian trigger words, to then get the rabble (your rabble) all excited, and jumping up and down like brainless schoolgirls.

    If you are going to debate somebody, at least learn something rather than regurgitate what others tell you.

    You also do hero worship, earlier it was Ron Paul, and now it is Peter Schiff. If you were a real man, you could debate Hudson yourself.

    I don’t worship Hudson, I worship the truth. Hudson drills nails, and when he goes of the reservation and doesn’t tell it like it is, then I call him on it. Hudson probably does not like me drawing parallels of NSDAP economy to classical economy. Too bad so sad, as NSDAP economy was very much classical, especially as it routed out usury and rent seeking.

    Would you call out Ron Paul, or Peter Schiff when they are wrong?

    My comment history often notes that Hudson won’t touch the third rail, and make note of the Jewish perfidy in monetary history. Hudson is against Finance Capitalism, which in turn is very Jewish, as a Jewish invention, yet he will not call out the Jew.

    Why? If he does call out the Jew, he would immediately be censored and thrown into the dust bin of history, much as what happened to David Irving. In other words, Hudson is smart, and besides not all Jews are agents of Mammon.

    Our Zionist friends are in no way scared of Lolbertarianism, they actually promote and fund the dialectic.

  187. HdC says:
    @CelestiaQuesta

    You need to talk to friends, relatives, business associates, etc., and read the financial pages, to get informed about investment houses, and waht questions to ask of potential advisers. Then interview a number of their representatives to see how they fit in with your goals.

    Only then turn over a small amount of your savings for their management. See how you like the results and make changes accordingly.

    DO NOT INVEST BY USING BANKS because their goals are different from yours.

    I started doing this in 1998 or so and have been through 3 brutal economic downturns. Yet the advice I received from my 2 investment houses served me very well and I came through the financial downturns better than ever.

    Did I make a huge amount of money over the years? NO! But I earned an average of 7% a year over the 20-odd years I have been with these houses.

    Some years I took a loss, others were very profitable. All in all I am satisfied and now live off my investment earnings.

  188. Mefobills says:

    Creditocracy is an important concept that flew over the heads of most UNZ readers.

    It is the imposition, or the extension of a Nation’s money, and hence said nation’s law, onto the international arena.

    Nationalism with fair legal trade becomes impossible unless humanity can digest and accept what Hudson and Desai are describing.

    Unfortunately, many of the ruling class benefit from imperialism inherent in extending a Creditocracy.

    Or, the finance elite emit hypnosis that confuses the population into becoming a good host. Witness the above conversation I had with Truth Vigilante, who is a very good host to the parasite.

    If a nation extends its credit beyond its borders, then it must send in the Marines if debt contracts are not honored. Better yet, just use the military and various means to control or create a comprador elite, and that way there is no worries about your “national” debt instruments not being paid. Even better, the compradors will help you extract wealth from your vassals.

    Now may be the time to examine the modern example of NSDAP economy, especially as it exited the Sterling “creditocracy” in 1933, as Germany couldn’t pay unpayable Versailles debts.

    Debts that can’t be paid, won’t be.

    • Replies: @Smith
  189. Smith says:
    @Mefobills

    Good sum-up.

    I’d like to add that those who prey on debts are scums.

Current Commenter
says:

Leave a Reply - Comments on articles more than two weeks old will be judged much more strictly on quality and tone


 Remember My InformationWhy?
 Email Replies to my Comment
$
Submitted comments have been licensed to The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Commenting Disabled While in Translation Mode
Subscribe to This Comment Thread via RSS Subscribe to All Radhika Desai Comments via RSS
PastClassics
The JFK Assassination and the 9/11 Attacks?
Analyzing the History of a Controversial Movement
Our Reigning Political Puppets, Dancing to Invisible Strings