Part 24: Monetary Reform: Series 1

Hi Ellen [Ellen Brown],

I actually had you in mind, but I also had myself in mind and even Joe, who I think held a pretty good tone in responding to you in his last response.

I wasn't thinking so much about public banking there as I was that the NEED Act, per se, doesn't have to be the one and only subject. Then I did bring up publicly owned banks as an example, as they aren't in the Act but should be in my view.

My feeling is that a public banking section would be very popular with your readers and many others (if it were done correctly). It would expand the support base for the Act and public banking by those for the Act already (many with qualifications).

If public banking were added and the MA were automated, I think the Act would be really well-rounded relative to usual bills. It would address so many of the ows issues and more.

My favorite parts of the bill right now are Greenbacks and infrastructure spending (wide-open definition -- very Dennis Kucinich and very smart and compassionate) -- just what we need for full employment.

As for the Act, you've done a good job of sticking to your view that credit risk is a huge issue.

I believe that after I've mentioned several times now the disappearance of anticipated interest income even on virtual money (multiplier/thin-air money), that there's been some softening concerning the degree of jeopardy the banks will be in unless there's a great deal of smoothing done that is being left up in the air as far as details are concerned. In the Act as-is, it's all left to the MA to work it out with Treasury and Congress too.

I suppose that's okay up to a point. It leaves some wiggle room when answering potential objections, but people are becoming shy about promises that aren't chiseled in granite.

BTW, how are you, Ellen? Is your recovery still going well? I hope so.

Oh, and since your writing your new book on the history of banking and you've mentioned Italy of course, have you run into montes pietatius? If not, you might want to include them as a sort of High Middle Ages antecedent corollary to your writing on modern Shadow Banking but with a twist or two. They were low-interest and no-interest pawn "shops" in answer to interest rates as high as 80% by such as the Lombards. Let me know what you think about that.

Monetary Reform: Series 1

  • Subscribe


  • Tom Usher

    About Tom Usher

    Employment: 2008 - present, website developer and writer. 2015 - present, insurance broker. Education: Arizona State University, Bachelor of Science in Political Science. City University of Seattle, graduate studies in Public Administration. Volunteerism: 2007 - present, president of the Real Liberal Christian Church and Christian Commons Project.
    This entry was posted in Libertarian Capitalism, Monetary Reform, United States Notes. Bookmark the permalink.