The International Monetary Fund (IMF) warned Tuesday that America’s recent economic performance is partially the result of the country’s unsustainable fiscal practices, creating risks for the globa…
Every central bank system is a perpetual debt machine. It’s why the founding fathers specifically fought against them being established here. If you print the money then loan it to a government, how does the government pay that interest? Central bank loans the government $100 at 1% interest, even if they spend none of it, how do they pay the 1% when the issuer of the currency is also the loaner? Governments have to continue to accumulate debt in this system. They have always been a perpetual and compounding debt system.
The founding fathers also kept slaves and didn’t let women vote. I’m tired of how Americans deify them, I suggest citing economists as authorities on economics instead of 18th century wealthy landowners.
I’m not deifying them by mentioning something they got right. I’m tired of people’s all or nothing lack of nuance. Humanity would be nowhere without the advancements of flawed people from the past. We can’t use our measuring stick on their lives without a huge degree of hypocrisy considering how much society has changed even in the last half century. For all their short comings, the founding fathers did create the frame work that most modern democracies are built on and ushered humanity away from monarchy.
Most modern democracies are parliamentary, actually. The US system has not been widely mimicked aside from cherry-picking a few specific details.
Also, monarchy and democracy are not mutually exclusive. I’m Canadian, for example, which is a democratic constitutional monarchy. We still have a king but we elect our government.
There were economists in the 18th century and none of the founding fathers were one.
The closest was probably Alexander Hamilton, who ended up as the first treasury secretary. Where he proposed and set up the very central bank that the commenter I was responding to is complaining about.
Central bank loans the government $100 at 1% interest, even if they spend none of it, how do they pay the 1% when the issuer of the currency is also the loaner?
Pretty sure they’re saying if we taxes everyone 100%… Collected all the money from everyone in the country, then gave it all back to the central bank we borrowed it from originally, we’d still owe the interest on the debt… With no more money in the system where would we get the “taxes”?
Every central bank system is a perpetual debt machine. It’s why the founding fathers specifically fought against them being established here. If you print the money then loan it to a government, how does the government pay that interest? Central bank loans the government $100 at 1% interest, even if they spend none of it, how do they pay the 1% when the issuer of the currency is also the loaner? Governments have to continue to accumulate debt in this system. They have always been a perpetual and compounding debt system.
The founding fathers also kept slaves and didn’t let women vote. I’m tired of how Americans deify them, I suggest citing economists as authorities on economics instead of 18th century wealthy landowners.
I’m not deifying them by mentioning something they got right. I’m tired of people’s all or nothing lack of nuance. Humanity would be nowhere without the advancements of flawed people from the past. We can’t use our measuring stick on their lives without a huge degree of hypocrisy considering how much society has changed even in the last half century. For all their short comings, the founding fathers did create the frame work that most modern democracies are built on and ushered humanity away from monarchy.
Most modern democracies are parliamentary, actually. The US system has not been widely mimicked aside from cherry-picking a few specific details.
Also, monarchy and democracy are not mutually exclusive. I’m Canadian, for example, which is a democratic constitutional monarchy. We still have a king but we elect our government.
Yes, but your king is basically a mascot. If they had any actual power, your system would be less democratic basically by definition.
Sure, but that’s adding quibbles beyond the scope of what I was responding to. We’re a democracy and we still have a monarch.
They were the economists of their time. Basic economic theory hasn’t changed in millennia, only opinion on how to manage economies has.
There were economists in the 18th century and none of the founding fathers were one.
The closest was probably Alexander Hamilton, who ended up as the first treasury secretary. Where he proposed and set up the very central bank that the commenter I was responding to is complaining about.
Taxes.
Pretty sure they’re saying if we taxes everyone 100%… Collected all the money from everyone in the country, then gave it all back to the central bank we borrowed it from originally, we’d still owe the interest on the debt… With no more money in the system where would we get the “taxes”?
As with most debt, it can’t be paid off immediately or it wouldn’t have been debt to being with. It’s a bet on the future.